of dangerous political opinions.  The idea has not altogether disappeared that free thought is peculiarly indecent in the poor, that it is highly desirable to keep them superstitious in order to keep them contented, that they should be duly thankful for all the theological as well as social arrangements which have been made for them by their betters.  I may quote from an essay of Mr. Frederic Harrison an anecdote which admirably expresses the becoming attitude of the poor towards ecclesiastical institutions.  “The master of a workhouse in Essex was once called in to act as chaplain to a dying pauper.  The poor soul faintly murmured some hopes of heaven.  But this the master abruptly cut short and warned him to turn his last thoughts towards hell.  ’And thankful you ought to be,’ said he, ‘that you have a hell to go to.’ "

[224]

The most important English freethinkers who appealed to the masses were Holyoake, [3] the apostle of “secularism,” and Bradlaugh.  The great achievement for which Bradlaugh will be best remembered was the securing of the right of unbelievers to sit in Parliament without taking an oath (1888).  The chief work to which Holyoake (who in his early years was imprisoned for blasphemy) contributed was the abolition of taxes on the Press, which seriously hampered the popular diffusion of knowledge. [4] In England, censorship of the Press had long ago disappeared (above, p. 139); in most other European countries it was abolished in the course of the nineteenth century. [5]

In the progressive countries of Europe there has been a marked growth of tolerance (I do not mean legal toleration, but the tolerance

[225] of public opinion) during the last thirty years.  A generation ago Lord Morley wrote:  “The preliminary stage has scarcely been reached—­the stage in which public opinion grants to every one the unrestricted right of shaping his own beliefs, independently of those of the people who surround him.”  I think this preliminary stage has now been passed.  Take England.  We are now far from the days when Dr. Arnold would have sent the elder Mill to Botany Bay for irreligious opinions.  But we are also far from the days when Darwin’s Descent created an uproar.  Darwin has been buried in Westminster Abbey.  To-day books can appear denying the historical existence of Jesus without causing any commotion.  It may be doubted whether what Lord Acton wrote in 1877 would be true now:  “There are in our day many educated men who think it right to persecute.”  In 1895, Lecky was a candidate for the representation of Dublin University.  His rationalistic opinions were indeed brought up against him, but he was successful, though the majority of the constituents were orthodox.  In the seventies his candidature would have been hopeless.  The old commonplace that a freethinker is sure to be immoral is no longer heard.  We may say that we have now

[226] reached a stage at which it is admitted by every one who counts (except at the Vatican), that there is nothing in earth or heaven which may not legitimately be treated without any of the assumptions which in old days authority used to impose.