1 1 MORAL PHILOSOPHY, BOOK IV. DUTIES TO OURSELVES HIS divifion of the fubject is retained TH merely for the fake of method, by which the writer and the reader are equally affifted. To the fubject itself it imports nothing; for the obligation of all duties being fundamentally the fame, it matters little under what clafs or title any of them are confidered. In ftrictness, there are few duties or crimes, which terminate in a man's self; and, fo far as others are affected by their operation, they have been treated of in some article of the preceding book, We have reserved however to this head the rights of B VOL. 11. Self felf-defence; alfo the confideration of drunkenness and fuicide, as offences against that care of our faculties, and preservation of our person, which we account duties, and call duties to ourfelves. CHA P. CHAP. I. THE RIGHTS OF SELF-DEFENCE, T has been afferted, that in a state of nature we might lawfully defend the most infignificant right, provided it were a perfect determinate right, by any extremities which the obftinacy of the aggreffor made neceffary. Of this I doubt; because I doubt whether the general rule be worth sustaining at such an expence, and because, apart from the general confequence of yielding to the attempt, it cannot be contended to be for the augmentation of human happiness, that one man fhould lofe his life, or a limb, rather than another a pennyworth of his property. Nevertheless, perfect rights can only be distinguished by their value; and it is impoffible to afcertain the value, at which the liberty of using extreme violence begins. The person attacked must balance, as well as he can, between the general confequence of yielding, and the particular effect of resistance. However, this right, if it exift in a state of nature, is fufpended by the establishment of civil fociety; because thereby other remedies are provided against attacks upon our property, and because it is neceffary to the peace and safety of the community, that the prevention, punishment, and redress of injuries be adjusted by public laws. Moreover, as the individual is affifted in the recovery of his right, or of a compenfation for it, by the public strength, it is no less equitable than expedient, that he should fubmit to public arbitration, the kind as well as the measure of the fatisfaction which he is to obtain. There is one cafe in which all extremities are justifiable, namely, when our life is affaulted, and it becomes neceffary for our prefervation to kill the affailant. This is evident in a state of nature; unless it can be fhewn, that we are bound to prefer the aggreffor's life to our own, that is to fay, to love our enemy better than ourselves, which can never be a debt of justice, nor any where appears to be a duty of charity. is the cafe altered by our living in civil society; because, by the supposition, the laws of fociety cannot interpofe to protect us, nor by the nature of the cafe compel reftitution. This liberty is Nor re veftrained to cafes, in which no other probable means of preferving our life remain, as flight, calling for affiftance, difarming the adversary, &c. The rule holds, whether the danger proceed from a voluntary attack, as by an enemy, robber, or affaffin; or from an involuntary one, as by a madman, or person finking in the water, and dragging us after him; or where two perfons are reduced to a fituation, in which one or both of them muft perish; as in a fhipwreck, where two feize upon a plank, which will fupport only one: although, to say the truth, these extreme cafes, which happen feldom, and hardly, when they do happen, admit of moral agency, are fcarcely worth mentioning, much lefs debating. 1 The instance which approaches the nearest to the prefervation of life, and which seems to juftify the fame extremities, is the defence of chastity. In all other cafes, it appears to me the safest to confider the taking away of life as authorized by the law of the land; and the perfon who takes it away, as in the fituation of a minifter or executioner of the law. In which view, homicide, in England, is justifiable: |