NNNNN con a to such being, is an assertion opposed to every established principle of justice and morality. A " dition" cannot be made without the mutual consent of parties, and therefore what this writer terms " condition" is nothing less than an unjust, arbitrary, and deceitful imposition. It is uncertain to what extent in this country the excess of unfeelingness to animals may arrive, or the cultivation of the carnivorous propensity. An ingenious and very respectable modern agriculturist urges the propriety and points out many advantages which, he thinks, would arise 'from an universal consent to eat the flesh of horses. The barbarous Europeans teach universal love and yet contract their benevolence to man. In their conduct to animals even generosity is abandoned, and man with all his inflated pride of pre-eminence, humanity, affection, sympathy, feeling, sensibility, &c. &c. is not what he thus professes, but partakes yet strongly of his savage nature, otherwise he would at least be merciful and just; he would receive their assistance and in return alleviate the evils of their state. "Such is the deadly and stupifying influence of habit or custom," says Mr. Lawrence, "of so poi. sonous and brutalizing a quality is prejudice, that men, perhaps no ways inclined from nature to acts of barbarity, may yet live insensible of the constant commission of the most flagrant deeds. In the history of the council of Constance, it is recorded, that a certain Neopolitan peasant who lived near a place infamous for robberies and murders, went once to confession; and having told the priest, that on a certain fast-day he had swallowed a draught of milk, he assured the father he could recollect no other sin he had committed. "How," said the confessor, NNNN "do you never assist your neighbours, in robbing and murdering the passengers, in a particular hollow road?" "O yes," said the peasant, "but that is so common with us, that we do'nt make it a point of conscience." The humane Titus, who exclaimed, on reflecting that he had done no beneficent act, Alas! my friends, I've lost a day!" did not once advert to the horrid barbarities he was at the same time inflicting on the wretched inhabitants of Judea; nor felt he the least remorse after having destroyed thirty out of forty thousands of Jew captives, in finishing the Colisæum at Rome; nor did he regret the slaughter of tens of thousands of innocent Jews, whom he sacrificed on the altars of vanity at Rome. The following anecdote, is related by James Pettit Andrews. When I was a boy," said he, 6 I was charmed with the tricks, which an itinerant rabbit-catcher had taught to a beautiful white ferret. 'But what means those bloody marks round his mouth?' I enquired. “Why, that is where I sews up his chaps, that he may n't bite the rabbits in their berrys," replied the insensible wretch. And how,' added I, can you be so barbarous to so tamê, so tractable, so beautiful an animal ?" Laud, master,” retorted the fool, “a likes it. A' will hold up his chaps to be sewed !? A cook maid will weep at a tale of woe while she is skinning a living eel. Even women of education, who readily weep while read. ing an affecting moral tale, will clear away clotted blood, still warm with departed life, cut the flesh, disjoint the bones, and tear out the intestines of an animal, without sensibility, without sympathy, without fear, without remorse. What is more common than to hear this softer sex talk of, and assist in, the NNNNN cookery of a deer, a hare, a lamb, or a calf (those acknowledged emblems of innocence,) with perfect composure. Thus the female character, by nature soft, delicate, and susceptible of tender impressions, is debased and sunk. It will be maintained, that in other repects, they still possess the characteristics of their sex, and are humane and sympathizing. The inconsistency, then, is the more glaring; to be virtu ous in some instances does not constitute the moral character, but to be uniformly so. 66 Mankind in general have a natural horror in the shedding of blood, and some in devouring the carcase of an innocent sufferer, which bad habit, im. proper education, and silly prejudices, have not overcome. This is proved by their affected and ab. surd refinement of calling the dead bodies of animals 'meat. If the meaning of words were to be regarded, this is a gross mistake, for the word meat is an universal term, applying equally to all nutritive and palatable substances. If it be intended to express that all other kinds of food are comparatively not meat, the intention is ridiculous. The truth is that the proper expression flesh, conveys ideas of murder and death. Neither can it easily be forgotten that in grinding the body of an animal, substances which constitute human bodies are masticated. This reflection comes somewhat home, and is recurred to by eaters of flesh, in spite of themselves, but recurred to unwillingly. They attempt therefore to pervert language in order to render it agreeable to the ear, as they disguise animal flesh by cookery, in order to render it pleasing to the taste. To the general appearance of beauty and happiness among animals the only interruption has arisen from Man. Disposed alike to mar the natural har NNNNN mony of the world, and to delight in moral discord, his malignant pursuits have discoloured the lovely picture with blood and slaughter. It is in vain for mankind to plead that "all things were made for their use." Vaunting superiority! perverse arro gation of fortuitous plenitude! Let them first shew that they understand the true limits between utility, justice, and abuse. A right founded only on power, is an ignominious usurpation. Conscientious men think it a duty which they owe to God, to beg a blessing on the food which, through his universal bounty they are about to partake. What profanation! what impiety! To beg a blessing on a meal torn from nature by rapine, obtained by disordering the plan of creation, furnished by an abuse of Providence, and by the torture of God's creatures. If the Deity were severe to inflict jus tice instead of bestowing clemency, he would affix a curse on such proceedings. It is of the first consequence in training up youth of both sexes, that they be early inspired with hu manity, and particularly that it's principles be im planted strongly in their tender minds to guard them against inflicting wanton pain on those animals, which use or accident may occasionally put into their power. Montaigne thinks it a reflection on human nature, that few people take delight in seeing animals caress or play together, but almost every one is pleased to see them lacerate and worry each other. I am sorry this temper is become almost a distinguishing character of our nation. Children are bred up in the principle of destroying life, and one of their first indulgences is the licence of inflicting pain on poor Mr. Locke takes notice of a mother who permitted her children to have animals, but rewarded or punished them as they treated them well or ill. Many dispositions have been formed to cruelty, from being permitted to tear off the wings of flies, whipping cats and dogs, or tying a string to the leg of a bird, and twirling it round till the thigh be torn from the bleeding body! It is highly necessary, therefore, for parents to watch, with anxious care, over their offspring, and strenuously to oppose such habits as these (tho they often arise from mere childish imitations, from a propensity to action, and from the curiosity excited by things that move, rather than from a bad disposition), and stifle in the birth every wish and desire to inflict torture, or even give unnecessary pain. The mean propensity of seeking birds' nests, of tearing them down, of taking the eggs, and of playing with the young ones, should be carefully checked. To say nothing of the lingering deaths of the callow brood," the exquisite anguish communicated to the parent birds, is evident to the most superficial observer; and it is both astonishing and abominable that parents, who have an affection for their children, appear insensible to the miseries, of parental affection in those animals they depreciate by the epithet of BRUTES. How infinitely superior would be the amusement, if parents would cultivate it in their children, of knowing the names of birds, and their habits by continual observation, and reference to Natural History. How much more humane and rational the amusement of looking for nests for the sake merely 66 |