In wading through the mass of absurdities and errors contained in Mr. Owen’s principles, as developed in the “Book of the New Moral World,” it would have been a very easy task to have selected a number more which might have been exposed: but to go through the whole work page by page, would indeed be labour lost, as to most readers; for I am persuaded there are very few that understand, or even profess completely to understand his principles. Neither is it necessary for their purpose that they should. What they want is a system which shall let them live and do as they like, without being exposed to the consequences of their conduct, and this they find in the system of the New Moral World. But I think I have knocked down some, if not all the main pillars of the structure: the rest will fall of themselves.
There is, however, one law of such a character, which, when understood, will perhaps have a greater influence in preserving such as have no selfish or wicked ends to answer, from falling into his pernicious errors, than any long train of argument, and that is the following:—“Each individual is so organized that he must like that which is pleasant to him, or which, in other words, produces agreeable sensations in him; and dislike that which is unpleasant to him, or which, in other words, produces in him disagreeable sensations; and he cannot know previous to experience, what particular sensations new objects will produce on any of his senses.” (Law 12.)
The meaning of this law will be best explained by an extract from Mr. Owen’s “Declaration of Mental Independence, addressed to the Society at New Harmony, July 4, 1826,” in which, in reference to the law of marriage, he says, “It is, in reality, the greatest crime against nature to prevent organized beings from uniting with those objects, or other organized beings, with which nature has created in them a desire to unite.”
Thus has Robert Owen ventured, not only to set himself in opposition to God, but also to declare that that law of Divine appointment which enjoins a man to “leave his father and his mother, and to cleave unto his wife;” and forbids “man to put asunder what God hath joined together,” is wicked; and, as he avers, has “produced hypocrisy, crime, and misery, beyond the power of language to express.” So that he would avoid the crime of adultery by making all persons common; and each man and each woman should be left at perfect liberty to have whom they liked, keep them as long as they liked, and change them as often as they liked. Come, this is speaking out; and it is just what is wanted. The poison then will carry along with it its own antidote.
On another subject, too, Mr. Owen has spoken plainly. He says, “The love of truth is an instinct of human nature which would be always exercised in simplicity, were not individuals praised and blamed for particular feelings,” p. 11. The Bible tells us that “man goeth astray from the womb, speaking lies.” Now, which is to be believed, Robert Owen, or God?
But I ought to beg Robert Owen’s pardon; according to his doctrine, there is no personal God: this is his language: “The error respecting this law of human nature, viz., the 14th, has led man to create a personal Deity, author of all good; and a personal devil, author of all evil. * * * * And yet, when the mind can be relieved from the early prejudices which have been forced into it on these subjects, it will be discovered that there is not a single fact known to man, after all the experience of the past generations, to prove that any such personalities exist, or ever did exist; and, in consequence, all the mythology of the ancients, and all the religions of the moderns, are mere fanciful notions of men, whose imaginations have been cultivated to accord with existing prejudices, and whose judgments have been systematically destroyed from their birth.” (Book of the New Moral World, p. 46.) And his idea on this awful subject he explains, when he says, “Without a shadow of a doubt, that truth is nature, and nature God; that ‘God is truth, and truth is God,’ as so generally expressed by the Mohammedans,” p. 65; and yet he tells us that “man is a wonderful and curiously contrived being;” and that, “in the formation of man and woman there is the most evident harmony and unison of design,” p. 70. How truth, which is an abstract quality, can be a power, can contrive and create, is what I do not understand; but, no doubt, Robert Owen, who, if persons will take his testimony, and follow his notions, can perform much more wonderful feats than this, will be able to explain it; especially as he tells us that “it is only now, for the first time, in the known history of mankind, that the mind has been permitted to examine facts, in order to discover truth, upon the subjects which have the greatest influence upon the human race.”
