{
  "schema": "tga.work.v1",
  "identifier": "dresden:vol-5:a-vindication-of-thomas-paine",
  "slug": "a-vindication-of-thomas-paine",
  "title": "A Vindication of Thomas Paine",
  "subtitle": "Reply to the New York Observer.",
  "excerpt": "Ingersoll's public demolition of the New York Observer's hundred-year slander of Thomas Paine — the claim that Paine had recanted on his deathbed — with affidavits, letters, and the record set straight.",
  "year": 1877,
  "volume": 5,
  "category": "Discussion",
  "author": {
    "name": "Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "wikidata": "Q360326",
    "viaf": "44331023"
  },
  "isPartOf": {
    "title": "The Works of Robert G. Ingersoll",
    "edition": "Dresden Edition",
    "publisher": "C. P. Farrell",
    "year": 1900
  },
  "license": "https://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/mark/1.0/",
  "url": "https://thegreatagnostic.com/works/a-vindication-of-thomas-paine/",
  "wordCount": 16889,
  "body": "_\"To argue with a man who has renounced the use and\nauthority of reason, is like administering\nmedicine to the dead.\"—Thomas Paine._\n\nPeoria, October 8, 1877.\n\nTo the Editor of the N Y. Observer:\n\nSir: Last June in San Francisco, I offered a\nthousand dollars in gold—not as a wager, but as a\ngift—to any one who would substantiate the absurd\nstory that Thomas Paine died in agony and fear,\nfrightened by the clanking chains of devils. I also\noffered the same amount to any minister who would\nprove that Voltaire did not pass away as serenely as\nthe coming of the dawn. Afterward I was informed\nthat you had accepted the offer, and had called upon\nme to deposit the money. Acting upon this inform-\nation, I sent you the following letter:\n\nPeoria, Ill., August 31st, 1877.\n\nTo the Editor of the New York Observer:\n\nI have been informed that you accepted, in your\npaper, an offer made by me to any clergyman in\nSan Francisco. That offer was, that I would pay\n\n448\n\none thousand dollars in gold to any minister in that\ncity who would prove that Thomas Paine died in\nterror because of religious opinions he had ex-\npressed, or that Voltaire did not pass away serenely\nas the coming of the dawn.\n\nFor many years religious journals and ministers\nhave been circulating certain pretended accounts of\nthe frightful agonies endured by Paine and Voltaire\nwhen dying; that these great men at the moment of\ndeath were terrified because they had given their\nhonest opinions upon the subject of religion to their\nfellow-men. The imagination of the religious world\nhas been taxed to the utmost in inventing absurd\nand infamous accounts of the last moments of these\nintellectual giants. Every Sunday school paper,\nthousands of idiotic tracts, and countless stupidities\ncalled sermons, have been filled with these calumnies.\n\nPaine and Voltaire both believed in God—both\nhoped for immortality—both believed in special\nprovidence. But both denied the inspiration of the\nScriptures—both denied the divinity of Jesus Christ.\nWhile theologians most cheerfully admit that most\nmurderers die without fear, they deny the possibility\nof any man who has expressed his disbelief in the\ninspiration of the Bible dying except in an agony of\nterror. These stories are used in revivals and in\n\n449\n\nSunday schools, and have long been considered of\ngreat value.\n\nI am anxious that these slanders shall cease. I\nam desirous of seeing justice done, even at this late\nday, to the dead.\n\nFor the purpose of ascertaining the evidence upon\nwhich these death-bed accounts really rest, I make\nto you the following proposition:—\n\nFirst.—As to Thomas Paine: I will deposit with\nthe First National Bank of Peoria, Illinois, one thou-\nsand dollars in gold, upon the following conditions:\nThis money shall be subject to your order when\nyou shall, in the manner hereinafter provided, sub-\nstantiate that Thomas Paine admitted the Bible to be\nan inspired book, or that he recanted his Infidel\nopinions—or that he died regretting that he had dis-\nbelieved the Bible—or that he died calling upon\nJesus Christ in any religious sense whatever.\n\nIn order that a tribunal may be created to try this\nquestion, you may select one man, I will select\nanother, and the two thus chosen shall select a third,\nand any two of the three may decide the matter.\n\nAs there will be certain costs and expenditures on\nboth sides, such costs and expenditures shall be paid\nby the defeated party.\n\nIn addition to the one thousand dollars in gold, I\n\n450\n\nwill deposit a bond with good and sufficient security\nin the sum of two thousand dollars, conditioned for\nthe payment of all costs in case I am defeated. I\nshall require of you a like bond.\n\nFrom the date of accepting this offer you may\nhave ninety days to collect and present your testi-\nmony, giving me notice of time and place of taking\ndepositions. I shall have a like time to take evi-\ndence upon my side, giving you like notice, and you\nshall then have thirty days to take further testimony\nin reply to what I may offer. The case shall then\nbe argued before the persons chosen; and their\ndecisions shall be final as to us.\n\nIf the arbitrator chosen by me shall die, I shall\nhave the right to choose another. You shall have\nthe same right. If the third one, chosen by our two,\nshall die, the two shall choose another; and all va-\ncancies, from whatever cause, shall be filled upon the\nsame principle.\n\nThe arbitrators shall sit when and where a major-\nity shall determine, and shall have full power to pass\nupon all questions arising as to competency of\nevidence, and upon all subjects.\n\nSecond.—As to Voltaire: I make the same prop-\nosition, if you will substantiate that Voltaire died\nexpressing remorse or showing in any way that he\n\n451\n\nwas in mental agony because he had attacked Catholi-\ncism—or because he had denied the inspiration of the\nBible—or because he had denied the divinity of Christ.\n\nI make these propositions because I want you\nto stop slandering the dead.\n\nIf the propositions do not suit you in any particu-\nlar, please state your objections, and I will modify\nthem in any way consistent with the object in view.\n\nIf Paine and Voltaire died filled with childish and\nsilly fear, I want to know it, and I want the world to\nknow it. On the other hand, if the believers in\nsuperstition have made and circulated these cruel\nslanders concerning the mighty dead, I want the\nworld to know that.\n\nAs soon as you notify me of the acceptance of\nthese propositions I will send you the certificate of\nthe bank that the money has been deposited upon\nthe foregoing conditions, together with copies of\nbonds for costs. Yours truly,\n\nR. G. Ingersoll.\n\nIn your paper of September 27, 1877, you acknowl-\nedge the receipt of the foregoing letter, and after\ngiving an outline of its contents, say: \"As not one\nof the affirmations, in the form stated in this letter,\nwas contained in the offer we made, we have no\noccasion to substantiate them. But we are prepared\n\n452\n\nto produce the evidence of the truth of our own\nstatement, and even to go further; to show not only\nthat Tom Paine 'died a drunken, cowardly, and\nbeastly death,' but that for many years previous, and\nup to that event he lived a drunken and beastly life.\"\nIn order to refresh your memory as to what you\nhad published, I call your attention to the following,\nwhich appeared in the N. Y. Observer, July 19, 1877:\n\"Put Down the Money.\n\n\"Col. Bob Ingersoll, in a speech full of ribaldry\nand blasphemy, made in San Francisco recently, said:\n\"I will give $1,000 in gold coin to any clergyman\nwho can substantiate that the death of Voltaire was\nnot as peaceful as the dawn; and of Tom Paine whom\nthey assert died in fear and agony, frightened by the\nclanking chains of devils—in fact frightened to death\nby God. I will give $1,000 likewise to any one who\ncan substantiate this 'absurd story'—a story without\na word of truth in it.\"\n\n\"We have published the testimony, and the wit-\nnesses are on hand to prove that Tom Paine died a\ndrunken, cowardly and beastly death. Let the Colo-\nnel deposit the money with any honest man, and the\nabsurd story, as he terms it, shall be shown to be an\nower true tale. But he wont do it. His talk is Infi-\ndel 'buncombe' and nothing more.\"\n\n453\n\nOn the 31st of August I sent you my letter, and\non the 27th of September you say in your paper:\n\"As not one of the affirmations in the form stated\nin this letter was contained in the offer we made, we\nhave no occasion to substantiate them.\"\n\nWhat were the affirmations contained in the offer\nyou made? I had offered a thousand dollars in gold\nto any one who would substantiate \"the absurd story\"\nthat Thomas Paine died in fear and agony,frightened\nby the clanking chains of devils—in fact, frightened to\ndeath by God.\n\nIn response to this offer you said: \"Let the Colo-\nnel deposit the money with an honest man and the\n'absurd story' as he terms it, shall be shown to be\nan 'ower true tale.' But he won't do it. His talk\nis infidel 'buncombe' and nothing more.\"\n\nDid you not offer to prove that Paine died in fear\nand agony, frightened by the clanking chains of\ndevils? Did you not ask me to deposit the money\nthat you might prove the \"absurd story\" to be an\n\"ower true tale\" and obtain the money? Did you\nnot in your paper of the twenty-seventh of September\nin effect deny that you had offered to prove this\n\"absurd story\"? As soon as I offered to deposit\nthe gold and give bonds besides to cover costs, did\nyou not publish a falsehood?\n\n454\n\nYou have eaten your own words, and, for my\npart, I would rather have dined with Ezekiel than\nwith you.\n\nYou have not met the issue. You have know-\ningly avoided it. The question was not as to the\npersonal habits of Paine. The real question was\nand is, whether Paine was filled with fear and horror\nat the time of his death on account of his religious\nopinions. That is the question. You avoid this.\nIn effect, you abandon that charge and make others.\n\nTo you belongs the honor of having made the\nmost cruel and infamous charges against Thomas\nPaine that have ever been made. Of what you\nhave said you cannot prove the truth of one word.\n\nYou say that Thomas Paine died a drunken,\ncowardly and beastly death.\n\nI pronounce this charge to be a cowardly and\nbeastly falsehood.\n\nHave you any evidence that he was in a drunken\ncondition when he died?\n\nWhat did he say or do of a cowardly character\njust before, or at about the time of his death?\n\nIn what way was his death cowardly? You must\nanswer these questions, and give your proof, or all\nhonest men will hold you in abhorrence. You have\nmade these charges. The man against whom you\n\nVindication of thomas paine.\n\n455\n\nmake them is dead. He cannot answer you. I\ncan. He cannot compel you to produce your testi-\nmony, or admit by your silence that you have\ncruelly slandered the defenceless dead. I can and I\nwill. You say that his death was cowardly. In\nwhat respect? Was it cowardly in him to hold the\nThirty-Nine Articles in contempt? Was it cowardly\nnot to call on your Lord? Was it cowardly not to\nbe afraid? You say that his death was beastly.\nAgain I ask, in what respect? Was it beastly to\nsubmit to the inevitable with tranquillity? Was it\nbeastly to look with composure upon the approach\nof death? Was it beastly to die without a com-\nplaint, without a murmur—to pass from life without\na fear?\n\nDid Thomas Paine Recant?\n\nMr. Paine had prophesied that fanatics would\ncrawl and cringe around him during his last mo-\nments. He believed that they would put a lie in\nthe mouth of Death.\n\nWhen the shadow of the coming dissolution was\nupon him, two clergymen, Messrs. Milledollar and\nCunningham, called to annoy the dying man. Mr.\nCunningham had the politeness to say, \"You have\nnow a full view of death you cannot live long, and\nwhosoever does not believe in the Lord Jesus Christ\n\n456\n\nwill asuredly be damned.\" Mr. Paine replied, \"Let\nme have none of your popish stuff. Get away with\nyou. Good morning.