On the Diversity of Origin of the Human Races [pp. 603-642]

Prof. Agassiz New Hypothesis
just as hostile to the scriptures, as flatly contradicts their
obvious meaning, and is just as pernicious in its social bearings,
as that for which it is exchanged. But for these mischievous
results, we should not deem it worthy of an argument at all;
for we are confident, from its inherent weakness, that it will
soon fall to pieces under its own weight.
We do not forget that Professor A. indignantly denies all
sympathy with the infidelity and inhumanity, which have fastened themselves to the publication of his views. And we confess
that the temper with which he disavows all responsibility for
these consequences, is not entirely to our mind. It is more easy
than satisfactory, for him to say, "I am not responsible for
the results. I did not make the facts." Very true. The
facts, we may thank God in the name of humanity, are not
made by philosophers or naturalists, however eminent or honoured. But is it nothing to broach opinions, susceptible, we
will not say of abuse, but of applications whose legitimacy is
not denied but admitted at least by implication, in the very
attempt to throw the responsibility of their consequences
coolly upon God. This will never do. However he may disavow all hostile designs, he should know that those to whom he
is lending the sanction and influence of his name and reputation, (for they have none of their own,) have one great ultimate
object ill view; and that is to break down the Bible, in order
to get ridcl of its sanctions, for ulterior purposes. We should
fancy that Prof. A. would be startled, if not humiliated, by
the yell of congratulation and triumph, with which his avowal
of these opinions has been received, by the whole crew of
infidel philosophers, and seized upon as a justification of their
traffic, by the breeders and drivers of slaves. Is there no evidence in such companionship of the tendency of his doctrines;
and does this tendency furnish no clear suggestion of their
falsehood? Are there no principles of morals or humanity,
settled in such sense that the remote analogies and vague conjectures of science would be disproved by their simple antagonism. Is there no such thing as the reductio ad absurdum.
To be the hero of such a mixed multitude, we should think,
would be quite as dubious as a testimony to the truth of the
views which awaken their hosannas, as it is questionable as a
638
[OCTOBIMIL