Henry David Thoreau – Civil Disobedience
OVERVIEW*
Henry David Thoreau (1817-1862) began keeping a journal when he graduated from
Harvard in 1837. The journal was preserved and published, and it shows us the seriousness,
determination, and elevation of moral value4s characteristic of his work. He is best known for
Walden (1854), a record of his departure from the warm congeniality of Concord, Massachusetts,
and the home of his close friend Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-1882), for the comparative
“wilds” of Walden Pond, where he built a cabin, planted a garden, and lived simply. In Walden,
Thoreau describes the deadening influence of ownership and extols the vitality and spiritual
uplift that come from living close to nature. He also argues that civilization’s comforts
sometimes rob a person of independence, integrity, and even conscience.
Thoreau and Emerson were prominent among the group of writers and thinkers who were
referred to as the Transcendentalists. They believed in something that transcended the limits of
sensory experience – in other words, something that transcended materialism. Their philosophy
was based on the works of Immanuel Kant (1724-1804), the German idealist philosopher;
Samuel Taylor Coleridge (1772-1834), the English poet; and Johann Wolfgang von Goethe
(1749-1832, the German dramatist and thinker. These writers praised human intuition and the
capacity to see beyond the limits of common experience.
The Transcendentalists’ philosophical idealism carried over into the social concerns of
the day, expressing itself in works such as Walden and “Civil Disobedience,” which was
published with the title “Resistance to Civil Government” in 1849, a year after the publication of
Karl Marx’s The Communist Manifesto. Although Thoreau all but denies his idealism in “Civil
Disobedience,” it is obvious that after spending a night in the Concord jail, he realizes he cannot
quietly accept his government’s behavior in regard to slavery. He begins to feel that it is not
only appropriate but imperative to disobey unjust laws.
In Thoreau’s time the most flagrantly unjust laws were those that supported slavery. The
Transcendentalists strongly opposed slavery and spoke out against it. Abolitionists in
Massachusetts harbored escaped slaves and helped them move to Canada and freedom. The
Fugitive Slave Act, enacted in 1850, the year after “Civil Disobedience” was published, made
Thoreau a criminal because he refused to comply with Massachusetts civil authorities when in
1851 they began returning escaped slaves to the South as the law required.
“Civil Disobedience” was much more influential in the twentieth century than it was in
the nineteenth. Mohandas Gandi (1869-1948) claimed that while he was editor of an Indian
newspaper in South Africa, it helped to inspire his theories of nonviolent resistance. Gandhi
eventually implemented these theories against the British Empire and helped win independence
for India. In the 1960s, Martin Luther King Jr. applied the same theories in the fight for racial
equality in the United States. Thoreau’s essay once again found widespread adherents among
the many young men who resisted being drafted into the military to fight in Vietnam because
they believed that the war was unjust.
“Civil Disobedience” was written after the Walden experience (which began on July 4,
1845, and ended on September 6, 1847). Thoreau quietly returned to Emerson’s home and
“civilization”. His refusal in 1846 to pay the Massachusetts poll tax – a “per head” tax imposed
on all citizens to help support what he considered an unjust war against Mexico – landed him in
the Concord jail. He spent just one day and one night there – his aunt paid the tax for him – but
the experience was so extraordinary that he began examining it in his journal..
THOREAU’S RHETORIC*
Thoreau maintained his journal throughout his life and eventually became convinced that
writing was one of the few professions by which he could earn a living. He made more money,
however, from lecturing on the lyceum circuit. The lyceum, a New England institution, was a
town adult education program, featuring important speakers such as the very successful Emerson
and foreign lecturers. Admission fees were very reasonable, and in the absence of other popular
entertainment, the lyceum was a major proving ground for speakers interested in promoting their
ideas.
“Civil Disobedience” was first outlined in rough-hewn form in the journal, where the
main ideas appear and where experiments in phrasing began. (Thoreau was a constant reviser.)
Then in February 1848, Thoreau delivered a lecture on “Civil Disobedience” at the Concord
Lyceum urging people of conscience to actively resist a government that acted badly. Finally,
the piece was prepared for publication in Aesthetic Papers, an intellectual journal edited by
Elizabeth Peabody (1804-1894), the sister-in-law of another important New England writer,
Nathaniel Hawthorne (1804-1864). There it was refined again, and certain important details
were added.
“Civil Disobedience” bears many of the hallmarks of the spoken lecture. For one thing, it
is written in the first person and addresses an audience that Thoreau expects will share many of
his sentiments but certainly not all his conclusions. His message is to some extent anarchistic,
virtually denying an unjust government any authority or respect.
Modern political conservatives generally take his opening quote – “That government is
best which governs least” – as a rallying cry against governmental interference in everyday
affairs. Such conservatives usually propose reducing government interference by reducing the
government’s capacity to tax wealth for unpopular causes. In fact, what Thoreau opposes is
simply any government that is not totally just, totally moral, and totally respectful of the
individual.
The easiness of the pace of the essay also derives from its original from as a speech.
Even such locutions as “But to speak practically and as a citizen” (para. 3) connect the essay
with its origins. Although Thoreau was not an overwhelming orator – he was short and
somewhat homely, an unprepossessing figure – he ensured that his writing achieved what some
speakers might have accomplished by means of gesture and theatrics.
Thoreau’s language is marked by clarity. He speaks directly to every issue, stating his
own position and recommending the position he feels his audience, as reasonable moral people,
should accept. One impressive achievement in this selection is Thoreau’s capacity to shape
memorable, virtually aphoristic statements that remain “quotable” generations later, beginning
with his own quotation from the words of John L. O’Sullivan: “That government is best which
governs least.” Thoreau calls it a motto, as if it belonged on the great seal of a government or on
a coin. It contains an interesting and impressive rhetorical flourish – the device of repeating
“govern” and the near rhyme of “best” with “least”.
His most memorable statements show considerable attention to the rhetorical qualities of
balance, repetition, and pattern . “The only obligation which I have a right to assume is to do at
any time what I think right (para. 4) uses the word right in two senses: first, as a matter of
personal volition; second, as a matter of moral rectitude. One’s right, in other words, becomes
the opportunity to do right. “For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what
matters is once well done is done forever” (para. 21) also relies on repetition for its effect and
balances the concept of a beginning with its capacity to reach out into the future. The use of the
rhetorical device of chiasmus, a criss-cross relationship between key words, marks “Under a
government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a prison” (para.
