תמונות בעמוד
[ocr errors]

the Testament' faithfully as I received it. It is a manly declaration of what was true to the conscience and right in the judgment of him who signed it. The signed and attested copy I have placed in the Reasoner office for the inspection of any who are curious or sceptical.] On the

evening after his death, a special meeting of the committee of the John Street Institute was held, when they, as a mark of respect to their deceased col. league, undertook the conduct of the burial. The arrangements were confided to Mr. Tiffin, of the New Road; and the event showed that they could not have been placed in more judicious hands. Everything was done in quiet taste. The proceedings were decorous without gloom. There was conscientious propriety without a particle of ostentation or affected display. The hearse was covered by a canopy of puse coloured silk, on each side of which appeared, in silver letters, the words of a frequent phrase of Hetherington's— WE OUGHT TO ENDEAVOUR TO LEAVE THE WORLD BETTER THAN WE FOUND IT. At the end of the hearse appeared, in similar letters,

HENRY HETHERINGTON, Mutes were superseded by pages with white and blue coloured wands, and the officers of the John Street Institution, and various friends of the deceased, walked with similar wands on each side the procession. The Messrs. Tiffin bore maces. David Hetherington, the only surviving son (who is with Mr. Heywood, of Manchester), a relative, Mr. Watson, and myself occupied the cab next the hearse. Twenty-five other cabs followed, and the rear was coinposed of a long procession of friends. The road, during the long journey to the cemetery, was lined with people. At times the scene was very affecting, as women following wept as though Hetherington was some Christ of Labour. The ground for the interment was that lately purchased by Mr. W. D. Saull, and Hetherington is the first who occupies it.* The concourse of persons at the grave was very great. To name all, who would be known to the public if named, would occupy a page. There were editors, lecturers, publishers, guardians of the poor, foreign Socialists and politicians of note, who respected Hetherington, or had co-operated with him. Adjoining the grave is the monument of Publicola,' the author of the wellknown Letters of the Weekly Dispatch. The eminence was appropriate. I stood upon that tomb to speak the Oration given in No. 9.



When Mr. Watson rose to speak, the assembly again uncovered. He laboured under such evident emotion that it communicated itself to those around. He said the grave at his feet was about to separate from him one who had been not only his political associate, but his personal friend for twenty years. And how. ever painful it was to him, he could not resist compliance, in some form, with the wish of Mr. Hetherington, in saying a few words over his remains. To the correctness of what his friend Mr. Holyoake had said he could bear his testimony. It was his misfortune to be out of town when Mr. Hetherington's illness was first communicated to him. He at once returned home; and when, after a long journey, he hastened to his friend's door-it was to find him dead. He could assure them that he felt deep, intense, inexpressible distress that it was denied to him to be also at his bed-side, as Mr. Holyoake had been, to administer to his wants : and he felt deeply grateful to those who were there, as he knew that all was done which friendly consideration could suggest or execute. He and Hetherington had suffered imprisonment together, and he knew that the pecuniary difficulties which had embittered his latter years, were almost altogether induced by his sacrifices and losses in the people's service. And his friendship was as disinterested as his patriotism. Hinself and Hetherington were both book

* On the morning after Mr. Saull announced at John Street that he had purchased a piece of ground in Kensal Green Cemetery, to serve as a burying place for our friends, Hetherington said to me Saull has bought a grave, and says he is able to give a friend a lift—there's a chance for us."

sellers, but there never was between them the smallest degree of that rivalry which was so commonly found, and which degraded trade into a low, a disingennous, a selfish, and a miserable contest. Whatever book he had undertaken, Hetherington promoted its sale just as though it was his own. They did so by each other, and their single friendship never knew two interests. Did his feelings leave him the power of speech, he could dwell long on the virtues of his friend. They had heard the tribute paid him by Mr. Holyoake. Let them inquire into its truth. It would bear the inquiry—and if they found it true, let each go, and to the extent of his power do what Hetherington had done. There were many young men around him. On them it devolved to carry forward the work to which he whom they deplored had made the unwearied contribution of his life. Let all who professed esteem for Hetherington imitate him. There could be no tribute more eloquent—no honour to him greater than that.

Mr. W. J. Linton has forwarded the following passage, which he would fain hang garland-like on Hetherington's tomb. The language in which it is expressed, no less than the friendship which dictated it, entitles it to preservation.


