Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

the object of the verdict of a Jury. The only test of truth, however, is the universal essent of mankind and a Jury of twelve unconnected and impartial men are a fair criterion of such universal assent, provided they really agree. If they should not all agree, the decision could not be deemed a truth, but a mere probability, strong or slight, in proportion to the num bers asserting or denying the proposition. Should the Jury divide 6 and 6, it would be an equal chance that either were right; should they divide 8 to 4, it would be but to 1 that they were correct; or 9 to 3, it would be but 3 to 1 that they were correct. But, if they all agree, it be comes 12 to 0, or a mathematical certainty that their decision is right according to the evidence before them.

Were the Jury increased in number, the test would be little improved, because I consider the unanimous decision of TWELVE as involving a fair criterion of certainty. Reducing their moral feelings to arithmetical calculation, it may be as sumed, as two to one, that no one jury man would give a wrong verdict; as four to oue that no two would give a false verdict; and so on for the others; becoming nine hundred and sixty millions to unity, that the twelve would not wilfully give a false verdict. And a higher degree of security could not reasonably be required or desired in human affairs; whereas, in deciding by a mere majority

on a similar calculation of chances, five

verdicts out of twelve might be false. In every issue to be tried by a Jury there lies some truth, and the only crite rion that the decision of the Jury sepa rate and discriminate that truth is their Unanumity. It is in this way that geometry, a certain science, commands immediate assent, affording by that assent a proof of its certainty. The moral ques tions connected with trials do not afford the same species of successive demonstration as Geometry; but unanimity of conelusion is a similar test of truth, and the best test that in such cases can be desired.

Let ne add that the required unanimity affords also the only touchstone that can be applied to the honor and conscience of every Juror; because, as every decision must have the assent

of every one of the Jury, we have therein a criterion of his attention and care; every one becoming responsible to his own conscience, to the parties, and to the public, for the integrity and justice

of the verdict.

In regard to the disputed question about the origin of the mode of trial by Jury, the author of this paper is in pos session of Laws of the Ancient Britons, as they exist at this day in manuscripts of great antiquity; and by these it appears, that the aboriginal Britons made use of Juries to decide disputes of every kind, public and private, and had their Juries of twelve, twenty-four, and even of two hundred and fifty! There is consequently no foundation for the idea, that Juries were contrived by Alfred, who probably only introduced appropriate regulations at the time he subdivided the kingdom into hundreds and counties; nor for the assertion that Juries were introduced by the Saxons as a Gothic practice; nor that they were a concession made to the people by the imme. diate descendants of the Norman usurper. These mistakes have arisen from the neglect of the original language of the Island, from the ignorance of Monkish historians, and from the slavish spirit of legal writers, who have always been tools of the existing dynasty. July 28, 1812. COMMON SENSE.

For the Monthly Magazine. REFLECTIONS on the ORIGIN of HISTORY. "Lux veritatis, Magistra vitæ."

The

Cic. de Oratore, 119. OTHING can be more natural, and N at the same time more just and rational, than for man to inquire into the origin and history of man. study of mankind, in all its varieties and ramifications, is the most interesting and useful of all pursuits; and in no other mode can it be prosecuted with so much effect, as in traversing the grand field of universal history, in which imen are exhibited under every diversity of form, and in every vicissitude of situation.

"The study of history," says the justly celebrated Lord Bolingbroke, “will prepare us for action and observation. As experience is conversant about the present, and the present enables us to guess at the future, so history is conver sant about the past, and by knowing the things that have been, we become better able to judge of the things that are."Letters on History, vol. I. p. 67.

"Ya-t'il, en effet, une erreur & un préjugé nuisible," to adopt the eloquent language of the Abbé Millor, dont elle

des illusions & des folies qui ont égaré ne puisse nous garantir par le tablear

[ocr errors]

les hommes? Ya-t'il un vice dont elle ne peigne dans une foule d'exemples la difformité & les malheurs? Une vertu dont elle n'inspire l'amour, en consacrant la mémoire des personnages vertueux ? Une seule circonstance de la vie, laquelle ne s'appliquent utilement ses leçons? Et depuis le trône des Rois jusqu'au cabinet du Philosophe, où trouver un état qui n'ait plus ou moins à profiter de ses lumieres?" - Elemens d'Histoire Générale,vol. I.p. 15. With respect to the origin of the mundane system, clouds and darkness rest upon it. Reason, in the investigation of this obscure and perplexing subject, can afford us but slender aid; and religion was not intended to gratify the eager cravings of philosophic curiosity.