22). Here is the pattern:
imprisons……………………….unjustly
just man……………………… prison
Such attention to phrasing is typical of speakers whose expressions must catch and retain the
attention of listeners. Audiences do not have the advantage of referring to a text, so the words
they hear must be forceful.
Thoreau relies also on analogy – comparing men with machines, people with plants, even
the citizen with states considering secession from the Union. His analogies Are effective and
thus worth examining in some detail. He draws on the analysis of circumstance throughout the
essay, carefully examining government actions to determine their qualities and their results. His
questions include comments on politics (para. 1), on the Bible (para. 23), on Confucius (para.
24), and finally on his contemporary Daniel Webster (1782-1852) (para. 42), demonstrating a
wide range of influences but avoiding the pedantic tone that can come from using quotations too
liberally or from citing obscure sources. This essay is simple, direct, and uncluttered. Its
enduring influence is in part due to the clarity and grace that characterize Thoreau’s writing at its
best. Its power derives from Thoreau’s demand that citizens act on the basis of conscience.
Pre-Reading Questions: What to Read for
The following pre-reading questions may help you anticipate key issues in the discussion of
Henry David Thoreau’s “Civil Disobedience”. Keeping them in mind during your first reading
of the selection should help focus your attention.
1. What kind of government does Thoreau think would be most ethical and moral?
2. What is the individuals ethical responsibility regarding supporting the government when it
is wrong?
3. How does Thoreau deal with unjust laws that seem immoral?
Civil Disobedience
I heartily accept the motto, "That government is best which governs least", and I
should like to see it acted up to more rapidly and systematically. Carried out, it finally amounts
to this, which also I believe- "That government is best which governs not at all"; and when men
are prepared for it, that will be the kind of government which they will have. Government is at
best but an expedient; but most governments are usually, and all governments are sometimes,
inexpedient. The objections which have been brought against a standing army, and they are many
and weighty, and deserve to prevail, may also at last be brought against a standing government.
The standing army is only an arm of the standing government. The government itself, which is
only the mode which the people have chosen to execute their will, is equally liable to be abused
and perverted before the people can act through it. Witness the present Mexican war, the work
of comparatively a few individuals using the standing government as their tool; for, in the outset,
the people would not have consented to this measure.
This American government- what is it but a tradition, though a recent one, endeavoring to
transmit itself unimpaired to posterity, but each instant losing some of its integrity? It has not the
vitality and force of a single living man; for a single man can bend it to his will. It is a sort of
wooden gun to the people themselves. But it is not the less necessary for this; for the people must
have some complicated machinery or other, and hear its din, to satisfy that idea of government
which they have. Governments show thus how successfully men can be imposed on, even
impose on themselves, for their own advantage. It is excellent, we must all allow. Yet this
government never of itself furthered any enterprise, but by the alacrity with which it got out of its
way. It does not keep the country free. It does not settle the West. It does not educate. The
character inherent in the American people has done all that has been accomplished; and it would
have done somewhat more, if the government had not sometimes got in its way. For government
is an expedient by which men would fain succeed in letting one another alone; and, as has been
said, when it is most expedient, the governed are most let alone by it. Trade and commerce, if
they were not made of india-rubber, would never manage to bounce over the obstacles which
legislators are continually putting in their way; and, if one were to judge these men wholly by the
effects of their actions and not partly by their intentions, they would deserve to be classed and
punished with those mischievous persons who put obstructions on the railroads.
But, to speak practically and as a citizen, unlike those who call themselves nogovernment men, I ask for, not at once no government, but at once a better government. Let
every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be
one step toward obtaining it.
After all, the practical reason why, when the power is once in the hands of the people, a
majority are permitted, and for a long period continue, to rule is not because they are most likely
to be in the right, nor because this seems fairest to the minority, but because they are physically
the strongest. But a government in which the majority rule in all cases cannot be based on
justice, even as far as men understand it. Can there not be a government in which majorities do
not virtually decide right and wrong, but conscience?- in which majorities decide only those
questions to which the rule of expediency is applicable? Must the citizen ever for a moment, or
in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislation? Why has every man a conscience,
then? I think that we should be men first, and subjects afterward. It is not desirable to cultivate a
respect for the law, so much as for the right. The only obligation which I have a right to assume
is to do at any time what I think right. It is truly enough said that a corporation has no
conscience; but a corporation of conscientious men is a corporation with a conscience. Law
never made men a whit more just; and, by means of their respect for it, even the well-disposed
are daily made the agents of injustice. A common and natural result of an undue respect for law
is, that you may see a file of soldiers, colonel, captain, corporal, privates, powder-monkeys, and
all, marching in admirable order over hill and dale to the wars, against their wills, ay, against
their common sense and consciences, which makes it very steep marching indeed, and produces
a palpitation of the heart. They have no doubt that it is a damnable business in which they are
concerned; they are all peaceably inclined. Now, what are they? Men at all? or small movable
forts and magazines, at the service of some unscrupulous man in power? Visit the Navy-Yard,
and behold a marine, such a man as an American government can make, or such as it can make a
man with its black arts- a mere shadow and reminiscence of humanity, a man laid out alive and
standing, and already, as one may say, buried under arms with funeral accompaniments, though
it may be,
Not a drum was heard, not a funeral note,
As his corse to the rampart we hurried;
Not a soldier discharged his farewell shot
O'er the grave where our hero we buried.
The mass of men serve the state thus, not as men mainly, but as machines, with their
bodies. They are the standing army, and the militia, jailers, constables, posse comitatus, etc. In
most cases there is no free exercise whatever of the judgment or of the moral sense; but they put
themselves on a level with wood and earth and stones; and wooden men can perhaps be
manufactured that will serve the purpose as well. Such command no more respect than men of
straw or a lump of dirt. They have the same sort of worth only as horses and dogs. Yet such as
these even are commonly esteemed good citizens. Others- as most legislators, politicians,
lawyers, ministers, and office-holders- serve the state chiefly with their heads; and, as they rarely
make any moral distinctions, they are as likely to serve the devil, without intending it, as God. A
very few- as heroes, patriots, martyrs, reformers in the great sense, and men- serve the state with
their consciences also, and so necessarily resist it for the most part; and they are commonly
treated as enemies by it. A wise man will only be useful as a man, and will not submit to be
"clay," and "stop a hole to keep the wind away," but leave that office to his dust at least:
I am too high-born to be propertied.
To be a secondary at control,
Or useful serving-man and instrument
To any sovereign state throughout the world.
He who gives himself entirely to his fellow-men appears to them useless and selfish; but
he who gives himself partially to them is pronounced a benefactor and philanthropist.
