throne, love with all other passions to be in subjection to its wise control—how perilous in its subversion of the order of nature, therefore, to make love, a mere passion of the soul, our guide. Thus, mingling sentiment with argument, and alternating between pathos and invective, I gave my best energies to the subject, and sat down at length amidst a feeble effort at applause, which, as I saw, came from my colleague appointed on the same side. And when the final vote was taken, my voice was the only one heard in the negative, even my colleague having ingloriously deserted me and whipped over to the other side.
When our stock of available questions had run low and interest in our society began to flag, the expedient was resorted to of re-enacting the celebrated scene in the debating club so graphically described by Judge Longstreet in the "Georgia Scenes." Many of you remember the question in that famous debate, "Whether, in popular elections, the vote of factions should predominate according to the bias of jurisprudence, or according to the force of internal suggestion." At first it was proposed to introduce the same question, but as it was found that one of the proposed debaters was familiar with the debate in "Georgia Scenes," it was found necessary to substitute another; and so, after considerable conference amongst those admitted to the secret, the following question was agreed upon and announced, "Whether the foundations of wise legislation are to be sought in the inherent principles of social ethics, or in the philosophy of practical utility."
The first speaker in the affirmative was a youthful chaplain, who had been until recently a private in the ranks, and for whom a chaplain's commission had been procured by way of promotion for gallantry in the ranks. He was as modest and retiring as a woman, though brave and generous almost to a fault. As his name was called and he took his place upon the floor, it was evident that he was not at all at ease. He began by saying that the question was a new and difficult one, that he undertook its discussion with great diffidence and hoped all due indulgence would be given him. He then proceeded to state as clearly as he could what he conceived to be the question for discussion, and had about gotten before the house a question which was susceptible of debate, when the president interrupted him by saying that whilst the question which he was discussing was a very interesting one, he must remind him that it was not the question of the evening and he would please confine his remarks to the subject immediately under debate. The
