The exercis rights imporis

of thefe natural

ble in the ftate

of fuciety.

It is as fingular, as it is unaccountable, that fome of the illuminating philofophers of the present day should, even under the British conftitution, claim and infift upon the actual exercise of these natural Rights of Man, when it is notorious, even to demonstration, that the exercise of them would be effentially deftructive of all political and civil liberty, could they be really brought into action. For it is felf-evident, that the perfect equali zation of mankind, fuch as is attributable to this imaginary and merely speculative state of natural freedom, would prevent every individual from acquiring an exclusive right or property in any portion of this terraqueous globe, or in any other particle of matter, beyond that of his own corporeal frame, Liberty presupposes the poffibility of acquiring and reaping the advantages of property; a right of receiving and giving aid and protection; and a power of bettering one's own condition, and providing for one's family: it presupposes virtue, in holding out its rewards; and the rewards of virtue neceffarily induce diftinction and preference of the virtuous over others, which are effentially contradictory. to perfect equalization. The extent of this men are all born equally free, must include each individual human being, or it

propofition,

Lays

fays nothing; but it admits of no other, than that original fenfe of equality inherent in the metaphyfical effence of man, which is not applicable to the phyfical exiftence of focial man, since it is effentially incompatible with the existence of fociety, which denominates man focial. In this fenfe, Mr. Payne fays truly, Every hiftory of the creation, and every traditionary account, whether from the lettered or unlettered world, however they may vary in their opinion or belief of certain particulars, all agree in establishing one point -the unity of man; by which I mean, that man is all of one degree, and confequently, that all men are born equal, and with equal natural rights, in the fame manner as if pofterity had been continued by creation instead of generation, the latter being only the mode, by which the former is carried forward; and confequently, every child born into the world must be confidered as deriving its existence from God. The world is as new to him, as it was to the first man, that existed, and his natural right in it is of the fame kind."

The admiffion of these principles into the ftate of civil fociety would prevent the very poffibility of thofe focial virtues, out of which

Payne's Rights of Man, p. 46.

arifes the moral and political harmony of the universe. To view this with an impartial eye, we must make ample allowances for the exigencies, and even the foibles of human nature. We are so constituted by an all-wifeCreator, that, although we act generally upon certain fundamental principles, that are effentially invariable, yet the prevalence of early prejudices, the force of example and habit, the impulfe of paffion, and the allurement of pleasure, create a great diversity in the cuftoms, manners, and actions of men. In fome focieties, the philanthropy of peace is never broken into; others are in an uninterrupted state of warfare; fome focieties float in a fea of pleasurable delights, whilft others glory in the rudeft practices, of which their nature is capable; one society countenances only the embellishment of the mind, whilst another encourages only the improvement of the body; fome focieties form themselves principally upon religious institutions, whilst others fhew not even the most remote knowledge of a deity *. It is then to be expected,

that

I have been informed by several German miffioners, who had spent many years in the inland parts of California, that, contrary to their own opinions and expectations, and contrary to the generally received notion, that every man has fome idea of a deity, they could not dif

that our practical ideas of the civilized ftate of fociety will be generally drawn from the practical knowledge, we have of different An Englishman societies. Under this influence, an Englishman will conceive no liberty, where there is

conceives no

liberty where

there is no law,

no property, no no law, no property, no religion. The pre

religion.

Mifchiefs arifing from the

fervation of thefe conftitutes the fum total of thofe rights and liberties, for which he will even facrifice his life. Upon what ground then, fhall an Englishman, even in theory, admit principles into civil government, which would juftify the peafant in feizing the lands of his lord, the fervant in demanding the property of his master, the labourer that of his employer, the robber in purloining his neighbour's purse, the adulterer in defiling the wife of another, the outlawed in reviling, contemning, and violating the laws of the community.

The greatest mischiefs arife from the mif ing and milap understanding and mifapplication of terms,

plication of general propofi

tions.

Millions of lives have been facrificed in difputes and controverfies upon the tenor and tendency of words. General abstract propofitions are fupereminently liable to this fatal evil, as I fhall hereafter have occafion to

cover the most remote or faint trace of any public or private cult or worship amongst the natives of this extenfive country.

fhew,

fhew, in many calamitous inftances of our The ufe of words and terms

own country.

of

can only be, to convey to others the real meaning and purport of what we think ourfelves. Thus if I happen, by an unusual and awkward combination of words and phrases, to express my meaning and fentiments upon a fubject to a third perfon, provided I am really understood, and my fentiments are admitted, I do not fee upon what other ground, than that of grammar or fyntax, a dispute can be instituted. And in the fubject under our present confideration, if any other terms had been used to express the natural Rights Man, or the state of nature, the whole animofity of the adverfe difputants would have fubfided, under the conviction that neither differed in opinion fubftantially from the other. I have read over most of the late publications upon the fubject; and I do not find one of any note or confequence, that does not in fact and fubftance admit this state of nature, to which they annex or attribute these indefeasible Rights of Man, to be a mere imaginary state of fpeculation. Much ill blood would have been avoided, much labour and pain have been spared, and many lives have been preferved, if any other, than

the