The anti-monopolist. [volume] (Saint Paul, Minn.) 1874-1878, 1874-11-19

incidentally becomes temptation to
others. In this case the answer does
1t seem to be very doubtful. The
mere fact that perfectly honorable
man keeps race horses without himself
sanctioning any malpractices does not
necessarily tend to improve the moral
atmosphere. Itmay at least be said
with Just as much probability that
rogues flourish because they are more
or less sanctioned by honest people. If
the turf simply consisted of a number
of knaves proving upon each other, It
would be a nuisance to be suppressed
as soon as possible. The fact that it is
still patronized by many men of IN
doubted honor is that which enables it
to hold its ground. Therefore an hon.
est man who keeps race horses is en-
couraging an institution which is, to say
the least, of very doubtful tendencies;
and if his profession is one which i'm
poses upon him the duty of intoxicating
moral improvement, he cannot be ex-
cused for the negative merit of not &C
tually doing wrong himself. lie incurs
a certain responsibility by mixing in
such an occupation, and could tonly
to put down the abuses which threaten
to make it an unmixed nuisance. 1t
would Of course be further question,
which we need not argue, whether even
in that case he would not act more eff
fectually by denouneing the evil from
outside.
This consideration suggests the true
reason why clergyman should be re-
quired to observe higher standard
than other men. He cannot, it may
be said. be excused simply on the ground
of his personal innocence. He is bound
to carry on warfare against the evils
of modern society, as we'll as to abstain
from fostering them. And yet there is
some difficulty in measuring the force
of this distinction. Every man, clergy
man or layman. is bound to protest, so
far as opportunity serves, against the
corruptions which he encounters. If a
clergyman has more definite position
and more frequent opportunities of dis
charging this duty than other men, it
does not follow that others are free
from the same obligation within their
own sphere of employment. In fact,
the question cannot be fully solved
without inquiring into the true mean
ing of the clerical calling. People who
take the highest view of that calling
will naturally be inclined, as a matter
of propriety and decorum, if pot as a
matter of absolute duty, to draw a
deeper line between the amusements
permitted to the clergy and to the la
ity. In this, as in many other appar-
emily trivial questions, we find that we
are really coming upon profound con-
trasts of belief. What appears to be
merely question Of external manners
really runs up into questions about
our most solemn conceptions of duty
and of the universe. Without enter.
ing upon any such speculations, we
may remark that the scandal given by
such cases as that Of Mr.. King illus.
trates great social change. In Mr..
Hsrhort Spencer's phraseology, the
clerical type is being more and more
differentiated from the ordinary Law
type. This may or may not be on the
whole an advantage, but it certainly
tends to the disappearance of a charac-
ter which was not without its merits.
The old-fash.oned clergyman who has
in him touch of the country gentle.
man has been in his day very useful
member Of society. He had his faults
undoubtedly. The special interests Of
his profession might suffer from his
other propensities. Perhaps he hated
poachers SO intensely as to be rather
blind to the poor mans temptations,
and was sometimes more interested in
improving his breed of pigs
than in attending to the souls Of his
Pensioners. Yet his interest in the
ordinary pursuits Of his neighbors was
not altogether bad thing. He struck
deep roots into the soil. and was an i'm
port,nt member of the social organism.
We generally abuse the eighteenth cen.
fury parson as a sordid and selfish kind
Of person. His religion was not Of an
exalted type. and consisted to great
extent, in hearty hatred for what he
called enthusiasts-that is to saw, for
any body who, like Wesley and Whit.
field, tried to rouse the people from a
comfortable indifference. He was not so
averse to a jobas he ought to have been;
he was apt to seek for promotion by I'M
worthy concessions to possible patrons;
and if he became Bishop, he thought
it only proper to save comfortable
fortune out Of his revenues. and to pre-.
sent his nearest relation to all the best
livings in the diocese. Doubtless we
have cleared away great many abuses.
and our present race Of clergymen take
a higher view of their duties and are
more devoted to their proper work.
But We generally begin to recognize the
merits Of an old institution when
We lose it, and there are some
charms in the domestic quiet of the
Georgian period, when the Church was
not yet torn by furious party spirit,
and many excellent clergymen led a
good homely patriarchal life. surround
ed by their families and respected By
their Pensioners. Their sermons
were undoubtedly sleep-compelling, and
their churches shocked all modern no.
tions of architectural proprietv. They
~