The Portland daily press., 1883-11-01
Matthew Arnold,s Lecture

The keynote of Matthew Arnold's lecture
in New York on Tuesday evening was that,
human nature being what it is, the majority
everywhere is unsound, and soundness is
with the few, the remnant, who study to
know the truth and to make it effective in
the regulation Of society and government.
There is safety and happiness and real prog
gress only as the few who are wise and who
love and serve righteousness succeed in per-
suading, or compelling, the majority to pur-
sue the way they point out He referred to
the history of the nations of the past, and
sometimes pointedly to nations of the
present time, for illustrations of the position
that the majority is unsound and not safe
guide, and that what is grand and worthy
in their achievement is the work of the
few.
But Mr.. Arnold's proposition does not, as
might at first appear, favor monarchy or
aristocracy rather than democracy as form
of political government He would say, very
likely, that the monarch and the noDlemen,
so-called, are quite as likely to form part
Va thO AuaJOilly WulCu 10 uucUuuQ do VI lnC
few who know what is right and do ii so far
as they are able. He is no supporter of the
notion that the good are the rich or the
highborn, or the beneficiaries of arbitrary
privilege. There is nothing in his lecture
which intimates that he condemns the
scheme of American government absolutely,
only he refuses to believe that the instinct
and impulse of the majority in number is
final or even very significant in respect of
what is absolutely right and best.
Mr.. Arnold is primarily moralist. He
believes in making sharp discrimination be-
tween right and wrong, and he believes also
that righteousness exalteth nation, while
sin is not only reproach to any people but a
surely destructive force wherever it appears.
The majority is unsound not SO much be-
cause it is unintelligent as because it is i'm
moral, with a tendency to do what is I'M
righteous, selfish and corrupting, but no more
so in republics than in countries with an
other form of government. Undoubtedly if
there were any devise by which the good
could surely control the bad and manage the
affairs of the world in their own way, he
would think it quite desirable to secure them
In authority; but he must know as well as
anybody that it is inpracticable. He does
not attempt to suggest how right can rule
In any other way than the old one. 1t is the
duty of those who seek righteousness to be
stesdfast, to proclaim INCREASINGLY the peril
of sin and the beauty of virtue, and to lead
the majority as best they can to abstain from
what is wrong and to uphold what is right
1t is the work of prophets and apostles rath-
er than the work of politicians that is endur-
ing, and those ara the saviors of States who
cry alond and spare not, warning the nation
of the evil to come if it defies the eternal
justice.
Mr.. Arnold's opinions, inimical as they
are to the cant that the voice of the ma
jority is the voice of God, are not, in fact,
hostile to the theory of our institutions,
which are based upon the idea that the good
are more likely to be influential and controll-
ing where the common veal is common in
terest, and all have equal power by their vote
In determining the fortunes of the State To
this consciousness of responsibility the wise
and earnest patriot appeals with some conf
dence. Ii is a restraining influence upon
selfish passions. While we are apt to think,
when corrupt men seem to flourish, that it
would be better if they had not SO fair an
opportunity to impose upon the ignorant
and to conspire - - ne recklessly base, the
,sxnariencessEzzeS 4 voors ooos Gov -
establish the reasonableness of the conclu-
sion that freedom affords the greatest secu-
rity and the best assurance that wise and
rightminded men will have their proper in
fuence in affairs.