covery is most suitable to the genius of man; whether the art of killing a good man merely for his goodness' sake, or that of killing a man by way of revenge, because he had killed some innocent person? I think, in the latter case, we need be at no great pains to discover any supernatural inspiration ; unless we were inclined to ascribe it to the inspiration of him. "who was a murderer from the beginning ;" and who by way of eminence is called the destroyer, or Apollyon..

Though the retaliation of injuries, extending even to the ultimate act of life for life, must have been prevalent in the antediluvian world; it is not very probable that there were any regular, or what we should term legal, tribunals. It might have been, and probably was in those rude times, as it now is among some tribes of savages, where the murderer must be slain by the nearest kinsman of the murdered man and this opinion seems confirmed by the fears expressed by Cain. Or perhaps, resting on a still looser principle, it was considered that any person, the very next he should meet, had a right to kill the murderer.

Let us, Sir, if you please, look more attentively at the boast ed right of retaliation, which Grotius, in the above passage, has styled, jus naturale talionis, i. e. the natural right of retaliation. Let us endeavour to see what are its true lineaments, and what its aspect and influence on Society. It is generally considered as inseparably connected with, and justified by, the law of self-preservation; and is contended for as taught by nature, and approbated by God. Cicero, than whom no writer speaks of it with more eloquence and force, says, Orat. pro. Mil. p. 316. "Hoc et ratio doctis, et necessitas barbaris, et mos gentibus, et feris naturæ ipsæ præscripsit, ut omnem semper vim, quacunque ope possent, a corpore, a capite, au vita sua propulsarent." "Reason has taught this to the learn ed, necessity to the barbarian, custom to all nations, and nature itself to the wild beasts, that they should always repel all violence, by all means in their power, from their body, their head, and their life."

If to offer violence to an innocent person without provoca. tion, may be considered as a dictate of a nature fallen and depraved, we surely need ascend no higher to look for motives for repelling injury and taking revenge. And we shall at once perceive, that a world filled with violence and outrage, must also inevitably abound with retaliation and vengeance: that aggression and retaliation in a race of creatures naturally unjust, cruel, and passionate, must go hand in hand.

Sir, it will not be contended that retaliation is a crime of equal atrocity with that of original aggression. Wanton malice and mischief unprovoked, incur greater guilt than the desire of vengeance carried into act. Yet the motive which leads to retaliation is in itself not founded in the best reason; the disposition with which it is effected, is generally if not always wrong; and its general consequences are always bad. And for these reasons it is, I presume, Sir, repealed by our Saviour, as a rule of action. For,

1. The motives to retaliation are not founded in good reason. They are threefold. First, self-defence; secondly, to prevent a repetition of the injury; and, thirdly, to punish or chastise the aggressor.

A state of rebellion against God, and ignorance of, or hostility to his almighty and universal providence, is the sole reason why men have cast off all reliance on him, and have with so much parade and vain confidence assumed their own preservation as their own care, and to be secured by their own wisdom and bravery. But it will be said in reply to this, that we are not to expect God will work miracles for our defence. Whoever believes the wisdom, and goodness, and power of God to be infinite; and at the same time remembers that he has said, that all things work together for good to them that love him, will feel no other concern about his own safety, provided he love God, than to yield unlimited obedience to his authority. Such a man will know that the Almighty Ruler can defend him without a miracle, or if need be by a miracle.

It is, Sir, this vain and haughty principle of self-defence, which has filled the world with blood and slaughter. It induces preparation, carries hostility on its front, provokes aggression, and after all, generally fails to accomplish its object; for it affords no safety. Individuals or nations, the quickest to resent and the most resolute to retaliate injuries, never fail to receive the most injuries. Could I dwell on this point I might show from actual details, that the genuine operation and tendency of the lex talionis, so much contended for by kings and priests, and statesmen, and heroes, is to destroy men: it is the gulph of destruction. Whereas, the meek and humble, the pacifick and magnanimous principle of forgiveness and non-resistance, in its own nature tends directly to personal security, and reposes under the shadow of Almighty protection and divine approbation.

The common objection to this idea is, that were it known that a man would not resist nor retaliate an injury, he would

immediately fall a prey to violence and injustice. It is true he might sometimes suffer from that quarter, but there would be an adequate alleviation of such suffering. "When ye suffer for righteousness' sake, happy are ye, for the Spirit of glory and of God resteth on you." But it should be remembered, that the spirit which would prompt a man never to resist nor retaliate, would surely never lead him to be the original aggressor. Those whom kindness or humility could gain, would always be his friends; and those whom his Christian temper might induce to invade him, God would judge in his own time and way.

Those, Sir, who are so noisy about self-defence, seem utterly to forget, or never to have known, that the best, and indeed the only effectual and rational plan of self-defence a man can form, is to please God. His omnipotent and infinitely benevolent Providence is always present with a man or a nation: it never slumbers; it is never weary.

"He sees with equal eye, as God of all,
The hero perish or the sparrow fall."

