instinct, and is not ascertained by any argument or reflection. But who is there that ever heard of fuch an instinct? Or is this a fubject, in which new discoveries can be made? We may as well expect to discover, in the body, new fenfes, which had before escaped all mankind.

But farther, though it seems a very fimple propofition, that nature, by an instinctive sentiment, diftinguishes property, yet in reality we shall find, that there are required for that purpose ten thousand different instincts, and these employed about objects of the greateft intricacy and niceft difcernment. For when a definition of property is required, that relation is found to refolve itself into any poffeffion acquired by occupation, by industry, by prescription, by inheritance, by contract,

c. Can we think, that nature, by an original instinct, instructs us in all these methods of acquifition?

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

But even though 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 though their fentence be erroneous and illegal, must be allowed, for the fake of peace and order, to have decifive authority, and ultimately to determine

property.

property. Have we original, innate ideas of prætors and chancellors and juries? Who fees not, that all these institutions. arife merely from the neceffities of human fociety?

All birds of the fame fpecies, in every age and country, build their nefts alike: In this we see the force of instinct. Men, in different times and places, frame their houfes differently: Here we perceive the influence of reafon and cuftom. A like inference may be drawn from comparing the instinct of generation and the institution 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 every where exactly similar. In like manner, all houses have a roof and walls, and windows and chimnies, though infinitely diversified in their shape, figure, and materials. The purposes of the latter, directed to the conveniencies of human life, discover not more plainly their origin from reason and reflection, than do those 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 connections of the imagination, and from the fubtilties and abstractions of lawtopics and reasonings. 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 inftance, conscious of any immediate reflection

VOL. II.

Qo

on

on the pernicious confequences of it. The views the most familiar to us are apt, for that very reason, to escape 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 fo univerfal, 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 ascertain 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 public utility, and afk, What must become of the world, if fuch practices prevail? How could fociety fubfift under fuch diforders? Were the diftinction or feparation of poffeffions intirely ufelefs, can any one conceive, that it ever should have obtained in society?

Thus we feem, upon the whole, to have attained a knowlege of the force of that principle here insisted on, and can determine what degree of efteem or moral approbation may result from reflections on public intereft and utility. The neceffity of juftice to the support of fociety is the SOLE foundation of that virtue; and fince no moral excellence is more highly esteemed, we may conclude, that this circumftance 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 ascribed to humanity, benevolence, 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

4

thofe

those other estimable and useful qualities and principles. 'Tis intirely agreeable to the rules of philofophy, and even of common reafon; where any principle has been found to have great force and energy in one inftance, to ascribe to it a like energy in all fimilar instances *.

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

002

SECTION IV.

OF POLITICAL SOCIETY.

HA

A D every man sufficient fagacity to perceive, at all times, the strong intereft, which binds him to the observance of justice and equity, and strength of mind fufficient to persevere in a steady adherence to a general and a distant interest, in oppofition to the allurements of present pleasure and advantage: There had never, in that cafe, been any such thing as government or political fociety, but each man following his natural liberty, had lived in intire peace and harmony with all others. What need of positive laws, where natural justice is, of itself, a fufficient restraint? Why create magiftrates, where there never arifes any disorder or iniquity? Why abridge our native freedom, when, in every instance, 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 preserving peace and order among mankind.

When a number of political focieties are erected, and maintain a great intercourse together, a new fet of rules are im

mediately