7
“Preface” and “Notes” to Philosophical Essays on Morals, Literature, and Politics, By David Hume, Esq. To Which is Added the Answer to his Objections to Christianity, By the Ingenious Divine Dr. Campbell. Also, An Account of Mr. Hume’s Life, an original Essay, and a few Notes, 2 vols (Georgetown, D.C. and Philadelphia, 1817); “Preface,” from vol. 1, pp. vii–xvii; “Notes,” from vol. 1, pp. 80, 231–2, 521–3; vol. 2, pp. 124–7, 475.
Thomas Ewell
Thomas Ewell (1785–1826) was a writer, physician, and surgeon in the navy. Ewell had studied in Virginia and before that in Philadelphia at the University of Pennsylvania, where one of his teachers was Dr. Benjamin Rush. Ewell’s edition of Hume’s Essays was dedicated to the President of the Untied States, James Monroe (1758–1831). Ewell remarked in the dedication that “Mr, Hume was a man of transcendant mind, and these writings transcend his other performances.” “If a parallel could be drawn with propriety between actions and writings, it appeared to me that it might be drawn between your labours and Mr. Hume’s Essays. — His productions exhibit a grandeur of genius — a depth of investigation — an independence of spirit — never surpassed by a British subject: — your exertions exhibit a soul never surpassed by an American citizen”(pp. iii–iv). The first of Ewell’s volumes included Hume’s My Own Life, the Essays, Moral, Political, and Literary as a collection of thirty-eight essays, and Ewell’s own original contribution, “Essay on the Laws of Pleasure and Pain.” The second volume reprinted An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, A Dissertation on the Passions, An Enquiry concerning the Principles of Morals, The Natural History of Religion and an Index of the Dissertaiton on Miracles which reprinted George Campbell’s answer to Hume on miracles. The “Preface” and “Notes” to Ewell’s edition of Hume show that, for many in early America, concern with Hume’s character was part and parcel of dealing with the ideas in Hume’s essays (see also Part II). The earl of Charlemont’s account of Hume’s character, reproduced by Ewell, had earlier been reprinted in American journals such as The Analectic Magazine: containing selections from Foreign Reviews and Magazines, together with original miscellaneous compositions; and a naval chronicle, vol. 1 (1813), pp. 419–25. Ewell’s “Preface” also hints at the nineteenth-century trend which would see the eighteenth-century American popularity of Hume’s History of England surpassed by Hume’s Essays and philosophy. On Thomas Ewell see Allan Westcott, “Thomas Ewell,” Dictionary of American Biography (New York, 1957), edited by Allen Johnson and Dumas Malone [hereafter DAB], vol. 3, part 2, pp. 230–31.
___________________________________
EWELL’S PREFACE
IT has been with much hesitation that I have undertaken to have an edition of Mr. Hume’s Essays printed. My engagements rendered it very inconvenient; and nothing but a strong desire of doing service to the gentlemen of minds in this country decided the undertaking. An instrumentality in disseminating such sublime philosophy, and astonishing research, as is exhibited by this wonderful genius and writer, could not be otherwise than exceedingly agreeable.
Unaccountable as it is, these Essays have not heretofore been printed in America — although pronounced by the author in health, and when about to die, “incomparably his best performance.” — while his history — which is marked by more objectional features, has been demanded in several editions. This suppression is a melancholy instance of withholding many advantages on account of a few probable errors; of the success of ignorance and prejudice, of incapacity and malignancy, in opposing ambition for intellectual advancement. The bigots have raised an unfounded clamour against the work — while its philosophy — seldom understood, and often misrepresented, — has been degraded by classing it with the disorganizing productions of the French nation. Assuredly these Essays may, with truth, be pronounced the greatest — the best calculated to awaken enquiry, while communicating instruction — that were ever written. The liberal, who have read them in the spirit of candour and truth, will not require to be reminded of their worth. Our host of horn-book politicians — our men of homespun literature — friends to the study of metaphysics and of morals — will all find themselves improved — raised — transported by the lights diffused.
