to accufe him before the Roman governor of ufurping or intermeddling with the civil government. This was their defign; and Chrift's behaviour throughout the whole affair proceeded from a knowledge of this defign, and a determination to defeat it. He gives them at firft a cold and fullen reception, well fuited to the infidious intention with which they came : "He ftooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.' "When they continued afking him," when they teased him to fpeak, he difmiffed them with a rebuke, which the impertinent malice of their errand, as well as the fecret character of many of them deferved: "He that is without fin (that is, this fin) among you, let him first cast a stone at her." This had its effect. Stung with the reproof, and difappointed of their aim, they ftole away one by one, and left Jefus and the woman alone. And then follows the converfation, which is the part of the narrative most material to our prefent fubject. "Jefus faith unto her, Woman, where are thofe thine accufers? hath no man condemned thee? She faid, No man, Lord. And Jesus faid unto her, Neither do I condemn thee; go and fin no more." Now, when Chrift afked the woman, "hath no man condemned thee," he certainly spoke, and was underftood by the woman to speak, of a legal and judicial condemnation; otherwife, her anfwer, "no man, Lord," was not true. In every other sense of condemnation, as blame, cenfure, reproof, private judg ment, and the like, many had condemned her; all thofe indeed who brought her to Jefus. If then a judicial fentence was what Chrift meant by condemning in the queftion, the common ufe of language requires us to fuppofe that he meant the fame in his reply, "neither do I condemn thee," i. e. I pretend to no judicial character or authority over thee; it is no office or bufinefs of mine to pronounce or execute the fentence of the law.

C c

When Chrift adds, "go and fin no more," he in effect tells her, that she had finned already; but as to the degree or quality of the fin, or Chrift's opinion concerning it, nothing is declared, or can be inferred, either way.

Adultery, which was punished with death during. the Ufurpation, is now regarded by the law of England only as a civil injury; for which the imperfect fatisfaction that money can afford, may be recovered by the hufband.

Chapter V.

INCEST.

IN order to preferve chastity in families, and between perfons of different fexes brought up and living together in a state of unreferved intimacy, it is neceffary by every method poffible to inculcate an abhorrence of inceftuous conjunctions; which abhorrence can only be upheld by the abfolute reprobation of all commerce of the fexes between near relations. Upon this principle, the marriage as well as other cohabitation of brothers and fifters, of lineal kindred, and of all who usually live in the fame family, may be faid to be forbidden by the law of nature.

Restrictions which extend to remoter degrees of kindred than what this reafon makes it neceffary to prohibit from intermarriage, are founded in the authority of the pofitive law which ordains them, and can only be justified by their tendency to diffufe wealth, to connect families, or to promote fome political advantage.

The Levitical law, which is received in this country, and from which the rule of the Roman law differs very little, prohibits* marriage between relations

* The Roman law continued the prohibition to the descendants of brothers and fifters without limits. In the Levitical and English law, there is nothing to hinder a man from marrying his great niece.

within three degrees of kindred; computing the generations not from but through the common ancestor, and accounting affinity the fame as confanguinity. The iffue, however, of fuch marriages are not baf tardized, unless the parents be divorced during their lifetime.

The Egyptians are said to have allowed of the mar riage of brothers and fifters. Amongst the Athenians a very fingular regulation prevailed; brothers and fifters of the half blood, if related by the father's fide, might marry; if by the mother's fide, they were prohibited from marrying. The fame cuftom also probably obtained in Chaldea fo early as the age in which Abraham left it; for he and Sarah his wife ftood in this relation to each other. “And yet, indeed, the is my fifter, fhe is the daughter of my father, but not of my mother, and fhe became my wife." Gen. xx. 12.

Chapter VI.

POLYGAMY.

THE equality in the number of males and fe

males born into the world intimates the intention of God, that one woman fhould be affigned to one man; for, if to one man be allowed an exclufive right to five or more women, four or more men must be deprived of the exclufive poffeffion of any : which could never be the order intended.

