Why, then, discuss the ideas and influence of so despicable a creature?  Because, sophistical as they were, those ideas contained truths of tremendous germinant power; because in the rank soil of his times they produced a vast crop of bitter, poisonous fruit, while in the more open, better aerated soil of this century they have borne and have yet to bear a fruitage of universal benefit.  God’s ways seem mysterious; it is for men patiently to study, understand, and utilize them.

Let us turn to the more definite consideration of the writings which have given this author so brilliant a fame.  I omit any review of his operas and his system of musical notation, as not bearing on the opinions of society.

The first work, as I have said, which brought Rousseau into notice was the treatise for the Academy of Dijon, as to whether the arts and sciences have contributed to corrupt or to purify morals.  Rousseau followed the bent of his genius, in maintaining that they have done more harm than good; and he was so fresh and original and brilliant that he gained the prize.  This little work contains the germ of all his subsequent theories, especially that in which he magnifies the state of nature over civilization,—­an amazing paradox, which, however, appealed to society when men were wearied with the very pleasures for which they lived.

Rousseau’s cant about the virtues engendered by ignorance, idleness, and barbarism is repulsive to every sound mind, Civilization may present greater temptations than a state of nature, but these are inseparable from any growth, and can be overcome by the valorous mind.  Who but a madman would sweep away civilization with its factitious and remediable evils for barbarism with its untutored impulses and animal life?  Here Rousseau makes war upon society, upon all that is glorious in the advance of intellect and the growth of morality,—­upon the reason and aspirations of mankind.  Can inexperience be a better guide than experience, when it encounters crime and folly?  Yet, on the other hand, a plea for greater simplicity of life, a larger study of Nature, and a freer enjoyment of its refreshing contrasts to the hot-house life of cities, is one of the most reasonable and healthful impulses of our own day.

What can be more absurd, although bold and striking, than Rousseau’s essay on the “Origin of Human Inequalities”!  In this he pushes out the doctrine of personal liberty to its utmost logical sequence, so as to do away with government itself, and with all regulation for the common good.  We do not quarrel with his abstract propositions in respect to political equality; but his deductions strike a blow at civilization, since he maintains that inequalities of human condition are the source of all political and social evils, while Christianity, confirmed by common-sense, teaches that the source of social evils is in the selfish nature of man rather than in his outward condition.  And further, if it were possible to destroy the inequalities of life, they would soon again return, even with the most boundless liberty.  Here common-sense is sacrificed to a captivating theory, and all the experiences of the world are ignored.