The Conservative Tradition
Burke’s “Reflections on the Revolution
in France”
DeMaistre’s “Study on Sovereignty”
Burke’s Reflections
 Biographical/Historical Background
 Ethics of the Community
 Conservatism
 Natural Hierarchy
I.
Biographical Background
 Edmund Burke (17291797)
 Born in Dublin, educated at
Trinity College
 Briefly attended law
school, gave it up for
literary career
 Published his first book
when he was 27
I.
Biographical Background
 Gets involved in Whig
party politics
 Serves in British House
of Commons from
1766 through 1780,
then from 1780-1794
 Supported American
independence, easing
laws against Catholics
I.
Biographical Background
 1773 travels to France and
is appalled by tide of
“rationalism” sweeping the
country
 Opposes the French
Revolution
 Founder of modern
conservatism
 One of, if not the, chief
opponents of the
Enlightenment
I.
Biographical Background
 Publication was widely
anticipated and
received huge reaction
 King George loved it,
as did most of the
aristocracy
 Why read it today?
I.
Biographical Background
 2 main reasons:

Relevance as a work of political science


“Science” not in the sense that it’s empirically driven - although there is some of that -- but rather “science”
in predictive sense
Founder of modern conservatism
I.
Biographical Background
 Burke was remarkably prescient about the
likely development of the French Revolution
and remarkably accurate about most
revolutions
 To appreciate, here’s the French Revolution
in a nutshell:
II. French Revolution
 1788, King Louis XVI,
facing financial crisis
 Calls for the assembly of
the Estates Generale
(French parliament which
hadn’t met since 1614!)
 Estates Generale divided
along class lines:
Aristocracy
Clergy
“Commoners”
II. French Revolution
 Elections for the common people -- or Third
Estate -- were held in 1788, the legislature
then convenes in 1789
 Voting was to be by class block (that is, one
vote each class)
 Third estate wants vote by individual
representative -- it’s rejected
II. French Revolution
 Third Estate pulls out of
assembly, declares itself
the true government -- a
“National Assembly” and
storms the Bastille Prison
 1789 “Declaration of the
Rights of Man and Citizen”
published
II. French Revolution
 King retreats to
Versaille... palace is
stormed by a group of
“market women” and
family forced to return
to quarters in Paris
under the control of the
National Assembly
II. French Revolution
 Reflections on the
Revolution in 1790
 1792 King Louis XIV
beheaded
 1793 “Committee on
Public Safety” formed
under leadership of
Maximilien Robespierre

Reign of Terror begins
 1793 Queen (Marie
Antoinette) beheaded
II. French Revolution
 1794 - Robespierre
executed
 1795-1799 “Thermidor
Reaction” to excesses
of the Reign of Terror
 1799 Napoleon seizes
power
II. French Revolution
 Burke’s Predictions: Reign of Terror:
“On the scheme of this barbarous philosophy,
which is the offspring of cold hearts and muddy
understandings, and which is as void of solid
wisdom as it is destitute of all taste and elegance,
laws are to be supported only by their own terrors
and by the concern which each individual may find
in them from his own private speculations or can
spare to them from his own private interests...”
Why?
II. French Revolution
 No good political situation can endure
without the rule of law
 By “law” here also include the habitual rules
we have for social interaction
 Note, the force of a law, compulsive power
of law, only comes through habit
II. French Revolution
 Force of Law: Habit
 Instilling new customs?

How to do it?