Op all the men in the battle for the People's Right, I have known none more single-minded, few so brave, so generous, so gallant as he. He was the most chivalrous of all our party. He could neglect his own interests (which is by no means a virtue, but there is never lack of rebukers for all failings of that kind), but he never did, and never could, neglect his duty to the cause he had embraced, to the principles he had avowed, There was no notoriety-hunting in him: as, indeed, so mean a passion has no place in any true man. And he was of the truest. He would toil in any unnoticeable good work for freedom, in any 'forlorn hope,' or even, when he saw that justice was with them, for men who were not of his party, as cheerfully and vigorously as most other inen will labour for money, or fame, or respectability. He was a real man, one of that select and 'glorious company of those who are completely in earnest. His principles were not kept in the pocket of a Sunday coat (I don't know that he always had a Sunday change of any sort); but were to him the daily light which led his steps. If strife and wrath lay in his path, it was seldom from any fault of his ; for though hasty, as a man of impulsive nature, and chafed by some afflictions, he was not intolerant, nor quarrelsome, nor vindietive. Men who did not know him have called him violent. He was, as I said before, hasty and impetuous, but utterly without malice; and he would not have harmed his worst enemy, though, in truth, he heartily detested tyranny and tyrants. Peace be with him, on the other side of this fitful dream which we call life: peace, which he seldom knew here, though. his nature was kindly and his hope strong, though he loved Truth and wilfully injured no man. One of the truest and bravest of the warm-hearted has laid down among the tombs, not worn out, but sorely wearied. May we rest as honourably, with as few specks to come between our lives and the grateful recollections of those who have journeyed with us. If our young men, in the vigour of their youth, will be but as enthusiastic and as untiring as was Hetherington, even in the last days of his long exertion, we need not despair of Freedom, por of a worthy monument to a noble life, which else would seem but as a rainly. spoken word, wasted and forgotten.

Yet again, peace be with him; and in his place, the copy and thankful remembrance of the worth we loved in him.


It is a peculiarity, which has been the subject of some remark, that I read my address at the grave. In addition to the reasons I there urged, one not noticed a public one-actuated me, which for public reasons I state. It seems to me that nothing is gained by dispensing with the Church Service unless something, as carefully considered and more personally conscientious, is put in its place. It seems to me that, in point of solemnity and decorum, the Church Service is perfect; and in every substitution of ours, the qualities of propriety and earnestness

[ocr errors]

should be most anxiously and effectually preserved. It has come under my observation, that some burials of our friends have been conducted where the possibility has been left open of irrelevant things being said—and sometimes they have been said. As far as this can be guarded against it should be--and to write what facts and thoughts are proposed to be expressed is the best precaution we can take to prevent it.

It must not be left open for any man to think that free tom of thought, which we claim to exercise, is not quite compatible with good taste. That philosophy which wants sensibility is false. It must be put past all doubt that scepticism of clerical error does not deprive us of the feelings of men, or the reverence of humanity. It does not matter to me that to read a speech is supposed to mar oratorical effect: this it by no means necessarily does. Victor Hugo's late speech at the Peace Conference in Paris, which has won so much applause in Europe, and so moved those who heard it, was read. But if reading did impair rhetorical effect, it would matter nothing in a funeral oration-as every appearance of display is best banished, and that is the most effective, on such an occasion, which is the most decorous, unambitious, simple, and earnest. My apology for making these remarks here, is my desire to see some fixed and wellconsidered canon of taste regulate the practice of our friends on these occasicns, and this seems a suitable opportunity for suggesting it.

At the conclusion of the service at the grave, I signed my name at the Lodge as ‘Officiating Clergyman,' Mr. Watson was required to do the same. We had no power to alter an official form, but I have since been instructed by a legal observer, that we might have written after our namesOficiating friends, thus determining our own qualification consistently with our views. The fact is worth mentioning, as it may guide others. The John Street Directors provided 2000 copies of Hetherington's 'Will and Testament for distribution to the assembly. In order that nothing should be done, which could interfere with the etiquette which the Committee of the Cemetery might be anxious to preserve, these were not given except outside the gates. Several reprints have already been made of the document, here inserted. But the distribution and sale of it, in a separate forin, has been discontinued, as it might be better circulated in connection with the matter in the Memorial, and the proceeds, which may thence arise, be appropriated, either to perpetuate Hetherington's memory in some obviously durable form, or to the advantage of his survivors—there being dependents to whom he was deeply attached--for whom it does not appear that any provision exists. Messrs. Watson and Whitaker are assiduously engaged in the arduous and difficult labour of adjusting his very confused and involved affairs, which his continuous adversities and sudden death have left in seemingly inextricable difficul. ties. And if the matter of the Memorial should not sufficiently compensate those who may purchase or circulate it, perhaps the reflection that they may thus contribute to the welfare of those whom Hetherington regarded, may prove an adequate satisfaction. For, he who cared more for the public than he cared for himself, is perhaps entitled (in the persons of those belonging to him) to some posthumous care in return.


The widest ocean is but an aggregate of drops. The spirit of man is but an accumulation of thoughts. Globules of water constitute the one, and items of idea measure the extent of the other. Everything, then, which tends to excite reflection and keep alive in the mind a sense of great truths, fosters idea, nourishes thought, and promotes the progress of humanity.

No one, I think, will deny this, and consequently no one will accuse me of wasting time if I devote a few minutes to the noting down what I have read in three authors bearing upon the cause of Democracy. If this only sets others reading and searching for themselves, some little good will be done.

