[685] _Ibid._ In this connection Morse seeks to extract comfort from the fact that the editors of the _British Critic_, having compared Robison’s _Proofs_ and Barruel’s _Memoirs of Jacobinism_, have recorded their verdict that the two works are highly confirmatory of each other, “barring certain unimportant particulars.” He likewise observes that the marks of precipitation and certain faults of style and expression which some of the impartial English reviewers have been able to point out, have yet not been allowed to alter their judgment that the book as a whole is a credit to its author, and contains much valuable information. The clamor that has arisen against the book, Morse insists, is to be traced to the hostility of men who have been incensed because their secrets have been exposed. At this point it may be said in passing that Morse allowed himself to be drawn into the expression of a sentiment, gratuitous in its nature, which served to precipitate the very thing he had been anxious to avoid, _viz._, a break with the Masons. Irritated by his critics, he wrote: “The Free Masons can not be angry with him [Robison].... If therefore any are really angry here, it must be because he has touched and exposed their secret friends.” [686] The reference is to Professor Tappan’s sermon before the senior class of Harvard. _Cf. supra_, pp. 244 _et seq._ [687] In this instance the reference is not to President Dwight’s Fourth of July sermon: that sermon had not yet been seen by Morse; but to an allusion made by Dwight to Robison’s book in a note appended to the following pamphlet: _The Nature and Danger of Infidel Philosophy. Two Discourses, to the Candidates for the Baccalaureate, in Yale College, September 9, 1797_.... New-Haven, 1798. _Cf._ _Massachusetts Mercury_, Aug. 17, 1798. [688] Theodore Dwight’s Fourth of July oration is referred to. _Cf. supra_, pp. 246 _et seq._ [689] _Massachusetts Mercury_, Aug. 17, 1798. [690] _Ibid._, Aug. 21, 1798. [691] _Massachusetts Mercury_, Aug. 21, 1798. Morse’s article in this issue of the _Mercury_, perhaps more discursive and less convincing than anything he had previously written on the general subject, at various points descends to the level of abuse, in which Robison’s hostile English reviewers, the Reverend William Bentley (for reasons that will appear later), and “Censor” are made to share. [692] _Massachusetts Mercury_, Aug. 28, 1798. In explanation of the delicacy and difficulty of such a task as Robison’s, Morse offered to his readers the following: “The schemes and views of Conspirators are often veiled in language and signs intelligible only to themselves; they correspond under fictitious names; their papers are sparingly multiplied, artfully detached, and most cautiously concealed.” (_Ibid._) The apologetic motive is evident.