Has the world been created from nothing, or is it eternal? If eternal, is the universe any thing different from the Deity himself? Or is matter only eternal in its unorganized state; and has form been given to it by a Being of incomprehensible wisdom and power? These are questions concerning which philosophers have been divided since the first existence of philosophy to the present day. Nevertheless, the difficulties that attend the idea of an immense power acting upon an unformed mass of pre-existing matter, and producing order and beauty from the jarring elements of chaos and eternal night, or the creation of matter itself from nothing, seem to vanish when compared with that transcendent absurdity and presumption, which, reject ing the hypothesis of an operative intelligent principle of almighty power, main tains the necessary and eternal existence of the world, and the frail and feeble Tace of mortals which inhabit it; of whose history the most accurate and profound researches have been able to attain only to a very imperfect knowledge, during the comparatively short space of a few centuries past.

formation of man, or his history in the earliest ages of the world.

Mr. Hume, the oracle of modern infidelity, avowedly regards the Pentateuch, ascribed to Moses, the Jewish legislator, as the production not merely of an uninspired, but uninformed, historian. "Here," says he, "is a book presented to us by a barbarous and ignorant people, written in an age when they were still more barbarous, and, in all proba bility, long after the facts which it relates; corroborated by no concurring testimony, and resembling those fabulous accounts which every nation gives of its origin. Upon reading this book, we find it full of prodigies and miracles. It gives an account of a state of the world, and of human nature, entirely different from the present; of our fall from that state; of the age of man extended to near a thousand years; of the destruction of the world by a deluge; of the arbitrary choice of one people as the favorites of Heaven, and that people the countrymen of the author; of their deliverance from bondage by prodigies the most astonishing imaginable. I desire any one to lay his hand upon his heart, and, after serious consideration, declare whether he thinks that the falsehood of such a book, supported by such a testimony, would be more extraordinary and miraculous than all the miracles it relates."-Hume's Essays, vol. ii. p. 147.

"The nature of man," says another philosopher of the same class, Lord Bo lingbroke, “and the constant course of human affairs, render it impossible that the first ages of any nation should afford authentic materials for history. We have none such concerning the originals of any of those nations that actually subsist. Shall we expect to find them concerning the originals of nations dispersed or extinguished two or three thousand years ago? If a thread of dark and uncertain tradition there is made, as it commonly is, the introduction to history, we should touch it lightly, and run swiftly over it, far from insisting on it either as authors or readers. Such introductions are, at best, no more than fanciful preludes, that try the instruments and precede the

The most ancient and venerable of all human records has positively declared that, "in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth," by his almighty fiat, breathing into man the breath of life; and that from the original parents of mankind sprang, in natural succession, the myriads of the human race. But concert. this account is accompanied with circumstances so confounding to the imagination, that not a few philosophic speculatists have rejected the whole as a mythologic fiction, and disclaim as utterly incredible the various relations transmitted to us respecting the original

[ocr errors]

"The Jewish history, in particular, never obtained any credit in the world, till Christianity was established. The foundation of this system being laid, partly in these histories and in the prophecies joined to them, or inserted in them, Christianity has reflected back upon

them

them an authority which they had not before, and this authority has prevailed wherever Christianity has spread. Both Jews and Christians held the same books in great veneration, whilst each condemns the other for not understanding or for abusing them. But I apprehend that the zeal of both has done much hurt, by endeavouring to extend their authoty much farther than is necessary for the support, perhaps of Judaism, but, to be sure, of Christianity. Christ came to fulfil the prophecies, but not to consecrate all the written, any more than the oral, traditions of the Jews. We must believe these traditions as far as they relate to Christianity, as far as Christianity refers to them, or supposes them necessary; but we can be under no obligation to believe them any farther, since without Christianity we should be under no obligation to believe them at ‚all.”—Letters on History, p. 71,94, 115. That we may not suppose this writer too much in earnest in his ironical insinuation, that the Scriptures of the Old Testament derive any validity from the sanction of the New, he goes on to tell us," that they come down broken and confused, full of additions, interpolations, and transpositions, made we neither know when, nor by whom, and such, in short, as never appeared on the face of any other book, on whose authority men have agreed to rely. Whoever takes the pains to read what learned men have writ on this subject, will find that they leave the matter as doubtful as they took it up. Who were the authors of these Scriptures when they were published? how they were composed and preserved? in fine, how they were lost during the captivity, and how they were retrieved after it? are all matters of controversy to this day. Upon the whole, the Scriptures are so far from giving us light into general history, that they increase the obscurity even of those parts to which they have the nearest relation."-Ibid.

On the other hand, men confessedly of the highest talents, of the most profound learning, and free even from the suspicion of any sinister motive, such as Locke, Newton, and Hartley, have received and acknowledged these ancient books as authentic records of inestimable value, and as containing a narrative, in all its essential features, worthy of rational credence. The last of these great Christian philosophers has entered into a very masterly and elaborate proof of the genuineness and consequent veracity

of these venerable writings, of which the following extract may serve to exhibit a succinct and general view.

