THESE reflections are far from weakening the obligations of justice, or diminishing any thing from the most facred attention to property. On the contrary, fuch fentiments must acquire new force from the prefent reafoning. For what: stronger foundation can be defired or conceived for any duty than to obferve, that human fociety, or even human nature couid not fubfift, without the establishment: of it; and will still arrive at greater degrees of happiness and perfection, the more inviolable the regard is, which is paid to that duty ?

IF juftice arole from a fimple, original inftinct in the human breaft, without any reflection, even on those obvious interests of fociety, which abfolutely: require that virtue; it must follow, that property, which is the object of justice, is alfo diftinguished by a fimple, original instinct, and is not ascertained by any argument or reflection. But who is there that ever heard of fuch an inftinct? Or: is this a fubject, in which new difcoveries will be made? We may as well expect to discover, in the body, new fenfes, which had before escaped all mankind.

Bur farther, tho' it seems a very fimple propofition to say, that nature, by an inftinctive fentiment, diftinguishes property, yet in reality we shall find, that there are required for that purpose ten thousand different inftincts, and these employed about objects of the greatest intricacy and niceft difcernment. For when a definition of property is demanded, that relation is found to refolve itself into any poffeffion acquired by occupation, by induftry, by prescription, by inheritance, by contract, &c. Can we think, that nature, by an original instinct, inftructs us in all thefe methods of acquifition?

THESE words too, inheritance and contract, ftand for ideas infinitely compli cated; and to define them exactly, a thousand volumes of laws, and innumerable volumes of commentators, have not been found fufficient. Does nature, whofe instincts in men are all fimple, embrace fuch complicated and artificial objects, and create a rational creature, without trufting any thing to the operation of his reafon?

But even tho' all this were admitted, it would not be fatisfactory. Pofitive laws can certainly transfer property. Is it by another original instinct, that we recognize the authority of kings and fenates, and mark all the boundaries of their jurifdiction? Judges too, even tho' their fentence be erroneous and illegal, muft be allowed, for the fake of peace and order, to have decifive authority, and ultimately to determine property. Have we original, innate ideas of prætors and chancellors and juries? Who fees not, that all thefe inftitutions arife merely from the neceffities of human fociety?

ALL birds of the fame fpecies, in every age and country, build their nests alike: In this, we fee the force of inftinct. Men, in different times and places, frame their houfes differently: Here we perceive the influence of reafon and cufA like inference may be drawn from comparing the inftinct of generation and the inftitution of property.

HOWEVER great the variety of municipal laws, it must be confeffed, that their great lines pretty regularly concur; because the purposes, to which they tend, are

greater than the fubtilities of lawyers, hinted at above; but as the former are pernicious, and the latter inn cent and even neceffary, this is the rea

fon of the very different reception they meet with from the world,

every where exactly fimilar. In like manner, all houses have a roof and walls, and windows and chimneys; tho' infinitely diverfified in their shape, figure, and materials. The purposes of the latter, directed to the conveniencies of human life, befpeak not more plainly their origin from reafon and reflection, than do thofe of the former, which point all to a like end.

I NEED not mention the variations which all the rules of property receive from the finer turns and connexions of the imagination, and from the subtilities and abftractions of law topics and reafonings. There is no poffibility of reconciling this obfervation to the notion of original instincts.

WHAT alone will beget a doubt of the theory, on which I infift, is the influence of education and acquired habits, by which we are fo accustomed to blame injustice, that we are not, in every instance, conscious of any immediate reflection on the pernicious confequences of it. The views, the most familiar to us are apt, for that very reafon, to efcape us; and what we have very frequently performed from certain motives, we are apt likewise to continue mechanically, without recalling, on every occafion, the reflections,, which first determined us. The convenience or rather neceffity, which leads to justice, is so universal, and every where points fo much to the fame rules, that the habit takes place in all focieties; and it is not without fome fcrutiny, that we are able to afcertain its true origin. The matter, however, is not fo obfcure,, but that, even in common life, we have, every moment, recourse to the principle of utility, and afk, What must become of the world, if fuch practices prevail ? How could fociety subsist under-such disorders? Were the diftinction or feparation of poffeffions entirely useless, can any one conceive, that it ever should have obtained in fociety?

THUS We feem, upon the whole, to have attained a knowlege of the force of that principle here infifted on, and can determine what degree of esteem or moral approbation may refult from reflections on public intereft and utility. The neceffity of juftice to the fupport of fociety is the SOLE foundation of that virtue; and fince no moral excellence is more highly esteemed, we may conclude, that this circumstance of usefulness has, in general, the strongest energy, and most entire command over our fentiments. It muft, therefore, be the fource of a confiderable part of the merit, afcribed to humanity, benevolence, friendship, public fpirit, and other focial virtues of that ftamp; as it is the SOLE fource of the moral approbation paid to fidelity, juftice, veracity, integrity, and those other eftimable and useful qualities and principles. 'Tis entirely agreeable to the rules of philofophy, and even of common reafon; where any principle, has been found to have a great force and energy in one inftance, to afcribe to it a like energy in all fimilar inftances t.