\"\n\nOn another occasion a Methodist minister ob-\ntruded himself when Willet Hicks was present.\nThis minister declared to Mr. Paine \"that unless he\nrepented of his unbelief he would be damned.\"\nPaine, although at the door of death, rose in his bed\nand indignantly requested the clergyman to leave\nhis room. On another occasion, two brothers by\nthe name of Pigott, sought to convert him. He was\ndispleased and requested their departure. After-\nward Thomas Nixon and Captain Daniel Pelton\nvisited him for the express purpose of ascertaining\nwhether he had, in any manner, changed his relig-\nious opinions. They were assured by the dying\nman that he still held the principles he had expressed\nin his writings.\n\nAfterward, these gentlemen hearing that William\nCobbett was about to write a life of Paine, sent him\nthe following note:\n\nNew York, April 24, 1818.\n\n\"Sir: We have been informed that you have a de-\nsign to write a history of the life and writings of\nThomas Paine. If you have been furnished with\nmaterials in respect to his religious opinions, or\n\n457\n\nrather of his recantation of his former opinions before\nhis death, all you have heard of his recanting is false.\nBeing aware that such reports would be raised after\nhis death by fanatics who infested his house at the\ntime it was expected he would die, we, the subscrib-\ners, intimate acquaintances of Thomas Paine since\nthe year 1776, went to his house. He was sitting\nup in a chair, and apparently in full vigor and use of\nall his mental faculties. We interrogated him upon\nhis religious opinions, and if he had changed his\nmind, or repented of anything he had said or wrote\non that subject. He answered, \"Not at all,\" and\nappeared rather offended at our supposition that any\nchange should take place in his mind. We took\ndown in writing the questions put to him and his\nanswers thereto before a number of persons then in\nhis room, among whom were his doctor, Mrs.\nBonneville, &c. This paper is mislaid and cannot\nbe found at present, but the above is the substance\nwhich can be attested by many living witnesses.\"\n\nThomas Nixon.\n\nDaniel Pelton.\n\nMr. Jarvis, the artist, saw Mr. Paine one or two\ndays before his death. To Mr. Jarvis he expressed\nhis belief in his written opinions upon the subject of\nreligion. B. F. Haskin, an attorney of the city of\n\n458\n\nNew York, also visited him and inquired as to his\nreligious opinions. Paine was then upon the thresh-\nold of death, but he did not tremble. He was not a\ncoward. He expressed his firm and unshaken belief\nin the religious ideas he had given to the world.\n\nDr. Manley was with him when he spoke his last\nwords. Dr. Manley asked the dying man if he did\nnot wish to believe that Jesus was the Son of God,\nand the dying philosopher answered: \"I have no\nwish to believe on that subject.\" Amasa Woodsworth\n\nsat up with Thomas Paine the night before his\ndeath. In 1839 Gilbert Vale hearing that Mr.\nWoodsworth was living in or near Boston, visited\nhim for the purpose of getting his statement. The\nstatement was published in the Beacon of June 5,\n1839, while thousands who had been acquainted with\nMr. Paine were living.\n\nThe following is the article referred to.\n\n\"We have just returned from Boston. One ob-\nject of our visit to that city, was to see a Mr. Amasa\nWoodsworth, an engineer, now retired in a hand-\nsome cottage and garden at East Cambridge, Boston.\nThis gentleman owned the house occupied by Paine\nat his death—while he lived next door. As an act\nof kindness Mr. Woodsworth visited Mr. Paine every\nday for six weeks before his death. He frequently\n\n459\n\nsat up with him, and did so on the last two nights of\nhis life. He was always there with Dr. Manley, the\nphysician, and assisted in removing Mr. Paine while\nhis bed was prepared. He was present when Dr.\nManley asked Mr. Paine \"if he wished to believe\nthat Jesus Christ was the Son of God,\" and he de-\nscribes Mr. Paine's answer as animated. He says\nthat lying on his back he used some action and with\nmuch emphasis, replied, \"I have no wish to believe\non that subject.\" He lived some time after this, but\nwas not known to speak, for he died tranquilly. He\naccounts for the insinuating style of Dr. Manley's\nletter, by stating that that gentleman just after its\npublication joined a church. He informs us that he\nhas openly reproved the doctor for the falsity con-\ntained in the spirit of that letter, boldly declaring be-\nfore Dr. Manley, who is yet living, that nothing\nwhich he saw justified the insinuations. Mr. Woods-\nworth assures us that he neither heard nor saw any-\nthing to justify the belief of any mental change in\nthe opinions of Mr. Paine previous to his death; but\nthat being very ill and in pain chiefly arising from\nthe skin being removed in some parts by long lying,\nhe was generally too uneasy to enjoy conversation\non abstract subjects. This, then, is the best evidence\nthat can be procured on this subject, and we publish\n\n460\n\nit while the contravening parties are yet alive, and\nwith the authority of Mr. Woodsworth.\n\nGilbert Vale.\n\nA few weeks ago I received the following letter\nwhich confirms the statement of Mr. Vale:\n\nNear Stockton, Cal., Green-\nwood Cottage, July 9, 1877.\n\nCol. Ingersoll: In 1842 I talked with a gentle-\nman in Boston. I have forgotten his name; but he was\nthen an engineer of the Charleston navy yard. I am\nthus particular so that you can find his name on the\nbooks. He told me that he nursed Thomas Paine\nin his last illness, and closed his eyes when dead. I\nasked him if he recanted and called upon God to\nsave him. He replied, \"No. He died as he had\ntaught. He had a sore upon his side and when we\nturned him it was very painful and he would cry out\n'O God!' or something like that.\" \"But,\" said\nthe narrator, \"that was nothing, for he believed in a\nGod.\" I told him that I had often heard it asserted\nfrom the pulpit that Mr. Paine had recanted in his\nlast moments. The gentleman said that it was not\ntrue, and he appeared to be an intelligent, truthful\nman. With respect, I remain, &c.,\n\nPhilip Graves, M. D.\n\n461\n\nThe next witness is Willet Hicks, a Quaker\npreacher. He says that during the last illness of\nMr. Paine he visited him almost daily, and that\nPaine died firmly convinced of the truth of the relig-\nious opinions he had given to his fellow-men. It\nwas to this same Willet Hicks that Paine applied for\npermission to be buried in the cemetery of the\nQuakers. Permission was refused. This refusal\nsettles the question of recantation. If he had re-\ncanted, of course there could have been no objection\nto his body being buried by the side of the best\nhypocrites on the earth.\n\nIf Paine recanted why should he be denied \"a\nlittle earth for charity\"? Had he recanted, it\nwould have been regarded as a vast and splendid\ntriumph for the gospel. It would with much noise\nand pomp and ostentation have been heralded\nabout the world.\n\nI received the following letter to-day. The\nwriter is well know in this city, and is a man of\nhigh character:\n\nPeoria, Oct. 8th, 1877.\n\nRobert G. Ingersoll, Esteemed Friend: My\nparents were Friends (Quakers). My father died\nwhen I was very young. The elderly and middle-\naged Friends visited at my mother's house. We\n\n462\n\nlived in the city of New York. Among the number\nI distinctly remember Elias Hicks, Willet Hicks,\n\nand a Mr.-Day, who was a bookseller in Pearl\n\nstreet. There were many others, whose names I\ndo not now remember. The subject of the recanta-\ntion by Thomas Paine of his views about the Bible\nin his last illness, or at any other time, was dis-\ncussed by them in my presence at different times.\nI learned from them that some of them had attended\nupon Thomas Paine in his last sickness and minis-\ntered to his wants up to the time of his death.\nAnd upon the question of whether he did recant\nthere was but one expression. They all said that\nhe did not recant in any manner. I often heard\nthem say they wished he had recanted. In fact,\naccording to them, the nearer he approached death\nthe more positive he appeared to be in his con-\nvictions.\n\nThese conversations were from 1820 to 1822. I\nwas at that time from ten to twelve years old, but\nthese conversations impressed themselves upon me\nbecause many thoughtless people then blamed the\nSociety of Friends for their kindness to that \"arch\nInfidel,\" Thomas Paine..\n\nTruly yours,\n\nA. C. Hankinson.\n\n463\n\nA few days ago I received the following letter:\nAlbany, New York, Sept. 27, 1877.\n\nDear Sir: It is over twenty years ago that pro-\nfessionally I made the acquaintance of John Hogeboom,\n\na Justice of the Peace of the county of\nRensselaer, New York. He was then over seventy\nyears of age and had the reputation of being a man\nof candor and integrity. He was a great admirer of\nPaine. He told me that he was personally ac-\nquainted with him, and used to see him frequently\nduring the last years of his life in the city of New\nYork, where Hogeboom then resided. I asked him\nif there was any truth in the charge that Paine was\nin the habit of getting drunk. He said that it was\nutterly false; that he never heard of such a thing\nduring the life-time of Mr. Paine, and did not believe\nany one else did. I asked him about the recantation\nof his religious opinions on his death-bed, and the\nrevolting death-bed scenes that the world had heard\nso much about. He said there was no truth in\nthem, that he had received his information from\npersons who attended Paine in his last illness, \"and\nthat he passed peacefully away, as we may say, in\nthe sunshine of a great soul.\"...\n\nYours truly,\n\nW. J. Hilton,\n\n464\n\nThe witnesses by whom I substantiate the fact\nthat Thomas Paine did not recant, and that he died\nholding the religious opinions he had published, are:\nFirst—Thomas Nixon, Captain Daniel Pelton,\nB. F. Haskin. These gentlemen visited him during\nhis last illness for the purpose of ascertaining whether\nhe had in any respect changed his views upon relig-\nion. He told them that he had not.\n\nSecond—James Cheetham. This man was the\nmost malicious enemy Mr. Paine had, and yet he\nadmits that \"Thomas Paine died placidly, and al-\nmost without a struggle.\" (See Life of Thomas\nPaine, by James Cheetham).\n\nThird—The ministers, Milledollar and Cunning-\nham. These gentlemen told Mr. Paine that if he\ndied without believing in the Lord Jesus Christ he\nwould be damned, and Paine replied, \"Let me have\nnone of your popish stuff. Good morning.\" (See\nSherwin's Life of Paine, p. 220).\n\nFourth—Mrs. Hedden. She told these same\npreachers when they attempted to obtrude them-\nselves upon Mr. Paine again, that the attempt to\nconvert Mr. Paine was useless—\"that if God did not\nchange his mind no human power could.\"\n\nFifth—Andrew A. Dean. This man lived upon\nPaine's farm at New Rochelle, and corresponded\n\n465\n\nwith him upon religious subjects. (See Paine's\nTheological Works, p. 308.)\n\nSixth—Mr. Jarvis, the artist with whom Paine\nlived. He gives an account of an old lady coming\nto Paine and telling him that God Almighty had\nsent her to tell him that unless he repented and be-\nlieved in the blessed Savior, he would be damned.\nPaine replied that God would not send such a foolish\nold woman with such an impertinent message. (See\nClio Rickman's Life of Paine.)\n\nSeventh—Wm. Carver, with whom Paine boarded.\nMr. Carver said again and again that Paine did not\nrecant. He knew him well, and had every opportun-\nity of knowing. (See Life of Paine by Gilbert Vale.)\n\nEighth—Dr. Manley, who attended him in his last\nsickness, and to whom Paine spoke his last words.\nDr. Manley asked him if he did not wish to believe in\nJesus Christ, and he replied, \"I have no wish to\nbelieve on that subject.\"\n\nNinth—Willet Hicks and Elias Hicks, who were\nwith him frequently during his last sickness, and\nboth of whom tried to persuade him to recant. Ac-\ncording to their testimony, Mr. Paine died as he had\nlived—a believer in God, and a friend of man.