How does it become a man to behave toward this American government today? I answer,
that he cannot without disgrace be associated with it. I cannot for an instant recognize that
political organization as my government which is the slave's government also.
All men recognize the right of revolution; that is, the right to refuse allegiance to, and to
resist, the government, when its tyranny or its inefficiency are great and unendurable. But almost
all say that such is not the case now. But such was the case, they think, in the Revolution Of '75.
If one were to tell me that this was a bad government because it taxed certain foreign
commodities brought to its ports, it is most probable that I should not make an ado about it, for I
can do without them. All machines have their friction; and possibly this does enough good to
counterbalance the evil. At any rate, it is a great evil to make a stir about it. But when the friction
comes to have its machine, and oppression and robbery are organized, I say, let us not have such
a machine any longer. In other words, when a sixth of the population of a nation which has
undertaken to be the refuge of liberty are slaves, and a whole country is unjustly overrun and
conquered by a foreign army, and subjected to military law, I think that it is not too soon for
honest men to rebel and revolutionize. What makes this duty the more urgent is the fact that the
country so overrun is not our own, but ours is the invading army.
Paley, a common authority with many on moral questions, in his chapter on the "Duty of
Submission to Civil Government," resolves all civil obligation into expediency; and he proceeds
to say that "so long as the interest of the whole society requires it, that is, so long as the
established government cannot be resisted or changed without public inconveniency, it is the will
of God... that the established government be obeyed- and no longer. This principle being
admitted, the justice of every particular case of resistance is reduced to a computation of the
quantity of the danger and grievance on the one side, and of the probability and expense of
redressing it on the other." Of this, he says, every man shall judge for himself. But Paley appears
never to have contemplated those cases to which the rule of expediency does not apply, in which
a people, as well as an individual, must do justice, cost what it may. If I have unjustly wrested a
plank from a drowning man, I must restore it to him though I drown myself. This, according to
Paley, would be inconvenient. But he that would save his life, in such a case, shall lose it. This
people must cease to hold slaves, and to make war on Mexico, though it cost them their existence
as a people.
In their practice, nations agree with Paley; but does any one think that Massachusetts
does exactly what is right at the present crisis?
A drab of state,
a cloth-o'-silver slut,
To have her train borne up,
and her soul trail in the dirt.
Practically speaking, the opponents to a reform in Massachusetts are not a hundred
thousand politicians at the South, but a hundred thousand merchants and farmers here, who are
more interested in commerce and agriculture than they are in humanity, and are not prepared to
do justice to the slave and to Mexico, cost what it may. I quarrel not with far-off foes, but with
those who, near at home, cooperate with, and do the bidding of those far away, and without
whom the latter would be harmless. We are accustomed to say, that the mass of men are
unprepared; but improvement is slow, because the few are not materially wiser or better than the
many. It is not so important that many should be as good as you, as that there be some absolute
goodness somewhere; for that will leaven the whole lump. There are thousands who are in
opinion opposed to slavery and to the war, who yet in effect do nothing to put an end to them;
who, esteeming themselves children of Washington and Franklin, sit down with their hands in
their pockets, and say that they know not what to do, and do nothing; who even postpone the
question of freedom to the question of free trade, and quietly read the prices-current along with
the latest advices from Mexico, after dinner, and, it may be, fall asleep over them both. What is
the price-current of an honest man and patriot today? They hesitate, and they regret, and
sometimes they petition; but they do nothing in earnest and with effect. They will wait, well
disposed, for others to remedy the evil, that they may no longer have it to regret. At most, they
give only a cheap vote, and a feeble countenance and God-speed, to the right, as it goes by them.
There are nine hundred and ninety-nine patrons of virtue to one virtuous man. But it is easier to
deal with the real possessor of a thing than with the temporary guardian of it.
All voting is a sort of gaming, like checkers or backgammon, with a slight moral tinge to
it, a playing with right and wrong, with moral questions; and betting naturally accompanies it.
The character of the voters is not staked. I cast my vote, perchance, as I think right; but I am not
vitally concerned that that right should prevail. I am willing to leave it to the majority. Its
obligation, therefore, never exceeds that of expediency. Even voting for the right is doing
nothing for it. It is only expressing to men feebly your desire that it should prevail. A wise man
will not leave the right to the mercy of chance, nor wish it to prevail through the power of the
majority. There is but little virtue in the action of masses of men. When the majority shall at
length vote for the abolition of slavery, it will be because they are indifferent to slavery, or
because there is but little slavery left to be abolished by their vote. They will then be the only
slaves. Only his vote can hasten the abolition of slavery who asserts his own freedom by his
vote.
I hear of a convention to be held at Baltimore, or elsewhere, for the selection of a
candidate for the Presidency, made up chiefly of editors, and men who are politicians by
profession; but I think, what is it to any independent, intelligent, and respectable man what
decision they may come to? Shall we not have the advantage of his wisdom and honesty,
nevertheless? Can we not count upon some independent votes? Are there not many individuals in
the country who do not attend conventions? But no: I find that the respectable man, so called, has
immediately drifted from his position, and despairs of his country, when his country has more
reason to despair of him. He forthwith adopts one of the candidates thus selected as the only
available one, thus proving that he is himself available for any purposes of the demagogue. His
vote is of no more worth than that of any unprincipled foreigner or hireling native, who may
have been bought. O for a man who is a man, and, as my neighbor says, has a bone in his back
which you cannot pass your hand through! Our statistics are at fault: the population has been
returned too large. How many men are there to a square thousand miles in this country? Hardly
one. Does not America offer any inducement for men to settle here? The American has dwindled
into an Odd Fellow-one who may be known by the development of his organ of gregariousness,
and a manifest lack of intellect and cheerful self-reliance; whose first and chief concern, on
coming into the world, is to see that the almshouses are in good repair; and, before yet he has
lawfully donned the virile garb, to collect a fund for the support of the widows and orphans that
may be; who, in short, ventures to live only by the aid of the Mutual Insurance company, which
has promised to bury him decently.
