We fhall conclude this article with another quotation or two relative to the production of light inflammable air during the diffolution of iron in diluted vitriolic acid, whereby the reader may form a very clear idea of the force and confiftency of their refpective arguments in exhibiting and defending their different doctrines.

And in effect,' fays Mr. Kirwan, if we confider the decompofition of water in this cafe, in a chemical point of view, it cannot but appear exceedingly improbable; every decompofition arifes either from a fingle or double affinity; therefore, if during the diffolution of iron in the diluted vitriolic acid, water is decompofed, this must happen either by virtue of a fingle or of a double affinity; yet neither can be faid to take place: not a double affinity, fince the inflammable air escapes without uniting to the acid; not a fingle affinity, fince there is no proof that any fuch affinity exifts in this cafe; and, if it did exift, water fhould as easily be decompofed by iron without an acid, as when an acid is present, or rather more eafi'y, fince the affinity of water to the acid muft diminish its tendency, or that of any of its component parts, to unite to any other fubftance; and on that account we find a variety of solutions precipitated by the vitriolic acid, merely because it attracts the water neceffary to hold them in folution. I would be glad to know what part the acid acts here; in the new theory it feems to be quite idle, and contributes nothing to the folution. Why does not its oxigenous principle unite to the inflammable air of the water at the fame time that the oxigenous principle of the water unites to the metal fince, by the table of M. Lavoifier, this principle has a greater affinity to inflammable air than to fulphur. How comes it that volatile vitriolic acid difengages inflammable air from iron ? fince its own oxigenous principle is fufficiently developed and fufficiently copious to unite to iron, without having recourse to that of How does fixed air expel inflammable air from iron? Do all acids help the decompofition of water, and yet remain inert?'

water.

Thefe are certainly very philofophical observations and queries of Mr. Kirwan; but we do not think that they appear more favourable to his doctrine than to that of the antiphlogiftians. M. de Fourcroy, in order to obviate these difficulties, makes the following reply:

• Mr. Kirwan,' fays he, does not conceive why iron should decompofe the water rather than the fulphuric acid; or why the difengaged hydrogene of the water did not deprive the fulphur of its oxigene. These phenomena appeared to him to be contrary to the theory we have effablished; but he does not recollect that the affinity which obtains between two bodies fingly, is fubject to remarkable variation by the addition of a third Thus iron and hydrogene decompofe the fulphuric acid when they act fingly upon it at a high temperature; but when the iron and acid are in contact with water, the order of the affinities is immediately changed; the affinity of the

iron for the oxigene of the water becomes ftronger than that of the metal for the oxigene of the fulphuric acid, because the latter has a very confiderable affinity for the water to which it adheres, and for the oxide of iron to which it tends to unite. Thefe two laftmentioned affinities caufe the acid to remain entire, and likewife afford the reason why the hydrogene of the water does not decompofe the fulphuric acid at the temperature of the solutions.'

This explanation of M. de Fourcroy is but a very inadequate folution of the above phenomenon, and will not on examination, we conceive, bear the test of found philofophy.

We shall beg leave to differ from the French translator of Mr. Kirwan's work where he says, in his note (fee p. 25 in the English translation), It may be obferved that air in general is fpecifically lighter when faturated with water than when deprived of it. In our opinion the cafe is quite the reverse; for water can be abftracted from a given quantity of air, and this water can be reftored to it again without altering its dimenfions, provided the temperature of the air be not changed; therefore it is fufficiently evident that air will acquire additional gravity by the presence of water; and that it will become lighter in proportion as it is again deprived of it.

Before we take leave of this work, we must observe that the English translator is entitled to our praise for the pains he has taken in furnishing us with the fentiments of the French academicians in our own language; a task which he appears to have executed with particular fidelity and exactness. The remarks, which he offers in his preface, concerning the limits of error in chemical experiments, certainly merit attention.