Can’t speak or reason (for example, why not wear a
hat inside? Why say “bless you” at a sneeze?)
Ultimately, the only way to change is through
force
II. French Revolution
“In the groves of
their academy, at
the end of
every vista, you
see nothing but
the gallows.”
II. French Revolution
 Burke’s Predictions: Reign of Terror:
“But when the leaders choose to make
themselves bidders at an auction of
popularity, their talents, in the construction of
the state, will be of no service. They will
become flatterers instead of legislators, the
instruments, not the guides, of the people...
II. French Revolution
“Moderation will be stigmatized as the virtue of
cowards, and compromise as the prudence of
traitors, until, in hopes of preserving the credit
which may enable him to temper and moderate, on
some occasions, the popular leader is obliged to
become active in propagating doctrines and
establishing powers that will afterwards defeat any
sober purpose at which he ultimately might have
aimed.”
II. French Revolution
“If any of them should happen to propose a
scheme of liberty, soberly limited and
defined with proper qualifications, he will be
immediately outbid by his competitors who
will produce something more splendidly
popular. Suspicions will be raised of his
fidelity to his cause...
II. French Revolution
 Burke’s Predictions:
 “It is, besides, to be considered whether an
assembly like yours, even supposing that it
was in possession of another sort of organ
through which its orders were to pass, is fit
for promoting the obedience and discipline of
an army...
II. French Revolution
“It is known that armies have hitherto
yielded a very precarious and uncertain
obedience to any senate or popular authority;
and they will least of all yield it to an
assembly which is only to have a
continuance of two years. ...
II. French Revolution
“In the weakness of one kind of authority, and in
the fluctuation of all, the officers of an army will
remain for some time mutinous and full of faction
until some popular general, who understands the art
of conciliating the soldiery, and who possesses the
true spirit of command, shall draw the eyes of all
men upon himself. Armies will obey him on his
personal account. There is no other way of securing
military obedience in this state of things...
II. French Revolution
“But the moment in which
that event shall happen, the
person who really
commands the army is
your master — the master
(that is little) of your king,
the master of your
Assembly, the master of
your whole republic.”
 Respect for the book
soared after Napoleon
came to power
II. Ethics of the Community
 Recall Locke’s discussion on best way to
evaluate society
 How do we evaluate society?
II. Ethics of Community
 For Burke and the conservative tradition, going
back to first principles does not involve imagining a
hypothetical prepolitical situation
 Instead we need to take account of the actual shared
history of the culture in which we are a part:
“The government of a nation is no more its own
creation than is its language.” -- Joseph de Maistre
II. Ethics of Community
“One of the great errors of our
time is to believe that the
political constitution of nations is
a purely human creation -- that a
constituion can be created much
as a watchmaker manufactures a
watch. Nothing could be more
false, except perhaps the claim
that a constitution can be created
by an assembly of men.”
-- Joseph de Maistre
“Study on Sovereignty”
II. Ethics of Community


The mechanics of governing are so complex, the
fabric of society woven so tightly, that it is
impossible for an assembly to come together and
fashion a system of law that will work
Moreover, tinkering with that fabric is folly at
best; suicide at worst.
II. Ethics of Community
 “The science of constructing a commonwealth, or
renovating it, or reforming it, is, like every other
experimental science, not to be taught a priori. Nor
is it a short experience that can instruct us in that
practical science; because the effects of moral
causes are not always immediate; but that which in
the first instance is prejudicial may be excellent in
its remoter operation...
II. Ethics of Community
“and its excellence may arise even ... from
the ill effects it procues in the beginning.
The reverse also happens; and very plausible
schemes, with very pleasing
commencements, have often shameful and
lamentable conclusions.”
II. Ethics of Community
“In states, there are often some obscure and
almost latent causes, things which appear at
first view of little moment, on which a very
great part of its prosperity or adversity may
most essentially depend.”
II. Ethics of Community
“[I]t is with infinite caution that any man
ought to venture upon pulling down an
edifice which has answered in any tolerable
degree for ages the common purposes of
society, or on building it up again, without
having models and patterns of approved
utility before his eyes.” -- Burke, Reflections
II. Ethics of Community
 Can’t create a community because we can’t create
conventions. They are passed down from traditions
of common life and shared history
 Conventions, laws, and habit are what make a
community
 Moreover, it is precisely this community which is
the prerequisite for a the good political life (in the
Aristotleian sense)
II. Ethics of Community
 Association vs. Community
 Association based on interests, voluntary,
impersonal
 Community based on relationships,
involuntary, personal
II. Ethics of Community
 Association is based on respect for persons
(rights) whereas community is based on love
 When love is involved, you have feelings for
the specific person, not the properties of that
person
 When respect is involved, you think about
the actions taken, not the properties of the
person taking the actions
II. Ethics of Community
 Hobbes/Locke and the liberals err in seeing
society as an association
 But Burke and the conservative tradition see
society as a community
 When you are in a community, you bear
special obligation/relation to other members
of the community
II. Ethics of Community
 Moral dilemmas emerge due to conflicts between
and impersonal moral constraints

