can either party morally have recourse to law, or prolong a suit, unless he thinks that his case is founded on right, and not dependent on the uncertainty of the decision; nor has he a right to take any steps to distort or prevent evidence likely to make against himself. In criminal prosecutions, the private injury must be lost sight of, and the sufferer must feel as if he is only the official prosecutor, acting for the public welfare. But, in the same degree, he is bound to prosecute whenever the interests of the community require the punishment of the offender; because it will not be done but through his instrumentality. In offences against the morals of society, where the prosecution concerns the whole neighborhood, it is not binding on any one individual; but there is merit, however, in his becoming the prosecutor, if he so act on the ground of public good, and not to gratify some private pique merely. The character of an informer is undeservedly accounted odious. But when a good man can promote by his activity the observance of laws of general utility, he will despise that unreasonable prejudice; or show, by giving away his share of the penalty, that he is uninfluenced by the pecuniary reward. But when he takes advantage of enactments disregarded because useless or obsolete, he acts morally wrong; because he wilfully misapplies a rule to a case which the law did not intend to embrace. CHAP. XI.-GRATITUDE. The mischief of ingratitude consists in its tendency to discourage voluntary beneficence. Nor is the mischief small; for much of the happiness of society depends on those offices of kindness, of which laws cannot compel the performance, and for which morality can suggest only faint motives. Another reason for cultivating a grateful temper towards 387 Of what are both parties disallowed? 388 How should criminal prosecutions be conducted? 389 What else will this feeling inculcate? Why? 390 What may be said of offences against society at large? Why? 396 What is another reason for cultivating a grateful temper? man, is in its tendency to produce a similar feeling towards God; and thus to become a source of one of the most exalted virtues. 6 This duty is not, as sometimes supposed, omitted in the Christian Scriptures; for the precept to love God because he first loved us,' both acknowledges the existence of the principle of gratitude, and directs it also to its highest object. As there are no limits to the occasions and feelings of gratitude, so there can be none for the ways of expressing it. We are not, however, bound by a principle of gratitude to do any act morally wrong; because the prohibition against such act is not only greater than the claim of gratitude, but also antecedent to it. But to plead a conscientious scruple for non-performance, when such does not really exist, is to add hypocrisy to ingratitude; and to bring upon honest noncompliance the suspicion of being a dishonest one. To upbraid a man with the favors he has received, is ungenerous; but infinitely more so to require of him, in return for such favors, any mean and dishonest compliances. CHAP. XII.-SLANDER. Speaking is really acting, but under another name. Now, as deeds are estimated according to our intentions, words must be tried by the same rule. The mischief is the same, though the means may differ. Hence, Christ declares (Matt. xii. 37)" by thy words thou shalt be justified, and by thy words thou shalt be condemned;" that is, by words as well as deeds; for both are equally capable of producing good and evil. Slander is either malicious or inconsiderate. Malicious slander is the assertion of either truth or falsehood, with a view to do evil. Slander generally means the promulgation of a malicious 397 Is gratitude inculcated in the Scriptures? 398 To what can we not be bound by feelings of gratitude? Why? 399 How may this excuse be considered when groundless? 400 What may be said of upbraiding men with the favors they have received? 401 What may speaking be considered in effect? 402 What follows from this? 403 What does our Savior say of speaking? Explanation. 404 How is slander distinguished? 405 What is malicious slander? 406 Give some explanation of the idea signified by "slander." falsehood; but if the truth be told with a malicious view, that is slander also, though its guilt is less than if united with falsehood. By slander ought to be meant the production of gratuitous mischief. For if any feelings of self-interest interfere, to be attained by a falsehood, the act is a fraud; if we serve our interest by truth, unless it is accompanied by some immoral act, such as breach of promise or betrayal of confidence, it is not criminal. Whether a person be affected directly by the scandal, or indirectly through another connected with him, the guilt must be measured by the misery intended to be produced; and the disguises under which slander is concealed are only so many aggravations, as they indicate more deliberation and design. Inconsiderate slander is less criminal, although it may actually produce the same mischief. But at the same time, it is not free from guilt; for, the offender cannot be exonerated by the plea that he had no design to injure; because he is bound to keep such a check on his words as to prevent even indirect mischief to others. Information given for the sole purpose of caution is not slander. On the other hand, indiscriminate praise is the opposite extreme of slander; and though it is apparently the excess of candor, it generally proceeds either from a frivolous understanding, or a contempt for all moral distinctions. 