1

This is Sir ISAAC NEWTON's fecond rule of philofophizing, Principia, lib. 3.

HAD

SECTION IV.

OF

POLITICAL SOCIETY.

AD every man fufficient fagacity to perceive, at all times, the strong intereft, which binds him to the obfervance of justice and equity, and strength of mind fufficient to perfevere in a steady adherence to a general and a distant intereft, in oppofition to the allurements of prefent pleasure and advantage: There had never, in that case, been any fuch thing as government or political fociety, but each man following his natural liberty, had lived in entire peace and harmony with all others. What need of pofitive laws, where natural justice is, of itself, a fufficient restraint? Why create magiftrates, where there never arifes any diforder or iniquity? Why abridge our native freedom, when, in every inftance, the utmost exertion of it is found innocent and beneficial? 'Tis evident, that, if government were totally useless, it never could have place, and that the SOLE foundation of the duty of ALLEGIANCE is the advantage which it procures to fociety, by preferving peace and order among mankind.

WHEN a number of political focieties are erected, and maintain a great intercourse together, a new set of rules are immediately discovered to be useful in that particular fituation; and accordingly take place, under the title of LAWS of NATIONS. Of this kind are, the facredness of the perfons of ambaffadors, abstaining from poisoned arms, quarter in war, with others of that kind; which are plainly calculated for the advantage of ftates and kingdoms, in their intercourse with each other.

THE rules of juftice, fuch as prevail among individuals, are not entirely fufpended among political focieties. All princes pretend a regard to the rights of others; and fome, no doubt, without hypocrify. Alliances and treaties are every day made between independent ftates, which would only be fo much waste of parchment, if they were not found, by experience, to have fome influence and authority. But here is the difference betwixt kingdoms and individuals. Human nature cannot, by any means, fubfift, without the affociation of individuals; and that affociation never could have place, were no regard paid to the laws of equity and juftice. Disorder, confufion, the war of all against all, are the neceffary confequences of fuch a licentious conduct. But nations can fubfift without intercourse. They may even fubfift, in some degree, under a general war. The observance of juftice, tho' ufeful among them, is not guarded by fo ftrong a neceffity as among individuals; and the moral obligation holds proportion with the usefulness. All politicians will allow, and most philofophers, that REASONS of STATE may, in particular emergencies, difpenfe with the rules of juftice, and invalidate any treaty or alliance, where the ftrict obfervance of it would be prejudicial, in a confiderable degree, to either of the contracting parties. But nothing less than the extremeft neceffity, 'tis confeft, can justify individuals in a breach of promise, or an invafion of the properties of others,

In a confederated commonwealth, fuch as the ACHEAN republic of old, or the Swiss cantons and united provinces in modern times; as the league has here a peculiar utility, the conditions of union have a peculiar facredness and authority, and a violation of them would be equally criminal, or even more criminal, than any private injury or injuftice.

THE long and helpless infancy of man requires the combination of parents for the fubfiftence of their young; and that combination requires the virtue of CHASTITY or fidelity to the marriage-bed. Without fuch an utility, it will readily be owned, that fuch a virtue would never have been thought of *.

An infidelity of this nature is much more pernicious in women than in men. Hence the laws of chastity are much stricter over the one fex than over the other +.

THOSE who live in the fame family have fo frequent opportunities of licence of this kind, that nothing could preferve purity of manners, were marriage allowed among the nearest relations, or any intercourfe of love between them ratified by law and cuftom. INCEST, therefore, being pernicious in a fuperior degree, has also a fuperior turpitude and moral deformity, annexed to it.

WHAT is the reafon, why, by the GREEK laws, one might marry a half-fifter by the father, but not by the mother? Plainly this. The manners of the GREEKS were so reserved, that a man was never permitted to approach the women's apartment, even in the fame family, unless where he visited his own mother. His step-mother and her children were as much fhut up from him as the women of any other family, and there was as little danger of any criminal correfpondence between them. Uncles and nieces, for a like reason, might marry at ATHENS ; but neither these nor half-brothers and fifters could contract that alliance at ROME, where the intercourse was more open betwixt the sexes. Public utility is the cause of all these variations.