\nWillet Hicks was offered money to say something\nfalse against Thomas Paine. He was even offered\n\n466\n\nmoney to remain silent and allow others to slander\nthe dead. Mr. Hicks, speaking of Thomas Paine,\nsaid: \"He was a good man—an honest man.\"\n(Vale's Life of Paine.)\n\nTenth—Amasa Woodsworth, who was with him\nevery day for some six weeks immediately preceding\nhis death, and sat up with him the last two nights of\nhis life. This man declares that Paine did not recant\nand that he died tranquilly. The evidence of Mr.\nWoodsworth is conclusive.\n\nEleventh—Thomas Paine himself. The will of\nThomas Paine, written by himself, commences as\nfollows:\n\n\"The last will and testament of me, the subscriber,\nThomas Paine, reposing confidence in my creator\nGod, and in no other being, for I know of no other,\nnor believe in any other;\" and closes in these words;\n\"I have lived an honest and useful life to mankind;\nmy time has been spent in doing good, and I die in\nperfect composure and resignation to the will of my\ncreator God.\"\n\nTwelfth—If Thomas Paine recanted, why do you\npursue him? If he recanted, he died substantially\nin your belief, for what reason then do you denounce\nhis death as cowardly? If upon his death-bed he\nrenounced the opinions he had published, the busi-\n\n467\n\nness of defaming him should be done by Infidels, not\nby Christians.\n\nI ask you if it is honest to throw away the testi-\nmony of his friends—the evidence of fair and honor-\nable men—and take the putrid words of avowed and\nmalignant enemies?\n\nWhen Thomas Paine was dying, he was infested\nby fanatics—by the snaky spies of bigotry. In the\nshadows of death were the unclean birds of prey\nwaiting to tear with beak and claw the corpse of him\nwho wrote the \"Rights of Man.\" And there lurk-\ning and crouching in the darkness were the jackals\nand hyenas of superstition ready to violate his grave.\n\nThese birds of prey—these unclean beasts are the\nwitnesses produced and relied upon by you.\n\nOne by one the instruments of torture have been\nwrenched from the cruel clutch of the church, until\nwithin the armory of orthodoxy there remains but\none weapon—Slander.\n\nAgainst the witnesses that I have produced you\ncan bring just two—Mary Roscoe and Mary Hins-\ndale. The first is referred to in the memoir of\nStephen Grellet. She had once been a servant in his\nhouse. Grellet tells what happened between this\ngirl and Paine. According to this account Paine\nasked her if she had ever read any of his writings,\n\n468\n\nand on being told that she had read very little of\nthem, he inquired what she thought of them, adding\nthat from such an one as she he expected a correct\nanswer.\n\nLet us examine this falsehood. Why would Paine\nexpect a correct answer about his writings from one\nwho had read very little of them? Does not such a\nstatement devour itself? This young lady further\nsaid that the \"Age of Reason\" was put in her hands\nand that the more she read in it the more dark and\ndistressed she felt, and that she threw the book into\nthe fire. Whereupon Mr. Paine remarked, \"I wish\nall had done as you did, for if the devil ever had any\nagency in any work, he had it in my writing that book.\"\n\nThe next is Mary Hinsdale. She was a servant\nin the family of Willet Hicks. She, like Mary Ros-\ncoe, was sent to carry some delicacy to Mr. Paine.\nTo this young lady Paine, according to her account,\nsaid precisely the same that he did to Mary Roscoe,\nand she said the same thing to Mr. Paine.\n\nMy own opinion is that Mary Roscoe and Mary\nHinsdale are one and the same person, or the same\nstory has been by mistake put in the mouth of both.\n\nIt is not possible that the same conversation should\nhave taken place between Paine and Mary Roscoe,\nand between him and Mary Hinsdale.\n\n469\n\nMary Hinsdale lived with Willet Hicks and he\npronounced her story a pious fraud and fabrication.\nHe said that Thomas Paine never said any such\nthing to Mary Hinsdale. (See Vale's Life of\nPaine.)\n\nAnother thing about this witness. A woman by\nthe name of Mary Lockwood, a Hicksite Quaker,\ndied. Mary Hinsdale met her brother about that\ntime and told him that his sister had recanted, and\nwanted her to say so at her funeral. This turned\nout to be false.\n\nIt has been claimed that Mary Hinsdale made her\nstatement to Charles Collins. Long after the alleged\noccurrence Gilbert Vale, one of the biographers of\nPaine, had a conversation with Collins concerning\nMary Hinsdale. Vale asked him what he thought\nof her. He replied that some of the Friends be-\nlieved that she used opiates, and that they did not\ngive credit to her statements. He also said that he\nbelieved what the Friends said, but thought that\nwhen a young woman, she might have told the\ntruth.\n\nIn 1818 William Cobbett came to New York.\nHe began collecting materials for a life of Thomas\nPaine. In this he became acquainted with Mary\nHinsdale and Charles Collins. Mr. Cobbett gave a\n\n470\n\nfull account of what happened in a letter addressed\nto the Norwich Mercury in 1819. From this ac-\ncount it seems that Charles Collins told Cobbett that\nPaine had recanted. Cobbett called for the testi-\nmony, and told Mr. Collins that he must give time,\nplace, and the circumstances. He finally brought a\nstatement that he stated had been made by Mary\nHinsdale. Armed with this document Cobbett, in\nOctober of that year, called upon the said Mary\nHinsdale, at No. 10 Anthony street, New York, and\nshowed her the statement. Upon being questioned\nby Mr. Cobbett she said, \"That it was so long ago\nthat she could not speak positively to any part of the\nmatter—that she would not say that any part of the\npaper was true—that she had never seen the paper\n—and that she had never given Charles Collins\nauthority to say anything about the matter in her\nname.\" And so in the month of October, in the\nyear of grace 1818, in the mist and fog of forgetful-\nness disappeared forever one Mary Hinsdale—the\nlast and only witness against the intellectual honesty\nof Thomas Paine.\n\n_Did Thomas Paine live the life of a drunken beast,\nand did he die a drunken, cowardly and beastly death?_\n\nUpon you rests the burden of substantiating these\ninfamous charges.\n\n471\n\nYou have, I suppose, produced the best evidence\nin your possession, and that evidence I will now pro-\nceed to examine. Your first witness is Grant Thor-\nburn. He makes three charges against Thomas\nPaine, 1st. That his wife obtained a divorce from\nhim in England for cruelty and neglect. 2d. That\nhe was a defaulter and fled from England to Amer-\nica. 3d. That he was a drunkard.\n\nThese three charges stand upon the same evidence\n—the word of Grant Thorburn. If they are not all\ntrue Mr. Thorburn stands impeached.\n\nThe charge that Mrs. Paine obtained a divorce on\naccount of the cruelty and neglect of her husband is\nutterly false. There is no such record in the world,\nand never was. Paine and his wife separated by\nmutual consent. Each respected the other. They\nremained friends. This charge is without any foun-\ndation in fact. I challenge the Christian world to\nproduce the record of this decree of divorce. Accord-\ning to Mr. Thorburn it was granted in England. In\nthat country public records are kept of all such de-\ncrees. Have the kindness to produce this decree\nshowing that it was given on account of cruelty or\nadmit that Mr. Thorburn was mistaken.\n\nThomas Paine was a just man. Although sepa-\nrated from his wife, he always spoke of her with\n\n472\n\ntenderness and respect, and frequently sent her\nmoney without letting her know the source from\nwhence it came. Was this the conduct of a drunken\nbeast?\n\nThe second charge, that Paine was a defaulter in\nEngland and fled to America, is equally false. He\ndid not flee from England. He came to America,\nnot as a fugitive, but as a free man. He came with\na letter of introduction signed by another Infidel,\nBenjamin Franklin. He came as a soldier of Free-\ndom—an apostle of Liberty.\n\nIn this second charge there is not one word of truth.\n\nHe held a small office in England. If he was a\ndefaulter the records of that country will show that\nfact.\n\nMr. Thorburn, unless the record can be produced\nto substantiate him, stands convicted of at least two\nmistakes.\n\nNow, as to the third: He says that in 1802 Paine\nwas an \"old remnant of mortality, drunk, bloated\nand half asleep.\"\n\nCan any one believe this to be a true account of\nthe personal appearance of Mr. Paine in 1802? He\nhad just returned from France. He had been wel-\ncomed home by Thomas Jefferson, who had said that\nhe was entitled to the hospitality of every American.\n\n473\n\nIn 1802 Mr. Paine was honored with a public din-\nner in the city of New York. He was called upon\nand treated with kindness and respect by such men\nas DeWitt Clinton.\n\nIn 1806 Mr. Paine wrote a letter to Andrew A.\nDean upon the subject of religion. Read that letter\nand then say that the writer of it was an \"old rem-\nnant of mortality, drunk, bloated and half asleep.\"\nSearch the files of the New York Observer from the\nfirst issue to the last, and you will find nothing supe-\nrior to this letter.\n\nIn 1803 Mr. Paine wrote a letter of considerable\nlength, and of great force, to his friend Samuel\nAdams. Such letters are not written by drunken\nbeasts, nor by remnants of old mortality, nor by\ndrunkards. It was about the same time that he\nwrote his \"Remarks on Robert Hall's Sermons.\"\n\nThese \"Remarks\" were not written by a drunken\nbeast, but by a clear-headed and thoughtful man.\n\nIn 1804 he published an essay on the invasion of\nEngland, and a treatise on gunboats, full of valuable\nmaritime information:—in 1805, a treatise on yellow\nfever, suggesting modes of prevention. In short, he\nwas an industrious and thoughtful man. He sympa-\nthized with the poor and oppressed of all lands. He\nlooked upon monarchy as a species of physical\n\n474\n\nslavery. He had the goodness to attack that form\nof government. He regarded the religion of his day\nas a kind of mental slavery. He had the courage to\ngive his reasons for his opinion. His reasons filled\nthe churches with hatred. Instead of answering his\narguments they attacked him. Men who were not\nfit to blacken his shoes, blackened his character.\n\nThere is too much religious cant in the statement\nof Mr. Thorburn. He exhibited too much anxiety\nto tell what Grant Thorburn said to Thomas Paine.\nHe names Thomas Jefferson as one of the disreputa-\nble men who welcomed Paine with open arms. The\ntestimony of a man who regarded Thomas Jefferson\nas a disreputable person, as to the character of any-\nbody, is utterly without value. In my judgment, the\ntestimony of Mr. Thorburn should be thrown aside\nas wholly unworthy of belief.\n\nYour next witness is the Rev. J. D. Wickham, D.\nD., who tells what an elder in his church said. This\nelder said that Paine passed his last days on his farm\nat New Rochelle with a solitary female attendant.\nThis is not true. He did not pass his last days at\nNew Rochelle. Consequently this pious elder did\nnot see him during his last days at that place. Upon\nthis elder we prove an alibi. Mr. Paine passed his\nlast days in the city of New York, in a house upon\n\n475\n\nColumbia street. The story of the Rev. J. D. Wick-\nham, D.D., is simply false.\n\nThe next competent false witness is the Rev.\nCharles Hawley, D.D., who proceeds to state that\nthe story of the Rev. J. D. Wickham, D.D., is cor-\nroborated by older citizens of New Rochelle. The\nnames of these ancient residents are withheld. Ac-\ncording to these unknown witnesses, the account\ngiven by the deceased elder was entirely correct.\nBut as the particulars of Mr. Paine's conduct \"were\ntoo loathsome to be described in print,\" we are left\nentirely in the dark as to what he really did.\n\nWhile at New Rochelle Mr. Paine lived with Mr.\nPurdy—with Mr. Dean—with Captain Pelton, and\nwith Mr. Staple. It is worthy of note that all of\nthese gentlemen give the lie direct to the statements\nof \"older residents\" and ancient citizens spoken of\nby the Rev. Charles Hawley, D.D., and leave him\nwith his \"loathsome particulars\" existing only in his\nown mind.