of greater religious liberty; there were the quakers, the huguenots, and the pilgrim fathers, though their spiritual interests were so soon subordinated to political necessities; religion has often played a conspicuous part in the settlement of the New World, and there has at times been present in some degree the theocratic, if not indeed the hierarchal, idea; but it has been long since the world, the old continent or the new, has witnessed anything like a new religion successfully established and set in prosperous running order upon the fullest and combined principles of theocracy, hierarchy, and patriarchy.
With this new series of phenomena, a new series of difficulties arises in attempting their elucidation: not alone the perplexities always attending unexplored fields, but formidable embarrassments which render the task at once delicate and dangerous.
If the writer is fortunate enough to escape the many pitfalls of fallacy and illusion which beset his way; if he is wise and successful enough to find and follow the exact line of equity which should be drawn between the hotly contending factions; in a word, if he is honest and capable, and speaks honestly and openly in the treatment of such a subject, he is pretty sure to offend, and bring upon himself condemnation from all parties. But where there are palpable faults on both sides of a case, the judge who unites equity with due discrimination may be sure he is not in the main far from right if he succeeds in offending both sides. Therefore, amidst the multiformity of conflicting ideas and evidence, having abandoned all hope of satisfying others, I fall back upon the next most reasonable proposition left—that of satisfying myself.