To repeat, to a man's prejudice, any thing that escaped him in private converfation, or to make any fuch ufe of his private letters, is highly blamed:

* The only folution, which PLATO gives to all the objections, that might be raised against the community of women, established in his imaginary commonwealth, is, Kadλıra yag in Telo xai λέγεται και λελέξεται, οτι το μεν ωφελιμον καλον. Tod βλαβερον αισχρον Seite en m iftud & dicitur & dicetur, Id quod utile fit boneftum effe, quod autem inutile fit turpe effe. De Rep. lib. 5. P. 457. Ex edit. Serr. And this maxim will admit of no doubt, where public utility is concerned; which is PLA To's meaning. And indeed to what other purpose do all the ideas of chastity and modefty ferve? Nifi utile eft quod facimus, fruftra eft gloria, fays PHÆDRUS, Kaλov Twv Bhabeçwv uder, says PLUTARCH de vitiofo pudore. Nihil eorum quæ damnofa funt, pulchrum eft, The fame was the opinion of the Stoics. Φασιν εν οι Στωικοί αγαθον είναι ωφελειαν η εκ ετέραν ωφελείας, ωφελείν μεν λέγοντες την αρετην και την Odalar weak. SEXT. EMP. lib. 3. cap. 20.

+ Thefe rules have all a reference to generation; and yet women paft child-bearing are no more fuppofed to be exempted from them than those in the flower of their youth and beauty.

General rules are often extended beyond the principle, whence they firft arise; and this in all mat ters of taste and fentiment. "Tis a vulgar story at PARIS, that during the rage of the MISSISSIPPI, a hump backed fellow went every day into the RUE DE QUINCEMPOIX, where the stock jobbers met in great crowds, and was well paid for allow. ing them to make use of his hump us a desk, in order to fign their contracts upon it. Would the fortune which he raised by this invention make him a handsome fellow; tho' it be confeft, that perfonal beauty arifes very much from ideas of utility? The imagination is influenced by affociations of ideas; which, tho' they arife, at first, from the judgment, are not eafily altered by every particular exception, that occurs to us. To which we may add, in the prefent cafe of chastity, that the example of the old would be pernicious to the young; and that women continually thinking, that a certain time would bring them the liberty of indulgence, would naturally advance that pe riod, and think more lightly of this whole duty, fo requifite to society.

The

The free and focial intercourfe of minds must be extremely checked, where no fuch rules of fidelity are established.

EVEN in repeating stories, whence we can fee no ill confequences to refult, 'the giving one's authors is regarded as a piece of indifcretion, if not of immorality. Thefe ftories, in paffing from hand to hand, and receiving all the usual variations, frequently come about to the perfons concerned, and produce animofities and quarrels among people, whofe intentions are the most innocent and inoffenfive.

To pry into fecrets, to open or even read the letters of others, to play the spy upon their words and looks and actions: what habits more inconvenient in fociety? What habits, of confequence, more blameable?

THIS principle is alfo the foundation of most of the laws of good-manners; a kind of leffer morality calculated for the ease of company and converfation. Too much or too little ceremony are both blamed, and every thing, which promotes ease, without an indecent familiarity, is ufeful and laudable.

CONSTANCY in friendships, attachments, and familiarities is commonly very commendable, and is requifite to support truft and good correfpondence in fociety. But in places of general, tho' cafual concourfe, where the pursuit of health and pleafure brings people promiscuously together, public conveniency has difpenfed with this maxim; and cuftom there promotes an unreferved converfation for the time, by indulging the privilege of dropping afterwards every indifferent acquaintance, without breach of civility or good-manners.

EVEN in focieties, which are established on principles the most immoral, and the most deftructive to the interefts of the general fociety, there are required certain rules, which a fpecies of falfe honor, as well as private intereft, engages the members to obferye. Robbers and pyrates, it has often been remarked, could not maintain their pernicious confederacy, did they not eftablish a new diftributive juftice among themfelves, and recall thofe laws of equity, which they have violated with the rest of mankind.

J

I HATE a drinking companion, fays the GREEK proverb, who never forgets. The follies of the last debauch should be buried in eternal oblivion, in order to give full fcope to the follies of the next.

AMONG nations, where an immoral gallantry, if covered with a thin veil of myftery, is, in fome degree, authorized by cuftom, there immediately arife a fet of rules, calculated for the conveniency of that attachment. The famous court or parliament of love in PROVENCE decided formally all difficult cafes of this na

ture.

IN focieties for play, there are laws required for the conduct of the game, and thefe laws are different in each game. The foundation, I own, of fuch focieties is frivolous; and the laws are, in a great measure, tho' not altogether, capricious and arbitrary. So far is there a material difference between them and the rules of juftice, fidelity and loyalty. The general focieties of men are abfolutely requifite for the fubfiftence of the fpecies; and the public conveniency, which regulates morals, is inviolably established in the nature of man, and of the world, in which he lives. The comparison, therefore, in thefe refpects, is very imperfect. We may only learn from it the neceffity of rules, wherever men have any intercourfe with each other,