\n\nThe next gentleman you bring upon the stand is\nW. H. Ladd, who quotes from the memoirs of\nStephen Grellet. This gentleman also has the mis-\nfortune to be dead. According to his account, Mr.\nPaine made his recantation to a servant girl of his\nby the name of Mary Roscoe. To this girl, accord-\n\n476\n\ning to the account, Mr. Paine uttered the wish that\nall who read his book had burned it. I believe there\nis a mistake in the name of this girl. Her name was\nprobably Mary Hinsdale, as it was once claimed that\nPaine made the same remark to her, but this point\nI shall notice hereafter. These are your witnesses,\nand the only ones you bring forward, to support\nyour charge that Thomas Paine lived a drunken and\nbeastly life and died a drunken, cowardly and beastly\ndeath. All these calumnies are found in a life of\nPaine by a Mr. Cheetham, the convicted libeler\nalready referred to. Mr. Cheetham was an enemy\nof the man whose life he pretended to write.\n\nIn order to show you the estimation in which Mr.\nCheetham was held by Mr. Paine, I will give you a\ncopy of a letter that throws light upon this point:\n\nOctober 28, 1807.\n\n\"Mr. Cheetham: Unless you make a public apol-\nogy for the abuse and falsehood in your paper of\nTuesday, October 27th, respecting me, I will prose-\ncute you for lying.\"\n\nThomas Paine.\n\nIn another letter, speaking of this same man, Mr.\nPaine says: \"If an unprincipled bully cannot be re-\nformed, he can be punished.\" \"Cheetham has been\nso long in the habit of giving false information, that\ntruth is to him like a foreign language.\"\n\n477\n\nMr. Cheetham wrote the life of Paine to gratify\nhis malice and to support religion. He was prose-\ncuted for libel—was convicted and fined.\n\nYet the life of Paine written by this man is referred\nto by the Christian world as the highest authority.\n\nAs to the personal habits of Mr. Paine, we have\nthe testimony of William Carver, with whom he\nlived; of Mr. Jarvis, the artist, with whom he lived;\nof Mr. Staple, with whom he lived; of Mr. Purdy,\nwho was a tenant of Paine's; of Mr. Burger, with\nwhom he was intimate; of Thomas Nixon and\nCaptain Daniel Pelton, both of whom knew him\nwell; of Amasa Woodsworth, who was with him\nwhen he died; of John Fellows, who boarded at the\nsame house; of James Wilburn, with whom he\nboarded; of B. F. Haskin, a lawyer, who was well\nacquainted with him and called upon him during his\nlast illness; of Walter Morton, a friend; of Clio\nRickman, who had known him for many years; of\nWillet and Elias Hicks, Quakers, who knew him in-\ntimately and well; of Judge Herttell, H. Margary,\nElihu Palmer, and many others. All these testified\nto the fact that Mr. Paine was a temperate man. In\nthose days nearly everybody used spirituous liquors.\nPaine was not an exception; but he did not drink to\nexcess. Mr. Lovett, who kept the City Hotel where\n\n478\n\nPaine stopped, in a note to Caleb Bingham, declared\nthat Paine drank less than any boarder he had.\n\nAgainst all this evidence you produce the story of\nGrant Thorburn—the story of the Rev. J. D. Wick-\nham that an elder in his church told him that Paine\nwas a drunkard, corroborated by the Rev. Charles\nHawley, and an extract from Lossing's history to\nthe same effect. The evidence is overwhelmingly\nagainst you. Will you have the fairness to admit it?\nYour witnesses are merely the repeaters of the false-\nhoods of James Cheetham, the convicted libeler.\n\nAfter all, drinking is not as bad as lying. An\nhonest drunkard is better than a calumniator of the\ndead. \"A remnant of old mortality, drunk, bloated\nand half asleep\" is better than a perfectly sober\ndefender of human slavery.\n\nTo become drunk is a virtue compared with steal-\ning a babe from the breast of its mother.\n\nDrunkenness is one of the beatitudes, compared\nwith editing a religious paper devoted to the defence\nof slavery upon the ground that it is a divine insti-\ntution.\n\nDo you really think that Paine was a drunken\nbeast when he wrote \"Common Sense\"—a pamphlet\nthat aroused three millions of people, as people were\nnever aroused by a pamphlet before? Was he a\n\n479\n\ndrunken beast when he wrote the \"Crisis\"? Was\nit to a drunken beast that the following letter was\naddressed:\n\nRocky Hill, September 10, 1783.\n\n\"I have learned since I have been at this place,\nthat you are at Bordentown.—Whether for the sake\nof retirement or economy I know not. Be it for\neither or both, or whatever it may, if you will come\nto this place and partake with me I shall be exceed-\ningly happy to see you at it. Your presence may\nremind Congress of your past services to this country;\nand if it is in my power to impress them, command\nmy best exertions with freedom, as they will be\nrendered cheerfully by one who entertains a lively\nsense of the importance of your works, and who with\nmuch pleasure subscribes himself,\n\n\"Your Sincere Friend,\n\n\"George Washington.\"\n\nDid any of your ancestors ever receive a letter\nlike that?\n\nDo you think that Paine was a drunken beast\nwhen the following letter was received by him?\n\n\"You express a wish in your letter to return to\nAmerica in a national ship; Mr. Dawson, who brings\nover the treaty, and who will present you with this\nletter, is charged with orders to the captain of the\n\n480\n\nMaryland to receive and accommodate you back, if you\ncan be ready to depart at such a short warning. You\nwill in general find us returned to sentiments worthy\nof former times; _in these it will be your glory to have\nsteadily labored and with as much effect as any man\nliving._ That you may live long to continue your\nuseful labors, and reap the reward in the _thankfulness\nof nations_, is my sincere prayer. Accept the assur-\nances of my high esteem and affectionate attachment.\"\n\nThomas Jefferson.\n\nDid any of your ancestors ever receive a letter\nlike that?\n\n\"It has been very generally propagated through\nthe continent that I wrote the pamphlet 'Common\nSense.' I could not have written anything in so\nmanly and striking a style.\"—John Adams.\n\n\"A few more such flaming arguments as were\nexhibited at Falmouth and Norfolk, added to the\nsound doctrine and unanswerable reasoning con-\ntained in the pamphlet 'Common Sense,' will not\nleave numbers at a loss to decide on the propriety of\na separation.\"—George Washington.\n\n\"It is not necessary for me to tell you how\nmuch all your countrymen—I speak of the great\nmass of the people—are interested in your welfare.\n\n481\n\nThey have not forgotten the history of their own\nRevolution and the difficult scenes through which\nthey passed; nor do they review its several stages\nwithout reviving in their bosoms a due sensibility of\nthe merits of those who served them in that great\nand arduous conflict. The crime of ingratitude has\nnot yet stained, and I trust never will stain, our\nnational character. You are considered by them as\nnot only having rendered important services in our\nown Revolution, but as being on a more extensive\nscale the friend of human rights, and a distinguished\nand able defender of public liberty. To the welfare\nof Thomas Paine the Americans are not, nor can\nthey be indifferent.\".. James Monroe.\n\nDid any of your ancestors ever receive a letter\nlike that?\n\n\"No writer has exceeded Paine in ease and famil-\niarity of style, in perspicuity of expression, happiness\nof elucidation, and in simple and unassuming lan-\nguage.\"'—Thomas Jefferson.\n\nWas ever a letter like that written about an editor\nof the New York Observer?\n\nWas it in consideration of the services of a\ndrunken beast that the Legislature of Pennsylvania\npresented Thomas Paine with five hundred pounds\nsterling?\n\n482\n\nDid the State of New York feel indebted to a\ndrunken beast, and confer upon Thomas Paine an\nestate of several hundred acres?\n\n\"I believe in the equality of man, and I believe\nthat religious duties consist in doing justice, loving\nmercy, and endeavoring to make our fellow-creat-\nures happy.\"\n\n\"My own mind is my own church.\"\n\n\"It is necessary to the happiness of man that he\nbe mentally faithful to himself.\"\n\n\"Any system of religion that shocks the mind of\na child cannot be a true system.\"\n\n\"The Word of God is the creation which we\nbehold.\"\n\n\"The age of ignorance commenced with the\nChristian system.\"\n\n\"It is with a pious fraud as with a bad action—it\nbegets a calamitous necessity of going on.\"\n\n\"To read the Bible without horror, we must undo\neverything that is tender, sympathizing and benev-\nolent in the heart of man.\"\n\n\"The man does not exist who can say I have per-\nsecuted him, or that I have in any case returned evil\nfor evil.\"\n\n\"Of all tyrannies that afflict mankind, tyranny in\nreligion is the worst.\"\n\n483\n\n\"My own opinion is, that those whose lives have\nbeen spent in doing good and endeavoring to make\ntheir fellow-mortals happy, will be happy hereafter.\"\n\"The belief in a cruel god makes a cruel man.\"\n\"The intellectual part of religion is a private affair\nbetween every man and his Maker, and in which no\nthird party has any right to interfere. The practical\npart consists in our doing good to each other.\"\n\n\"No man ought to make a living by religion. One\nperson cannot act religion for another—every person\nmust perform it for himself.\"\n\n\"One good schoolmaster is of more use than a\nhundred priests.\"\n\n\"Let us propagate morality unfettered by super-\nstition.\"\n\n\"God is the power, or first cause, Nature is the\nlaw, and matter is the subject acted upon.\"\n\n\"I believe in one God and no more, and I hope\nfor happiness beyond this life.\"\n\n\"The key of heaven is not in the keeping of any\nsect nor ought the road to it to be obstructed\nby any.\"\n\n\"My religion, and the whole of it, is the fear and\nlove of the Deity and universal philanthropy.\"\n\n\"I have yet, I believe, some years in store, for I\nhave a good state of health and a happy mind. I\n\n484\n\ntake care of both, by nourishing the first with tem-\nperance and the latter with abundance.\"\n\n\"He lives immured within the Bastile of a\nword.\"\n\nHow perfectly that sentence describes you! The\nBastile in which you are immured is the word\n\"Calvinism.\"\n\n\"Man has no property in man.\"\n\nWhat a splendid motto that would have made for\nthe New York Observer in the olden time!\n\n\"The world is my country; to do good, my\nreligion.\"\n\nI ask you again whether these splendid utterances\ncame from the lips of a drunken beast?\n\nDid Thomas Paine die in destitution and want?\n\nThe charge has been made, over and over again,\nthat Thomas Paine died in want and destitution—\nthat he was an abandoned pauper—an outcast with-\nout friends and without money. This charge is just\nas false as the rest.\n\nUpon his return to this country in 1802, he was\nworth $30,000, according to his own statement made\nat that time in the following letter addressed to Clio\nRickman:\n\n\"My Dear Friend: Mr. Monroe, who is appointed\nminister extraordinary to France, takes charge of\n\n485\n\nthis, to be delivered to Mr. Este, banker in Paris, to\nbe forwarded to you.\n\n\"I arrived at Baltimore the 30th of October, and\nyou can have no idea of the agitation which my\narrival occasioned. From New Hampshire to\nGeorgia (an extent of 1,500 miles) every newspaper\nwas filled with applause or abuse.\n\n\"My property in this country has been taken care\nof by my friends, and is now worth six thousand\npounds sterling; which put in the funds will bring\nme L400 sterling a year.\n\n\"Remember me in affection and friendship to your\nwife and family, and in the circle of your friends.\"\n\nThomas Paine.\n\nA man in those days worth thirty thousand dol-\nlars was not a pauper. That amount would bring an\nincome of at least two thousand dollars per annum.\nTwo thousand dollars then would be fully equal to\nfive thousand dollars now.