The present time appears to be peculiarly adapted to the study of such works of philosophy. Suspicious of their agency in producing that infuriation of mind, regardless of morals, and devoted to revolutions, that marked the age which has just passed by, are now subsiding. The intelligent perceive it was the great foul mass of the community, not the thinking philosophers; the bad passions of the men, not erroneous principles conceived in the closet — which have produced the calamities of thoughtless insurrection, and all the horrors of its train, which have desolated so fair a portion of Europe. The present subsidence of the violent convulsions which agitated the world affords, at all events, the most proper time for receiving, considering, and settling, the value of the innovations of philosophers.
But a few pages of Mr. Hume’s Essays are devoted to religious subjects — yet the confederation of decryers would stamp the whole as inimical to religion. To guard against infidelity — that might arise from the freedom of his discussion — the pious Dr. Campbell’s answer is annexed. The character of this stands deservedly high; and ought to be read, not only for its object, — but on account of the ingenuity — the close and strong reasoning it exhibits. It is by tracing, and going along with, the ideas of such powerful minds that our own become enlarged.
No character, however religious, can rationally object to reading these volumes under the present circumstances of publication. On the score of Christianity, his faith cannot be affected. Indeed it would be well for the clergy if they would diligently study, instead of endeavouring to proscribe, them. They cannot do the one, and will be greatly benefited by the other. Doctor Campbell states it was first from the study of Mr. Hume’s ingenious writings, that he learnt to think and write on the subject. Our clergy will not be accused of having more learning than the Scotch divines; and they may safely imitate them by venturing on the study. The habit of acute reflection will more effectually enable them to make converts to the religion of our Saviour, than all the rhapsodical promises and denunciations that ever came from the pulpit. As a friend to the preachers of Christianity, I wish them more learning, and better temper to discuss and glean the good from every writer — however objectionable they may be in some points. Men are so frequently benefited from hearing the worst said of them by their enemies, that I cannot think sound religion can be injured by its friends reading the strictures passed on it: — indeed it must be strengthened, since it can stand the most scrutinizing attacks.
After all the clamour about Mr. Hume’s anti-religious doctrines, it appears that what he calls his discovery for the solution of miracles, is the point most objectionable and dreaded. It appears astonishing to me that such importance has been attached to this subject. Most people are conscious of most extraordinary emotions in them at times, which they attribute to something of the miraculous. Many clergymen of certain sects teach, that a man converted to Christianity has an extra visit from the Holy Spirit. Can it be of the least importance, if our faith be brought on by a miracle within us, or by a visitation in spirit from above? For my part — so that a man has the true faith, and acts the good part of a christian, — I care not to what possible cause he may attribute his creed. No one ought to be more displeased at his amusing himself by ascribing it to the ghosts of his fancy, than at Mr. Hume’s ascribing it to a miracle. It is somewhere said by one of the apostles, “a good work is wrought within me.”
Many of those who have not capacity to understand the doctrines of Mr. Hume — on the one side, and on the other, — have not patience to enter into his singularly ingenious modes of reasoning, have confederated to propagate unfounded slander against him — hoping so to traduce his private life as to lessen the respect paid to his doctrines. — Among the various attempts of this kind which have been made, I have heard of reports of him in this country, very contrary to the plain — interesting account he gives of himself in his life annexed. The annexed extracts, taken from Mr. Handy’s life of the Earl of Charlemont, give sufficient: evidence of his truly amiable spirit.
“The celebrated David Hume — whose character is so deservedly high in the literary world; and whose works, both as a philosopher and as an historian, are so wonderfully replete with genius and entertainment — was, when I was at Turin, secretary to sir John Sinclair, minister from the court of Great Britain to his Sardinian majesty. — With this extraordinary man I was intimately acquainted. He had kindly distinguished me from among a number of young men, who were then at the academy, and appeared so warmly attached to me, that it was apparent he not only intended to honour me with his friendship, but to bestow on me what was, in his opinion, the first of all favours and benefits, by making me his convert and disciple.”