The authors I allude to are Blackstone, Paley, and Montesquieu. Neither of these writers were republicans, but they have written enough to convince an unprejudiced' mind that republicanism is the only true, just, and virtuous form of government. Blackstone says, 'In a democracy, where the right of making laws resides in the people at large, public virtue or goodness of intention is more likely to be found than either of the other qualities of government.' By this we are to understand that though an aristocracy may boast of more wisdom, and a monarchy of more strength than a republic—which is a very questionable statement-yet a republic is the best adapted to the growth of unselfishness and pure patriotic feeling. The wisdom of aristocracies and the strength of monarchies being extremely uncertain, particularly the former; the superiority of morality over mere intellectual power being generally adınitted ; and the greater probability that morality, the soul of all virtue, will prevail under a republic than under the rule of kings or nobles-thé palm must decidedly be awarded to the democratic form of government. In Paley's Philosophy we read thus :

—The advantages of a republic are, liberty or exemption from needless restrictions; equal laws; regulations adapted to the wants and circumstances of the people ; public spirit, frugality, averseness to war; the opportunities which democratic assemblies afford to men of every description of producing their abilities and counsels to public observation, and the exciting thereby and calling forth to the service of the commonwealth the faculties of its best citizens. According to Paley, therefore, the distinctive merit of a republic is that it proclaims and encourages the principles of liberty, equality, and fraternity. And without these principles of what value is any government? But a monarchy is the direct antithesis of a democracy; the watchwords of monarchies, then, are Slavery, Injustice, and Fratricide. Whatever vices are incident to republics are also incident to monarchies; but the virtues of a republic are her own offspring, they arise out of her because she is based on human nature. In human nature the germs

of every virtue are planted, and require but the sunshine of Truth to bring them to maturity,

Montesquieu, in that magnificent work of his, the Spirit of Laws,' pays a profound homage to republicanism when he says "The more an aristocracy borders on democracy, the nearer it approaches to perfection; and in proportion as it draws towards monarchy the more it is imperfect.'

In addition to these writers, and on the idea entertained by many of the advantage and beauty resulting from a union of the three forms of government, I shall quote a well-known passage from Thomas Paine. He says, “When men are spoken of as kings and subjects, or when government is mentioned under the distinct or combined heads of monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, what is it that reasoning man is to understand by the terms? If there really existed in the world two or more distinct and separate elements of human power, we should then see the several origins to which those terms would descriptively apply: but as there is but one species of man, there can be but one element of human power, and that element is man himself. Monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy, are but creatures of imagination; and a thousand such may be contrived, as well as three.'

[ocr errors]

Would that we could resuscitate the glorious author of those words! How his bright mind would again rouse the world to action! How he would

pour forth scorn upon royal thrones, and how he would sigh over the follies of too eager democrats ! By his deathless name let it even be impressed on our hearts that monarchy is an anointed blasphemy; aristocracy a gilded lic; democracy an eternal truth. FRANK GRANT.



Sir, I have read with satisfaction your observations over the grave of Mr. Hetherington. I have read also a printed copy of a paper purporting to be his • Last Will and Testament,' in which he states that he leaves it that no mistake or apprehension may arise through the false reports of those who officiously and obtrusively obtained access to the death-beds of avowed infidels to priestcraft and superstition ; and who, by their annoying importunities, labour to extort from an opponent, whose intellect is already worn out and subdued by protracted physical suffering, some trifling admission, that they may blazon it forth io the world as a Death-bed Confession, and a triumph of Christianity over Infidelity. This will appears to have been attested by you and two other gentlemen.

I regret to see that such were his opinions. At the same time as I know the opinions of any man do not change the nature of things--that things remain as they were and are, whatever men may think about them, I do not so much regret his opinions, as I am pleased to see that whatever they were men have courage enough to print and circulate them.

It is not that our laws are essentially different now from what they were, but that the spirit of the age forbids an interference with the exercise of the right to speak or publish what is thought, and that the greater spread of education enables men to express their thoughts in language less obnoxious to legal charge. But what is to satisfy those who doubt atheists as much as atheists doubt priests, that the friends of Hetherington did not get round him in his weaker moments, and obtain his signature to their own, rather than to his expressions of opinion? The Will itself has not appeared in the Reasoner, but as it is probable that those who read the one will have seen the other, I submit to you that the document is fairly open to the objection that the Will may have been a concoction of those who surrounded the dying man rather than the expression of his own convictions.

You may therefore, perhaps, as you are an attesting witness, deem it wise to state the circumstances under which the document which has been printed as his last Will received its existence. Is it in his own hand-writing?

EDWARD SEARCH. [The question here asked is relevant, and in consequence of the above request, I have explained the circumstances of the origination and signature of the Will, in another part of this paper, in a passage which accompanies the reprint of the Will, in the Memorial of Hetherington' issued this day.-G. J. H.]

« הקודםהמשך »