CHA P. V.

W

THE DIVINE BENEVOLENCE.

HEN God created the human fpecies, either he wifhed their happiness, or he wished their mifery, or he was indifferent and unconcerned about both.

If he had wifhed our misery, he might have made fure of his purpose, by forming our fenses to be as many fores and pains to us, as they are now inftruments of gratification and enjoyinent; or by placing us amidst objects fo ill fuited to our perceptions, as to have continually offended us, inftead of miniftering to our refreshment and delight. He might have made, for example, every thing we tafted bitter; every thing we faw loathfome; every thing we touched a fting; every fmell a stench; and every found a difcord.

If he had been indifferent about our happiness or mifery, we muft impute to our good fortune, (as all defign by this fuppofition is excluded) both the capacity of our fenfes to receive pleafure, and the fupply of external objects fitted to produce it.

But either of thefe, and ftill more both of them, being too much to be attributed to accident, nothing remains but the first fuppofition, that God, when he created the human fpecies, wifhed their happiness; and made for them the provision which he has made, with that view, and for that purpose.

The fame argument may be propofed in different terms, thus: Contrivance proves defign; and the predominant tendency of the contrivance indicates the difpofition of the defigner. The world abounds with contrivances; and all the contrivances which

we

we are acquainted with, are directed to beneficial purposes. Evil no doubt exifts; but is never, that we can perceive, the object of contrivance. Teeth are contrived to eat, not to ache; their aching now and then is incidental to the contrivance, perhaps, infeparable from it; or even, if you will, let it be called a defect in the contrivance; but it is not the object of it. This is a diftinction which well deferves to be attended to. In defcribing implements of husbandry, you would hardly fay of a fickle, that it is made to cut the reaper's fingers, though from the conftruction of the inftrument, and the manner of ufing it, this mifchief often happens. But if you had occafion to defcribe inftruments of torture or execution, this engine, you would fay, is to extend the finews; this to dislocate the joints; this to break the bones; this to fcorch the foles of the feet. Here pain and mifery are the very objects of the contrivance. Now nothing of this fort is to be found in the works of nature. We never dif cover a train of contrivance to bring about an evil purpose. No anatomift ever discovered a fyftem of organization, calculated to produce pain and dif cafe; or, in explaining the parts of the human body, ever faid this is to irritate; this to inflame; this duct is to convey the gravel to the kidneys; this gland to fecrete the humour which forms the gout: if by chance he come at a part of which he knows not the ufe, the most he can fay is, that it is useless; no one ever fufpects that it is put there to incommode, to annoy, or torment. Since then God hath called forth his confummate wifdom to contrive and provide for our happiness, and the world appears to have been conftituted with this defign at first, so long as this conftitution is upholden by him, we must in reason suppose the same defign to continue.

The contemplation of univerfal nature rather be wilders the mind than affects it. There is always a bright spot in the profpect, upon which the eve

refs;

refts; a fingle example, perhaps, by which each man finds himself more convinced than by all others put together. I feem, for my own part, to fee the benevolence of the Deity more clearly in the pleafures of very young children, than in any thing in the world. The pleafures of grown perfons may be reckoned partly of their own procuring; efpecially if there has been any induftry, or contrivance, or purfuit, to come at them; or if they are founded, like mufic, painting, &c. upon any qualification of their own acquiring. But the pleasures of a healthy infant are fo manifeftly provided for it by another, and the benevolence of the provifion is fo unquestionable, that every child I fee at its fport affords to my mind a kind of fenfible evidence of the finger of God, and of the difpofition which directs it.

But the example, which strikes each man most ftrongly, is the true example for him; and hardly two minds hit upon the fame; which fhews the abundance of fuch examples about us.

We conclude therefore, that God wills and wishes the happiness of his creatures. And this conclufion being once established, we are at liberty to go on with the rule built upon it, namely," that the "method of coming at the will of God, concern. ing any action, by the light of nature, is, to inquire into the tendency of that action, to pro"mote or diminish the general happiness."

66

CHAP.

СНА Р. VI.

UTILITY.

O then actions are to be estimated by their tendency. * Whatever is expedient is right. It is the utility of any moral rule alone which conftitutes the obligation of it.

But to all this there seems a plain objection, viz. that many actions are ufeful, which no man in his fenfes will allow to be right. There are occafions, in which the hand of the affaffin would be very useful. The prefent poffeffor of fome great eftate employs his influence and fortune, to annoy, corrupt, or opprefs all about him. His eftate would devolve, by his death, to a fucceffor of an oppofite character. It is ufeful, therefore, to dispatch fuch a one as foon as poffible out of the way; as the neighbourhood will exchange thereby a pernicious tyrant for a wife and generous benefactor. It may be useful to rob a mifer, and give the money to the poor; as the money, no doubt, would produce more happiness, by being laid out in food and clothing for half a dozen diftreffed families, than by con. tinuing locked up in a mifer's cheft. It may bẹ

Actions in the abftra&t are right or wrong, according to their tendency; the agent is virtuous or vicious, according to his defign. Thus, if the queftion be, Whether relieving common beggars be right or wrong? we inquire into the tendency of fuch a conduct to the public advantage or inconvenience. if the question be, Whether a man, temarkable for this fort of bounty, is to be efteemed virtuous for that reafon ? we inquire into his defign, whether his liberality fprung from charity or from oftentation. It is evident that our concern is with actions in the abAra&t.

useful to get poffeffion of a place, a piece of preferment, or of a feat in parliament, by bribery or falfe fwearing; as by means of them we may ferve the public more effectually than in our private ftation. What then fhall we fay? Muft we admit these actions to be right, which would be to justify affaffination, plunder, and perjury; or muft we give up our principle, that the criterion of right is utility?

It is not neceffary to do either.

The true answer is this; that thefe actions, after all, are not useful, and for that reason, and that alone, are not right.

To fee this point perfectly, it must be observed, that the bad confequences of actions are two-fold, particular and general.

The particular bad confequence of an action, is the mischief which that fingle action directly and immediately occafions.

The general bad confequence is, the violation of fome neceffary or useful general rule.

Thus the particular bad confequence of the affaffination above defcribed, is the fright and pain which the deceafed underwent, the lofs he suffered of life, which is as valuable to a bad man, as to a good one, or more fo; the prejudice and affliction, of which his death was the occafion, to his family, friends, and dependants.

The general bad confequence is the violation of this neceffary general rule, that no man be put to death for his crimes, but by public authority.

Although therefore, fuch an action have no particular bad confequence, or greater particular good confequences, yet it is not ufeful, by reafon of the general confequence, which is of more importance, and which is evil. And the fame of the other two inftances, and of a million more, which might be mentioned.

But