Wichita eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1886-1890, 1890-01-01
INGERSOLL'S LATEST.
ON the Kansas City Journal.

FROM the Kansas City Journal.
Colonel Robert G. Ingersolls article in
the January Arena, entitled GOD in the
Constitution" will probably be widely
| read. Almost everything that Colonel
Ingersol writes is widely read, and his
cleverly turned sentences are memorized
and quoted by a vast army of young
men whose intellectual ambition is to
disbelieve as Ingerson disbelieves and to
scott in the polished phrases which slip
SO smoothly from his lips.
There are number of quotable pass
ages in this latest assault of the puissant
Ingersoll upon the God of the Christian.
The delicate irony of this, for instance:
sis it possible to fiatter the infinite with
a constitutional amendment: The Con-
federate Ttates acknowledged God in
their constitution, and yet they were
overwhelmed by people in whose
organic law no reference to God is
made" Or again the unanswerable
question: Suppose that we amend
the constitution and acknowledge the
existence and supremacy of God-what
becomes Of the supremacy of the peo-
ple?" And here is one of the colonels
cleverest bits of humor-a play
full thrust at the powerlessness of the
omnipotent: eff he governs all nations
now he has always controlled the affairs
of men. Having this control why did
he not see to it that he was recognized
in the constitution of the United States?"
But the particular portions of Colonel
IngersolIs article to which we would
call attention as instances of his unfor-
tunate practice of suppressing the truth
"a practice which does not accord with
his virtuous pagan precepts-are the first
and last sentences. In the first, Colonel
Ingorsoll, by an astounding suppressio
veri, altogether misrepresents the pat
riots who framed the declaration of indie
pendence. ''In 1776," he says, "our IA
theirs endeavored to retire the gods from
politics. They declared that 'all govern
ments derive their just powers from the
consent of the governed Now the
declaration of independence starts out
by asserting the right of this people 'to
assume among the nations of the earth
the separate and equal station to which
the laws of nature and natures God en-
title Them" And the next para
graph, from which Colonel Ingersoll
has extracted phrase that suits
his purpose, opens as follows: 1--WE
hold these truths to be self-evident, that
all men are created equal, that they are
endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights. that among these are
life, liberty and the pursuit of happi-
ness. That to secure these rights with
which they have been endowed by their
Creator) governments are instituted
among men deriving their just powers
from the consent of the governed"
So much for the colonels opening SEN
tence in which he sadly misrepresents
''our fathers in 1776."
The closing paragraph of the article is
as follows: Let us hold fast to the sub
lime declaration of Lincoln. Let us in
sist that the republic is a government of
the people, by the people and for the
people," Now, why does not Colonel
Ingersoll give the whole of this sublime
declaration of LincOln3 The por-
ton which he quotes does
not even, Of itself, make CON-
plete sense. 1t is not full sentence. In
fact, it is taken from the middle of this
clause which occurs in the speech deliv-
cred by Abraham Lincoln, at Gettys-
burg, November 10, 1868: ''That this
nation, under God, shall have a new
birth of freedom. and that government
of the people, by the people, for the peo-
pie shall not perish from the earth"
In newspaper controversy one of the
most contemplate offenses of which a
writer can be guilty is that of perverting
a quotation for.the sake of his argument
of eliminating an essential part thereby
giving to what is left significance
which the author did not in the least in
tend. We would recommend to Colonel
Ingersoll, who much affects the news
papers, careful study of their code of
ethics.