\n\nOn the 12th of July, 1809, the year in which he\ndied, Mr. Paine made his will. From this instru-\nment we learn that he was the owner of a valuable\nfarm within twenty miles of New York. He also\nwas the owner of thirty shares in the New York\nPhoenix Insurance Company, worth upwards of fif-\nteen hundred dollars. Besides this, some personal\n\n486\n\nproperty and ready money. By his will he gave to\nWalter Morton, and Thomas Addis Emmett, brother\nof Robert Emmett, two hundred dollars each, and\none hundred to the widow of Elihu Palmer.\n\nIs it possible that this will was made by a pauper\n—by a destitute outcast—by a man who suffered for\nthe ordinary necessaries of life?\n\nBut suppose, for the sake of the argument, that he\nwas poor and that he died a beggar, does that tend\nto show that the Bible is an inspired book and that\nCalvin did not burn Servetus? Do you really regard\npoverty as a crime? If Paine had died a millionaire,\nwould you have accepted his religious opinions? If\nPaine had drank nothing but cold water would you\nhave repudiated the five cardinal points of Calvin-\nism? Does an argument depend for its force upon\nthe pecuniary condition of the person making it?\nAs a matter of fact, most reformers—most men and\nwomen of genius, have been acquainted with poverty.\nBeneath a covering of rags have been found some of\nthe tenderest and bravest hearts.\n\nOwing to the attitude of the churches for the last\nfifteen hundred years, truth-telling has not been a\nvery lucrative business. As a rule, hypocrisy has\nworn the robes, and honesty the rags. That day is\npassing away. You cannot now answer the argu-\n\n487\n\nments of a man by pointing at holes in his coat.\nThomas Paine attacked the church when it was\npowerful—when it had what was called honors to\nbestow—when it was the keeper of the public con-\nscience—when it was strong and cruel. The church\nwaited till he was dead then attacked his reputation\nand his clothes.\n\nOnce upon a time a donkey kicked a lion. The\nlion was dead.\n\nConclusion.\n\nFrom the persistence with which the orthodox\nhave charged for the last sixty-eight years that\nThomas Paine recanted, and that when dying he\nwas filled with remorse and fear; from the malignity\nof the attacks upon his personal character, I had con-\ncluded that there must be some evidence of some\nkind to support these charges. Even with my ideas\nof the average honor of believers in superstition—\nthe disciples of fear—I did not quite believe that all\nthese infamies rested solely upon poorly attested\nlies. I had charity enough to suppose that some-\nthing had been said or done by Thomas Paine capa-\nble of being tortured into a foundation for these\ncalumnies. And I was foolish enough to think that\neven you would be willing to fairly examine the pre-\ntended evidence said to sustain these charges, and\n\n488\n\ngive your honest conclusion to the world. I sup-\nposed that you, being acquainted with the history of\nyour country, felt under a certain obligation to\nThomas Paine for the splendid services rendered by\nhim in the darkest days of the Revolution. It was\nonly reasonable to suppose that you were aware that\nin the midnight of Valley Forge the \"Crisis,\" by\nThomas Paine, was the first star that glittered in the\nwide horizon of despair. I took it for granted that\nyou knew of the bold stand taken and the brave\nwords spoken by Thomas Paine, in the French Con-\nvention, against the death of the king. I thought it\nprobable that you, being an editor, had read the\n\"Rights of Man;\" that you knew that Thomas\nPaine was a champion of human liberty; that he was\none of the founders and fathers of this Republic; that\nhe was one of the foremost men of his age; that he\nhad never written a word in favor of injustice; that\nhe was a despiser of slavery; that he abhorred tyr-\nanny in all its forms; that he was in the widest and\nhighest sense a friend of his race; that his head was\nas clear as his heart was good, and that he had the\ncourage to speak his honest thought. Under these\ncircumstances I had hoped that you would for the\nmoment forget your religious prejudices and submit\nto the enlightened judgment of the world the evi-\n\n489\n\ndence you had, or could obtain, affecting in any way\nthe character of so great and so generous a man. This\nyou have refused to do. In my judgment, you have\nmistaken the temper of even your own readers. A\nlarge majority of the religious people of this country\nhave, to a considerable extent, outgrown the preju-\ndices of their fathers. They are willing to know the\ntruth and the whole truth, about the life and death of\nThomas Paine. They will not thank you for having\npresented them the moss-covered, the maimed and dis-\ntorted traditions of ignorance, prejudice, and credulity.\nBy this course you will convince them not of the\nwickedness of Paine, but of your own unfairness.\n\nWhat crime had Thomas Paine committed that he\nshould have feared to die? The only answer you\ncan give is, that he denied the inspiration of the\nScriptures. If this is a crime, the civilized world is\nfilled with criminals. The pioneers of human thought\n—the intellectual leaders of the world—the foremost\nmen in every science—the kings of literature and\nart—those who stand in the front rank of investiga-\ntion—the men who are civilizing, elevating, instruct-\ning, and refining mankind, are to-day unbelievers in\nthe dogma of inspiration. Upon this question, the\nintellect of Christendom agrees with the conclusions\nreached by the genius of Thomas Paine. Centuries\n\n490\n\nago a noise was made for the purpose of frightening\nmankind. Orthodoxy is the echo of that noise.\n\nThe man who now regards the Old Testament as\nin any sense a sacred or inspired book is, in my judg-\nment, an intellectual and moral deformity. There is\nin it so much that is cruel, ignorant, and ferocious\nthat it is to me a matter of amazement that it was\never thought to be the work of a most merciful deity.\n\nUpon the question of inspiration Thomas Paine\ngave his honest opinion. Can it be that to give an\nhonest opinion causes one to die in terror and de-\nspair? Have you in your writings been actuated by\nthe fear of such a consequence? Why should it be\ntaken for granted that Thomas Paine, who devoted\nhis life to the sacred cause of freedom, should have\nbeen hissed at in the hour of death by the snakes of\nconscience, while editors of Presbyterian papers who\ndefended slavery as a divine institution, and cheer-\nfully justified the stealing of babes from the breasts of\nmothers, are supposed to have passed smilingly from\nearth to the embraces of angels? Why should you\nthink that the heroic author of the \"Rights of Man\"\nshould shudderingly dread to leave this \"bank and\nshoal of time,\" while Calvin, dripping with the blood\nof Servetus, was anxious to be judged of God? Is\nit possible that the persecutors—the instigators of\n\n491\n\nthe massacre of St. Bartholomew—the inventors and\nusers of thumb-screws, and iron boots, and racks—\nthe burners and tearers of human flesh—the stealers,\nwhippers and enslavers of men—the buyers and\nbeaters of babes and mothers—the founders of\ninquisitions—the makers of chains, the builders of\ndungeons, the slanderers of the living and the calum-\nniators of the dead, all died in the odor of sanctity,\nwith white, forgiven hands folded upon the breasts\nof peace, while the destroyers of prejudice—the\napostles of humanity—the soldiers of liberty—the\nbreakers of fetters—the creators of light—died sur-\nrounded with the fierce fiends of fear?\n\nIn your attempt to destroy the character of Thomas\nPaine you have failed, and have succeeded only in\nleaving a stain upon your own. You have written\nwords as cruel, bitter and heartless as the creed of\nCalvin. Hereafter you will stand in the pillory of\nhistory as a defamer—a calumniator of the dead.\nYou will be known as the man who said that Thomas\nPaine, the \"Author Hero,\" lived a drunken, coward-\nly and beastly life, and died a drunken and beastly\ndeath. These infamous words will be branded upon\nthe forehead of your reputation. They will be re-\nmembered against you when all else you may have\nuttered shall have passed from the memory of men.\n\nRobert G. Ingersoll.\n\nThe Observer's Second Attack\n  • From the NY. Observer of Nov. 1, 1877.\n\nTom Paine Again\n\nIn the Observer of September 27th, in response\nto numerous calls from different parts of the country\nfor information, and in fulfillment of a promise, we\npresented a mass of testimony, chiefly from persons\nwith whom we had been personally acquainted,\nestablishing the truth of our assertions in regard to\nthe dissolute life and miserable end of Paine. It was\nnot a pleasing subject for discussion, and an apology,\nor at least an explanation, is due to our readers for\nresuming it, and for occupying so much space, or\nany space, in exhibiting the truth and the proofs in\nregard to the character of a man who had become so\ndebased by his intemperance, and so vile in his\nhabits, as to be excluded, for many years before and\nup to the time of his death, from all decent society.\n\nOur reasons for taking up the subject at all, and\nfor presenting at this time so much additional testi-\nmony in regard to the facts of the case, are these:\nAt different periods for the last fifty years, efforts\n\n493\n\nhave been made by Infidels to revive and honor the\nmemory of one whose friends would honor him most\nby suffering his name to sink into oblivion, if that\nwere possible. About two years since, Rev. O. B.\nFrothingham, of this city, came to their aid, and\nundertook a sort of championship of Paine, making\nin a public discourse this statement: \"No private\ncharacter has been more foully calumniated in the\nname of God than that of Thomas Paine.\" (Mr.\nFrothingham, it will be remembered, is the one who\nrecently, in a public discourse, announced the down-\nfall of Christianity, although he very kindly made\nthe allowance that, \"it may be a thousand years\nbefore its decay will be visible to all eyes.\" It is\nour private opinion that it will be at least a thousand\nand one.) Rev. John W. Chadwick, a minister of\nthe same order of unbelief, who signs himself, \"Min-\nister of the Second Unitarian Society in Brooklyn,\"\nhas devoted two discourses to the same end, eulogiz-\ning Paine. In one of these, which we have before\nus in a handsomely printed pamphlet, entitled,\n\"Method and Value of his (Paine's) Religious\nTeachings,\" he says: \"Christian usage has determ-\nined that an Infidel means one who does not believe\nin Christianity as a supernatural religion; in the\nBible as a Supernatural book; in Jesus as a super-\n\n494\n\nnatural person. And in this sense Paine was an\nInfidel, and so, thank God, am I.\" It is proper to\nadd that Unitarians generally decline all responsibil-\nity for the utterances of both of these men, and that\nthey compose a denomination, or rather two denom-\ninations, of their own.\n\nThere is also a certain class of Infidels who are\nnot quite prepared to meet the odium that attaches\nto the name; they call themselves Christians, but\ntheir sympathies are all with the enemies of Chris-\ntianity, and they are not always able to conceal it.\nThey have not the courage of their opinions, like\nMr. Frothingham and Mr. Chadwick, and they work\nonly sideways toward the same end. We have been\nno little amused since our last article on this subject\nappeared, to read some of the articles that have been\nwritten on the other side, though professedly on no\nside, and to observe how sincerely these men depre-\ncate the discussion of the character of Paine, as an\nunprofitable topic. It never appeared to them un-\nprofitable when the discussion was on the other side.\n\nThen, too, we have for months past been receiving\nletters from different parts of the country, asking\nauthentic information on the subject and stating that\nthe followers of Paine are making extraordinary\nefforts to circulate his writings against the Christian\n\n495\n\nreligion, and in order to give currency to these writ-\nings they are endeavoring to rescue his name from\nthe disgrace into which it sank during the latter\nyears of his life. Paine spent several of his last\nyears in furnishing a commentary upon his Infidel\nprinciples. This commentary was contained in his\nbesotted, degraded life and miserable end, but his\nfriends do not wish the commentary to go out in\nconnection with his writings. They prefer to have\nthem read without the comments by their author.