a crime that no man could be guilty of it; and, on the contrary, a whole nation considering it a virtue! Has mankind as yet arrived at the conclusion as to what is, and what is not, moral? Here we find parents aged and helpless, on our own continent, buried alive by their own children; who, in cold blood, with the most perfect unconcern, and believing they do right, consign them to a bloody grave!

Let us next see what was the general opinion respecting incest. Have all nations and all philosophers agreed on this subject? Have they considered it a virtue or a crime? Were we to form a conclusion from the practice of civilised nations now, perhaps we would conclude that it never was, and never could be, deemed virtuous or moral. This is the opinion of infidels and free-thinkers, who assert that incest is so contrary to the well-being of society, that it never would be permitted, although there were no prohibition against it! This assertion is just as erroneous and false as most of their assumptions! Pray, what was the practice of the most refined nations of antiquity? Do they forget that incest was common amongst the Egyptians, the Persians, the Grecians, the Lacedemonians, and the Romans? In those nations marriages took place between the nearest relations, even between brother and sister, and oftentimes the same woman was the wife of two men! Schiller, the celebrated German poet and historian, speaking of the laws of Lycurgus, the Grecian legislator, says, "from the marriage state itself all jealousy was banished." Every thing, even female modesty, this legislator rendered subordinate to his chief design. He sacrificed female fidelity to obtain healthy children for the state! What think you now of the unanimity of opinion respecting this crime? Was there no necessity for a law respecting this immorality? Perhaps some may reply, oh, there might have been a difference of

opinion respecting such an act as incest, but on the crime of murder or theft, there never could exist two opinions.

Stop, my friends, do not be in too great a hurry. Are men in earnest when they say, there never could have been two opinions respecting murder being an immoral act? What! have we already forgot the American nation, I have a short time ago alluded to, where the young men put their old and decrepid parents into a pit and tomahawked them to death, and considered so doing a virtue? Is this not murder, because its inhumanity is augmented by its being parricide?

Are all people then agreed that murder is a crime? But it may be said, this is only amongst savages, amongst uncivilised people! Were this the case, which it is not, as I shall immediately show, it would at once knock down the bold assertion of infidels, that the laws of nature are quite sufficient to guide and regulate man! So that whatever way it may be viewed, it demolishes the first principle of Infidelity! But so far from all civilised nations agreeing that murder is a crime, the most emi nent and civilised legislators and philosophers of antiquity, differed on the subject; and even numbers of the learned (real Christians excepted) amongst the present most civilised nations of the world, differ very much as to what actually constitutes murder! Amongst the former we need only allude to Lycurgus and Solon, who actually made a law to sanction murder, that is, to make it a duty, and duty is of course a virtue; therefore, murder is a virtue!

The law of Lycurgus was, that as soon as a boy was born, the elders of each tribe visited him; if they found him well made, strong and vigorous, they ordered him to be brought up, and assigned him one of the good por

tions of land for his inheritance. If, on the contrary, they found him to be deformed, tender and weakly, so that they could not expect that he would ever have a strong and healthy constitution, they condemned him to perish, and accordingly threw him into a deep pit near Mount Taygetus! Will any one say this was not murder? It was not only murder, but murder legalised― murder made a virtue!

Where now was the agreement among the civilised nations of antiquity respecting the criminality of murder? Where were the boasted laws of nature then? Had these laws not been born? Or have they only come to light in modern times? Some of my infidel friends may reply, Oh, all this is what occurred in ancient times, in the infancy of society! What! in the infancy of society; was the world in its infancy two thousand years ago? The world which infidels pretend has existed for sixty thousand years, or, as others say, never had a beginning!

The term infancy, with the advocates of the eternity of the world, is truly ridiculous. Perhaps it may be said, but in these times, in civilised nations, there cannot be two opinions as to what is and what is not virtue! Stop, friends, do not go too fast; we need not travel to Italy, nor to Greece, nor two thousand years back, to find out crimes equally heinous, equally disgusting, equally brutal with those sanctioned by Lycurgus and Solon! We have only to look at a spot in the state of New York, which was purchased not (I believe) ten years ago, for the express purpose of sanctioning, of encouraging, of propagating, the doctrine, that marriage is a crime, and adultery a virtue! And on that tract of land to raise a colony, in order by, and through them, to diffuse these principles throughout the whole world! By whom was. this scheme

devised? By one of the leading members of Tammany Hall!

Are modern "Philanthropists," (as they call themselves) agreed upon the principle of morality, upon what is really right and really wrong? They are not contaminated with Bible doctrines; they have the unmolested possession of the pure laws of nature; why then are they not agreed in what morality consists? Only banish the Bible from the land, and it will soon be seen, what then will constitute morality.

But why should we confine our remarks to the Infidels of this country? Let us look back only a few yearslook at the conduct of the Infidels in France during the revolution of 1793. Behold the revolutionary legislature one day solemnly declaring "There is no God," the next day introducing a common actress, instituting and worshipping her as the "Goddess of Reason!" Behold the same infidel philosophers one day writing on the church-yard gates, “ DEATH IS AN ETERNAL SLEEP,” and proclaiming liberty of conscience to all, yet the next day, torturing aud butchering all, who would not conform to their principles and laws.

Where and to whom are we to look for any thing like unanimity of sentiment respecting what is really right and really wrong? To the infidel works of antiquity? We find it not.

To the infidel works of our own times? We find it not. To the works of great and learned men in ancient or modern times? We find it not. To the laws of nature? Where are they? Amongst civilised nations? Amongst uncivilised nations?-With the beasts of the field?-With the trees of the forest?-Tell me, Q! ye wise men, ye modern philosophers, ye self-called philanthropists, where are we to find those pure, enlightening and sovereign laws of nature? If you possess them, oh,

give them to me! Alas, in vain I ask for them, from Nature! Is there no record-no book-no document on the earth which contains the real principle of genuine moraliiy? There is, there is. It is the Bible, the despised Bible!

I have now for the present done with the proof of the truth of my second proposition. Have I not incontrovertibly, and I trust most satisfactorily, demonstrated from ancient and modern history, that the uniform experience of mankind in all ages of the world, proves, that man does not possess any intuitive principle, by which he is capable of correctly ascertaining what is really right and really wrong? And if I have so proved it, then the inevitable, inference is, that man stood in need of a direct. revelation from his Creator to teach him the path of virtue.

Now to which of the following infidel philosophers shall we refer, to teach us genuine morality?

1. Zeno, the stoic, and Diogenes, the cynic, sanctioned the foulest impurities: of which Socrates also was more than suspected!

2. Lycurgus and Solon, authorised, yea, legalised the murder of delicate children!

3. Draco, the celebrated Athenian, punished all crimes alike, with death!

4. Plato recommended a community of wives!

5. Aristotle maintained the right of making war on Barbarians!

6. Cato, the elder, was remarkable for the ill usage of his slaves, and the younger Cato gave up the person of

his wife!

7. Mohammed sanctioned unlimited sensualities!

8. Lord Herbert (one of the most celebrated modern infidels) says, "the indulgence of lust and anger, is no more to be blamed, than the thirst occasioned by dropsy !"