“Nature, I believe never formed any man more unlike his real character than David Hume. The powers of physiognomy were baffled by his countenance; neither could the most skilful, in that science, pretend to discover the smallest trace of the faculties of his mind, in the unmeaning features of his visage. His face was broad and fat, his mouth wide; and without any other expression than that of imbecility. His eyes, vacant and spiritless, and the corpulence of his whole person was far better fitted to communicate the idea of a turtle-eating alderman, than of a refined philosopher. His speech in English, was rendered ridiculous by the broadest Scotch accent, and his French was, if possible, still more laughable; so that wisdom, most certainly, never disguised herself before in so uncouth a garb. Though now fifty years old, he was healthy and strong; but his health and strength far from being advantageous to his figure, instead of manly comeliness, had only the appearance of rusticity. His wearing an uniform added greatly to his natural awkwardness, for he wore it like a grocer of the trained bands. Sinclair was a lieutenant-general and was sent to the courts of Vienna and Turin, as a military envoy, to see that their quota of troops was furnished by the Austrians and Piedmontese. It was therefore thought necessary that his secretary should appear to be an officer, and Hume was accordingly disguised in scarlet.”
“Having thus given an account of his exterior, it is but fair that I should state my good opinion of his character. Of all the philosophers of his sect, none, I believe, ever joined more real benevolence than my friend Hume. His love to mankind was universal, and vehement; and there was no service he would not cheerfully have done to his fellow creatures, excepting only that of suffering them to save their souls in their own way. He was tender-hearted, friendly, and charitable in the extreme, as will appear from a fact, which I have from good authority. When a member of the university of Edinburgh, and in great want of money, having little or no paternal fortune, and the collegiate stipend being very inconsiderable, he had procured, through the interest of some friend, an office in the university, which was worth about forty pounds a year. On the day when he had received this good news, and just when he had got into his possession the patent, or grant intitling him to his office, he was visited by his friend Blacklock, the poet, who is much better known by his poverty and blindness, than by his genius. This poor man began a long descant on his misery, bewailing his want of sight, his large family of children and his utter inability to provide for them, or even to procure them the necessaries of life. Hume, unable to bear his complaints, and destitute of money to assist him, ran instantly to his desk, took out the grant, and presented it to his miserable friend, who received it with exultation, and whose name was soon after, by Hume’s interest, inserted instead of his own. After such a relation it is needless that I should say any more of his genuine philanthropy and generous beneficence.[”]
“About this time 1766 or somewhat before this, lord Charlemont once more met his friend David Hume. His lordship mentions him in some detached papers which I shall here collect, and give to the reader. “Nothing,” says lord Charlemont, “ever showed a mind more truly beneficent than Hume’s whole conduct with regard to Rousseau. That story is too well known to be repeated, and exhibits a striking picture of Hume’s heart, whilst it displays the strange and unaccountable vanity and madness of the French, or rather Swiss, moralist. When first they arrived together from France, happening to meet Hume in the park, I wished him joy of his pleasing connexion, and particularly hinted that I was convinced he must be perfectly happy in his new friend, as their sentiments were, I believed, nearly similar. “Why, no man,” said he, “in that you are mistaken; Rousseau is not what you think him; he has a hankering after the bible, indeed is little better than a christian, in a way of his own.” Excess of vanity was the madness of Rousseau. When he first arrived in London, he and his Armenian dress were followed by crowds, and as long as this species of admiration lasted, he was contented and happy. But in London such sights are only the wonder of the day, and in a very short time he was suffered to walk where he pleased, unattended, unobserved. From that instant his discontent may be dated. But to dwell no longer on matters of public notoriety, I shall only mention one fact, which I can vouch for truth, and which would, of itself, be amply sufficient to convey an adequate idea of the amazing eccentricity of this singular man. When, after having quarrelled with Hume, and all his English friends, Rousseau was bent on making his escape, as he termed it, into France, he stopped at a village between London and Dover, and from thence wrote to general Conway, then secretary of state, informing him that although he had got so far with safety, he was well apprised that the remainder of his route was so beset by his inexorable enemies, that, unprotected, he could not escape. He therefore solemnly claimed the protection of the king, and desired that a party of cavalry might be immediately ordered to escort him to Dover. This letter general Conway showed to me, together with his answer, in which he assured him that the postillions were, altogether, a very sufficient guard throughout every part of the king’s dominions. To return to Hume. In London where he often did me the honour to communicate the manuscripts of his additional essays, before their publication, I have sometimes, in the course of our intimacy, asked him whether he thought that, if his opinions were universally to take place, mankind would not be rendered more unhappy than they now were; and whether he did not suppose that the curb of religion was necessary to human nature? “The objections,” answered he, “are not without weight; but error never can produce good, and truth ought to take place of all considerations.” He never failed in the midst of any controversy, to give its due praise to every thing tolerable that was either said, or written against him. One day that he visited me in London, he came into my room laughing, and apparently well pleased. “What has put you into this good humor Hume?” said I. “Why man,” replied he, “I have just now had the best thing said to me I ever heard. I was complaining in a company, where I spent the morning, that I was very ill treated by the world, and that the censures past upon me were hard and unreasonable. That I had written many volumes, throughout the whole of which, there were but few pages that contained any reprehensible matter, and yet, for those few pages, I was abused and torn to pieces.” “You put me in mind,” said an honest fellow in the company whose name I did not know, “of an acquaintance of mine, a notary public, who, having been condemned to be hanged for forgery, lamented the hardship of his case; that, after having written many thousand inoffensive sheets, he should be hanged for one line.”