It is not a man's duty, as a matter of course, to devote himself to the eradication of any,
even the most enormous, wrong; he may still properly have other concerns to engage him; but it
is his duty, at least, to wash his hands of it, and, if he gives it no thought longer, not to give it
practically his support. If I devote myself to other pursuits and contemplations, I must first see, at
least, that I do not pursue them sitting upon another man's shoulders. I must get off him first, that
he may pursue his contemplations too. See what gross inconsistency is tolerated. I have heard
some of my townsmen say, "I should like to have them order me out to help put down an
insurrection of the slaves, or to march to Mexico;- see if I would go"; and yet these very men
have each, directly by their allegiance, and so indirectly, at least, by their money, furnished a
substitute. The soldier is applauded who refuses to serve in an unjust war by those who do not
refuse to sustain the unjust government which makes the war; is applauded by those whose own
act and authority he disregards and sets at naught; as if the state were penitent to that degree that
it differed one to scourge it while it sinned, but not to that degree that it left off sinning for a
moment. Thus, under the name of Order and Civil Government, we are all made at last to pay
homage to and support our own meanness. After the first blush of sin comes its indifference; and
from immoral it becomes, as it were, unmoral, and not quite unnecessary to that life which we
have made.
The broadest and most prevalent error requires the most disinterested virtue to sustain it.
The slight reproach to which the virtue of patriotism is commonly liable, the noble are most
likely to incur. Those who, while they disapprove of the character and measures of a
government, yield to it their allegiance and support are undoubtedly its most conscientious
supporters, and so frequently the most serious obstacles to reform. Some are petitioning the State
to dissolve the Union, to disregard the requisitions of the President. Why do they not dissolve it
themselves- the union between themselves and the State- and refuse to pay their quota into its
treasury? Do not they stand in the same relation to the State that the State does to the Union?
And have not the same reasons prevented the State from resisting the Union which have
prevented them from resisting the State?
How can a man be satisfied to entertain an opinion merely, and enjoy it? Is there any
enjoyment in it, if his opinion is that he is aggrieved? If you are cheated out of a single dollar by
your neighbor, you do not rest satisfied with knowing that you are cheated, or with saying that
you are cheated, or even with petitioning him to pay you your due; but you take effectual steps at
once to obtain the full amount, and see that you are never cheated again. Action from principle,
the perception and the performance of right, changes things and relations; it is essentially
revolutionary, and does not consist wholly with anything which was. It not only divides States
and churches, it divides families; ay, it divides the individual, separating the diabolical in him
from the divine.
Unjust laws exist: shall we be content to obey them, or shall we endeavor to amend them,
and obey them until we have succeeded, or shall we transgress them at once? Men generally,
under such a government as this, think that they ought to wait until they have persuaded the
majority to alter them. They think that, if they should resist, the remedy would be worse than the
evil. But it is the fault of the government itself that the remedy is worse than the evil. It makes it
worse. Why is it not more apt to anticipate and provide for reform? Why does it not cherish its
wise minority? Why does it cry and resist before it is hurt? Why does it not encourage its citizens
to be on the alert to point out its faults, and do better than it would have them? Why does it
always crucify Christ, and excommunicate Copernicus and Luther, and pronounce Washington
and Franklin rebels?
One would think, that a deliberate and practical denial of its authority was the only
offence never contemplated by government; else, why has it not assigned its definite, its suitable
and proportionate, penalty? If a man who has no property refuses but once to earn nine shillings
for the State, he is put in prison for a period unlimited by any law that I know, and determined
only by the discretion of those who placed him there; but if he should steal ninety times nine
shillings from the State, he is soon permitted to go at large again.
If the injustice is part of the necessary friction of the machine of government, let it go, let
it go: perchance it will wear smooth- certainly the machine will wear out. If the injustice has a
spring, or a pulley, or a rope, or a crank, exclusively for itself, then perhaps you may consider
whether the remedy will not be worse than the evil; but if it is of such a nature that it requires
you to be the agent of injustice to another, then, I say, break the law. Let your life be a counterfriction to stop the machine. What I have to do is to see, at any rate, that I do not lend myself to
the wrong which I condemn.
As for adopting the ways which the State has provided for remedying the evil, I know not
of such ways. They take too much time, and a man's life will be gone. I have other affairs to
attend to. I came into this world, not chiefly to make this a good place to live in, but to live in it,
be it good or bad. A man has not everything to do, but something; and because he cannot do
everything, it is not necessary that he should do something wrong. It is not my business to be
petitioning the Governor or the Legislature any more than it is theirs to petition me; and if they
should not bear my petition, what should I do then? But in this case the State has provided no
way: its very Constitution is the evil. This may seem to be harsh and stubborn and
unconciliatory; but it is to treat with the utmost kindness and consideration the only spirit that
can appreciate or deserves it. So is an change for the better, like birth and death, which convulse
the body.
I do not hesitate to say, that those who call themselves Abolitionists should at once
effectually withdraw their support, both in person and property, from the government of
Massachusetts, and not wait till they constitute a majority of one, before they suffer the right to
prevail through them. I think that it is enough if they have God on their side, without waiting for
that other one. Moreover, any man more right than his neighbors constitutes a majority of one
already.
I meet this American government, or its representative, the State government, directly,
and face to face, once a year- no more- in the person of its tax-gatherer; this is the only mode in
which a man situated as I am necessarily meets it; and it then says distinctly, Recognize me; and
the simplest, the most effectual, and, in the present posture of affairs, the indispensablest mode
of treating with it on this head, of expressing your little satisfaction with and love for it, is to
deny it then. My civil neighbor, the tax-gatherer, is the very man I have to deal with- for it is,
after all, with men and not with parchment that I quarrel- and he has voluntarily chosen to be an
agent of the government. How shall he ever know well what he is and does as an officer of the
government, or as a man, until he is obliged to consider whether he shall treat me, his neighbor,
for whom he has respect, as a neighbor and well-disposed man, or as a maniac and disturber of
the peace, and see if he can get over this obstruction to his neighborliness without a ruder and
more impetuous thought or speech corresponding with his action. I know this well, that if one
thousand, if one hundred, if ten men whom I could name- if ten honest men only- ay, if one
HONEST man, in this State of Massachusetts, ceasing to hold slaves, were actually to withdraw
from this copartnership, and be locked up in the county jail therefor, it would be the abolition of
slavery in America. For it matters not how small the beginning may seem to be: what is once
well done is done forever. But we love better to talk about it: that we say is our mission, Reform
keeps many scores of newspapers in its service, but not one man. If my esteemed neighbor, the
State's ambassador, who will devote his days to the settlement of the question of human rights in
the Council Chamber, instead of being threatened with the prisons of Carolina, were to sit down
the prisoner of Massachusetts, that State which is so anxious to foist the sin of slavery upon her
sister- though at present she can discover only an act of inhospitality to be the ground of a
quarrel with her- the Legislature would not wholly waive the subject the following winter.
Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also a
prison. The proper place today, the only place which Massachusetts has provided for her freer
and less desponding spirits, is in her prisons, to be put out and locked out of the State by her own
act, as they have already put themselves out by their principles. It is there that the fugitive slave,
and the Mexican prisoner on parole, and the Indian come to plead the wrongs of his race should
find them; on that separate, but more free and honorable, ground, where the State places those
who are not with her, but against her- the only house in a slave State in which a free man can
abide with honor. If any think that their influence would be lost there, and their voices no longer
afflict the ear of the State, that they would not be as an enemy within its walls, they do not know
by how much truth is stronger than error, nor how much more eloquently and effectively he can
combat injustice who has experienced a little in his own person. Cast your whole vote, not a strip
of paper merely, but your whole influence. A minority is powerless while it conforms to the
majority; it is not even a minority then; but it is irresistible when it clogs by its whole weight. If
the alternative is to keep all just men in prison, or give up war and slavery, the State will not
hesitate which to choose. If a thousand men were not to pay their tax-bills this year, that would
not be a violent and bloody measure, as it would be to pay them, and enable the State to commit
violence and shed innocent blood. This is, in fact, the definition of a peaceable revolution, if any
such is possible. If the tax-gatherer, or any other public officer, asks me, as one has done, "But
what shall I do?" my answer is, "If you really wish to do anything, resign your office." When the
subject has refused allegiance, and the officer has resigned his office, then the revolution is
accomplished. But even suppose blood should flow. Is there not a sort of blood shed when the
conscience is wounded? Through this wound a man's real manhood and immortality flow out,
and he bleeds to an everlasting death. I see this blood flowing now.
I have contemplated the imprisonment of the offender, rather than the seizure of his
goods- though both will serve the same purpose- because they who assert the purest right, and
consequently are most dangerous to a corrupt State, commonly have not spent much time in
accumulating property. To such the State renders comparatively small service, and a slight tax is
wont to appear exorbitant, particularly if they are obliged to earn it by special labor with their
hands. If there were one who lived wholly without the use of money, the State itself would
hesitate to demand it of him. But the rich man- not to make any invidious comparison- is always
sold to the institution which makes him rich. Absolutely speaking, the more money, the less
virtue; for money comes between a man and his objects, and obtains them for him; and it was
certainly no great virtue to obtain it. It puts to rest many questions which he would otherwise be
taxed to answer; while the only new question which it puts is the hard but superfluous one, how
to spend it. Thus his moral ground is taken from under his feet. The opportunities of living are
diminished in proportion as what are called the "means" are increased. The best thing a man can
do for his culture when he is rich is to endeavor to carry out those schemes which he entertained
when he was poor. Christ answered the Herodians according to their condition. "Show me the
tribute-money," said he;- and one took a penny out of his pocket;- if you use money which has
the image of Caesar on it, and which he has made current and valuable, that is, if you are men of
the State, and gladly enjoy the advantages of Caesar's government, then pay him back some of
his own when he demands it. "Render therefore to Caesar that which is Caesar's, and to God
those things which are God's"- leaving them no wiser than before as to which was which; for
they did not wish to know.
When I converse with the freest of my neighbors, I perceive that, whatever they may say
about the magnitude and seriousness of the question, and their regard for the public tranquillity,
the long and the short of the matter is, that they cannot spare the protection of the existing
government, and they dread the consequences to their property and families of disobedience to it.
For my own part, I should not like to think that I ever rely on the protection of the State. But, if I
deny the authority of the State when it presents its tax-bill, it will soon take and waste all my
property, and so harass me and my children without end. This is hard. This makes it impossible
for a man to live honestly, and at the same time comfortably, in outward respects. It will not be
worth the while to accumulate property; that would be sure to go again. You must hire or squat
somewhere, and raise but a small crop, and eat that soon. You must live within yourself, and
depend upon yourself always tucked up and ready for a start, and not have many affairs. A man
may grow rich in Turkey even, if he will be in all respects a good subject of the Turkish
government. Confucius said: "If a state is governed by the principles of reason, poverty and
misery are subjects of shame; if a state is not governed by the principles of reason, riches and
honors are the subjects of shame." No: until I want the protection of Massachusetts to be
extended to me in some distant Southern port, where my liberty is endangered, or until I am bent
solely on building up an estate at home by peaceful enterprise, I can afford to refuse allegiance to
Massachusetts, and her right to my property and life. It costs me less in every sense to incur the
penalty of disobedience to the State than it would to obey. I should feel as if I were worth less in
that case.
Some years ago, the State met me in behalf of the Church, and commanded me to pay a
certain sum toward the support of a clergyman whose preaching my father attended, but never I
myself. "Pay," it said, "or be locked up in the jail." I declined to pay. But, unfortunately, another
man saw fit to pay it. I did not see why the schoolmaster should be taxed to support the priest,
and not the priest the schoolmaster; for I was not the State's schoolmaster, but I supported myself
by voluntary subscription. I did not see why the lyceum should not present its tax-bill, and have
the State to back its demand, as well as the Church. However, at the request of the selectmen, I
condescended to make some such statement as this in writing:- "Know all men by these presents,
that I, Henry Thoreau, do not wish to be regarded as a member of any incorporated society which
I have not joined." This I gave to the town clerk; and he has it. The State, having thus learned
that I did not wish to be regarded as a member of that church, has never made a like demand on
me since; though it said that it must adhere to its original presumption that time. If I had known
how to name them, I should then have signed off in detail from all the societies which I never
signed on to; but I did not know where to find a complete list.
I have paid no poll-tax for six years. I was put into a jail once on this account, for one
night; and, as I stood considering the walls of solid stone, two or three feet thick, the door of
wood and iron, a foot thick, and the iron grating which strained the light, I could not help being
struck with the foolishness of that institution which treated me as if I were mere flesh and blood
and bones, to be locked up. I wondered that it should have concluded at length that this was the
best use it could put me to, and had never thought to avail itself of my services in some way. I
saw that, if there was a wall of stone between me and my townsmen, there was a still more
difficult one to climb or break through before they could get to be as free as I was. I did not for a
moment feel confined, and the walls seemed a great waste of stone and mortar. I felt as if I alone
of all my townsmen had paid my tax. They plainly did not know how to treat me, but behaved
like persons who are underbred. In every threat and in every compliment there was a blunder; for
they thought that my chief desire was to stand the other side of that stone wall. I could not but
smile to see how industriously they locked the door on my meditations, which followed them out
again without let or hindrance, and they were really all that was dangerous. As they could not
reach me, they had resolved to punish my body; just as boys, if they cannot come at some person
against whom they have a spite, will abuse his dog. I saw that the State was half-witted, that it
was timid as a lone woman with her silver spoons, and that it did not know its friends from its
foes, and I lost all my remaining respect for it, and pitied it.