e.g., dinner party, restaurant service
 The move towards an association means you may
get more justice, but you lose those intimate
relations
 “The pretended rights of these theorists are all
extremes; and in proportion as they are
metaphysically true, they are morally and politically
false.” [Burke, Reflections]
II. Ethics of Community
 Liberals presuppose that the social relations
of persons are uttely accidental occurences
that in no way constitute your “nature.”
 That is, they assume you can join a society
like you’d join a bowling league.
 Burke and the conservatives argue that our
attachments are much deeper though:
II. Ethics of Community
“Society is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts
for objects of mere occasional interest may be
dissolved at pleasure -- but the state ought not to be
considered as nothing better than a partnership
agreement in a trade of pepper and coffee, callico or
tobacco, or some other such low concern, to be
taken up for a little temporary interest, and to be
dissolved by the fancy of the parties...”
“It is to be looked on with other reverence; because
it is not a partnership in things subservient only to
the gross animal existence of a temporary and
perishable nature. It is a partnership in all science;
a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue,
and in all perfection. As the ends of such a
partnership cannot be obtained in many generations,
it becomes a partnership not only between those
who are living, but between those who are living,
those who are dead, and those who are to be born.”
II. Ethics of Community
 So if society is a
community, what would it
look like?
 Let’s look at feudal society
 Hierarchical structure
where position is based on
personal relation (father)
 Occupations are passed
down through generations
II. Ethics of Community
 The hierarchy itself had dignity since it was based
on divine will.
 Position not based on own merit


consolation for the poor
check on the wealthy
 No need for massive state structure because the
order was governed by privilege (private law)
 Each order had reciprocal obligations to those
above and below it in hierarchy
II. Ethics of Community
 But all that vanishes in liberalism:
“The age of chivalry is gone. That of sophisters,
economists, and calculators has succeeded, and the
glory of Europe is extinguished forever. Never,
never more shall we behold that generous loyalty to
rank and sex, that proud submission, that dignified
obedience, that subordination of the heart which
kept alive, even in servitude itself, the spirit of an
exalted freedom.” -- Burke, Reflections
II. Ethics of Community
“On this scheme of things, a king is but a man, a
queen is but a woman; a woman is but an animal,
and an animal not of the highest order. All homage
paid to the sex in general as such, and without
distinct views, is to be regarded as romance and
rolly. Regicide, and parricide, and sacrilege are but
fictions of superstition, corrupting jurisprudence by
destroying its simplicity...”
II. Ethics of Community
“The murder of a king, or a queen, or a
bishop, or a father are only common
homicide; and if the people are by any
chance or in any way gainers by it, a sort of
homicide much the most pardonable, and
into which we ought not to make too severe a
scrutiny” (Burke, Reflections)
II. Ethics of Community
 The liberal demand for liberty inevitably leads to
demands for equality
 Demands for equality, though, are false, since they
destroy the natural order and natural hierarchy
 Now, we’re going to need a strong and powerful
state to emerge to keep the peace
 Despotism is inevitably because some group will
always claim they have rights being violated and
they will work to seize the state to secure these
rights and slaughter those who disagree
III. Conservatism
 Although Burke laments the loss of
feudalism, he recognizes that society is
developing towards democracy and the
defeat of democacy is unlikely
 He is, though, asking us to remember what
the breakdown of feudal society involves
III. Conservatism
 For Burke, power in feudal societies is hierarchical,
but dispersed (there’s matching church and political
systems for instance)
 But in a democracy, where individuals are all that
matters, each individual is threatened by the
“tyranny of the mob.”
 Moreover, in a class divided society, you’ll get
centralized random terror as competing classes
struggle for control of the power of the state
III. Conservatism
 Democracy bludgeons individuality or liberty
since individuals need to be mindful of what
the majority wants and how their personal
opinions/beliefs may differ from the majority
 Individuals will conform to majority
 Democracy will end with mass of isolated
individuals unable to stand up to majority
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 Most modern political
thinkers believe that
good political societies
can be made through
revolution
 We take revolutionaries
seriously as moral
figures
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 But violence (and
hence revolution) are
apolitical acts since
neither has anything to
do with reason and
speech.
 Animals settle their
differences by fighting
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 Revolution is the point where we’ve given up
on reason and speech, and…
 It doesn’t usually work out for the best in the
long run
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 Change is generally not for the better
 We shouldn’t undermine customs, mores, and
traditions of the nation for risky social
experiments
Conservatism and
Rule of Law
 No good political situation can endure
without the rule of law
 By “law” here also include the habitual rules
we have for social interaction
 Note, the force of a law, compulsive power
of law, only comes through habit
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 For example, let’s
examine the rules of
etiquette
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 How do we judge the merit of different
conventions? Can we do that?