“But an unfortunate disposition to doubt of every thing seemed interwoven with the nature of Hume, and never was there, I am convinced, a more thorough and sincere sceptic. He seemed not to be certain even of his own present existence, and could not therefore be expected to entertain any settled opinion respecting his future state. Once I asked him what he thought of the immortality of the soul; “Why troth, man,” said he, “it is so pretty and so comfortable a theory, that I wish I could be convinced of its truth, but I cannot help doubting.”
“Hume’s fashion at Paris when he was there as secretary to lord Hertford, was truly ridiculous; and nothing ever marked in a more striking manner, the whimsical genius of the French. No man, from his manners, was surely less formed for their society, or less likely to meet with their approbation; but that flimsy philosophy which pervades, and deadens even their most licentious novels, was then the folly of the day. Freethinking and English frocks were the fashion, and the Anglomanie was the ton du pais. Lord Holland, though far better calculated than Hume to please in France, was also, an instance of this singular predilection. Being about this time on a visit to Paris, the French concluded that an Englishman of his reputation must be a philosopher, and must be admired. It was customary with him to doze after dinner, and one day at a great entertainment he happened to fall asleep: ‘Le voila!’ says a marquis, pulling his neighbour by the sleeve, ‘Le voila! qui pense!’ But the madness for Hume was far more singular and extravagant. From what has been already said of him, it is apparent that his conversation to strangers, and particularly to Frenchmen, could be little delightful, and still more particularly, one would suppose, to French women. And yet no lady’s toilet was complete without Hume’s attendance. At the opera his broad unmeaning face was usually seen entre deux tolis minois. The ladies in France give the ton, and the ton was deism; a species of philosophy, ill suited to the softer sex, in whose delicate frame weakness is interesting, and timidity a charm. But the women in France were deists, as with us they were charioteers. The tenets of the new philosophy were a portee de tout le monde, and the perusal of a wanton novel, such, for instance, as Therese Philosophe, was amply sufficient to render any fine gentleman, or any fine lady, an accomplished, nay, a learned deist. How my friend Hume was able to endure the encounter of these French female Titans I know not. In England, either his philosophic pride, or his conviction that infidelity was ill suited to women, made him perfectly averse from the initiation of ladies into the mysteries of his doctrine. I never saw him so much displeased, or so much disconcerted, as by the petulance of Mrs. Mallet, the conceited wife of Bolingbroke’s editor. This lady, who was not acquainted with Hume, meeting him one night at an assembly, boldly accosted him in these words: “Mr. Hume, give me leave to introduce myself to you; we deists ought to know each other.” “Madam,” replied he, “I am no deist. I do not style myself so, neither do I desire to be known by that appellation.”
