Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom DogBlatchford, Robert
Philosophy
Not Guilty: A Defence of the Bottom Dog
Blatchford, Robert
Criminals; Free will and determinism
But the world is very ignorant in affairs of moral sanitation; and has
an almost religious veneration for the sacredness of Grand Ducal ducks.
As for the children--why do not their parents take care of them? Perhaps
because the parents were neglected by _their_ parents.
And which is the better, to go back for a dozen generations blaming
parents, or to begin now and teach and save the children?
CHAPTER FIFTEEN--THE DEFENCE OF THE BOTTOM DOG
FRIENDS, I write to defend the Bottom Dog. It is a task to stagger the
stoutest heart. With nearly all the power, learning, and wealth of the
world against him; with all the precedents of human history against
him; with law, religion, custom, and public sentiment against him, the
unfortunate victim's only hope is in the justice of his case. I would he
had a better advocate, as I trust he some day will.
The prosecution claim a monopoly of learning, and virtue, and modesty.
They may be justified in this. I do not grudge them such authority as
their shining merits may lend to a case so unjust, so feeble, and so
cruel as theirs.
Many of the gentlemen on the other side are Christian ministers. They
uphold blame and punishment, in direct defiance of the teaching and
example of Jesus Christ.
The founder of their religion bade them love their enemies. He taught
them that if one stole their coat they should give him their cloak also.
He prevented the punishment of the woman taken in adultery, and called
upon him without sin to cast the first stone. He asked God to forgive
his murderers, because they knew not what they did. In not one of these
cases did Christ say a word in favour of punishment nor of blame.
Christians pray to be forgiven, as they forgive; they ask God to "have
mercy upon us miserable sinners"; they ask Him to "succour, help, and
comfort all that are in danger, necessity, and tribulation," and
to "show His pity upon all prisoners and captives"; how, then, can
Christians advocate the blame of the weak, and the punishment of the
persecuted and unfortunate?
I suggest that men who do not understand their own religion are not
likely to understand a religion to which they are opposed.
As I am generally known as a poor man's advocate, I ask you to remember
that I am not now appearing for the poor, but for the wrong-doer. There
are many very poor who do no serious wrong; there are many amongst the
rich, the successful, and the respectable, whose lives are evil.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account