being, the Desire of Having, which urges him to labor of mind and body, and thereby to obtain as his own that which he desires. It is an indestructible and fundamental faculty and feeling of his nature—to be ruled, of course, by law and equity, but not originating in them, but in the man's nature, concurring with the external means of gratifying it.

The Desire to Have-Labor-Property-these are as the eye -its power of sight-things visible. They belong to the Individual Man, as the power of making honey,—the desire to make it,and the honey, to the Bee. Inherent in Man, they are connatural, always existing; belonging to the very nature of the being, and to that of the world wherein that being is. They can be regulated, never destroyed.* This is the second natural tie, and it connects man in a very strong way with the world of things palpable to the senses and perceptible by them.

Thirdly the "Body" is manifestly a material organization—a living organization, too, in the midst of forces, some of which are destructive, some tend to its support. It needs, evidently, a protective sense, by which it shall be instinctively guarded against those that are destructive, and turned to those that are for its

* I have stated thus briefly the foundation of Property to be,-First, in an inherent faculty of our being, that cannot be eradicated from it. Secondly, in an action of the man, labor, that is always necessary to man's being, always has its Rights, and always must exist. Thirdly, in the provision in the external world of rewards for Labor, and incentives to the Desire of Having. If, then, from the system of the world you would destroy Property, you must be able to eradicate from the nature of man in each individual and in the whole race, an inherent and essential faculty of the mind. You must destroy Labor, and the value of its rewards. Better rule this desire by wise laws, and true and rational principles of Morality and Policy, than waste strength in doing that which cannot be done.

Another thing I would just say to those who may read this book. As in beasts, a certain shape of hoof always implies horns, and horns always imply that peculiar shape of hoof, and yet we cannot trace the logical reason, or even the natural one,—only as a fact of Natural Science it is so ;—so with regard to the doctrine of "Community of Property," always through history as a fact, we see it has implied another "Community-that of Wives. These two always have been connected, one always has inferred the other. The “hoof” has always implied the "horns”—the "horns" the “hoof.” Let those, therefore, who may have been pleased with these notions, be slow-look carefully-examine cautiously—and perhaps they may see the "hoof” and the “horns,”—and escape from both.

being, the Desire of Having, which urges him to labor of mind and body, and thereby to obtain as his own that which he desires. It is an indestructible and fundamental faculty and feeling of his nature—to be ruled, of course, by law and equity, but not originating in them, but in the man's nature, concurring with the external means of gratifying it.

The Desire to Have-Labor-Property-these are as the eye -its power of sight-things visible. They belong to the Individual Man, as the power of making honey,-the desire to make it,— and the honey, to the Bee. Inherent in Man, they are connatural, always existing; belonging to the very nature of the being, and to that of the world wherein that being is. They can be regulated, never destroyed.* This is the second natural tie, and it connects man in a very strong way with the world of things palpable to the senses and perceptible by them.

Thirdly the "Body" is manifestly a material organization—a living organization, too, in the midst of forces, some of which are destructive, some tend to its support. It needs, evidently, a protective sense, by which it shall be instinctively guarded against those that are destructive, and turned to those that are for its

* I have stated thus briefly the foundation of Property to be,-First, in an inherent faculty of our being, that cannot be eradicated from it. Secondly, in an action of the man, labor, that is always necessary to man's being, always has its Rights, and always must exist. Thirdly, in the provision in the external world of rewards for Labor, and incentives to the Desire of Having. If, then, from the system of the world you would destroy Property, you must be able to eradicate from the nature of man in each individual and in the whole race, an inherent and essential faculty of the mind. You must destroy Labor, and the value of its rewards. Better rule this desire by wise laws, and true and rational principles of Morality and Policy, than waste strength in doing that which cannot be done.

Another thing I would just say to those who may read this book. As in beasts, a certain shape of hoof always implies horns, and horns always imply that peculiar shape of hoof, and yet we cannot trace the logical reason, or even the natural one,-only as a fact of Natural Science it is so ;-so with regard to the doctrine of "Community of Property," always through history as a fact, we see it has implied another " Community-that of Wives. These two always have been connected, one always has inferred the other. The "hoof" has always implied the "horns"-the "horns" the "hoof." Let those, therefore, who may have been pleased with these notions, be slow-look carefully-examine cautiously—and perhaps they may see the "hoof” and the "horns,”—and escape from both.

good-this is manifestly in what we call Sensibility* "the power of Sensation in the various tissues of the body, by which it has perceptions and emotions of Pleasure and Pain." This is branched out into the five Senses, which, besides their giving us kno vledge of many qualities in bodies of which without them we should be otherwise ignorant, are of themselves organs of Pleasure and Pain.

Now, with reference to this subject, let us consider a little. Here, we will say, is a Child-its eyes are delighted naturally with anything bright, clear, sparkling-it has never had experience-a lamp is brought close at hand to it-it puts its hand directly into the flame. And instantly the emotion of pain is caused in a very great degree, and the hand is withdrawn.

Now observe, had there been no Pain, the hand would have remained there, and have been destroyed; and secondly, the pain occurs before any material injury takes place, or rather cotemporaneous with the smallest, so as to be an immediate warning. This emotion, therefore, is in its simplest form, purely defensive and protective.

