The distinctness of the fallacies is creditable to the composers, and shows that scientific habits tend to clearness, even to sophistry. Nowhere does it so plainly stand out that the _Written Word_ means the sense in which the accuser takes it, while the sense of the other side is _their interpretation_. The infallible church on one side, arrayed against heretical pravity on the other, is seen in all subjects in which men differ. At school there were various games in which one or another advantage was the right of those who first called for it. In adult argument the same thing is often attempted: we often hear--I cried _Church_ first! I end with the answer which I myself gave to the application: its revival may possibly save me from a repetition of the like. If there be anything I hate more than another it is the proposal to place any persons, especially those who allow freedom to me, under any abridgment of their liberty to think, to infer, and to publish. If they break the law, take the law; but do not make the law: [Greek: agoraioi agontai enkaleitosan allelois.][410] I would rather be asked to take shares in an argyrosteretic company (with limited liability) for breaking into houses by night on fork and spoon errands. I should put aside this proposal with _nothing but laughter_. It was a joke against Sam Rogers[411] that his appearance was very like that of a corpse. The _John Bull_ {261} newspaper--suppose we now say Theodore Hook[412]--averred that when he hailed a coach one night in St. Paul's Churchyard, the jarvey said, "Ho! ho! my man; I'm not going to be taken in that way: go back to your grave!" This is the answer I shall make for the future to any relics of a former time who shall want to call me off the stand for their own purposes. What obligation have I to admit that they belong to our world? "SCRIPTURE AND SCIENCE. "_The Writ De Haeretico Commiserando._[413] Nov. 14, 1864. "This document was sent to me four days ago. It 'solicits the favor'--I thought at first it was a grocer's supplication for tea and sugar patronage--of my signature to expression of 'sincere regret' that some persons unnamed--general warrants are illegal--differ from what I am supposed--by persons whom it does not concern--to hold about Scripture and Science in their real or alleged discrepancies. "No such favor from me: for three reasons. First, I agree with Sir. J. Herschel that the solicitation is an intrusion to be publicly repelled. Secondly, I do _not_ regret that others should differ from me, think what I may: those others are as good as I, and as well able to think, and as much entitled to their conclusions. Thirdly, even if I did regret, I should be ashamed to put my name to bad chemistry made to do duty for good reasoning. The declaration is an awkward attempt to saturate sophism with truism; but the sophism is left largely in excess. {262}