Donald Ardell: Ingersoll on blasphemy, free expression

By Donald B. Ardell

In 1887, a Methodist minister turned barnstorming advocate for secularism and freethought named Charles B. Reynolds was tried for blasphemy by the state of New Jersey. Reynolds was a nonbeliever in gods and any redeeming qualities of religion. His offense was circulating a pamphlet outlining his views of theology, which led to an indictment for blasphemy. In a trial nearly as famous as the famed Scopes “Monkey Trial” — featuring a clash of attorneys William Jennings Bryan and Clarence Darrow concerning the teaching of evolution — Reynolds was brought before a Morristown jury.

He was defended by the famed attorney and orator extraordinaire, Robert Green Ingersoll — “The Great Agnostic.”

Ingersoll regarded this case as one of the most important that could be submitted to a jury, as it affected freedom of speech and the intellectual liberty of every citizen of New Jersey. These words were among his first to the jury in Morristown: “Now gentlemen, what is blasphemy? Of course, nobody knows what it is, unless he takes into consideration where he is. What is blasphemy in one country would be a religious exhortation in another. It is owing to where you are and who is in authority.”

The case concerned whether a citizen has the right to express honest thoughts. He asked: “Have you not the right to read, to observe, to investigate —  and, when you have so read and so investigated, have you not the right to reap that field? And what is it to reap that field? It is simply to express what you have ascertained. If there is one subject in this world worthy of being discussed and understood, it is the question of intellectual liberty.”

I quote from the opening of his hour-long summation:

“He who takes it [liberty] from you is a robber. For thousands of years, people have been trying to force other people to think their way. Did they succeed? No. Will they succeed? No.

“Why? Because brute force is not an argument. You can stand with the lash over a man, or you can stand by the prison door, or beneath the gallows, or by the stake, and say to this man: ‘Recant, or the lash descends, the prison door is locked upon you, the rope is put about your neck, or the torch is given to the fagot.’ And, so, the man recants. Is he convinced? Not at all. Have you produced a new argument? Not the slightest. And yet the ignorant bigots of this world have been trying for thousands of years to rule the minds of men by brute force. They have endeavored to improve the mind by torturing the flesh — to spread religion with the sword and torch. They have tried to convince their brothers by putting their feet in iron boots, by putting fathers, mothers, patriots, philosophers and philanthropists in dungeons. And what has been the result? Are we any nearer thinking alike to-day than we were then?”

Ingersoll also quoted the “great clause in the New Jersey Constitution of 1844 . . . a clause that shines . . . like a star at night: ‘No law shall be passed to restrain or abridge the liberty of speech or of the press.’” He appealed to the jury as “the judges of the law, as well as the judges of the facts,” to acquit: The statute he termed “unconstitutional, because it does abridge the liberty of speech.”

Here are a few key points made in his summation:

• “The most important thing in this world is liberty. More important than food or clothes — more important than gold or houses or lands — more important than art or science — more important than all religions, is the liberty of humans.”

• “If civilization tends to do away with liberty, then . . .  civilization is a curse. Gladly would I give up the splendors of the nineteenth century — gladly would I forget every invention that has leaped from the brain of man — gladly would I see all books ashes, all works of art destroyed, all statues broken, and all the triumphs of the world lost — gladly, joyously would I go back to the abodes and dens of savagery, if that is necessary to preserve the inestimable gem of human liberty. So would every man who has a heart and brain.”

• “How has the church in every age, when in authority, defended itself? Always by a statute against blasphemy, against argument, against free speech . . . I advocate only the doctrines that in my judgment will make this world happier and better. If I know myself, I advocate only those things that will make a man a better citizen, a better father, a kinder husband — that will make a woman a better wife, a better mother — doctrines that will fill every home with sunshine and with joy. And if I believed that anything I should say today would have any other possible tendency, I would stop. I am a believer in liberty. That is my religion — to give to every other human being every right that I claim for myself.”

• “It is hardly possible that this state has accomplished all that it is ever going to accomplish. Religions are for a day. They are the clouds. Humanity is the eternal blue. Religions are the waves of the sea. These waves depend upon the force and direction of the wind — that is to say, of passion; but humanity is the great sea. And, so, our religions change from day to day, and it is a blessed thing that they do. Why? Because we grow, and we are getting a little more civilized every day — and any man that is not willing to let another man express his opinion, is not a civilized man, and you know it. Any man that does not give to everybody else the rights he claims for himself, is not an honest man.”

• “As long as the Church has the power to close the lips of men, so long and no longer will superstition rule this world.”

• “Blasphemy is the word the majority hisses into the ear of the few. After every argument of the Church has been answered, has been refuted, then the Church cries, ‘blasphemy!’

“Blasphemy is what an old mistake says of a newly discovered truth. Blasphemy is what a withered last year’s leaf says of this year’s bud. Blasphemy is the bulwark of religious prejudice. Blasphemy is the breastplate of the heartless. And let me say now, that the crime of blasphemy set out in this statute, is impossible. No man can blaspheme a book. No man can commit blasphemy telling his honest thoughts. No man can blaspheme God, or a Holy Ghost, or a Son of God. The Infinite cannot be blasphemed.

“What is real blasphemy?

“To live on the unpaid labor of other men — that is blasphemy. To enslave your fellow human, to put chains upon his body — that is blasphemy. To enslave the minds of men, to put manacles upon the brain, padlocks upon the lips — that is blasphemy. To deny what you believe to be true, to admit to be true what you believe to be a lie — that is blasphemy. To strike the weak and unprotected, in order that you may gain the applause of the ignorant and superstitious mob — that is blasphemy. To persecute the intelligent few, at the command of the ignorant many — that is blasphemy. To forge chains, to build dungeons, for your honest fellow [humans] — that is blasphemy. To pollute the souls of children with the dogma of eternal pain — that is blasphemy. To violate your conscience — that is blasphemy. The jury that gives an unjust verdict, and the judge who pronounces an unjust sentence, are blasphemers. The man who bows to public opinion against his better judgment and against his honest conviction, is a blasphemer.”

• “Why should we fear our fellow humans? Why should not each human being have the right, so far as thought and its expression are concerned, of all the world? What harm can come from an honest interchange of thought?”

These comments are but a small portion of the extraordinary oration that Ingersoll performed for the jury on the last day of Reynolds’ blasphemy trial.

Here are Ingersoll’s closing remarks:

“I sincerely hope that it will never be necessary again, under the flag of the United States — that flag for which has been shed the bravest and best blood of the world — under that flag maintained by Washington, by Jefferson, by Franklin and by Lincoln — under that flag, in defense of which New Jersey poured out her best and bravest blood — I hope it will never be necessary again for a man to stand before a jury and plead for the liberty of speech.”

(Note: The jury brought in a verdict of guilty. The judge imposed a fine of $25 and costs amounting in all to $75, which Ingersoll paid, giving his service free.)

Donald B. Ardell is a longtime FFRF member who publishes the REAL Wellness Report. His latest book is “Freedom From Religion in 30 Days,” available at FFRF.org/shop.