But, before I proceed further, I must here stop to inquire, Are there any human beings gifted with reason, and in the use of their sober senses, who can, with their eyes open, rest their faith upon testimony such as that contained in the Book of the New Moral World, and stake their eternal interests upon the reception of that testimony? Then, indeed, are they to be pitied. They are not only groping in the dark, but they put out, with their own hands, the only light which can conduct them through the darkness of this world to the regions of immortal blessedness and joy. And what do they get in return? Mr. Owen promises them a paradise—a paradise, however, only for this world; his system has nothing to do with anything beyond the grave; that is a dark and dreary waste, in which, yet, they must exist and dwell; and, without an acquaintance with, and a belief in the gospel of Jesus Christ, must live and dwell there in eternal misery. But, even in the paradise which Mr. Owen promises, there is not the happiness which his followers expect. As a proof of this, I beg attention to the following account of his settlement at New Harmony, in America, published by Mr. Flint, in his History of the Western States. Mr. Flint was, and, it is supposed, still is the friend of Mr. Owen, and was made acquainted by him with his proceedings; his account, therefore, as far as it goes, may be considered to be authentic. The statement, too, has now been five years before the British public; and yet has never, as far as I am aware, in any shape been contradicted.
“Harmony, fifty-four miles below Vincennes, and something more than a hundred, by water, above the mouth of the Wabash, is the seat of justice for the county of Posey. It is situate on the east bank of the river, sixteen miles from the nearest point of the Ohio, on a wide, rich, and heavily-timbered plateau, or second bottom. It is high, healthy, has a fertile soil, and is in the vicinity of small and rich prairies, and is, on the whole, a pleasant and well-chosen position. It was first settled, in 1814, by a religious sect of Germans,” who resigned it to “the leader of a new sect,” who “came upon them. This was no other than Robert Owen of New Lanark, in Scotland, a professed philosopher of a new school, who advocated new principles, and took new views of society. He calls his views upon this subject ‘the Social System.’ He was opulent, and disposed to make a grand experiment of his principles on the prairies of the Wabash. He purchased the lands and the village of Mr. Rapp,” the head and leader of the Germans, in whose name all the lands and possessions were held, “at an expense, it is said, of 190,000 dollars. In a short time, there were admitted to the new establishment from 700 to 800 persons. They danced all together one night in every week, and had a concert of music on another. The sabbath was occupied in the delivery and hearing of lectures. Two of Mr. Owen’s sons, from Scotland, and Mr. M‘Clure, joined him. The society at New Harmony, as the place was called, excited a great deal of interest and remark in every part of the United States. Great numbers of distinguished men, in all the walks of life, wrote to the society, making inquiries respecting its prospects and rules, and expressing a desire, at some future time, to join it. Mr. Owen’s experiment at New Harmony lasted little more than a year, during which he made a voyage to Europe. The 4th of July, 1826, he promulgated his famous declaration of ‘mental independence.’ The society had begun to moulder before this time. He has left New Harmony, and the ‘Social System’ seems to be abandoned.”
Thus far Mr. Flint’s account; from which we gather, that although the establishment was formed under Mr. Owen’s personal superintendence, and managed by himself, and formed, too, under the most favourable circumstances, yet one short twelvemonth was sufficient to explode all his views, and to crumble his system to nothing! But he hopes, perhaps, to develope it under more favourable circumstances in this country, and his followers are subscribing monies to enable him so to do; and yet he tells us that his system is to change the character of the whole world. It, however, did not seem to meet with a congenial soil in America, or else he found that it was not suited to that part of the world. But what failed in America in twelve months, where he had all his own way, and nothing to interfere with his plans, is likely to succeed better in England! What dupes they must be who believe him!
But it did not take even twelve months to show, that in Mr. Owen’s boasted paradise there were the seeds of evil which he could not eradicate, and miseries which he could not counteract, as appears from the following testimonies and statements. The Duke of Saxe Weimar, to whose work a reference has already been made, states, “that it shocked the feelings of people of education to live on the same footing with every one indiscriminately, and that several of the discontented wished to leave the society immediately, and to go to Mexico. One lady, the widow of an American merchant, was full of complaints of disappointed expectations. The duke observed the better educated members of the society keeping themselves together, and taking no notice of tatterdemalions, who stretched themselves on the platform. The young ladies of the better class kept themselves in a corner, forming a little aristocratical club, and turned up their noses apart at the democratic dancers, who often fell to their lot, when the gentlemen, as well as the ladies, drew numbers for the cotillions, with a view to prevent partialities. The duke expresses his regret that Mr. Owen should have allowed himself to be so infatuated by his passion for universal improvement, at the very time when almost every member of the society with whom the duke had conversed apart, acknowledged that he was deceived in his expectations.” (Stuart’s Three Years in North America, vol. ii., pp. 444, 445.)