ART. VIII. The Principles of Moral Philofophy investigated, and briefly applied to the Conftitution of Civil Society: together with Remarks on the Principle affumed by Mr. Paley as the Bafis of all moral Conclufions, and on other Pofitions of the fame Author. By Thomas Gisborne, M. A. 8vo. 3s. 6d. boards. White. London, 1789.

THOUGH we objected to Mr. Paley's performance from

its want of novelty, either in arrangement or argument, we did not enter clofely into the defign of his philofophy. The truth is, there must be fome firft principles in morals; and those of Mr. Paley (general expedience, which is much the fame as univerfal benevolence) ftand on as good, or perhaps better ground, than any other. Mr. Gisborne is, however, of a different opinion, and finds no great difficulty in expofing the un

certainty

certainty and danger of allowing difcretionary powers to direct our conduct. We fhall give his arguments on this subject in his own words:

• Before we enter into an examination of the truth or fallacy of the arguments by which this doctrine [general expediency] is fupported, it may be of ufe to confider its nature and tendency, and to beftow a minute attention on the effects which it would be likely to produce, if universally admitted, on the conduct and happiness of

- mankind.

A moralift, poffeffed, like Mr. Paley, of a found and penetrating understanding, actuated by a fincere reverence for the fcriptures, a firm attachment to virtue, and a decided abhorrence of vice'; if he alfo concur in Mr. Paley's principle, mult maintain that in certain poffible cafes he fhould deferve not merely pardon, but approbation, from his fellow-creatures, for actions which are ufually deemed the blacket crimes. He must maintain that circumstances may arise which fhall entitle him to the reward of everlasting glory, at the judgment-feat of Chrift, for his rapine, for his hypocrify, for his perjuries, for his murders, for having betrayed his country, or abjured his God! He mult maintain that his private opinion of future confequences is the ftandard which alone eftablishes the meaning of the plaineft precepts, and the obligation of the most positive injunctions, of the gospel!

From Mr. Paley's conceffions it must be allowed that no one of the cafes defcribed is too extravagant to be verified by facts, or to be authorised by general expediency. But if his previous declarations would have permitted him to affert that no crime, fuch as those which I have fpecified, can ever be generally expedient (an affertion which, on grounds very different from Mr. Paley's, may be firmly eftablished), his principles would ftill remain open to the fame objections: for they would equally justify a man in the commiffion of any one or all of thefe enormities, provided he were perfuaded of the general utility of his conduct, whether that perfuafion were the result of reafon, of prejudice, or of fanaticifm."

It is hardly neceffary to obferve that enormities like thefe have ufually been perpetrated, not by Christians or philofophers who have reafoned on the fcale of general expediency, but by fanatics, who were fancying themfelves fulfilling the will of God. Our author proceeds:

Such would be the fruits of this doctrine when applied by a wife and virtuous moralift. What then would be its effects when applied by a man poffeffed of wisdom, but deflitute of virtue? or of virtue, but deftitute of wisdom? or equally deficient in both? Would it not be made to affume every form under the hand of artifice, and to countenance every practice under the control of paffion and interest ? How would it be narrowed and contracted, when fubmitted to the ignorance of the bulk of mankind, fo little qualified to discover and appreciate the various caufes of ultimate utility, to trace remote contingencies, and contemplate the defigns of Providence with a com

prehenfive

prehenfive eye! When we are eftimating the confequences which would accrue to human happiness from the general reception of Mr. Paley's principle, we must take into the account not only thofe conclufions which are fairly deducible from it, but those also which we may reasonably fuppofe will be inferred, or reprefented as inferred, from it, by a confiderable part of mankind. We are further to pay particular attention to the use likely to be made of this doctrine by princes and men in power, as their influence over the happiness of others is fo extenfive and fo great.'

It cannot furely be required of any one to discover general principles which a man poffeffed of wisdom, but not of virtue, would not pervert; and men poffeffed of virtue without wisdom have feldom acted wrong from judging for themselves on general expediency, but from miftaken notions of revelation.

