that the statutes against witchcraft were repealed.

As for the English Court of Chancery, we know that its antiquated abuses form one of the staples of common proverbs and popular literature.

So the laws and the lawyers have to be watched perpetually by public opinion as much as the doctors do.
I don't think the other profession is an exception.

When the Reverend Mr.Cauvin and his associates burned my distinguished scientific brother,--he was burned with green fagots, which made it rather slow and painful,--it appears to me they were in a state of religious barbarism.
The dogmas of such people about the Father of Mankind and his creatures are of no more account in my opinion than those of a council of Aztecs.
If a man picks your pocket, do you not consider him thereby disqualified to pronounce any authoritative opinion on matters of ethics?
If a man hangs my ancient female relatives for sorcery, as they did in this neighborhood a little while ago, or burns my instructor for not believing as he does, I care no more for his religious edicts than I should for those of any other barbarian.
Of course, a barbarian may hold many true opinions; but when the ideas of the healing art, of the administration of justice, of Christian love, could not exclude systematic poisoning, judicial duelling, and murder for opinion's sake, I do not see how we can trust the verdict of that time relating to any subject which involves the primal instincts violated in these abominations and absurdities .-- What if we are even now in a state of semi-barbarism?
[This physician believes we "are even now in a state of semi-barbarism": invasive procedures for the prolongation of death rather than prolongation of life; "faith",as slimly based as medieval faith in minute differences between control and treated groups; statistical manipulation to prove a prejudice.

Medicine has a good deal to answer for! D.W.] Perhaps some think we ought not to talk at table about such things .-- I am not so sure of that.