COPY OF A LETTER SENT TO THE KING, WINDSOR CASTLE. SIR, Dorchester Gaol, Sept. 23, 1825. THERE is nothing more unpleasant than for a writer to have to write a certain something, without a subject whereupon to write. This I take to be the cause of one half of the written nonsense that is ushered forth to the world. Το mend this matter, I will set a good example; and, having nothing before me whereupon to touch, I will not write nonsense; but content myself with saying, that I remain your-prisoner, in the last month of the sixth year, of an imprisonment, for disputing certain doctrines which are evidently disputable and indefensible. RICHARD CARLILE. TO RICHARD CARLILE-THE BOLD PUBLISHER OF PAINE'S WORKS. SIR, "An enemy to Persecution" transmits you Ten Pounds (being his sixth contribution) as a testimony of his admiration of your persevering exertions in the glorious cause of free discussion and of his abhorence of the tyranny which oppresses you. Note. To the best of my recollection, this sum makes the total of subscription by this generous individual to be above one hundred pounds. Since I acknowledged £20. last year, £25. have been sent to Newgate. The four contributions first sent, I believe were five pounds each, then there were £5. each to Mrs. Wright, Tunbridge, Watson, and my Sister, and near £20. sent altogether to the Giltspur Street Compter.. There have been other handsome subscriptions to other individuals, who were prosecuted in the country for selling my publications. I can but express my gratitude and confess my growing curiosity, even anxiety, to have a personal knowledge of this genuine "Enemy to Persecution." R. C. TO MR. R. CARLILE, DORCHESTER GAOL. SIR. HAVING read in the Republican No. 5 Vol. 12 a letter to you by Mr. Heinikin in answer to your Bradford correspondent Leucippus, in which Mr. H. supports his belief in a future life, of rewards and punishments, and the most convincing proof of which, appears to Mr. H., to be the sufferings of the martyrs, (of which he accuses, with great emphasis, your correspondent, of over.. looking) I think, that, notwithstanding the clever refutation given in the Republican No. 11, the following 4 chapters translated from the excellent French Book Le Bon Sens (good sense*) the best thing I have yet seen on the subject, will perhaps contribute to enlighten Mr. H.'s mind, if he will but pay attention to them. Should you think them worthy the Republican, and that they will in any ways contribute to snatch from the grasp of priestcraft any of your Christian readers, I hope you will not hesitate to render a service to humanity by inserting them, begging of you at the same time, that on account of my being a foreigner; perhaps the translation may be expressed in words, or sentences, which might be substituted by others better adapted to make good English, in which case, I hope you will have the goodness to correct it, as you think proper. I am Sir, London, Friday, September 23 1825. Т. А. С. * I have an American translated copy of this work which will be soon in print., R. C. CHAPTER LXVI. By the invention of the doctrine of the eternal (or eternity) pains of hell theologians have made of their god a detestable being, more wicked, than the wickedest of men, a malignant tyrant, cruel without end, and that for pleasure, THE inventers of the doctrine of the eternity of the pains of, hell, have made of the god they call so good, the most detestable of beings. The cruelty in men is the last pitch of malignity; there is not a sensible soul that will not feel moved, and revolted at the recital alone of torments that the greatest of sinners has to undergo; but cruelty is much more capable of exasperating, when it is looked upon as gratuitously, or destitute of motives. The most sanguinary tyrants, the Caligulas, the Neros, the Domitians at least had some motives to torture their victims, and insult their sufferings; these motives were either their own safety For the rage of vengeance, or the intent to affright by dismal examples, or perhaps the vanity of making shew of their power, and the desire to satisfy a barbarous curiosity, Can a god have any of these motives? In tormenting the victims of his wrath, he would punish beings, who neither endanger his unshaken authority, nor trouble his felicity, which nothing can impair. In another view, the punishments in another life would be useless to the living who cannot be the witnesses. Those sufferings would be useless to the damned, as in hell there is no more conversion, and the time of mercy is over. whence it follows, that god, in the exercise of his eternal vengeance, would have no other end than to amuse himself, and to insult the weakness of his creatures. From I appeal to the whole of the human species. Is there in nature, a man, who feels himself so cruel, as to wish, in cool blood, to torment, not his fellow creature; buta sensible being, of whatever nature, without emolument, without profit, without curiosity, without having any thing to fear? Then O theologians! according to your own principles, your god is infinitely more wicked than the most wicked of men. You, perhaps, will say that offences infinite deserve infinite punishments. And I will tell you, that no one offends a god, whose goodness is infinite. I will tell you more, that the offences of finite beings cannot be infinite, I will tell you, that a god, who does not wish to be offended, cannot consent to prolong the offences of his creatures during eternity. I will tell you, that a god, infinitely good, cannot be infinitely cruel; nor reconcile to his creatures an everlasting infinity, entirely to give himself the pleasure to torment them without end. There is but the most savage barbarity, there is but the most signal deceit, there is but the blindest ambition, that could have imagined the doctrine of the eternity of sufferings. If there existed a god, whom one might offend, or blaspheme, there would not be upon earth greater blasphemers than those who dare to assert, that that god is a tyrant, wicked enough, to please himself, during eternity, with the useless sufferings of his feeble creatures. CHAPTER LXXXVII. The prayers of men to god prove plainly that they are not satisfi ed with the divine disposition. NOTWITHSTANDING men do not cease to admire the wisdom, the goodness, the justice, the fine order of providence, in reality, they are never contented; the prayers which they address continually to heaven; does it not demonstrate to us, that they are not at all satisfied with the divine disposition? To pray to god, to ask him a benefit is to distrust the assiduity of his vigilance. To pray god, asking him to avert, or to cease an evil, is to try to put an obstacle to the course of his justice. To implore the assistance of god in in those calamities, is to address oneself to the very author of those calamities, to represent to him, that in our favor, he ought to rectify his design, which does not agree with our interests. The optimist, or he who finds, that in this world, all is good, and who proclaims to us unceasingly, that we live in the best of worlds possible, if consistent, should never beseech, even more, he should never be in expectation of another better world, than the best of worlds possible. Some theologians have treated the optomist as impious, for having given to be understood (fait entendre) that god was not able to beget a better world than this we live in; according to those Doctors, it is to limit the divine power and to do it a wrong. But those theologians do not see, that it is much less reproachful, to god, in pretending that he has done his best, in creating the world, than to say that having the power of creating a better, he had the wickedness to make a very bad one. If the optomist, by his system, wrongs the divine power, the theologian, who treats him as impious, is himself impious, who wounds the divine goodness, under the pretext of assuming the interests of his almighty. CHAPTER CXXXII. The very blood of the martyrs deposes against the truth of miracles, and against the divine origin, which is given to Christianism. IF history acquaints me, that the first apostles, founders, or reformers of religions, have made many miracles; history teaches me, likewise, that these apostles, reformers and their adherents were commonly reviled, persecuted and put to death as disturbers of the repose of nations. I am accordingly apt to think, that they have not wrought the miracles which are attributed to them. In reality, those miracles ought to have caused them a great number of partisans amongst those who saw them, who could have prevented the operators from being badly treated. My incredulity redoubles, if I am told, that the miracle makers were cruelly tortured or executed. How am I to believe, that missionaries, patronized by a God, and endued with his divine power, possessing the gift of miracles, were not able to work such a simple miracle as to avoid the cruelty of their persecutors? They have the art to draw from the persecutors themselves, a convincing proof, |