Can’t compare between the conventions, only
within them
Better for those within the society governed by
the convention to abide the convention
“But the age of chivalry is gone.
That of sophisters, economists; and calculators has succeeded; and the
glory of Europe is extinguished forever. Never, never more shall we
behold that generous loyalty to rank and sex, that proud submission,
that dignified obedience, that subordination of the heart which kept
alive, even in servitude itself, the spirit of an exalted freedom. The
unbought grace of life, the cheap defense of nations, the nurse of
manly sentiment and heroic enterprise, is gone! It is gone, that
sensibility of principle, that chastity of honor which felt a stain like a
wound, which inspired courage whilst it mitigated ferocity, which
ennobled whatever it touched, and under which vice itself lost half its
evil by losing all its grossness.”
Conservatism and
Rule of Law
 What do we lose by trashing (allegedly)
arbitrary rules of etiquette?


Etiquette is a form of communication
Its rules create expectations which enrich life by
providing us with another avenue of
communication besides language
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law


Customs are a set of conventions which enable
us to have a common life together
The idea that a culture can be “made” is selfdefeating in that by taking away conventions we
limit and erode the available avenues of
communication
“But now all is to be changed. All the pleasing illusions which made
power gentle and obedience liberal, which harmonized the different
shades of life, and which, by a bland assimilation, incorporated into
politics the sentiments which beautify and soften private society, are to
be dissolved by this new conquering empire of light and reason. All the
decent drapery of life is to be rudely torn off. All the super-added ideas,
furnished from the wardrobe of a moral imagination, which the heart
owns and the understanding ratifies as necessary to cover the defects of
our naked, shivering nature, and to raise it to dignity in our own
estimation, are to be exploded as a ridiculous, absurd, and antiquated
fashion.”
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 Force of Law: Habit
 Instilling new customs?

How to do it?


