which die to furnish his table, would never have lived but they by no means justify our right over the lives of brutes, to the extent in which we exercise it. What danger is there, for inftance, of fish interfering with us, in the occupation of their element? Or what do we contribute to their fupport or prefervation?

It seems to me that it would be difficult to defend this right, by any arguments which the light and order of nature afford; and that we are beholden for it, to the permiffion recorded in fcripture, Gen. ix. 1, 2, 3: "And God "bleffed Noah and his fons, and faid unto them, "be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the "earth; and the fear of you, and the dread "of you, shall be upon every beast of the "earth, and upon every fowl of the air, and

upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the fea; into your hand are they delivered: every moving thing fhall be meat for you; even as the green herb, "have I given you all things." To Adam and his pofterity had been granted at the creation,

66

every green herb for meat," and nothing more. In the last claufe of the paffage now produced, the old grant is recited, and extended to the flesh of animals, " even as the green herb,

"have I given you all things." But this was not till after the flood; the inhabitants of the ántediluvian world therefore had no fuch permiffion, that we know of. Whether they actually refrained from the flesh of animals, is another question. Abel, we read, was a keeper of fheep; and for what purpose he kept them, except for food, is difficult to fay (unless it were facrifices): might not, however, fome of the ftricter fects among the antediluvians be fcrupulous as to this point? and might not Noah and his family be of this description? for it is not probable that God would publish a permission, to authorize a practice which had never been difputed.

Wanton, and, what is worfe, ftudied cruelty to brutes, is certainly wrong, as coming within none of these reasons.

From reafon then, or revelation, or from both together, it appears to be God Almighty's intention, that the productions of the earth fhould be applied to the fuftentation of human life. Consequently, all waste and mifapplication of these productions, is contrary to the divine inH

VOL. I.

tention

tention and will; and therefore wrong, for the same reason that any other crime is fo. Such as, what is related of William the Conqueror, the converting of twenty manors into a forest for hunting, or which is not much better, fuffering them to continue in that ftate; or the letting of large tracts of land lie barren, because the owner cannot cultivate them, nor will part with them to those who can; or deftroying, or suffering to perish great part of an article of human provifion, in order to enhance the price of the remainder, which is faid to have been, till lately, the cafe with fish caught upon the English coast; or diminishing the breed of animals, by a wanton, or improvident confumption of the young, as of the spawn of shell-fish, or the fry of falmon, by the use of unlawful nets, or at improper seasons: to this head may also be referred, what is the fame evil in a smaller way, the expending of human food on fuperfluous dogs or horfes; and lastly, the reducing of the quantity, in order to alter the quality, and to alter it generally for the worse; as the diftillation of fpirits from bread corn, the boiling down of folid meat for fauces, effences, &c.

This feems to be the leffon which our Saviour, after his manner, inculcates, when he bids his

difciples

difciples gather up the fragments, that nothing be loft." And it opens indeed a new field of duty. Schemes of wealth or profit, prompt the active part of mankind to caft about, how they may convert their property to the most advantage and their own advantage, and that of the public, commonly concur. But it has not as yet entered into the minds of mankind, to reflect that it is a duty, to add what we can to the common stock of provision, by extracting out of our estates the most they will yield; or that it is any sin to neglect this.

From the fame intention of God Almighty, we alfo deduce another conclufion, namely, "that nothing ought to be made exclusive property, which can be conveniently enjoyed in common."

It is the general intention of God Almighty, that the produce of the earth be applied to the ufe of man. This appears from the conftitution of nature, or, if you will, from his express declaration; and this is all that appears hitherto. Under this general donation, one man has the fame right as another. You pluck an apple from a tree, or take a lamb out of a flock, for your immediate use and nourishment, and I do the fame; and we both plead for what we

do, the general intention of the Supreme Proprietor. So far all is right; but you cannot. claim the whole tree, or the whole ftock, and exclude me from any share of them, and plead this general intention for what you do. The plea will not ferve you: you must shew something more. You must fhew, by probable arguments at leaft, that it is God's intention, that these things should be parcelled out to individuals; and that the established diftribution, under which you claim, fhould be upheld. Shew me this, and I am fatisfied. But until this be fhewn, the general intention, which has been made appear, and which is all that does appear, muft prevail; and, under that, my title is as good as yours. Now there is no argument to induce fuch a prefumption, but one, that the thing cannot be enjoyed at all, or enjoyed with the fame, or with nearly the fame advantage, while it continues in common, as when appropriated. This is true, where there is not enough for all, or where the article in queftion requires care or labour in the production or prefervation but where no fuch reafon obtains, and the thing is in its nature capable of being enjoyed by as many as will, it feems an arbitrary ufurpation upon the rights of mankind, to confine the ufe of it to any.

If