It seems alfo a fignificant indication of the divine will, that he at firft created only one woman to one man. Had God intended polygamy for the fpecies, it is probable he would have begun with it; efpec

This equality is not exact. The number of male infants exceeds that of females in the proportion of nineteen to eighteen, or thereabouts; which excefs provides for the greater confumption of males by war, feafaring and other dangerous or unhealthy occupations.

ially as, by giving to Adam more wives than one, the multiplication of the human race would have proceeded with a quicker progrefs.

Polygamy not only violates the conftitution of nature, and the apparent design of the Deity, but produces to the parties themselves, and to the public, the following bad effects: contefts and jealoufies amongst the wives of the fame hufband; diftracted affections, or the lofs of all affection in the husband himfelf; a voluptuoufnefs in the rich which diffolves the vigour of their intellectual as well as active faculties, producing that indolence and imbecility both of mind and body, which have long characterized the nations of the Eaft; the abafement of one half of the human species, who, in countries where polygamy obtains, are degraded into mere inftruments of phyfical pleasure to the other half; neglect of children; and the manifold, and fometimes unnatural mifchiefs, which arise from a scarcity of women. To compenfate for these evils, polygamy does not of fer a fingle advantage. In the article of population, which it has been thought to promote, the community gain nothing:* for the queftion is not, whether one man will have more children by five or more wives than by one; but whether thefe five wives would not bear the fame, or a greater number of children, to five feparate hufbands. And as to the care of the children when produced, and the fending of them into the world in fituations in which

Nothing, I mean, compared with a state in which marriage is nearly univerfal. Where marriages are lefs general, and many women unfruitful from the want of husbands, polygamy might at first add a little to population; and but a little for, as a variety of wives would be fought chiefly from temptations of voluptuoufnefs, it would rather increase the demand for female beauty, than for the fex at large. And this little would foon be made lefs by many deductions. For, first, as none but the opulent can maintain a plurality of wives, where polygamy obtains, the rich indulge in it, while the reft take up with a vague and barren incontinency. And, fecondly, women would grow lefs jealous of their virtue, when they had nothing for which to referve it, but a chamber in the baram; when their chastity was no longer to be rewarded with the rights and happiness of a wife, as enjoyed under the marriage of one woman to one man. Thefe confiderations may be added to what is mentioned in the text, concerning the eafy and early fettlement of children in the world.

they may be likely to form and bring up families of their own, upon which the increase and fucceffion of the human fpecies in a great degree depend; this is lefs provided for, and lefs practicable, where twenty or thirty children are to be fupported by the attention and fortunes of one father, than if they were divided into five or fix families, to each of which were affigned the industry and inheritance of two parents.

Whether fimultaneous polygamy was permitted by the law of Mofes, feems doubtful:* but whether permitted or not, it was certainly practifed by the Jewish patriarchs, both before that law, and under

The permiffion, if there was any, might be like that of divorce, "for the hardness of their heart," in condefcenfion to their eftablished indulgencies, rather than from the general rectitude or propriety of the thing itself. The ftate of manners in Judea had probably undergone a reformation in this refpect before the time of Christ, for in the New Teftament we meet with no trace or mention of any fuch practice being tolerated.

For which reason, and because it was likewife for bidden amongst the Greeks and Romans, we cannot expect to find any exprefs law upon the fubject in the Chriftian code. The words of Chrift, Matt. xix. 9. may be conftrued by an easy implication to prohibit polygamy; for, if "whoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery,' he who marrieth another without putting away the firft is no less guilty of adultery; because the adultery does not confift in the repudiation of the first wife (for, however unjuft or cruel that may be, it is not adultery) but in entering into a fecond marriage during the legal existence and obligation of the firft. The feveral paffages in St. Paul's writings, which speak of marriage, always fuppofe it to fignify

See Deut. xvii. 17. xxi. 15.

"I lay unto you, Whofoever fhall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and fall marry another, committeth adultery."