Can’t speak or reason (for example, why not wear a
hat inside? Why say “bless you” at a sneeze?)
Ultimately, the only way to change is through
force
“On this scheme of things, a king is but a man, a queen is
but a woman; a woman is but an animal, and an animal
not of the highest order. All homage paid to the sex in
general as such, and without distinct views, is to be
regarded as romance and folly. Regicide, and parricide,
and sacrilege are but fictions of superstition, corrupting
jurisprudence by destroying its simplicity. The murder of
a king, or a queen, or a bishop, or a father are only
common homicide; and if the people are by any chance
or in any way gainers by it, a sort of homicide much the
most pardonable, and into which we ought not to make
too severe a scrutiny.”
“On the scheme of this barbarous philosophy, which is the offspring
of cold hearts and muddy understandings, and which is as void of
solid wisdom as it is destitute of all taste and elegance, laws are to
be supported only by their own terrors and by the concern which
each individual may find in them from his own private speculations
or can spare to them from his own private interests. In the groves of
their academy, at the end of every vista, you see nothing but the
gallows. Nothing is left which engages the affections on the part of
the commonwealth.”
“On the principles of this mechanic philosophy, our institutions
can never be embodied, if I may use the expression, in persons, so
as to create in us love, veneration, admiration, or attachment. But
that sort of reason which banishes the affections is incapable of
filling their place. These public affections, combined with
manners, are required sometimes as supplements, sometimes as
correctives, always as aids to law. The precept given by a wise
man, as well as a great critic, for the construction of poems is
equally true as to states: — Non satis est pulchra esse poemata,
dulcia sunto.* There ought to be a system of manners in every
nation which a well-informed mind would be disposed to relish.
To make us love our country, our country ought to be lovely.”
*“It is not enough that poems be beautiful; they must also be affecting” -Horace
Conservatism and the
Rule of Law
 Can’t create a community because we can’t create
conventions. They are passed down from traditions
of common life and shared history
 Conventions, laws, and habit are what make a
community
 Moreover, it is precisely this community which is
the prerequisite for a the good political life
The Social Contract
 For Burke, the true social contract is
intergenerational
 The political community is composed of
more than its present members
 We need to consider both what past
generations have bestowed upon us and what
we intend to give to future generations
“SOCIETY is indeed a contract. Subordinate contracts for objects of
mere occasional interest may be dissolved at pleasure — but the state
ought not to be considered as nothing better than a partnership agreement
in a trade of pepper and coffee, calico, or tobacco, or some other such low
concern, to be taken up for a little temporary interest, and to be dissolved
by the fancy of the parties. It is to be looked on with other reverence,
because it is not a partnership in things subservient only to the gross
animal existence of a temporary and perishable nature. It is a partnership
in all science; a partnership in all art; a partnership in every virtue and in
all perfection. As the ends of such a partnership cannot be obtained in
many generations, it becomes a partnership not only between those who
are living, but between those who are living, those who are dead, and
those who are to be born...”
“Each contract of each particular state is but a clause in the great primeval
contract of eternal society, linking the lower with the higher natures,
connecting the visible and invisible world, according to a fixed compact
sanctioned by the inviolable oath which holds all physical and all moral
natures, each in their appointed place. This law is not subject to the will of
those who by an obligation above them, and infinitely superior, are bound to
submit their will to that law. The municipal corporations of that universal
kingdom are not morally at liberty at their pleasure, and on their speculations
of a contingent improvement, wholly to separate and tear asunder the bands of
their subordinate community and to dissolve it into an unsocial, uncivil,
unconnected chaos of elementary principles.
“It is the first and supreme necessity only, a necessity that is not
chosen but chooses, a necessity paramount to deliberation, that
admits no discussion and demands no evidence, which alone can
justify a resort to anarchy. This necessity is no exception to the rule,
because this necessity itself is a part, too, of that moral and physical
disposition of things to which man must be obedient by consent or
force; but if that which is only submission to necessity should be
made the object of choice, the law is broken, nature is disobeyed,
and the rebellious are outlawed, cast forth, and exiled from this
world of reason, and order, and peace, and virtue, and fruitful
penitence, into the antagonist world of madness, discord, vice,
confusion, and unavailing sorrow.”
Conservatism
 If we can’t stop this change, the next best
alternative is to move as slowly as possible
 Keep as many of the old, time-tested
traditions alive as possible
 Remember, the contract is generational and
we need to bequeath something to our heirs
Generational Debts
 For the conservative
tradition, liberals and
radicals woefully
misunderstand the risks
involved in social
experimentation
 We are trustees of the
past for future
generations
Natural Inequality
 For Burke and the conservative tradition, just
as liberals misunderstand the social contract,
so too do they misunderstand the nature of
equality
 It is correct to treat equals as equals, but
unjust to treat unequals as equals
 Liberals miss that distinction
Natural Inequality
“BELIEVE ME, SIR, those who attempt to level, never
equalize. In all societies, consisting of various descriptions
of citizens, some description must be uppermost. The
levelers, therefore, only change and pervert the natural order
of things; they load the edifice of society by setting up in the
air what the solidity of the structure requires to be on the
ground. The association of tailors and carpenters, of which
the republic (of Paris, for instance) is composed, cannot be
equal to the situation into which by the worst of usurpations
— an usurpation on the prerogatives of nature — you
attempt to force them.”
Natural Inequality
“The Chancellor of France, at the opening of the states, said, in a tone of
oratorical flourish, that all occupations were honorable. If he meant only
that no honest employment was disgraceful, he would not have gone