And when the Almighty God beholds mankind proudly slighting his protection; arming for their own defence; summoning up all their impotent courage for war and devastation, he mocks at their wrath, derides their prowess, and often says, "Let them perish in their own devices." Yet earnestly, in his holy word, he expostulates with them: "O that they had hearkened to my commandments, then had their peace been as a river, and their righteousness as the waves of the sea."

On this ground the case of the midnight robber and assassin is often brought forward; and it is urged with seeming triumph: "What! if I wake at midnight, and find a man in my house murdering my children and robbing my house, shall I not defend with whatever weapon I can ?" This case is specious, and it carries away the mind with the terrors of its appearance. But, Sir, let the conduct of the primitive Christians answer this question. Did that principle of self-preservation, which Tully styles reason in the learned, necessity in the barbarian, custom among nations, and nature itself in the wild beasts, prompt them to repel violence when and where they could, and by whatever weapon? Surely not. They used no other method to repel and overcome evil than that of doing good.

It is said, we are not to expect miracles to defend us. A miracle, Sir, is but a departure from that usual course of Pro

vidence, whose most common operations would fill us no less with astonishment and gratitude, were it not for our extreme stupidity. I ask the man who pleads so vehemently for the privilege of repelling violence by force, contrary to the injunction of the Redeemer of the world, who preserves him every moment from death? Who causes the planets to revolve, the sun to shine, the earth to vegetate? who causes the pulsations of life through his body, and repairs the incessant waste of arterial energy? who keeps in repair the incomparably delicate and diversified apparatus, requisite to the functions of animal bodies? who impels with such celerity and force the purple current from the citadel of life; through the arteries branching into millions of tenuous tubes, till the microscope can no longer trace them; revolving in countless meanders, till they exactly meet the corresponding extremities of the veins; thence returning the torrent of life through widening and converging channels? what sentinel stands at that critical post where the secretory glands are placed to draw from the passing current of the blood their appropriate selection of fluids, so essential to life? In fine, who gives power to that amazing alembic, to transform our daily food into all the solids and fluids of the body; skill to separate, activity to -convey them to their several stations? All this, to a careful observer, looks almost like a standing miracle. It is the hand . of God.

:

Sir, the destiny of man is eternal and every circumstance of the preservation and close of his life, lies in a train of › events directed by infinite wisdom. God preserves him: nor is there a moment of his life in which the presence of Almighty power and goodness are not as truly evinced for his preservation, as they would be in defending him from the rage of a midnight robber and assassin, who had broken into his chamber while he slept. This boasted case, so often urged in vin-dication of self-defence, brings no aid to that doctrine. Is it to be presumed that Christ would be deterred from forbidding his followers to resort to violence in their own defence, for -fear of what junctures they might fall into, when every man on earth every moment, needs his preserving power no less than the man at the moment he is attacked by a robber?

Besides, those who bring up this case do not seem to consider, that Divine, protection can be exerted as well by preventing an attack, as by repelling violence when offered. The Almighty showed how he can protect in case of the three children thrown into a furnace of fire; and in the case

of the martyrs he has also shown us that he does not always see fit to detend.

On the whole, the preservation of human life, and a man's security from violence and evil, are matters so immediately connected with Divine power and goodness, that the vehement pretensions of mankind to the right of self-defence, are as arrogant and insolent in the sight of God, as they are absolutely vain and fruitless; and of course, they are suffered by Divine Providence, to be the cause of the sudden destruction of millions of men. They impiously arrogate, and God in his displeasure gives up to them their preservation. Let us sup pose that a man in a single combat, or in battle, fights bravely, but falls. What benefit has he gained? Men praise his valour, but God condemns his pride, passion, and folly; and if there be no better parts to his character than those evinced in his last moments, he perishes for ever.

A man rushes into battle, and lays about him with great rage and violence, performs prodigies of valour, perhaps kills a score of men, and escapes unhurt. He retires from battle full of self-complacency; extols his success; thinks with high gratulation and self-applause on the safety which his own arm afforded him. But all-seeing Providence knows how little thanks he owes to himself for his preservation; nay, that the security he enjoyed from the dangers of battle, was but a trifling part of the whole of the protection and aid afforded him at that very moment, by that God in whose hand his breath is. A host of enemies, far more formidable than the opposing army, hovers round him, to destroy his life and make war on his soul; the claims of Divine Justice and eternal wrath hang over him ;-the thunders of God's displeasure murmur round his head, and threaten him with endless perdition. Nothing but a Providence directed by the omnipotent mercy of God, saves him for a moment. And yet, thoughtless creature, he goes away praising the strength of his own arm, as that which brought him salvation.

I have, Sir, dwelt long on this point, as it is one of essential importance to our inquiry and I shall close by observing, that, aside from the prohibition of our Saviour, the general principles of resistance and retaliation, regarded in their operation on the human race, have destroyed thousands where they have preserved one human life.

It now remains that we notice the other two motives of retaliation as above stated; viz. to prevent the repetition of injuries, and to chastise or punish the aggressor.

I am, Sir, yours, with great respect, &c.