Let us,' continues our author, confider, then, whether the admiffion of this rule would not be extremely favourable to defpotifm. A monarch is told that there is no fuch thing as right in oppofition to general expediency; and he is also told that he is to judge of that expediency. He can fcarcely meet with a principle more likely to miflead himself; nor need he with for one more convenient, when he is defirous of impofing upon others. If he be a good man, confcious of the purity of his views, and ftrongly impreffed with a conviction of the bleflings which would arife from the fuccefs of his plans, -how eafily will it vindicate, to his own fatisfaction, any line of conduct which he may wish to purfue. If he be ambitious and defigning, it will never fail to fupply him with fpecious reasoning, with which he may dazzle or blind his fubjects, and prevent them from oppofing him with firmnefs and vigour.

Nor would this principle point more directly, or lead more rapidly, to civil than to religious flavery. When the matchlefs benefits of true faith, and the invaluable happiness of everlafting falvation, were preffed upon him, how often would an upright monarch be perfuaded that general expediency required him to abandon the heretic to the zeal of the mifguided, but well-meaning priest? And how much more frequently would the tyrant and the bigot defend, upon this plea, the preconcerted facrifice of an obnoxious fect to their rapacity and pride?

A moderate knowledge of hiftory will teach us that this reasoning is confirmed by numerous facts. The principle of expediency has been alleged to juftify fucceffive invafions of the civil and religious rights of mankind, too palpably unjust to be vindicated on any other plea. Was it not alleged when the Albigenfes were devoted to the fword, when the fires of the inquifition were kindled? Unhappily for the world, its influence is not extinguished in modern times. Was it not the foundation of the abominable doctrines of the Jefuits, of their intriguing counfels as politicians, their unchriftian compliances as miffionaries? Have we not recently heard it maintained to vindicate the actions of a neighbouring defpotic monarch; and those of a subject frequently more defpotic, the West Indian planter?'

In answer to this we fay, it is not the wish for general expediency or univerfal benevolence that makes ambitious monarchs deprive their fubjects of liberty, or of their lives, by engaging in unneceffary contests; that no philofopher is answerable for the fophifmms of politicians, or the intrigues of churchmen, who can twist the best doctrine to any purpose; that the foundation of the Jefuit fyftem was not general expediency, but the support of the papal power; that, aware of the importance of the former, they attempted to connect the latter with it, as all ingenious people will endeavour to fanction their maxims by the known principles of rectitude, or by popular prejudice. The fame may be faid of the defpotic monarch and the planter. These, however, choose rather to plead the advantage of their own particular ftates, and not to argue on general expediency till they are drove to defend themselves from this moft formidable artillery of their adverfaries.

We pass over our author's proofs from revelation, because it is prefuppofed by Mr. Paley that in all cafes where we are guided by a pofitive fcripture rule we are implicitly to obey*.

Nor fhall we take any more notice of Mr. Paley or Mr. Gifborne's illuftrations on this fubject, by fuppofing a Christian in the fituation of an ambassador, whofe inftructions are not full on every poffible occurrence. The mode of reafoning by illuftration is ever liable to mifconception, and has been the fource of infinite error.

Mr. Gisborne next states what he calls the original rights of individuals. Thefe he confiders,.

I. Perfonal freedoin, and fuch a portion of the unappropriated productions of the earth, as is neceffary for his comfortable fubfiftence.

II. To deprive another of these is an act of injuftice, and a fin against God.

III. Excepting when, according to the exprefs command of God; in the defence of his own or another's rights; or with the confent of the individual.

IV. Every man fins againft God who confents to fuch an abridgment of his rights as may difqualify himself for the great purposes of his creation, or who accepts fuch a transfer from

another.

In proving this laft propofition, which is in itself unobjectionable, our author involves himself in a few difficulties:

*Though Mr. Gisborne would urge that we have no general rule in fcripture to authorife our acting on the fyftem of general expediency, we cannot help thinking love is the fulfilment of the law, a fair implication that promoting the happiness of the whole is performing the will of God.