Thus the State never intentionally confronts a man's sense, intellectual or moral, but only
his body, his senses. It is not armed with superior wit or honesty, but with superior physical
strength. I was not born to be forced. I will breathe after my own fashion. Let us see who is the
strongest. What force has a multitude? They only can force me who obey a higher law than I.
They force me to become like themselves. I do not hear of men being forced to have this way or
that by masses of men. What sort of life were that to live? When I meet a government which says
to me, "Your money or your life," why should I be in haste to give it my money? It may be in a
great strait, and not know what to do: I cannot help that. It must help itself; do as I do. It is not
worth the while to snivel about it. I am not responsible for the successful working of the
machinery of society. I am not the son of the engineer. I perceive that, when an acorn and a
chestnut fall side by side, the one does not remain inert to make way for the other, but both obey
their own laws, and spring and grow and flourish as best they can, till one, perchance,
overshadows and destroys the other. If a plant cannot live according to its nature, it dies; and so a
man.
The night in prison was novel and interesting enough. The prisoners in their shirt-sleeves
were enjoying a chat and the evening air in the doorway, when I entered. But the jailer said,
"Come, boys, it is time to lock up"; and so they dispersed, and I heard the sound of their steps
returning into the hollow apartments. My room-mate was introduced to me by the jailer as "a
first-rate fellow and a clever man." When the door was locked, he showed me where to hang my
hat, and how he managed matters there. The rooms were whitewashed once a month; and this
one, at least, was the whitest, most simply furnished, and probably the neatest apartment in the
town. He naturally wanted to know where I came from, and what brought me there; and, when I
had told him, I asked him in my turn how he came there, presuming him to be an honest man, of
course; and, as the world goes, I believe he was. "Why," said he, "they accuse me of burning a
barn; but I never did it." As near as I could discover, he had probably gone to bed in a barn when
drunk, and smoked his pipe there; and so a barn was burnt. He had the reputation of being a
clever man, had been there some three months waiting for his trial to come on, and would have
to wait as much longer; but he was quite domesticated and contented, since he got his board for
nothing, and thought that he was well treated.
He occupied one window, and I the other; and I saw that if one stayed there long, his
principal business would be to look out the window. I had soon read all the tracts that were left
there, and examined where former prisoners had broken out, and where a grate had been sawed
off, and heard the history of the various occupants of that room; for I found that even here there
was a history and a gossip which never circulated beyond the walls of the jail. Probably this is
the only house in the town where verses are composed, which are afterward printed in a circular
form, but not published. I was shown quite a long list of verses which were composed by some
young men who had been detected in an attempt to escape, who avenged themselves by singing
them.
I pumped my fellow-prisoner as dry as I could, for fear I should never see him again; but
at length he showed me which was my bed, and left me to blow out the lamp.
It was like travelling into a far country, such as I had never expected to behold, to lie there for
one night. It seemed to me that I never had heard the town clock strike before, nor the evening
sounds of the village; for we slept with the windows open, which were inside the grating. It was
to see my native village in the light of the Middle Ages, and our Concord was turned into a
Rhine stream, and visions of knights and castles passed before me. They were the voices of old
burghers that I heard in the streets. I was an involuntary spectator and auditor of whatever was
done and said in the kitchen of the adjacent village inn- a wholly new and rare experience to me.
It was a closer view of my native town. I was fairly inside of it. I never had seen its institutions
before. This is one of its peculiar institutions; for it is a shire town. I began to comprehend what
its inhabitants were about.
In the morning, our breakfasts were put through the hole in the door, in small oblongsquare tin pans, made to fit, and holding a pint of chocolate, with brown bread, and an iron
spoon. When they called for the vessels again, I was green enough to return what bread I had
left; but my comrade seized it, and said that I should lay that up for lunch or dinner. Soon after
he was let out to work at haying in a neighboring field, whither he went every day, and would
not be back till noon; so he bade me good-day, saying that he doubted if he should see me again.
When I came out of prison- for some one interfered, and paid that tax- I did not perceive that
great changes had taken place on the common, such as he observed who went in a youth and
emerged a tottering and gray-headed man; and yet a change had to my eyes come over the scenethe town, and State, and country- greater than any that mere time could effect. I saw yet more
distinctly the State in which I lived. I saw to what extent the people among whom I lived could
be trusted as good neighbors and friends; that their friendship was for summer weather only; that
they did not greatly propose to do right; that they were a distinct race from me by their prejudices
and superstitions, as the Chinamen and Malays are; that in their sacrifices to humanity they ran
no risks, not even to their property; that after all they were not so noble but they treated the thief
as he had treated them, and hoped, by a certain outward observance and a few prayers, and by
walking in a particular straight though useless path from time to time, to save their souls. This
may be to judge my neighbors harshly; for I believe that many of them are not aware that they
have such an institution as the jail in their village.
It was formerly the custom in our village, when a poor debtor came out of jail, for his
acquaintances to salute him, looking through their fingers, which were crossed to represent the
grating of a jail window, "How do ye do?" My neighbors did not thus salute me, but first looked
at me, and then at one another, as if I had returned from a long journey. I was put into jail as I
was going to the shoemaker's to get a shoe which was mended. When I was let out the next
morning, I proceeded to finish my errand, and, having put on my mended shoe, joined a
huckleberry party, who were impatient to put themselves under my conduct; and in half an hourfor the horse was soon tackled- was in the midst of a huckleberry field, on one of our highest
hills, two miles off, and then the State was nowhere to be seen.
This is the whole history of "My Prisons."
I have never declined paying the highway tax, because I am as desirous of being a good
neighbor as I am of being a bad subject; and as for supporting schools, I am doing my part to
educate my fellow-countrymen now. It is for no particular item in the tax-bill that I refuse to pay
it. I simply wish to refuse allegiance to the State, to withdraw and stand aloof from it effectually.
I do not care to trace the course of my dollar, if I could, till it buys a man or a musket to shoot
one with- the dollar is innocent- but I am concerned to trace the effects of my allegiance. In fact,
I quietly declare war with the State, after my fashion, though I will still make what use and get
what advantage of her I can, as is usual in such cases
.