\nHence this anxiety to free the great apostle of\nInfidelity from the obloquy which his life brought\nupon his name; to represent him as a pure, noble,\nvirtuous man, and to make it appear that he died a\npeaceful, happy death, just like a philosopher.\n\nBut what makes the publication of the facts in the\ncase still more imperative at this time is the whole-\nsale accusation brought against the Christian public\nby the friends and admirers of Paine. Christian\nministers as a class, and Christian journals are\nexpressly accused of falsifying history, of defaming\n\"the mighty dead!\" (meaning Paine,) &c., &c. In\nthe face of all these accusations it cannot be out of\nplace to state the facts and to fortify the statement\nby satisfactory evidence, as we are abundantly able\nto do.\n\n496\n\nThe two points on which we proposed to produce\nthe testimony are, the character of Paine's life (refer-\nring of course to his last residence in this country,\nfor no one has intimated that he had sunk into such\nbesotted drunkenness until about the time of his\nreturn to the United States in 1802), and the real\ncharacter of his death as consistent with such a life,\nand as marked further by the cowardliness, which\nhas been often exhibited by Infidels in the same\ncircumstances.\n\nIt is nothing at all to the purpose to show, as his\nfriends are fond of doing, that Paine rendered\nimportant service to the cause of American Inde-\npendence. This is not the point under discussion\nand is not denied. No one ever called in question\nthe valuable service that Benedict Arnold rendered\nto the country in the early part of the Revolutionary\nwar; but this, with true Americans, does not suffice\nto cast a shade of loveliness or even to spread a man-\ntle of charity over his subsequent career. Whatever\nshare Paine had in the personal friendship of the\nfathers of the Revolution he forfeited by his subse-\nquent life of beastly drunkenness and degradation,\nand on this account as well as on account of his\nblasphemy he was shunned by all decent people.\n\nWe wish to make one or two corrections of mis-\n\n497\n\nstatements by Paine's advocates, on which a vast\namount of argument has been simply wasted. We\nhave never stated in any form, nor have we ever\nsupposed, that Paine actually renounced his Infidel-\nity. The accounts agree in stating that he died a\nblaspheming Infidel, and his horrible death we regard\nas one of the fruits, the fitting complement of his\nInfidelity. We have never seen anything that\nencouraged the hope that he was not abandoned of\nGod in his last hours. But we have no doubt, on\nthe other hand, that having become a wreck in body\nand mind through his intemperance, abandoned of\nGod, deserted by his Infidel companions, and de-\npendent upon Christian charity for the attentions he\nreceived, miserable beyond description in his condi-\ntion, and seeing nothing to hope for in the future, he\nwas afraid to die, and was ready to call upon God\nand upon Christ for mercy, and ready perhaps in the\nnext minute to blaspheme. This is what we referred\nto in speaking of Paine's death as cowardly. It is\nshown in the testimony we have produced, and still\nmore fully in that which we now present. The most\nwicked men are ready to call upon God in seasons\nof great peril, and sometimes ask for Christian min-\nistrations when in extreme illness; but they are\noften ready on any alleviation of distress to turn to\n\n498\n\ntheir wickedness again, in the expressive language\nof Scripture, \"as the sow that was washed to her\nwallowing in the mire.\"\n\nWe have never stated or intimated, nor, so far as\nwe are aware, has any one of our correspondents\nstated, that Paine died in poverty. It has been\nfrequently and truthfully stated that Paine was de-\npendent on Christian charity for the attentions he\nreceived in his last days, and so he was. His Infidel\ncompanions forsook him and Christian hearts and\nhands ministered to his wants, notwithstanding the\nblasphemies of his death-bed.\n\nNor has one of our correspondents stated, as\nalleged, that Paine died at New Rochelle. The\nRev. Dr. Wickham, who was a resident of that place\nnearly fifty years ago, and who was perfectly familiar\nwith the facts of his life, wrote that Paine spent \"his\nlatter days\" on the farm presented to him by\nthe State of New York, which was strictly true,\nbut made no reference to it as the place of his\ndeath.\n\nSuch misrepresentations serve to show how much\nthe advocates of Paine admire \"truth.\"\n\nWith these explanations we produce further evi-\ndence in regard to the manner of Paine's life and the\ncharacter of his death, both of which we have already\n\n499\n\ncharacterized in appropriate terms, as the following\ntestimony will show.\n\nIn regard to Paine's \"personal habits,\" even before\nhis return to this country, and particularly his aver-\nsion to soap and water, Elkana Watson, a gentleman\nof the highest social position, who resided in France\nduring a part of the Revolutionary war, and who\nwas the personal friend of Washington, Franklin,\nand other patriots of the period, makes some inci-\ndental statements in his \"Men and Times of the\nRevolution.\" Though eulogizing Paine's efforts in\nbehalf of American Independence, he describes him\nas \"coarse and uncouth in his manners, loathsome\nin his appearance, and a disgusting egotist.\" On\nPaine's arrival at Nantes, the Mayor and other dis-\ntinguished citizens called upon him to pay their\nrespects to the American patriot. Mr. Watson says:\n\"He was soon rid of his respectable visitors, who\nleft the room with marks of astonishment and dis-\ngust.\" Mr. W., after much entreaty, and only by\npromising him a bundle of newspapers to read while\nundergoing the operation, succeeded in prevailing\non Paine to \"stew, for an hour, in a hot bath.\" Mr.\nW. accompanied Paine to the bath, and \"instructed\nthe keeper, in French, (which Paine did not under-\nstand,) gradually to increase the heat of the water\n\n500\n\nuntil 'le Monsieur serait bien bouille (until the gentle-\nman shall be well boiled;) and adds that \"he became\nso much absorbed in his reading that he was nearly-\nparboiled before leaving the bath, much to his im-\nprovement and my satisfaction.\"\n\nWilliam Carver has been cited as a witness in be-\nhalf of Paine, and particularly as to his \"personal\nhabits.\" In a letter to Paine, dated December 2,\n1776, he bears the following testimony:\n\n\"A respectable gentlemen from New Rochelle\ncalled to see me a few days back, and said that\neverybody was tired of you there, and no one would\nundertake to board and lodge you. I thought this\nwas the case, as I found you at a tavern in a most\nmiserable situation. You appeared as if you had\nnot been shaved for a fortnight, and as to a shirt, it\ncould not be said that you had one on. It was only\nthe remains of one, and this, likewise, appeared not\nto have been off your back for a fortnight, and was\nnearly the color of tanned leather; and you had the\nmost disagreeable smell possible; just like that of\nour poor beggars in England. Do you remember the\npains I took to clean you? that I got a tub of warm\nwater and soap and washed you from head to foot, and\nthis I had to do three times before I could get you\nclean.\" (And then follow more disgusting details.)\n\n501\n\n\"You say, also, that you found your own liquors\nduring the time you boarded with me; but you\nshould have said, 'I found only a small part of the\nliquor I drank during my stay with you; this part I\npurchased of John Fellows, which was a demijohn of\nbrandy containing four gallons, and this did not serve\nme three weeks.' This can be proved, and I mean\nnot to say anything that I cannot prove; for I hold\ntruth as a precious jewel. It is a well-known fact,\nthat you drank one quart of brandy per day, at my\nexpense, during the different times that you have\nboarded with me, the demijohn above mentioned\nexcepted, and the last fourteen weeks you were sick.\nIs not this a supply of liquor for dinner and supper?\"\nThis chosen witness in behalf of Paine, closes his\nletter, which is full of loathsome descriptions of\nPaine's manner of life, as follows:\n\n\"Now, sir, I think I have drawn a complete por-\ntrait of your character; yet to enter upon every\nminutiae would be to give a history of your life, and\nto develop the fallacious mask of hypocrisy and de-\nception under which you have acted in your political\nas well as moral capacity of life.\"\n\n(Signed) \"William Carver.\"\n\nCarver had the same opinion of Paine to his dying\nday. When an old man, and an Infidel of the Paine\n\n502\n\ntype and habits, he was visited by the Rev. E. F.\nHatfield, D.D., of this city, who writes to us of his\ninterview with Carver, under date of Sept. 27, 1877:\n\"I conversed with him nearly an hour. I took\nspecial pains to learn from him all that I could about\nPaine, whose landlord he had been for eighteen\nmonths. He spoke of him as a base and shameless\ndrunkard, utterly destitute of moral principle. His\ndenunciations of the man were perfectly fearful, and\nfully confirmed, in my apprehension, all that had been\nwritten of Paine's immorality and repulsiveness.\"\nCheetham's Life of Paine, which was published\nthe year that he died, and which has passed through\nseveral editions (we have three of them now before\nus) describes a man lost to all moral sensibility and\nto all sense of decency, a habitual drunkard, and it is\nsimply incredible that a book should have appeared\nso soon after the death of its subject and should have\nbeen so frequently republished without being at once\nrefuted, if the testimony were not substantially true.\nMany years later, when it was found necessary to\nbolster up the reputation of Paine, Cheetham's\nMemoirs were called a pack of lies. If only one-\ntenth part of what he publishes circumstantially in\nhis volume, as facts in regard to Paine, were true, all\nthat has been written against him in later years does\n\n503\n\nnot begin to set forth the degraded character of the\nman's life. And with all that has been written on\nthe subject we see no good reason to doubt the sub-\nstantial accuracy of Cheetham's portrait of the man\nwhom he knew so well.\n\nDr. J. W. Francis, well-known as an eminent phy-\nsician, of this city, in his Reminiscences of New York,\nsays of Paine:\n\n\"He who, in his early days, had been associated\nwith, and had received counsel from Franklin, was,\nin his old age, deserted by the humblest menial; he,\nwhose pen has proved a very sword among nations,\nhad shaken empires, and made kings tremble, now\nyielded up the mastery to the most treacherous of\ntyrants, King Alcohol.