“Nothing ever gave Hume more real vexation, than the strictures made upon his history in the house of lords, by the great lord Chatham. Soon after that speech I met Hume, and ironically wished him joy of the high honour that had been done him. ‘Zounds, man,” said he, with more peevishness than I had ever seen him express, ‘he’s a Goth! he’s a Vandal!’ Indeed, his history is as dangerous in politics, as his essays are in religion; and it is somewhat extraordinary, that the same man who labours to free the mind from what he supposes religious prejudices, should as zealously endeavour to shackle it with the servile ideas of despotism. But he loved the Stuart family, and his history is, of course, their apology. All his prepossessions, however, could never induce him absolutely to falsify history; and though he endeavours to soften the failings of his favourites, even in their actions, yet it is on the characters which he gives to them, that he principally depends for their vindication; and from hence frequently proceeds, in the course of his history, this singular incongruity, that it is morally impossible that a man, possessed of the character which the historian delineates, should, in certain circumstances, have acted the part which the same historian narrates and assigns to him. But now to return to his philosophical principles, which certainly constitute the discriminative feature of his character. The practice of combating received opinions, had one unhappy, though not unusual, effect on his mind. He grew fond of paradoxes, which his abilities enabled him successfully to support; and his understanding was so far warped and bent by this unfortunate predilection, that he had well nigh lost that best faculty of the mind, the almost intuitive perception of truth. His skeptical turn made him doubt, and consequently dispute, every thing; yet was he a fair and pleasant disputant. He heard with patience, and answered without acrimony. Neither was his conversation at any time offensive, even to his more scrupulous companions; his good sense, and good nature, prevented his saying any thing that was likely to shock; and it was not till he was provoked to argument, that, in mixed companies, he entered into his favourite topics. Where indeed, as was the case with me, his regard for any individual rendered him desirous of making a proselyte, his efforts were great, and anxiously incessant.”
___________________________________
EWELL’S NOTES
In his essay “Whether the British Government inclines more to Absolute Monarchy, or to a Republic,” Hume wrote that “If the house of commons … ever dissolve itself, which is not to be expected, we may look for a civil war every election. If it continue itself, we shall suffer all the tyranny of a faction, subdivided into new factions. And, as such a violent government cannot long subsist, we shall, at last, after many convulsions, and civil wars, find repose in absolute monarchy, which it would have been happier for us to have established peaceably from the beginning.” To that statement, Ewell added the following editorial note:
*Mr. Hume’s prejudices in favor of a monarchy, appear to have warpt his judgment in this assertion. It is only where elections are very uncommon, like that for example in Poland, that such excesses are committed. The frequency of elections, as in the United States, afford an effectual remedy against the violence apprehended by Mr. Hume.
E.
___________________________________
To Hume’s essay “Of National Characters,” Ewell added the following editorial note:
* Notwithstanding the learning and ingenuity exhibited by Mr. Hume in this essay, it appears to me that he has missed the truth. There can be no doubt but that the human mind is so connected with the body, that but few changes can be made in one without affecting the other. It is not to be contended that minds may not, by extraordinary means, be moulded almost to any disposition; for the coward may be made brave, and the brave made to lose self command; the cold inhabitant of the north, by generous diet and drink, diligently given, will become fully as amorous as those stimulated by a southern sun. But by the ordinary operation of regimen and of climate, I think effects will be produced peculiar to each essential change, ultimately fully equal to counteracting any operation from accidental and extraordinary causes. A vegetable diet lessens the ferocity of all accustomed to animal; as does a stimulating diet encrease it. — Obesity begets good nature; and the climate favouring it must be marked by the good nature of the inhabitants, when not counteracted by some powerful cause. The state of country producing the enlargement of the throat called goitre; or indeed any other enlargement of the body cannot fail to produce some peculiar effects upon the mind, although at present not known. The emigrations or changes of residence, to which most men are so much inclined, render it difficult to acquire accurate knowledge of the peculiar effects produced by each climate. But I think it may be laid down as a truth, that any climate which produces peculiar effects upon men’s bodies, will produce changes on their habits. Must it not be owing to the climate, that in Turkey, at the present day, there are nunneries established by sects of the Mahomedans, who devote themselves as fully to the monastic life, as the followers of the Christian religion, in the same country, of former ages? Do not the Christians of Judea circumcise, with the same pious motives, as the Jews? To what but the climate can be ascribed the despotic governments, universal in all hot countries? Indeed I have some belief, that every country remarkably different from another, will have a government and religion as peculiar and natural to it, as any peculiar shape of body or disposition. But many centuries must elapse, and man become infinitely more stationary, before we can pretend to say what religion, morals and manners are peculiar to each climate.
E.