407 What should be intended by the use of the word? Why? 408 How must we measure the guilt of slander ? 409 What may be said of any disguise under which slander may be concealed? Why? 410 What is the guilt of inconsiderate slander? 411 Why is it criminal at all? 412 What is not slander? 413 What may be said of indiscriminate praise? BOOK III.-PART III. RELATIVE DUTIES, WHICH RESULT FROM THE CONSTITUTION OF THE SEXES. THE Constitution of the sexes is the foundation of marriage. Collateral to the subject of marriage, are chastity, incest, polygamy, and divorce. Consequential to marriage, is the relation and reciprocal duty of parent and child. CHAP. I.-USE OF MARRIAGE INSTITUTIONS. The use of marriage consists in its promoting the following beneficial effects: 1. The private comforts of individuals; of the female sex especially. All, perhaps, are not interested in this reason; but, as whatever adds to the happiness of the majority is binding on the whole, all are bound to abstain from any conduct that would tend in its general consequence to the obstruction of marriage. 2. The preservation and education of the greatest number of children. 3. The peace of society, by preventing the contention that would otherwise ensue amongst several men for the possession of one woman. 4. The improvement of society, by the formation of separate families, and by appointing one master over each. This authority has more influence than all civil authority put together. 5. The additional security of the state, founded in the soli 414 What does the constitution of sexes lead to ? 415 What subjects are collateral to marriage? 416 What ethical subjects in consequence of marriage? 417 What is the first beneficial effect of marriage? 418 How will this reason effect those who are not interested in it as concerns themselves individually? 419 What is the second beneficial effect? 420 What is the third? 421 What is the fourth? 422 What effect has parental authority? 423 What is the fifth benefit? citude of persons for the welfare of their children, and in their restriction to fixed habitations. 6. The encouragement of industry. Of the utility of marriage, some ancient nations were more sensible than the moderns are. The Spartans checked celibacy by penalties, and the Romans encouraged matrimony by conferring privileges upon persons who had three children. A man who had no child could not, by the Roman law, claim but the half of a legacy left to him. Marriage between brothers and sisters, and between any who usually live in the same family, may be said to be forbidden by the law of nature. Restrictions which extend to remoter degrees of kindred than thus described, are founded only in the positive law which ordains them; and, when so made, must be justified by their tendency to promote general good. [Ecclesiastical law, wherever it has had authority or influence, has prohibited matrimony between near relations by blood or marriage.] The Levitical law, from which these prohibitions were deduced, and also the Roman law, prohibit marriage between relations that are within three degrees of kindred, computing the generations, not from, but through the common ancestor, and accounting affinity the same as consanguinity. The Egyptians are said to have permitted the marriage of brothers and sisters; but among the Athenians, although brothers and sisters of half blood on the father's side could marry, those on the mother's side could not. The same custom probably obtained in Chaldea in the time of Abraham ; for he and Sarah his wife stood in this relation to each other. "And yet, indeed, she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not of my mother, and she became my wife." Gen. xx. 12. [In several of the United States, marriages within the Levitical degrees are made void by statute; but in others, there 424 The sixth ? 425 What opinions had the ancients on the utility of marriage? 426 What marriages are forbidden by the law of nature? 427 On what are any other restrictions founded? 428 What prohibitions were made by the Levitical law? 429 What were allowed among ancient nations? 430 What legal provision is made in the United States upon the subject |