peace and friendship, besprinkled his girdle, and wet his shoes with the blood of these two generals, as though he had slain them in battle. Do, therefore, according to thy wisdom, and let not his hoary head go down to the grave peace.

in

Here are three murders David mentions to Solomon as the grounds of his charge not to let Joab die a natural death. The one is intimated: Thou knowest what he did to me, viz. when he cruelly stabbed Absalom, contrary to my immediate orders: the two others are expressly mentioned, namely, those of Abner and Amasa; and on these accounts he advises Solomon to put him to death. This advice may appear strange to some, but we cannot help thinking, upon mature consideration, that it was worthy of a good king, and fit to be given at a time when he thought himself not long for this world. The crimes which drew down this punishment upon Joab have been already sufficiently displayed not to be forgotten by the reader. Many reasons concurred to prevent David's calling him to an account; but it is plain that he never forgot nor forgave his crime: nay, he could not, consistently with the law, have forgiven him, if he had been inclined to it. His deferring his punishment so long was no reason why he should always do it. Reasons of state prevented its being inflicted before, and reasons of state required its being put into execution at this juncture. In time of war it was dangerous to attempt it on account of the power, influence, and military skill of Joab; in a time of peace it was safe, because Joab's power was then upon the decline, and his services were unnecessary. Joab was ambitious, enterprizing and restless, and having not proved very loyal to the father, might have practised the same perfidy against the son; who, being young, and scarcely settled on his throne, might have suffered from his treachery, his want of fidelity, and his ambitious views, which were insatiable.

We may consider this transaction in another light: we may consider Joab as relative to David in his public capacity. Now David, in his public capacity, was king of Israel: Joab, in his public capacity, stood related to him as his general, and assisted him, and adhered to him in his extremities. David therefore, in his public capacity, as king, was obliged to punish Joab with death in his public

capacity as general, assassin, and murderer. If Joab had been his faithful general, and frequently assisted David in his extremities; private obligations are in their nature inferior, and ought to give way to public ones; and the yielding up such an offender to public justice, when personal obligations might have been pleaded in his favor, was a nobler sacrifice in its nature, and renders David's merits, as a prince, the more illustrious. In this light we must commend the master, who died meditating and ordering the punishment of a servant, who, by basely stabbing two worthier men than himself, forfeited the protection of his king and country, and cancelled all the obligations that could arise from his former services. It should be added, that whatever Joab's past services were to David, and however faithfully he had formerly been attached to him, yet he had now been engaged in a conspiracy to depose him, and to set aside the intended succession to the crown, and had actually proclaimed Adonijah king, during his father's life. This was adding rebellion to murder. What was David to do? Was he to have forgiven him at his last hours, in order to manifest his own charity? No! For if a prince's charity influences him, living or dying, to pardon repeated offences, inconsistent with the public safety, it is folly and weakness, and not virtuous charity; it is cruelty to his people, instead of real generosity and goodness. David had not this charity, and it heightens his character that he had not. His last charge to Solomon shews his inviolable regard to justice, by positively ordering the execution of a murderer too powerful for himself to punish; and he would neither have been a wise nor a righteous prince had he forgotten to do it.

After David had given this charge to his son Solomon, to execute the due punishment on Joab for his numerous and aggravated crimes, he gave him another, relative to Shimei the Benjamite, who, as hath been already ob

* The sense of the two charges given by David to his son Solomon relative to Joab and Shimei, are thus expressed by the learned Bishop Patrick: Speaking of the first he says, "Thou rememberest "what Joab did unto me: with what insolence he treated me in the "time of the war against Absalom; how, contrary to my orders, he "slew him, and afterwards talked to me in a menacing and imperi"ous manner. Thou rememberest what he did to Amasa, whom I

66

served, when the king was in his flight from Jerusalem, to prevent his falling into Absalom's hands, met him, railed at, and cursed him in his journey; and, as he went on, had the farther insolence to pelt him with stones. Behold, said he to Solomon, thou hast with thee Shimei, the son of Gera, a Benjamite of Bahurim, which cursed me with a grievous curse, in the day that I went to Mahanaim: but he came down to meet me at Jordan, and I sware to him by the Lord, saying, I will not put thee to death with the sword. Now therefore hold him not guiltless: for thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him; but his hoary head bring thou down to the grave with blood.*

"intended to have put in his place, and made the general of all my "forces; and what to Abner, who was then endeavoring to gain over "to my party all that adhered to the house of Saul. The injury done "to these two brave men redounds upon me, since they were both "under my protection, and both murdered, basely murdered, because "I had an esteem for them; and till justice be done to their murderer, "(which I in my life-time had not power to do) their innocent blood "will not depart from my house. Do thou therefore take care to as"soil it, and whenever he commits any transgression against thee, "let the blood of these two valuable men be charged to his account, "and let him, as he has long deserved, be put to death."