\"\n\nThe physician who attended Paine during his last\nillness was Dr. James R. Manley, a gentleman of the\nhighest character. A letter of his, written in Octo-\nber of the year that Paine died, fully corroborates\nthe account of his state as recorded by Stephen\nGrellet in his Memoirs, which we have already\nprinted. He writes:\n\n\"New York, October 2, 1809: I was called upon\nby accident to visit Mr. Paine, on the 25th of Feb-\nruary last, and found him indisposed with fever, and\nvery apprehensive of an attack of apoplexy, as he\n\n504\n\nstated that he had that disease before, and at this\ntime felt a great degree of vertigo, and was unable\nto help himself as he had hitherto done, on account\nof an intense pain above the eyes. On inquiry of\nthe attendants I was told that three or four days\npreviously he had concluded to dispense with his\nusual quantity of accustomed stimulus and that he\nhad on that day resumed it. To the want of his\nusual drink they attributed his illness, and it is highly\nprobable that the usual quantity operating upon a\nstate of system more excited from the above priva-\ntions, was the cause of the symptoms of which he\nthen complained.... And here let me be per-\nmitted to observe (lest blame might attach to those\nwhose business it was to pay any particular attention\nto his cleanliness of person) that it was absolutely\nimpossible to effect that purpose. Cleanliness ap-\npeared to make no part of his comfort; he seemed\nto have a singular aversion to soap and water; he\nwould never ask to be washed, and when he was he\nwould always make objections; and it was not un-\nusual to wash and to dress him clean very much\nagainst his inclinations. In this deplorable state,\nwith confirmed dropsy, attended with frequent cough,\nvomiting and hiccough, he continued growing from\nbad to worse till the morning of the 8th of June,\n\n505\n\nwhen he died. Though I may remark that during\nthe last three weeks of his life his situation was such\nthat his decease was confidently expected every day,\nhis ulcers having assumed a gangrenous appearance,\nbeing excessively fetid, and discolored blisters hav-\ning taken place on the soles of his feet without any\nostensible cause, which baffled the usual attempts to\narrest their progress; and when we consider his\nformer habits, his advanced age, the feebleness of his\nconstitution, his constant habit of using ardent spirits\nad libitum till the commencement of his last illness,\nso far from wondering that he died so soon, we are\nconstrained to ask, How did he live so long? Con-\ncerning his conduct during his disease I have not\nmuch to remark, though the little I have may be\nsomewhat interesting. Mr. Paine professed to be\nabove the fear of death, and a great part of his con-\nversation was principally directed to give the impres-\nsion that he was perfectly willing to leave this world,\nand yet some parts of his conduct were with difficulty\nreconcilable with his belief. In the first stages of his\nillness he was satisfied to be left alone during the\nday, but he required some person to be with him at\nnight, urging as his reason that he was afraid that\nhe should die when unattended, and at this period\nhis deportment and his principle seemed to be con-\n\n506\n\nsistent; so much so that a stranger would judge from\nsome of the remarks he would make that he was an\nInfidel. I recollect being with him at night, watch-\ning; he was very apprehensive of a speedy dissolu-\ntion, and suffered great distress of body, and perhaps\nof mind (for he was waiting the event of an applica-\ntion to the Society of Friends for permission that his\ncorpse might be deposited in their grave-ground, and\nhad reason to believe that the request might be\nrefused), when he remarked in these words, 'I think\nI can say what they made Jesus Christ to say—\"My\nGod, my God! why hast thou forsaken me?\" He\nwent on to observe on the want of that respect which\nhe conceived he merited, when I observed to him\nthat I thought his corpse should be matter of least\nconcern to him; that those whom he would leave\nbehind him would see that he was properly interred,\nand, further, that it would be of little consequence to\nme where I was deposited provided I was buried;\nupon which he answered that he had nothing else to\ntalk about, and that he would as lief talk of his death\nas of anything, but that he was not so indifferent\nabout his corpse as I appeared to be.\n\n\"During the latter part of his life, though his con-\nversation was equivocal, his conduct was singular;\nhe could not be left alone night or day; he not only\n\n507\n\nrequired to have some person with him, but he must\nsee that he or she was there, and would not allow\nhis curtain to be closed at any time; and if, as it\nwould sometimes unavoidably happen, he was left\nalone, he would scream and halloo until some person\ncame to him. When relief from pain would admit,\nhe seemed thoughtful and contemplative, his eyes\nbeing generally closed, and his hands folded upon\nhis breast, although he never slept without the assist-\nance of an anodyne. There was something remark-\nable in his conduct about this period (which comprises\nabout two weeks immediately preceding his death),\nparticularly when we reflect that Thomas Paine was\nthe author of the 'Age of Reason.' He would call\nout during his paroxysms of distress, without inter-\nmission, 'O Lord help me! God help me! Jesus\nChrist help me! Lord help me!' etc., repeating the\nsame expressions without the least variation, in a\ntone of voice that would alarm the house. It was\nthis conduct which induced me to think that he had\nabandoned his former opinions, and I was more\ninclined to that belief when I understood from his\nnurse (who is a very serious and, I believe, pious\nwoman), that he would occasionally inquire, when he\nsaw her engaged with a book, what she was reading,\nand, being answered, and at the same time asked\n\n508\n\nwhether she should read aloud, he assented, and\nwould appear to give particular attention.\n\n\"I took occasion during the nights of the fifth\nand sixth of June to test the strength of his opinions\nrespecting revelation. I purposely made him a very\nlate visit; it was a time which seemed to suit exactly\nwith my errand; it was midnight, he was in great\ndistress, constantly exclaiming in the words above\nmentioned, when, after a considerable preface, I\naddressed him in the following manner, the nurse\nbeing present: 'Mr. Paine, your opinions, by a large\nportion of the community, have been treated with\ndeference, you have never been in the habit of mix-\ning in your conversation words of coarse meaning;\nyou have never indulged in the practice of profane\nswearing; you must be sensible that we are ac-\nquainted with your religious opinions as they are\ngiven to the world. What must we think of your\npresent conduct? Why do you call upon Jesus\nChrist to help you? Do you believe that he can\nhelp you? Do you believe in the divinity of Jesus\nChrist? Come, now, answer me honestly. I want\nan answer from the lips of a dying man, for I verily\nbelieve that you will not live twenty-four hours.' I\nwaited some time at the end of every question; he\ndid not answer, but ceased to exclaim in the above\n\n509\n\nmanner. Again I addressed him; 'Mr. Paine, you\nhave not answered my questions; will you answer\nthem? Allow me to ask again, do you believe? or\nlet me qualify the question, do you wish to believe\nthat Jesus Christ is the Son of God?' After a pause\nof some minutes, he answered, 'I have no wish to\nbelieve on that subject.' I then left him, and knew\nnot whether he afterward spoke to any person on\nany subject, though he lived, as I before observed,\ntill the morning of the 8th. Such conduct, under\nusual circumstances, I conceive absolutely unaccount-\nable, though, with diffidence, I would remark, not so\nmuch so in the present instance; for though the first\nnecessary and general result of conviction be a sin-\ncere wish to atone for evil committed, yet it may be\na question worthy of able consideration whether\nexcessive pride of opinion, consummate vanity, and\ninordinate self-love might not prevent or retard that\notherwise natural consequence. For my own part,\nI believe that had not Thomas Paine been such a\ndistinguished Infidel he would have left less equivo-\ncal evidences of a change of opinion. Concerning\nthe persons who visited Mr. Paine in his distress as\nhis personal friends, I heard very little, though I may\nobserve that their number was small, and of that\nnumber there were not wanting those who endeavor-\n\n510\n\ned to support him in his deistical opinions, and to\nencourage him to 'die like a man,' to 'hold fast his\nintegrity,' lest Christians, or, as they were pleased to\nterm them, hypocrites, might take advantage of his\nweakness, and furnish themselves with a weapon by\nwhich they might hope to destroy their glorious sys-\ntem of morals. Numbers visited him from motives\nof benevolence and Christian charity, endeavoring to\neffect a change of mind in respect to his religious\nsentiments. The labor of such was apparently lost,\nand they pretty generally received such treatment\nfrom him as none but good men would risk a second\ntime, though some of those persons called frequently.\"\nThe following testimony will be new to most of\nour readers. It is from a letter written by Bishop\nFenwick (Roman Catholic Bishop of Boston), con-\ntaining a full account of a visit which he paid to\nPaine in his last illness. It was printed in the _United\nStates Catholic Magazine for 1846; in the Catholic\nHerald_ of Philadelphia, October 15, 1846; in a sup-\nplement to the Hartford Courant, October 23, 1847;\nand in Littell's Living Age for January 22, 1848,\nfrom which we copy. Bishop Fenwick writes:\n\n\"A short time before Paine died I was sent for by\nhim. He was prompted to this by a poor Catholic\nwoman who went to see him in his sickness, and\n\n511\n\nwho told him, among other things, that in his\nwretched condition if anybody could do him any\ngood it would be a Roman Catholic priest. This\nwoman was an American convert (formerly a Shak-\ning Quakeress) whom I had received into the church\nbut a few weeks before. She was the bearer of this\nmessage to me from Paine. I stated this circum-\nstance to F. Kohlmann, at breakfast, and requested\nhim to accompany me. After some solicitation on\nmy part he agreed to do so? at which I was greatly\nrejoiced, because I was at the time quite young and\ninexperienced in the ministry, and was glad to have\nhis assistance, as I knew, from the great reputation\nof Paine, that I should have to do with one of the\nmost impious as well as infamous of men. We\nshortly after set out for the house at Greenwich\nwhere Paine lodged, and on the way agreed on a\nmode of proceeding with him.\n\n\"We arrived at the house; a decent-looking elderly\nwoman (probably his housekeeper,) came to the\ndoor and inquired whether we were the Catholic\npriests, for said she, 'Mr. Paine has been so much\nannoyed of late by other denominations calling upon\nhim that he has left express orders with me to admit\nno one to-day but the clergymen of the Catholic\nChurch. Upon assuring her that we were Catholic\n\n512\n\nclergymen she opened the door and showed us into\nthe parlor. She then left the room and shortly after\nreturned to inform us that Paine was asleep, and, at\nthe same time, expressed a wish that we would not\ndisturb him, 'for,' said she, 'he is always in a bad\nhumor when roused out of his sleep. It is better we\nwait a little till he be awake.' We accordingly sat\ndown and resolved to await a more favorable moment.\n'Gentlemen,' said the lady, after having taken her\nseat also, 'I really wish you may succeed with Mr.\nPaine, for he is laboring under great distress of mind\never since he was informed by his physicians that he\ncannot possibly live and must die shortly. He sent\nfor you to-day because he was told that if any one\ncould do him good you might. Possibly he may\nthink you know of some remedy which his physicians\nare ignorant of. He is truly to be pitied. His cries\nwhen he is left alone are heart-rending. 'O Lord\nhelp me!' he will exclaim during his paroxysms of\ndistress—'God help me—Jesus Christ help me!'\nrepeating the same expressions without the least\nvariation, in a tone of voice that would alarm the\nhouse. Sometimes he will say, 'O God, what have\nI done to suffer so much!' then, shortly after, 'But\nthere is no God,' and again a little after, 'Yet if\nthere should be, what would become of me hereafter.'\n\n513\n\nThus he will continue for some time, when on a sud-\nden he will scream, as if in terror and agony, and\ncall out for me by name. On one of these occasions,\nwhich are very frequent, I went to him and inquired\nwhat he wanted. 'Stay with me,' he replied, 'for\nGod's sake, for I cannot bear to be left alone.' I\nthen observed that I could not always be with him,\nas I had much to attend to in the house. 'Then,' said\nhe, 'send even a child to stay with me, for it is a\nhell to be alone.' 'I never saw,' she concluded, 'a\nmore unhappy, a more forsaken man. It seems he\ncannot reconcile himself to die.'