First, he remarks," that it is very rare to meet with any genuine writings of the historical kind, in which the principal facts are not true, unless where both the motives which engaged the author to falsify, and the circumstances which gave some plausibility to the fiction, are apparent; neither of which can be alleged in the present case with any color of reason. Falsehoods and frauds of a common nature shock the moral sense of common men, and are rarely met with, except in persons of abandoned characters. How inconsistent then must those of the most glaring and impious nature be, with the highest moral characters! That such characters are due to the sacred writers, appears from the writings themselves, by an internal evidence. There is also strong external evidence in many cases. The Jewish history," this excellent writer and reasoner observes, “as handed down from age to age, resembles the manuer in which all other genuine books and true histories have been conveyed down to posterity. As the writings of the Greek and Roman poets, orators, philosophers, and historians, were esteemed by these nations to be transmitted to them by their forefathers, in a confirmed succession, from the times when the respective authors lived, so have the books of the Old Testament by the Jewish nation, The history of the creation, fall, deluge, longevity of the patriarchs, dispersion of mankind, calling of Abraham, descent of Jacob with his family into Egypt, and the precepts of abstaining from blood and circumcision, were of so much con cern either to mankind in general, or to the Israelites in particular, and some of them of so extraordinary a nature, as that it could not be an indifferent matter to the people amongst whom the ac count given of them was first published, whether they received them or not. Suppose this account to be first published amongst the Israelites by Moses, and also to be then confirmed by clear, universal, and uninterrupted tradition, which is possible and probable, according to the history itself; and it will be easy to conceive, upon this true supposition, how this account should be handed down from age to age amongst the Jews, and received by them as indubitable. Suppose this account to be false, i. e. suppose that there were no such evidences

and

and vestiges of these histories and precepts, and it will be difficult to conceive how this could have happened, let the time of publication be as it will. If early, the people would reject the account at once, for want of a clear tradition, which the account itself would give them reason to expect. If late, it would be natural to inquire how the author came to be informed of things never known before to others. If it be said that there were many cosmogonies and theogonies current amongst the Pagans, which yet are evidently fictions, I answer that these were in generai regarded only as amusing fictions: however, that they had some truths in them either expressed in plain words, or concealed in figures, and their agreement with the book of Genesis, as far as they are consistent with one another, or have any appearance of truth, is a remarkable evidence in favour of this book." Again: "The preservation of the Law of Moses, which is probably the first book that was ever written in any language, while So many others more modern have been Jost, shews the great regard paid to it. The same holds, in a less degree, of most of the other books of the Old Testament, since most of them are more ancient than the oldest Greek historians. And, as the records of all the neighbouring nations are lost, we must suppose those of the Jews to have been preserved, from their superior importance. The very great number of particular circumstances of time, place, persons, &c. mentioned in the Scriptures, are arguments both of their genuineness and their truth. We never find that forged or false accounts of things superabound thus in particula rities. Thus, there is a great want of the particulars of time, place, and persons in Manetho's account of the Egyptian dynasties, Ctesias's of the Assyrian kings, and those which the technical chronologers have given of the ancient kingdoms of Greece; and, agreeably thereto, these accounts have much fic tion and falsehood, with some truth; whereas Thucydides' History of the Pe loponnesian War, and Cæsar's of the War in Gaul, in both which the particulars of time, place, and persons, are mentioned, are universally esteemed true to a great degree of exactness. It cannot be denied, indeed, but that both the history of the creation and that of the fall, are attended with great difficulties; but then they are not of such a kind as intimate them to be a fiction contrived

by Moses. It is probable he set down the traditional account, such as he received it from his ancestors. There is no appearance of any motive to a fraud either in the history of the creation or fall, nor any mark of one. If we suppose these histories to have been delivered by traditional explanations that accompanied hieroglyphical delineations, this would perhaps account for some of the difficulties. The appellations of the tree of life, of the tree of knowledge, of good and evil, and of the serpent, seem to favour this supposition.

A

Natural history bears a strong testi mony to Moses' account of the deluge. Civil history affords, likewise, many evidences which support the Mosaic account. 1st. We find from Pagan authors that the tradition of a flood was general or even universal. 2nd. The paucity of mankind, and the vast tracts of uninhabited land, which are mentioned in the accounts of the first ages, shew that mankind are lately sprung from a small stock, and even suit the time assigned by Moses for the flood. Sd. The great number of small kingdoms and petty states in the first ages, and the late rise of the great empires of Egypt, Assyria, Babylon, &c. concur to the same pur pose. 4th. The invention and progress of arts and sciences concur likewise. farther confirmation of the Scripture ac counts of the flood, dispersion of man kind, and patriarchal revelations, may be had from the following very remarkable particular. It appears from his tory that the different nations of the world have had cæteris paribus, more of less knowledge, civil and religious, in proportion as they were nearer to, oz had more intimate communication with, Egypt, Palestine, Chaldea, and the other countries that were inhabited by the most eminent persons amongst the first descendants of Noah. It is an evis dence in favor of the Scriptures, that the manners of the persons mentioned in them, have that simplicity and plain. ness which is also ascribed to the first ages of the world by Pagan writers. And both of them concur by this, to intimate the novelty of the then present race. Besides these attestations from profane history, we may consider the Jews themselves as bearing testimony this day, in all the countries of the world, to the truth of their ancient history. Suppose any considerable alteration made in that history, i. e. any such as may answer the purposes of infidelity,

