apartment, and the Univerfity of Cambridge makes use of it in public examinations.

Having myself always been of opinion, that Cicero de Officiis is, by general practice, read too early in schools, I poftponed it till I could affift the young men by Dr. PALEY'S obfervations, and I have reafon to believe, that the practice was not unfuccefsful, that a study imperfectly followed in earlier years, has fince been purfued with alacrity and advantage, and has had a falutary influence upon the mind at a period when it is most ingenuous, and free from art and fufpicion.

In procefs of time Mr. GISBORNE, whose diligence, whofe benevolence, and whofe ingenuity are beyond my praife, took the alarm at Dr. PALEY'S notion of general utility, and dreaded the most fatal confequences to religion and morality; and indeed if we could admit the construction which is put upon Dr. PALEY'S words to be just, we might all of us equally take the alarm. But the words which Mr. GISBORNE quotes

very.

乘

himself remove every fuch apprehenfion.

For in order that no man captivated by immediate advantage might think himfelf authorised to deviate from general rules, Dr. PALEY affirms, Whatever is expedient is " right.

ડ

right. It must be expedient upon the whole, at the long run, in all its effects collateral and remote, as well as in those that are immediate and direct, as it is ob"vious that, in computing confequences, it "makes no difference in what way, or at what distance they enfue." Gifb. p. 13Paley, p. 70, vol. i.

What words can more strongly prevent perverse and crooked cafuifty than these, it is difficult to fay, and if they fhould be thought infufficient, we have in various parts of Dr. PALEY'S book the idea of general.confequences fairly and properly ftated, as if on purpose to admonith us of our danger in mifapplying his principle.

But Mr. GISBORNE is fo alarmed that he ftates the following cafe. When St. Paul's "cathedral was erected, the architect willed " and wifhed the excellence of the edifice. "This pofition we will suppose to be allow"ed. Confequently thofe proceedings of "the workmen, which fhould promote that will and wish, must have been agreeable to "him, and the contrary. Granted alfo. "Therefore the method, which it was right "for the workmen individually to purfue, if they were at any time without specific in"ftructions,

B 2

fructions, in order to ascertain his will respecting any proceeding, was to enquire into the tendency of that proceeding to promote or diminish the excellence of the "ftructure.-If one of the mafons had rea"foned in this manner, and, in conformity

દ

to his rule, had commenced, at his own "difcretion, an arch in one place, and formed the rudiments of a dome in another, would "he have been able to exculpate himself "from the charge of prefumption? Would

his arguments have been judged logical, "and accepted by the architect as a defence " of his conduct? Would he have been al

lowed capable of afcertaining the will of "Sir Chriftoper Wren, from his own crude 'ideas of architectural expediency ?”

The plain answer to this feemingly for midable comparison is, that the workman knows himfelf generally accountable, and that if by his own rashness or prefumption he injure the fabrick, he must fuffer for it; that if the architect's inftructions have not been minute as to each particular, and if any unforeseen accident, fhould compel him to deviate from fuch inftructions, he ftill hopes that neceffity, and the nature of his employment, will be his juftification.

If the reader will admit this to be a fair construction of Dr. PALEY'S meaning, then he will alfo fee that the rule of expediency will in no cafe be rendered paramount to the injunctions of Scripture, a confequence at which every christian must shudder.

It is a trite observation, that exceptions prove rules, and while we hold ourselves accountable to God, our confciences, and our fellow creatures, we are in no danger of being misled by vifionary notions of expediency,

If we deprive a fellow creature of life, if we deftroy his property, or do any thing by which he fuffers damage or pain, we are amenable, and we know that we are fo.. But privation of life may be justifiable from felfdefence; privation or diminution of property may be juftified from publick utility-we may pull down a fingte houfe, or a part of it, to fave a street from burning; we may pluck the ears of corn to prevent our perifhing by hunger; we may with-hold information, we may violate a promife, and we may tell a falfehood, under certain circumstances and reftrictions; ftil we must be fure that those circumstances and reftrictions will bear us out, other

B3

otherwise we open a door for equivocation, chicanery, treachery, and lying.

The phyfician does not acquaint his patient with the extent of his danger; a promifer will not fulfil his promise, if he find that he should thereby injure instead of serving the promifee; and who would not fave a friend pursued by an enraged adverfary, if a pardonable lye would' anfwer the purpofe? There are indeed fome commandments which admit of no exception. It can never be lawful to commit adultery or fornication, to be guilty of fwearing or drunkenness, or to use licentious converfation, or to be avaricious. The question then is, whether a proper notion of expediency can ever mislead us? I prefume it cannot but through our own perverfeness. Dr. PALEY and Mr. GISBORNE are writing for improved understandings, and the danger therefore is leffened in proportion as fuch understandings can more easily make a proper diftinction.

T

But let us not therefore conclude, that in material, in prominent cafes which moft frequently occur, uneducated persons of honeft intentions will often be at a lofs. Paroxyfms of rage or grief are incident to all men, and

who