beyond the truth. But in asserting that anything is honorable, we imply
some distinction in its favor. The occupation of a hairdresser or of a
working tallow-chandler cannot be a matter of honor to any person — to
say nothing of a number of other more servile employments. Such
descriptions of men ought not to suffer oppression from the state; but the
state suffers oppression if such as they, either individually or
collectively, are permitted to rule. In this you think you are combating
prejudice, but you are at war with nature.”
Natural Inequality
 One of the political implications of this, of
course, is that each of us is entitled to our
“fair share” in the society
 And that “fair share” is determined by the
contributions and stake we have in the
system.
“If civil society be made for the advantage of man, all the advantages for
which it is made become his right. It is an institution of beneficence; and
law itself is only beneficence acting by a rule. Men have a right to live
by that rule; they have a right to do justice, as between their fellows,
whether their fellows are in public function or in ordinary occupation.
They have a right to the fruits of their industry and to the means of
making their industry fruitful. They have a right to the acquisitions of
their parents, to the nourishment and improvement of their offspring, to
instruction in life, and to consolation in death. Whatever each man can
separately do, without trespassing upon others, he has a right to do for
himself; and he has a right to a fair portion of all which society, with all
its combinations of skill and force, can do in his favor. In this partnership
all men have equal rights, but not to equal things...”
“He that has but five shillings in the partnership has as good
a right to it as he that has five hundred pounds has to his
larger proportion. But he has not a right to an equal dividend
in the product of the joint stock; and as to the share of
power, authority, and direction which each individual ought
to have in the management of the state, that I must deny to
be amongst the direct original rights of man in civil society;
for I have in my contemplation the civil social man, and no
other. It is a thing to be settled by convention.”
Natural Inequality
 And just as this equal share principle applies
to economic and social power, so too does it
apply to political power
 In other words, a just political system will
not distribute political power equally across
the board without distinction
Natural Inequality
“IT is said that twenty-four millions ought to prevail over two hundred
thousand. True; if the constitution of a kingdom be a problem of
arithmetic. This sort of discourse does well enough with the lamp-post
for its second; to men who may reason calmly, it is ridiculous The will of
the many and their interest must very often differ, and great will be the
difference when they make an evil choice. A government of five hundred
country attornies and obscure curates is not good for twenty-four
millions of men, though it were chosen by eight and forty millions, nor is
it the better for being guided by a dozen of persons of quality who have
betrayed their trust in order to obtain that power. At present, you seem in
everything to have strayed out of the high road of nature”
Individual and Community
 Just as liberals misconstrue the true
understanding of equality, so too do they
misunderstand the nature of our social
relations
 Society is a community, not an association
 And communities are built on feelings for
each of the members, not on rational
calculation
“Atheists are not our preachers; madmen are not our lawgivers. We know that
we have made no discoveries, and we think that no discoveries are to be made in
morality, nor many in the great principles of government, nor in the ideas of
liberty, which were understood long before we were born, altogether as well as
they will be after the grace has heaped its mold upon our presumption and the
silent tomb shall have imposed its law on our pert loquacity. In England we have
not yet been completely embowelled of our natural entrails; we still feel within
us, and we cherish and cultivate, those inbred sentiments which are the faithful
guardians, the active monitors of our duty, the true supporters of all liberal and
manly morals. We have not been drawn and trussed, in order that we may be
filled, like stuffed birds in a museum, with chaff and rags and paltry blurred
shreds of paper about the rights of men. We preserve the whole of our feelings
still native and entire, unsophisticated by pedantry and infidelity. We have real
hearts of flesh and blood beating in our bosoms...”
“We fear God; we look up with awe to kings, with affection
to parliaments, with duty to magistrates, with reverence to
priests, and with respect to nobility.Why? Because when
such ideas are brought before our minds, it is natural to be
so affected; because all other feelings are false and spurious
and tend to corrupt our minds, to vitiate our primary morals,
to render us unfit for rational liberty, and, by teaching us a
servile, licentious, and abandoned insolence, to be our low
sport for a few holidays, to make us perfectly fit for, and
justly deserving of, slavery through the whole course of our
lives.”
 “YOU see, Sir, that in this enlightened age I am bold enough
to confess that we are generally men of untaught feelings,
that, instead of casting away all our old prejudices, we
cherish them to a very considerable degree, and, to take
more shame to ourselves, we cherish them because they are
prejudices; and the longer they have lasted and the more
generally they have prevailed, the more we cherish them.
We are afraid to put men to live and trade each on his own
private stock of reason, because we suspect that this stock in
each man is small, and that the individuals would do better
to avail themselves of the general bank and capital of
nations and of ages.
“Many of our men of speculation, instead of exploding general
prejudices, employ their sagacity to discover the latent wisdom which
prevails in them. If they find what they seek, and they seldom fail, they
think it more wise to continue the prejudice, with the reason involved,
than to cast away the coat of prejudice and to leave nothing but the
naked reason; because prejudice, with its reason, has a motive to give
action to that reason, and an affection which will give it permanence.
Prejudice is of ready application in the emergency; it previously engages
the mind in a steady course of wisdom and virtue and does not leave the
man hesitating in the moment of decision skeptical, puzzled, and
unresolved. Prejudice renders a man's virtue his habit, and not a series of
unconnected acts. Through just prejudice, his duty becomes a part of his
nature.”