___________________________________
To Hume’s essay “Idea of a Perfect Commonwealth,” Ewell added the following editorial note:
*Mr. Hume’s idea of a perfect Commonwealth, like all that have heretofore been published, is very defective. The authors have entirely lost sight of the most important part of man — his usefulness in the community. No one will think that the value of a man in society, is in proportion to his wealth: or that numbers constitute wealth; for it is daily seen the rich become the greatest drones, and the most worthless people the most numerous. Although all men will differ, probably, as much about the degree of each other’s utility, as they have about the standard of taste; yet, as certainly as that they have agreed that Homer and Virgil are great poets, they will agree that one man is more serviceable than another: They can make sufficient approaches to the truth, for useful purposes.
Where is the man who will presume to declare, that the part of the community occupied in those low employments, which keep the mind in total ignorance, can be qualified to judge of the expediency of a political measure? It is a mockery, to call on such to decide: yet reason dictates that, whatever may be the poverty or condition of such men, no laws should be made respecting them, without their having a voice.
The plan which presents itself to my mind, as best calculated to insure prosperity to the public; to reduce the influence of the wealthy, who cease to be active and useful; to keep the ignorant in their proper sphere; and to raise the useful to their standing in the government, is the following:
Let the country be divided into small districts of population, not exceeding one thousand voters or free men: let each hundred elect one of their number; and the ten so elected to be sworn judges, free from favor or prejudice: Let them meet; and, choosing an eleventh to decide on equal divisions, they are to fix a scale of utility from one to twenty degrees — the most useful in the community to have twenty votes; the most indifferent but one vote; the intermediate stages to be filled up by the judges, according to their honest belief of the relative value of the exertions of each citizen.
There can be no doubt, but that such judges would with all men agree, that the drunken carman was not to have as many votes; or, in other words, was not as useful as an attentive ingenious mechanic: that the mechanic was not as useful as the merchant, who relieved the wants of his country, by converting what could be spared into the superfluities of other countries: They would say, that the professional man of science, who was active in his business, was entitled to more weight than the recluse: In short they would decide, that one sphere was superior to another — though the lowest be necessary. And although they might err in their decisions, more justice would come from them than from the monstrous system — giving to the fool and the knave the weight of the useful.
After determining the scale every two or three years, of each man’s useful activity, the people would assemble; and, according to their rate, vote for legislators: And if any possible contrivance could secure proper representatives, assuredly this would.
According to this plan, the only chance of continuing in office, and in rank, would be through the best possible channel, usefulness to the community. In addition, what a powerful stimulus would it prove, to encrease the valuable labours of every citizen? Would the indolent rich see themselves in inferior stations to the industrious poor? The Spartan and the Christian age would speedily appear in perfection: to promote one’s self, by promoting or doing good to the public, being the achme of human greatness. Such a government would for ever be the government of the thinking part of the people; having in its nature the principles of as eternal life, as can be had by human institutions.
E.
___________________________________
To Section X of Hume’s An Enquiry concerning Human Understanding, “Of Miracles,” Ewell added the following editorial note:
NOTE.
I repeat the observation made in the preface, that it matters naught, so that we believe in the doctrines of our holy Testament, whether we ascribe the belief to a miracle wrought within us, or to the workings of the Holy Spirit, as among several religious sects, or to any other cause into the admission of which we may be able to reason ourselves. The miracle of conversion into the true faith, does not in my view appear half so extraordinary as many sudden excitements in our systems. Indeed, we could better explain to our minds, an hundred miracles for converting the souls of men to heaven, than for example, the operations for generation; a most wonderful process as all admit.
Again; Mr. HUME states, that there is no connexion between cause and effect; we are to look upon every thing as detached; that the connexion is only in our habit of associating the one with the other. Suppose then, a man saw but one event of a kind; that he never saw but one conversion of water into ice; would he be justifiable in doubting his senses; could he deny the occurrence because to him it appeared as a miracle; an extraordinary event, although it may have been in contradiction to all he had formerly seen? If this astonished man ought to be credited about the ice, why should not others who report extraordinary occurrences for supporting doctrines, connected with the fate of the world, be also credited?
But those who are not satisfied with this short manner of treating Mr. Hume’s argument, must refer to Dr. Campbell’s answer annexed.
E.