where the very institution of marriage, with all the feelings and forms of life with which it is necessarily connected, becomes a positive curse, the moment that connexion is discouraged, upon whatever grounds.

(29) But I recur, in conclusion, to the idea with which I commenced in treating this revolting subject: I shall again express it in the words of Locke; the great wickedness of this check consists in this, that it purposely "crosses the main intention of Nature, which willeth the increase of mankind;" and which increase is equally commanded by the Deity, prompted by Nature, and required for the promotion of the happiness and prosperity of the species. Inexpressibly sinful, as well as presumptuous, is, therefore, any systematic and premeditated attempt to repress the natural numbers of mankind! Something is there inconceivably cold and dark in the endeavour to desert, upon principle, destitute poverty; to abandon innocent and helpless infancy, as utterly valueless; but, beyond all, the proposal to counteract, as far as in us lies, the prolific power of Nature; to lock up the springs of existence, except to the privileged few,-to "cut off the sequence of posterity!" posterity!" To every passing generation, the Eternal successively commits the issues of life; such are, if I may so speak, the trustees of Divine Providence, and are answerable for the destiny of future ages. But if, then, our perverseness or corruption, or the puny efforts of presumptuous men, were availing, they might become the last surviving heirs, instead of successively the progenitors of their race. They might prodigally and selfishly expend the heritage of existence, instead of transmitting it down, according to its original entail; and bar posterity of the right of succession. Yes! in every interference of the nature proposed, existence is at stake! Exist

ence! that best, and, as we believe of man, that irrevocable gift of the Eternal; that gift, of which the worm that creeps beneath our foot, as well as the first of created beings which bows before the Creator, is so tenacious: that mysterious principle, which images the Almighty's own being:-his highest work, which his power last called forth, and which he surrounds and sustains by his mercies; without which the Temple of Nature would be silent of his eternal worship, and Creation itself a boundless and solitary desert, in which the Maker's wisdom would be unknown, his goodness incommunicable, and that vital happiness annihilated with which he has deluged the universe. Let, then, the great, and the powerful appropriate, if they please, the surface of the world; let them take its wealth, its distinctions, and its grandeur; but, in the name of the Eternal GOD, let them not attempt to monopolize existence; let them not monopolize immortality! In the final home of human beings, the principle of population can be no evil; there," are there many mansions," too many to fear that crowding which is here deprecated so deeply; let those, therefore, who, in their lifetime, have their good things, grudge not that happiness and repose which await the humble and the virtuous in another and a better world! But I forbear to pursue the subject, as prompted by my awakened feelings!

(30) There is a broad distinction made, it is true, between preventing beings from living which would otherwise emerge into existence, and depriving them of life when they have obtained it; and I well know, that those who regard the last as a crime, pronounce the former, under certain circumstances, which they declare always exist, a "virtue." But believing in the immortality of the soul, and the perpetual happi

ness of the innocent after death-doctrines which natural theology itself inculcates; but much more viewing it through the medium of that religion which has "brought life and immortality to light," I confess I cannot fully comprehend the distinction. Nay, were I placed in a position to determine, could I unravel the mazes of future contingencies, so as to bring before me, by the aid of an unerring prescience, those who, in the natural course of things, would become heirs of immortality, and if I had the choice of shutting the door of existence against them, thereby depriving them of everlasting happiness, or of letting them emerge into life, and, after they had tasted of mortality, sending them to a state of perpetual blessedness, could I hesitate? Would I choose the former alternative?

"No! Heaven forefend, I would not kill their soul !"

(31) The last argument will have little weight with the mere political economists, who, as it regards this question, reject all consideration of a future state, as analytical writers do their vanishing quantities. The heathens of antiquity judged differently. But to shew that such a view of the subject is no extravagant effusion, even were futurity left out of the question, I will quote the opinion of a writer who has never been charged with taking too superstitious a view of any subject, much less one of a religious nature. In speaking of the means which have been taken by some parents in order to limit the number and charge of their progeny, by preventing the marriages of their children, (and surely, if the imposition of the preventive check is justifiable in any case, it must be when under such authority,) Hume thus expresses himself: "The ancients had a method almost

as innocent, and more effectual to that purpose, to "wit, exposing their children in early infancy."

(32) In reviewing these various expedients of the preventive check, I speak seriously in asserting, that a far better than any of them, both as it respects humanity, decency, and efficiency, would be an early and somewhat gentler application of a remedy described by Homer, which I shall not venture to translate 1.

(33) I shall not allude to the guilt of patricide with which the preventive check, if generally introduced in the country, would stand charged; the pollution would spread till general depravity would contaminate the whole community, with those consequences in its train which are sufficiently adverted to in other parts of the present work, and of which the history of the world furnishes too many melancholy examples.

(34) Reviewing, then, the wicked and disgusting effects which have been enumerated, we may confidently exclaim, in the language of Burke, "Such

would, and in no long time, be the effect of attempt"ing to forbid, as a crime, and to suppress, as an "evil, the command and blessing of Providence,"increase and multiply!" In the meantime, however, hoping better things of this country than that its moral and intelligent people will believe such means necessary to regulate and repress their numbers, I confidently leave the subject to their determination. They will, doubtless, see and feel that, however it is palliated, and by whomsoever recommended, the preventive check is utterly incompatible with the morals, happiness, or well-being of the community; that, whether in its individual or general application,-"THE FORBIDDING TO MARRY IS THE DOCTRINE OF DEVILS."

μήδιά τ' ἐξέουσαν, κυσὶν ἐμὰ δάσασθαι. Homer, Odys. xxii., ν. 476.

339

CHAPTER XIX.

OF THE PREVENTIVE CHECK: ITS PARTIALITY AND

INJUSTICE.

(1) BUT the partiality and injustice which the preventive check involves, as well as its innate wickedness, fully disprove the notion, that any such means can be in the contemplation of Nature for the regulation of the numbers of the species. It has been the triumph of moral philosophy to shew that the Governor of the universe has equally distributed happiness throughout all those different ranks and degrees of human existence of which society ever has been, and probably ever will be, composed. Nay, it has been asserted, that, as it regards the main ingredients of human enjoyment, health, peace, and contentment, the balance has ever been in favour of the lower, rather than the higher, ranks of life. The great moralist, Paley, has presented us with a pleasing illustration of this important and consoling fact. But, allowing this to be true, this happiness of poverty is founded upon the few simple enjoyments which Nature dictates and demands. It is not a state which presents a choice of, or a change in, the nature of its modest gratifications. They are found exclusively in the domestic scene. Rob it of the pleasures that are centered there, and it becomes a condition forlorn and wretched in the extreme; you "leave it poor indeed."

(2) But the proposition is, that this check shall operate upon this class of society exclusively; the