\n\n\"Such was the conversation of the woman who\nhad received us, and who probably had been employ-\ned to nurse and take care of him during his illness.\nShe was a Protestant, yet seemed very desirous that\nwe should afford him some relief in his state of\nabandonment, bordering on complete despair. Hav-\ning remained thus some time in the parlor, we at\nlength heard a noise in the adjoining passage-way,\nwhich induced us to believe that Mr. Paine, who was\nsick in that room, had awoke. We accordingly pro-\nposed to proceed thither, which was assented to by\nthe woman, and she opened the door for us. On\nentering, we found him just getting out of his\nslumber. A more wretched being in appearance I\n\n514\n\nnever beheld. He was lying in a bed sufficiently\ndecent of itself, but at present besmeared with filth;\nhis look was that of a man greatly tortured in mind;\nhis eyes haggard, his countenance forbidding, and\nhis whole appearance that of one whose better days\nhad been one continued scene of debauch. His only\nnourishment at this time, as we were informed, was\nnothing more than milk punch, in which he indulged\nto the full extent of his weak state. He had par-\ntaken, undoubtedly, but very recently of it, as the\nsides and corners of his mouth exhibited very un-\nequivocal traces of it, as well as of blood, which had\nalso followed in the track and left its mark on the\npillow. His face, to a certain extent, had also been\nbesmeared with it.\"\n\nImmediately upon their making known the object\nof their visit, Paine interrupted the speaker by say-\ning: \"That's enough, sir; that's enough,\" and again\ninterrupting him, \"I see what you would be about.\nI wish to hear no more from you, sir. My mind is\nmade up on that subject. I look upon the whole of\nthe Christian scheme to be a tissue of absurdities\nand lies, and Jesus Christ to be nothing more than a\ncunning knave and impostor.\" He drove them out\nof the room, exclaiming: Away with you and your\nGod, too; leave the room instantly; all that you\n\n515\n\nhave uttered are lies—filthy lies; and if I had a\nlittle more time I would prove it, as I did about\nyour impostor, Jesus Christ.\"\n\nThis, we think, will suffice. We have a mass of\nletters containing statements confirmatory of what\nwe have published in regard to the life and death of\nPaine, but nothing more can be required.\n\nIngersoll's Second Reply\n\nPeoria, Nov. 2d, 1877.\n\nTo the Editor of the New York Observer:\n\nYou ought to have honesty enough to admit that\nyou did, in your paper of July 19th, offer to prove\nthat the absurd story that Thomas Paine died in\nterror and agony on account of the religious opinions\nhe had expressed, was true. You ought to have\nfairness enough to admit that you called upon me\nto deposit one thousand dollars with an honest man,\nthat you might, by proving that Thomas Paine did\ndie in terror, obtain the money.\n\nYou ought to have honor enough to admit that\nyou challenged me and that you commenced the\ncontroversy concerning Thomas Paine.\n\nYou ought to have goodness enough to admit\nthat you were mistaken in the charges you made.\n\nYou ought to have manhood enough to do what\nyou falsely asserted that Thomas Paine did:—you\nought to recant. You ought to admit publicly that\nyou slandered the dead; that you falsified history;\nthat you defamed the defenceless; that you deliber-\n\n517\n\nately denied what you had published in your own\npaper. There is an old saying to the effect that\nopen confession is good for the soul. To you is\npresented a splendid opportunity of testing the truth\nof this saying.\n\nNothing has astonished me more than your lack\nof common honesty exhibited in this controversy. In\nyour last, you quote from Dr. J. W. Francis. Why\ndid you leave out that portion in which Dr. Francis\nsays _that Cheetham with settled malignity wrote the\nlife of Paine?_ Why did you leave out that part in\nwhich Dr. Francis says that Cheetham in the same\nway _slandered Alexander Hamilton and De Witt\nClinton?_ Is it your business to suppress the truth?\nWhy did you not publish the entire letter of Bishop\nFenwick? Was it because it proved beyond all\ncavil that Thomas Paine did not recant? Was it\nbecause in the light of that letter Mary Roscoe,\nMary Hinsdale and Grant Thorburn appeared un-\nworthy of belief? Dr. J. W. Francis says in the\nsame article from which you quoted, \"_Paine clung to\nhis Infidelity until the last moment of his life!'_ Why\ndid you not publish that? It was the first line im-\nmediately above what you did quote. You must\nhave seen it. Why did you suppress it? A lawyer,\ndoing a thing of this character, is denominated a\n\n518\n\nshyster. I do not know the appropriate word to\ndesignate a theologian guilty of such an act.\n\nYou brought forward three witnesses, pretending\nto have personal knowledge about the life and death\nof Thomas Paine: Grant Thorburn, Mary Roscoe\nand Mary Hinsdale. In my reply I took the ground\nthat Mary Roscoe and Mary Hinsdale must have\nbeen the same person. I thought it impossible that\nPaine should have had a conversation with Mary\nRoscoe, and then one precisely like it with Mary\nHinsdale. Acting upon this conviction, I proceeded\nto show that the conversation never could have hap-\npened, that it was absurdly false to say that Paine\nasked the opinion of a girl as to his works who had\nnever read but little of them. I then showed by the\ntestimony of William Cobbett, that he visited Mary\nHinsdale in 1819, taking with him a statement con-\ncerning the recantation of Paine, given him by Mr.\nCollins, and that upon being shown this statement\nshe said that \"it was so long ago that she could not\nspeak positively to any part of the matter—that she\nwould not say any part of the paper was true.\" At\nthat time she knew nothing, and remembered noth-\ning. I also showed that she was a kind of standing\nwitness to prove that others recanted. Willett Hicks\ndenounced her as unworthy of belief.\n\n519\n\nTo-day the following from the New York World\nwas received, showing that I was right in my\nconjecture:\n\nTom Paine's Death-Bed.\n\nTo the Editor of the World:\n\nSir: I see by your paper that Bob Ingersoll dis-\ncredits Mary Hinsdale's story of the scenes which\noccurred at the death-bed of Thomas Paine. No\none who knew that good lady would for one moment\ndoubt her veracity or question her testimony. Both\nshe and her husband were Quaker preachers, and\nwell known and respected inhabitants of New York\nCity, _Ingersoll is right in his conjecture that Mary\nRoscoe and Mary Hinsdale was the same person_. Her\nmaiden name was Roscoe, and she married Henry\nHinsdale. My mother was a Roscoe, a niece of\nMary Roscoe, and lived with her for some time. I\nhave heard her relate the story of Tom Paine's dying\nremorse, as told her by her aunt, who was a witness\nto it. She says (in a letter I have just received from\nher), \"he (Tom Paine) suffered fearfully from remorse,\nand renounced his Infidel principles, calling on God\nto forgive him, and wishing his pamphlets and books\nto be burned, saying he could not die in peace until\nit was done.\" (Rev.) A. W. Cornell.\n\nHarpersville, New York.\n\n520\n\nYou will notice that the testimony of Mary Hins-\ndale has been drawing interest since 1809, and has\nmaterially increased. If Paine \"suffered fearfully\nfrom remorse, renounced his Infidel opinions and\ncalled on God to forgive him,\" it is hardly generous\nfor the Christian world to fasten the fangs of malice\nin the flesh of his reputation.\n\nSo Mary Roscoe was Mary Hinsdale, and as\nMary Hinsdale has been shown by her own admis-\nsion to Mr. Cobbett to have known nothing of the\nmatter; and as Mary Hinsdale was not, according to\nWillet Hicks, worthy of belief—as she told a false-\nhood of the same kind about Mary Lockwood, and\nwas, according to Mr. Collins, addicted to the use of\nopium—this disposes of her and her testimony.\n\nThere remains upon the stand Grant Thorburn.\nConcerning this witness, I received, yesterday, from\nthe eminent biographer and essayist, James Parton,\nthe following epistle:\n\nNewburyport, Mass.\n\nCol. R. G. Ingersoll:\n\nTouching Grant Thorburn, I personally know him\nto have been a dishonest man. At the age of ninety-\ntwo he copied, with trembling hand, a piece from a\nnewspaper and brought it to the office of the _Home\nJournal, as his own_. It was I who received it and\n\n521\n\ndetected the deliberate forgery. If you are ever go-\ning to continue this subject, I will give you the exact\nfacts.\n\nFervently yours,\n\nJames Parton.\n\nAfter this, you are welcome to what remains of\nGrant Thorburn.\n\nThere is one thing that I have noticed during this\ncontroversy regarding Thomas Paine. In no instance\nthat I now call to mind has any Christian writer\nspoken respectfully of Mr. Paine. All have taken\nparticular pains to call him \"Tom\" Paine. Is it not\na little strange that religion should make men so\ncoarse and ill-mannered?\n\nI have often wondered what these same gentle-\nmen would say if I should speak of the men eminent\nin the annals of Christianity in the same way. What\nwould they say if I should write about \"Tim\"\nDwight, old \"Ad\" Clark, \"Tom\" Scott, \"Jim\"\nMcKnight, \"Bill\" Hamilton, \"Dick\" Whately, \"Bill\"\nPaley, and \"Jack\" Calvin?\n\nThey would say of me then, just what I think of\nthem now.\n\nEven if we have religion, do not let us try to get\nalong without good manners. Rudeness is exceed-\ningly unbecoming, even in a saint. Persons who\n\n522\n\nforgive their enemies ought, to say the least, to\ntreat with politeness those who have never injured\nthem.\n\nIt is exceedingly gratifying to me that I have com-\npelled you to say that \"Paine died a blaspheming\nInfidel.\" Hereafter it is to be hoped nothing will be\nheard about his having recanted. As an answer to\nsuch slander his friends can confidently quote the\nfollowing from the New York Observer of November\nist, 1877:\n\n\"WE HAVE NEVER STATED IN ANY FORM, NOR\nHAVE WE EVER SUPPOSED THAT PAINE ACTUALLY RE-\nNOUNCED HIS INFIDELITY. THE ACCOUNTS AGREE IN\nSTATING THAT HE DIED A BLASPHEMING INFIDEL.\"\n\nThis for all coming time will refute the slanders of\nthe churches yet to be.\n\nRight here allow me to ask: If you never supposed\nthat Paine renounced his Infidelity, why did you try\nto prove by Mary Hinsdale that which you believed\nto be untrue?\n\nFrom the bottom of my heart I thank myself for\nhaving compelled you to admit that Thomas Paine\ndid not recant.\n\nFor the purpose of verifying your own admission\nconcerning the death of Mr. Paine, permit me to call\nyour attention to the following affidavit:\n\n523\n\nWabash, Indiana, October 27, 1877.\n\nCol. R. G. Ingersoll:\n\nDear Sir: The following statement of facts is at\nyour disposal. In the year 1833 Willet Hicks made\na visit to Indiana and stayed over night at my father's\nhouse, four miles east of Richmond. In the morn-\ning at breakfast my mother asked Willet Hicks the\nfollowing questions:\n\n\"Was thee with Thomas Paine during his last\nsickness?\"\n\nMr. Hicks said: \"I was with him every day dur-\ning the latter part of his last sickness.\"\n\n\"Did he express any regret in regard to writing\nthe 'Age of Reason,' as the published accounts say\nhe did—those accounts that have the credit of ema-\nnating from his Catholic housekeeper?\"\n\nMr. Hicks replied: \"He did not in any way by\nword or action.\"\n\n\"Did he call on God or Jesus Christ, asking either\nof them to forgive his sins, or did he curse them or\neither of them?\"\n\nMr. Hicks answered: \"He did not. He died as\neasy as any one I ever saw die, and I have seen\nmany die in my time.\" William B Barnes.\n\nSubscribed and sworn to before me Oct. 27, 1877.\n\nWarren Bigler, Notary Public.\n\n524\n\nYou say in your last that \"Thomas Paine was\nabandoned of God.\" So far as this controversy is\nconcerned, it seems to me that in that sentence you\nhave most graphically described your own condi-\ntion.\n\nWishing you success in all honest undertakings, I\nremain,\n\nYours truly,\n\nRobert G. Ingersoll.\n"
}