and

and their present state will be inexpli- in the portraiture of those scenes and
cable."-Hartley's Observations on Man,
part II.

To the Editor of the Monthly Magazine.

SIP,

TLS sont résolus à pardonner tout à leurs anciens. Qué dis je, à leur pardonner tout?-à les admirer sur tout. C'est la particulierement le genie des commentateurs, peuple le plus superstitieux de tous ceux qui sont dans le culte de l'Antiquité. Quelles beautez ne se tiendroient heureuses d'inspirer à leurs Amans une Passion aussi vive et aussi tendre, que celle qu'un Grec ou un Latin inspire à son respectueus Interprète ?

The above is a passage from Fontenelle's Digression, sur les Anciens et les Modernes, and I have been tempted to quote it from the relation which it bears to the subject of my present letter.

There appeared, some months since, an observation in one of the periodical publications, quoted as coming from a late Cambridge professor, which, if he did make the observation, tends to conrince us of the fallibility of poor human nature, and at the same time to warn us against the ipse dixit of any man, how great or eminent soever he may be. It was quoted by a reviewer, in examining Mr. Southey's "Curse of Kehama." "The late Professor Porson remarked, that Southey would be read when Homer and Virgil were forgotten,"-concluding, of course, that, as Homer and Virgil would never be forgotten, Southey would never be read. Really, Sir, it is difficult to describe one's sensations at this anathema; but, if the said Professor possessed ears, and would listen to what was every day passing amongst us, he must have known that the sarcasm was as untrue as unjust.

It is true, modern poets have, sometimes, a current of popular opinion set ting in their favour; and, from the impulsion of peculiar circumstances, the tide flows higher than it otherwise would, were it left to the quiet operation of intrinsic merit: but such flowings will na turally subside after the circumstances which caused them are removed. Per haps the strongest instance of this is to be found in the poetry of Mr. Walter Scott: but, Sir, it does not follow that Mr. Scott has no merit; in my opinion he will have a good deal after the ebullition of his fame has subsided; and that not by fanning the flame of the martial spirit of the age, but in his descriptions,

4

1

incidents which please every age, and
every person of taste. Who, that has
any relish for poetry, can avoid being
delighted with this apostrophe to woman
in the last canto of Marmion?

"O woman! in our hours of ease
Uncertain, coy and hard to please,
And variable as the shade,

By the light quivering aspen made;
When pain and anguish wring the brow,
A ministering angel thou!"

Who, that has been laid on the bed of
sickness, and who has felt the kindnesses
of female attention, can avoid thanking
the poet for such delicate pencilings of
Nature?

very different both in cast and character
The poetry of Mr. Southey is assuredly
from the poetry of Scott. It is well
known that Mr. Southey began his poe
tical career, not by fostering the martial
spirit of the age, nor by accommodating
his muse to the prejudices of it, but by a
bold and unreserved attack on the cor-
rupt institutions of the world, the guilt
of ambition, and the folly and wickedness
of war: so that it may be fairly pre-
sumed, the fame of Southey is well
earned: here were no popular impulsions
to assist him, but, on the contrary, a
variety of strong impediments blocked up
his way; nor were there wanting writers
who could meanly attack him, in their
Pursuit of Literature, on account of his
youth and inexperience; although that
youth and inexperience form a proud
era in his career, upon which I am sure
he can never look back but with mingled
sensations of gratifying pleasure.

Without at all detracting from the
merits of Mr. Porson, (whose perfect
familiarity with the languages of Greece
and Rome, no one will, I presume, ven-
to infer that, from his mathematical pre-
ture to dispute,) might we not be allowed
cision of ideas, joined to a veneration
which the pursuit of the same objects for
a long series of years, almost necessarily
inspires; the learned professor could not
think well of the productions of modern
genius. We find, that he exalted Virgil
and Homer above the moderns; but it is
a question with me, whether he had any
modern: he might prefer Homer and
real relish for poetry, either ancient or
Virgil, because they were ancients; as to
their poetry, who knows whether he did
certained, he would, in all probability,
or not?-And, could bis opinions be as-
have preferred the Stagyrite or Horace,
to any of our modern critics, (some of

1

« ZurückWeiter »