Again, look at Physical Pleasure, this in its simplest form tends manifestly to the preservation of the body, guiding us towards those physical things external, that most conduce to that end. To the uncorrupted appetite, the most pleasant food is always the most healthy. The things that to the senses uncorrupted give a natural feeling of pleasure are to them the best-and those things that are not pleasant but painful, are destructive.

Now, when we look at the power of Habit and Experience, we find that these experiences of Pleasure and Pain, by man and by the animals having bodily organization, are enrolled in the memory, so that the experience of the past is a guide to the present and the future, and thus, that the period of infancy in the animals as well as in man is by this means a period of Education with respect to outward things.

Here then are three guides. The Spiritual Sense in reference to man's Spiritual being. The Sense of Having in reference to the mind. The Sense of Pleasure and Pain in reference to the integrity and preservation of the bodily organization.

Pleasure and Pain then are strictly bodily, for the prescrvation

Sensibility is here used in the Physiological sense.

1

of the Body, and when we apply them to the mind it is in a purely figurative sense. The delight for instance that a conscientious man has in obeying his conscience, is not only not bodily pleasure, but is of a kind so wholly and entirely different, that it may exist along with the highest degree of bodily pain, caused by that very

action.

Good and Evil then are not determined by Pleasure and Pain; for the Good is not always pleasant, nor the Evil always painful. The Good may bring exceeding Pain and the Evil exceeding Pleasure; and yet we shall be bound to do the Good and not to do the Evil; nay, to do the Good when the Pain is so great that it ends in the utter destruction of the body, as martyrs that have suffered death in fire, because they felt themselves bound to maintain the truth; as patriots that have died in torments for their country's sake; and as women that have borne all affliction for their children, have found, and received the applause of all ages for it.

Pleasure and Pain then are for the Good and Evil of the Body. They meddle not with the Good of the Spirit. It is not to be measured by them, but itself is to be superior to them.

I have already, in the early part of this treatise, shown that each man has in his estimation some one object that he considers to be his Highest Good:-now let us take these ordinary objects we see men pursue, and we shall plainly see that they admit of a threefold division. If the man places his Highest Good in obeying his Conscience, or living with justice, holiness or truth-then shall his Highest Good be in and within the regions of the Spirit or Moral Being. If he places it in "Having," no matter what form of it,— having power, or having wealth, or having fame, or having property; then it is within the animal mind. The man is Selfish. Again, if his main object be bodily Pleasure, no matter how or in what way it is, the man is Sensual.

This is the true definition of Sensuality. The Sensual man makes the pleasure of the body his Highest Good—he lives for the sake of feeling bodily pleasure and avoiding bodily pain.

When we consider the glutton, the drunkard, the epicure, the licentious man, in them all we shall see that they are all Sensual, they make the pleasure of the physical frame the end for which they live, and that by which they measure their Good and their Evil.

And we see plainly that these are the Good and the Evil of the

*

beasts that perish; they have no other Good and Evil than physical Pleasure and Pain.

We have already shown how what is ordinarily called viciousness of life is Sensuality in a great degree, properly so called. Another form of Sensuality we would now notice.

There are persons who look upon vice and its pleasures, and pains; and who by mere reason argue in this way: "Vice is injurious and destructive even to its own object, the desire of high-wrought Physical happiness and its ecstacies of pleasure are attended by revulsions of the deepest physical distress-it shatters, destroys, ruins life and fortune and character,-and therefore man ought not to be vicious. But he may take the same desire that urges on the vicious man, the same Sensuality; he may guide and govern it by reason and so his enjoyment shall be permanent, steady and equable. He may live for it and it only, and suffer no evil."

There are multitudes that do so; that look to the Home, only as a place of temperate sensual pleasure; that steadily and system

* Now let my reader look at the Sensualist philosophy of John Locke, and make his choice between it and that in this Treatise.

“Good and Evil what―Things then are Good and Evil only in reference to Pleasure and Pain. That we call Good which is apt to cause or increase Pleasure or diminish Pain in us; or else to procure or preserve us the possession of any other good, or absence of any evil. And on the other hand, we name that evil which is apt to produce or increase any pain or diminish any pleasure in us; or else to procure any evil or deprive us of any good. By Pleasure or Pain I must be understood to mean of body or mind, as they are commonly distinguished; though in truth they be only different constitutions of the mind, sometimes occasioned by disorder in the body, sometimes by thoughts in the mind."-Locke's Essay on Human Understanding, Book II. Chap. 20, Section 2.

To follow this out we shall show what that philosophy ended in. Listen to the estimate of its result and its tendency, made by Louis Blanc, a bold and daring Socialist, but unquestionably a man of genius.

"It was in England that Voltaire had drunk in that Epicurean Wisdom, which he carried among the French, * * * he read the works of the wise Locke, 'the only one who has taught the human mind to understand itself,' and he had yielded without effort to the doctrine received from Aristotle, that our ideas are derived from our senses. * * * Thus Voltaire, on returning to France, carried with him the education England had given him, his religion was Deism, his philosophy Sensation, his system of morality Tolerance. The overthrow of Christianity was his aim."-History of French Revolution, Philadelphia, 1848, 1 vol. p. 214.

Can this Philosophy end in anything else?