If others pay the tax which is demanded of me, from a sympathy with the State, they do
but what they have already done in their own case, or rather they abet injustice to a greater extent
than the State requires. If they pay the tax from a mistaken interest in the individual taxed, to
save his property, or prevent his going to jail, it is because they have not considered wisely how
far they let their private feelings interfere with the public good.
This, then, is my position at present. But one cannot be too much on his guard in such a
case, lest his action be biased by obstinacy or an undue regard for the opinions of men. Let him
see that he does only what belongs to himself and to the hour.
I think sometimes, Why, this people mean well, they are only ignorant; they would do
better if they knew how: why give your neighbors this pain to treat you as they are not inclined
to? But I think again, This is no reason why I should do as they do, or permit others to suffer
much greater pain of a different kind. Again, I sometimes say to myself, When many millions of
men, without heat, without ill will, without personal feeling of any kind, demand of you a few
shillings only, without the possibility, such is their constitution, of retracting or altering their
present demand, and without the possibility, on your side, of appeal to any other millions, why
expose yourself to this overwhelming brute force? You do not resist cold and hunger, the winds
and the waves, thus obstinately; you quietly submit to a thousand similar necessities. You do not
put your head into the fire. But just in proportion as I regard this as not wholly a brute force, but
partly a human force, and consider that I have relations to those millions as to so many millions
of men, and not of mere brute or inanimate things, I see that appeal is possible, first and
instantaneously, from them to the Maker of them, and, secondly, from them to themselves. But if
I put my head deliberately into the fire, there is no appeal to fire or to the Maker of fire, and I
have only myself to blame. If I could convince myself that I have any right to be satisfied with
men as they are, and to treat them accordingly, and not according, in some respects, to my
requisitions and expectations of what they and I ought to be, then, like a good Mussulman and
fatalist, I should endeavor to be satisfied with things as they are, and say it is the will of God.
And, above all, there is this difference between resisting this and a purely brute or natural force,
that I can resist this with some effect; but I cannot expect, like Orpheus, to change the nature of
the rocks and trees and beasts.
I do not wish to quarrel with any man or nation. I do not wish to split hairs, to make fine
distinctions, or set myself up as better than my neighbors. I seek rather, I may say, even an
excuse for conforming to the laws of the land. I am but too ready to conform to them. Indeed, I
have reason to suspect myself on this head; and each year, as the tax-gatherer comes round, I
find myself disposed to review the acts and position of the general and State governments, and
the spirit of the people, to discover a pretext for conformity.
We must affect our country as our parents,
And if at any time we alienate
Our love or industry from doing it honor,
We must respect effects and teach the soul
Matter of conscience and religion,
And not desire of rule or benefit.
I believe that the State will soon be able to take all my work of this sort out of my hands,
and then I shall be no better a patriot than my fellow-countrymen. Seen from a lower point of
view, the Constitution, with all its faults, is very good; the law and the courts are very
respectable; even this State and this American government are, in many respects, very admirable,
and rare things, to be thankful for, such as a great many have described them; but seen from a
point of view a little higher, they are what I have described them; seen from a higher still, and
the highest, who shall say what they are, or that they are worth looking at or thinking of at all?
However, the government does not concern me much, and I shall bestow the fewest
possible thoughts on it. It is not many moments that I live under a government, even in this
world. If a man is thought-free, fancy-free, imagination-free, that which is not never for a long
time appearing to be to him, unwise rulers or reformers cannot fatally interrupt him.
I know that most men think differently from myself; but those whose lives are by
profession devoted to the study of these or kindred subjects content me as little as any. Statesmen
and legislators, standing so completely within the institution, never distinctly and nakedly behold
it. They speak of moving society, but have no resting-place without it. They may be men of a
certain experience and discrimination, and have no doubt invented ingenious and even useful
systems, for which we sincerely thank them; but all their wit and usefulness lie within certain not
very wide limits. They are wont to forget that the world is not governed by policy and
expediency. Webster never goes behind government, and so cannot speak with authority about
it. His words are wisdom to those legislators who contemplate no essential reform in the existing
government; but for thinkers, and those who legislate for all time, he never once glances at the
subject. I know of those whose serene and wise speculations on this theme would soon reveal the
limits of his mind's range and hospitality. Yet, compared with the cheap professions of most
reformers, and the still cheaper wisdom and eloquence of politicians in general, his are almost
the only sensible and valuable words, and we thank Heaven for him. Comparatively, he is always
strong, original, and, above all, practical. Still, his quality is not wisdom, but prudence. The
lawyer's truth is not Truth, but consistency or a consistent expediency. Truth is always in
harmony with herself, and is not concerned chiefly to reveal the justice that may consist with
wrong-doing. He well deserves to be called, as he has been called, the Defender of the
Constitution. There are really no blows to be given by him but defensive ones. He is not a leader,
but a follower. His leaders are the men of '87- "I have never made an effort," he says, "and never
propose to make an effort; I have never countenanced an effort, and never mean to countenance
an effort, to disturb the arrangement as originally made, by which the various States came into
the Union." Still thinking of the sanction which the Constitution gives to slavery, he says,
"Because it was a part of the original compact- let it stand." Notwithstanding his special
acuteness and ability, he is unable to take a fact out of its merely political relations, and behold it
as it lies absolutely to be disposed of by the intellect- what, for instance, it behooves a man to do
here in America today with regard to slavery- but ventures, or is driven, to make some such
desperate answer as the following, while professing to speak absolutely, and as a private manfrom which what new and singular code of social duties might be inferred? "The manner," says
he, "in which the governments of those States where slavery exists are to regulate it is for their
own consideration, under their responsibility to their constituents, to the general laws of
propriety, humanity, and justice, and to God. Associations formed elsewhere, springing from a
feeling of humanity, or any other cause, have nothing whatever to do with it. They have never
received any encouragement from me, and they never will."
They who know of no purer sources of truth, who have traced up its stream no higher,
stand, and wisely stand, by the Bible and the Constitution, and drink at it there with reverence
and humility; but they who behold where it comes trickling into this lake or that pool, gird up
their loins once more, and continue their pilgrimage toward its fountain-head.
