who offends firft, the guilt of the second offender is extenuated. But this can never amount to a juftification; unless it could be fhewn that the obligation of the marriage vow depends upon the condition of reciprocal fidelity; for which conftruction, there appears no foundation, either in expediency, or in the terms of the promife, or in the defign of the legislature which prescribed the marriage rite. Moreover, the rule contended for by this plea has a manifest tendency to multiply the offence, but none to reclaim the offender.

The way of confidering the offence of one party as a provocation to the other, and the other as only retaliating the injury by repeating the crime, is a childish trifling with words.

"Thou shalt not commit adultery," was an interdict delivered by God himself. By the Jewish law adultery was capital to both parties in the crime: "Even he that committeth adul66 tery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer "and adulterefs fhall furely be put to death." Lev. xx. 10. Which paffages prove, that the divine legislator placed a great difference between adultery and fornication. And with this agree the Chriftian scriptures; for in almost all the catalogues they have left us of crimes and criminals,

X 4

minals, they enumerate fornication, adultery," "whoremongers, adulterers," (Matt. xv. 19. 1 Cor. vi. 9. Gal. v. 9. Heb. xiii. 4.) by which mention of both, they fhew that they did not confider them as the fame; but that the crime of adultery was, in their apprchenfion, diftinct from, and accumulated upon that of fornication.

The hiftory of the woman taken in adultery, recorded in the eighth chapter of St. John's Gospel, has been thought by fome to give countenance to that crime. As Chrift told the wo"neither do I condemn thee," we must man, believe, it is faid, that he deemed her conduct either not criminal, or not a crime however of the heinous nature we reprefent it to be. A more attentive examination of the cafe will, I think, convince us, that nothing can be concluded from it, as to Chrift's opinion concerning adultery, either one way or the other. The transaction is thus related: "Early in the morning Jefus came again into the temple, and all "the people came unto him; and he fat down "and taught them; and the Scribes and Pha"rifees brought unto him a woman taken in "adultery; and when they "midft, they fay unto him,

had fet her in the Mafter, this wo

man was taken in adultery, in the very act; et now Mofes in the law commanded that fuch "fhould be ftoned, but what fayeft thou? This

"they said tempting him, that they might have "to accuse him: But Jefus ftooped down, and "with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. So when they "continued afking him, he lift up himself, and "faid unto them, he that is without fin amongst you, let him firft caft a ftone at her; and

66

again he stooped down and wrote on the "ground: and they which heard it, being con"victed by their own confcience, went out one "by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto "the laft; and Jefus was left alone, and the "woman ftanding in the midft. When Jefus "had lift up himself, and saw none but the 66 woman, he faid unto her, woman, where are those thine accufers? hath no man condemned "thee? She faid unto him, no man, Lord; and "he faid unto her, neither do I condemn thee, go "and fin no more."

σει

"This they faid tempting him, that they "might have to accufe him," to draw him, that is, into an exercife of judicial authority, that they might have to accuse 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 teazed him to speak, he dismissed them with a rebuke, which the impertinent malice of their errand, as well as the fecret character of many of them deserved: “He "that is without fin (that is, this fin) among

you, let him firft caft a ftone 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 moft material to our present fubject. "Jefus faith unto her, woman, where 6c are those thine accufers? hath no man con"demned thee? She faid, no man, Lord. And

Jefus faid unto her, neither do I condemn "thee; go and fin no more. Now, when Chrift afked the woman," hath no man con"demned thee," he certainly spoke, and was understood

derstood by the woman to speak, of a legal and judicial condemnation; otherwise, her answer, 66 no man, Lord," was not true. In every other sense of condemnation, as blame, cenfure, reproof, private judgment, 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 question, the common use 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 business of mine to pronounce or execute the fentence of the law.

When Christ adds, “ go and fin no more," he in effect tells her, that fhe 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 husband.

CHAP.