Speaking of Shimei, he says, "Thou hast Shimei with thee, and "some share perhaps he may have in thy favor; but trust him "not, he is no friend to kings or kingly power. Remember what he "did to me in my distress; how bitterly, how virulently he cursed 66 me to my face; and I make no doubt, but that he would be the same "to thee in the like circumstances. I forgave him in my exile, because I looked upon him, as an instrument in God's hands to hum"ble me for my great offence. I forgave him in my return home, because he came to me when my heart was open, and unwilling to "damp the joy of my restoration with the effusion of any blood. I "promised him his life; aud let not that promise be violated in my "days: but what I did is no rule or obligation to thee. Let him not "die, however, for his offence against me, but rather watch his con"duct, and, if he should chance to give thee a fresh occasion, be sure to lay hold of it, because it is not in his nature to be a good subject." * The ingenious Dr Delaney observes, that the words but his hoary head bring thou down to the grave with blood is not rightly translated; for that the particle vau should be rendered, as in similar cases, not connectively, but disjunctively: for instance, Agur, (Prov. xxx.) beseeches God to keep him from the extremes, both of poverty and wealth: if the vau were to be rendered connectively, the petition would run thus: Give me not poverty and riches-which is absurd: in the same analogy this verse, rightly translated, will stand thus: Now therefore neither hold him not guiltless, (for thou art a wise man, VOL. ii. F

66

It appears, from the expression, Behold thou hast with thee, that Shimei was at this time in Jerusalem; and therefore David thought it a proper opportunity for confining him, that he might not spread disaffection to Solomon's government among those of his own tribe, or of any of the other tribes of Israel: a precaution the more necessary in the infancy of Solomon's reign, and as some of his brethren were inclined to dispute with him the succession to the crown. It is far from being improbable, that Shimei was in the party with Adonijah against Solomon, as he was in that of Absalom against David, and this is the true reason of those words, Now therefore hold him not guiltless, that is, "Though I forgave him, and swore to him that he should not die, do not thou look on him as an innocent man that is reconciled to my family, and thy succession to the throne of Israel: he is Shimei still, and wants nothing but a fair opportunity to declare it. Clear him not, therefore, as I did, if thou findest him guilty of any mal-practices: but his hoary head bring down, &c. Cut him off as an old offender, and dangerous enemy, to secure thy own peace, and the safety of thy government." Farther, David's telling Solomon that he sware Shimei, that he would not put him to death for his outrage and treason is a demonstrative proof that he did not advise Solomon to put him to death for the crime which he himself had solemnly forgiven; for, can it be imagined that David would tell Solomon he had sworn not to put Shimei to death, and in the same breath order him, in violation of his oath, to be put to death? If he intended that Solomon should have immediately put him to death, there would be neither reason nor sense in the words, thou art a wise man, and knowest what thou oughtest to do unto him. Now to what purpose was it to tell Solomon that he knew how to behave to Shimei, if David's command was immediately to cut him off, and Solomon understood him in that sense? But that Solomon did not understand his father in this sense is evident, by his ordering him to build an house for himself in Jerusalem,* as well as from the

to

Ec:) nor his hoary heud bring thou down to the grave with blood. In this sense, the advice is full of humanity, as well as wisdom; and Solomon understood and observed it in this sense, and no other.

* See 1 Kings ii. 36.

different manner in which he afterwards treated Shimei and Joab. By the way, let it be observed, that after Shemei's confession of his fault, Abishai asked, shall not Shimei be put to death, besause he cursed the Lord's anointed? By this question he meant, put to death instantly, as appears from David's answer, Shall there any man be put to death this day in Israel? Do not I know that I am this day king over Israel? Therefore the king said to Shimei, Thou shalt not die; and the king sware to him, viz. that he should not then, or on that day, or at that time, be put to the sword. On the whole, nothing farther can certainly be collected from the words, as they stand connected, but that David reprieved Shimei from immediate execution, and left himself at liberty to call him to an account at any other time for the outrage and treason of which he had been guilty; and therefore David violated no oath, if he actually ordered Solomon to put him to death as a dangerous enemy to his person and government; and much less still if, for the same reason, he advised him to keep a strict watch over Shimei, and put him to death only in case he should commit any crime in future that merited the forfeiture of his life. This is the true state of the case, and we would only ask those who are inclined to impeach David's character on account of his conduct in this particular, how they can think it either inconsistent with piety, or the advice of a prince on his death-bed? It is true, forgivness of enemies is a duty, provided they cease to become our enemies; but no man is obliged by any law so to forgive an enemy, continuing such, as not to take the proper methods to guard against the effects of his enmity, and bring him to justice, if no other method will prove effectual. Much less is a prince obliged so to forgive an implacable enemy to his crown and government, and one who is likely to disturb the settlement of the crown in his successor, as not to order the successor to be upon his guard against him, and punish him, when guilty, according to his demerits. Such a caution and order is what he owes to his people; and he may die, as a private person, in charity with all mankind, and forgive every private injury against himself; and yet as a prince advise what is necessary to the public good after his decease, and even the execution of particular persons, if,