No man with a genius for legislation has appeared in America. They are rare in the
history of the world. There are orators, politicians, and eloquent men, by the thousand; but the
speaker has not yet opened his mouth to speak who is capable of settling the much-vexed
questions of the day. We love eloquence for its own sake, and not for any truth which it may
utter, or any heroism it may inspire. Our legislators have not yet learned the comparative value of
free trade and of freedom, of union, and of rectitude, to a nation. They have no genius or talent
for comparatively humble questions of taxation and finance, commerce and manufactures and
agriculture. If we were left solely to the wordy wit of legislators in Congress for our guidance,
uncorrected by the seasonable experience and the effectual complaints of the people, America
would not long retain her rank among the nations. For eighteen hundred years, though perchance
I have no right to say it, the New Testament has been written; yet where is the legislator who has
wisdom and practical talent enough to avail himself of the light which it sheds on the science of
legislation?
The authority of government, even such as I am willing to submit to- for I will cheerfully
obey those who know and can do better than I, and in many things even those who neither know
nor can do so well- is still an impure one: to be strictly just, it must have the sanction and consent
of the governed. It can have no pure right over my person and property but what I concede to it.
The progress from an absolute to a limited monarchy, from a limited monarchy to a democracy,
is a progress toward a true respect for the individual. Even the Chinese philosopher was wise
enough to regard the individual as the basis of the empire. Is a democracy, such as we know it,
the last improvement possible in government? Is it not possible to take a step further towards
recognizing and organizing the rights of man? There will never be a really free and enlightened
State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from
which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly. I please myself
with imagining a State at least which can afford to be just to all men, and to treat the individual
with respect as a neighbor; which even would not think it inconsistent with its own repose if a
few were to live aloof from it, not meddling with it, nor embraced by it, who fulfilled all the
duties of neighbors and fellow-men. A State which bore this kind of fruit, and suffered it to drop
off as fast as it ripened, would prepare the way for a still more perfect and glorious State, which
also I have imagined, but not yet anywhere seen.
Questions for Critical Reading
1. To what extent do you think Thoreau's intended audience agreed with him?
2. What is the relation of justice to the moral view that Thoreau maintains?
3. Thoreau provides us with a detailed account of his imprisonment (paragraphs 2835).What is the ethical lesson that Thoreau learned in prison?
4. One example of Thoreau's use of irony is in paragraph 25. What other examples ofirony
seem effective in his argument?]
5. In Thoreau's view, what is the ethical responsibility of a government to a minority
population?
6. How clear is Thoreau's position on ethics and morality? What is most convincing to you?
7. Is it possible that Thoreau's “Chinese philosopher” is Lao-tzu. How likely is it that
Thoreau had read Lao-tzu and agreed with him?
Calendar Questions
1. In paragraph 11 Thoreau says, “All voting is a sort of gaming.” What does he mean by
this?
2. Is it true?
3. What is the gaming aspect of voting?
4. Why is Thoreau so harsh about voting?
Notes on the Thoreau Text*
“…governs least”. John L. O’Sullivan (1813-1895) wrote in the United States Magazine and
Democratic Review (1837) that “all government is evil, and the parents of evil…The best
government is that which governs least.” Thomas Jefferson wrote, “That government is best
which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves.” Both comments echo the
Tao-te-Ching.
The present Mexican war (1846-1848) The war was extremely unpopular in New England
because it was an act of a bullying government anxious to grab land from a weaker nation. The
United States had annexed Texas in 1845, precipitating a retaliation from Mexico.
powder-monkeys The boys who delivered gunpowder to cannons.
Navy-Yard This is apparently the U.S. naval yard at Boston.
Not a drum was heard… These lines are from “Burial of Sir John Moore at Corunna” (1817)
by the Irish poet Charles Moore Wolfe (1791-1823).
posse comitatus Literally, the power of the county; the term means a law-enforcement group
made up of ordinary citizens.
“clay,” “stop a hole…wind away.” I am too high-born… These lines are from Shakespeare;
the first is from Hamlet, V.i.226-27. The verse s from King john, V.ii.79-82.
William Paley (1743-1805) English theologian who lectured widely on moral philosophy.
Paley is famous for A View of the Evidences of Christianity (1794). “Duty of Submission to
Civil Government Explained” is Chapter 3 of Book 5 of The Principles of Moral and Political
Philosophy (1785).
A drab… From Cyril Tourneur (1575?-1626), revenger’s Tragedy (1607), IV.iv.70-72. “Drab”
is an obsolete term for a prostitute. Thoreau quotes the lines to imply that Massachusetts is a
“painted lady” with a defiled soul.
Baltimore In 1848, the political environment was particularly intense; it was a seedbed of
theoreticians of the Confederacy, which was only beginning to be contemplated.
Odd Fellow The Independent Order of Odd Fellows, a fraternal and benevolent secret society,
founded in England in the eighteenth century and first established in the United States in 1819 in
Baltimore.
Nicolaus Copernicus (1473-1543) and Martin Luther (1483-1546) Copernicus
revolutionized astronomy and the way humankind perceives the universe; Luther was a religious
revolutionary who began the Reformation and created the first Protestant faith.
esteemed neighbor Thoreau refers to Samuel Hoar (1778-1856), a Massachusetts congressman,
who went to South Carolina to protest that state’s practice of seizing black seamen from
Massachusetts ships and enslaving them. South Carolina threatened Hoar and drove him out of
the state. He did not secure the justice he demanded.
Herodians Followers of King Herod who were opposed to Jesus Christ (see Matt.22:16)
Confucius (551-479 B.C.E.) The most important Chinese religious leader. His Analects
(collection) treated not only religious but moral and political matters as well.
poll-tax A tax levied on every citizen living in a given area; poll means “head,” so it is a tax per
head. The tax Thoreau refers to, about $2, was used to support the Mexican War.
shire town A county seat, which means the town had a court, county offices, and jails.
Mussulman Muslim; a follower of the religion of Islam.
Orpheus In Greek mythology, Orpheus was a poet whose songs were so plaintive that they
affected animals, trees, and even stones.
We must affect… From George Peele (1556-1596), The Battle of Alcazar (acted 1588-1589,
printed 1594), II.ii. Thoreau added these lines in a later printing of the essay. They emphasize
the fact that one is disobedient to the state as one is to a parent – with love and affection and
from a cause of conscience. Disobedience is not taken lightly.
Daniel Webster (1782-1852) One of the most brilliant orators of his time. He was secretary of
state from 1841-1843, which is why Thoreau thinks he cannot be a satisfactory critic of the
government.
men of ’87 The Men who framed the Constitution in 1787.
…and they never will These extracts have been inserted since he Lecture was read. [Thoreau’s
note]
Chinese philosopher Thoreau probably means Confucius.
*Jacobus, Lee A., ed. A World of Idea, 10th edition. Bedford/St. Martin’s, 2017.
Purchase answer to see full
attachment