to speak, of a legal and judicial condemnation otherwise, her answer, No man, Lord," was not true. In every other sense of condemnation, as blame, censure, reproof, private judgment, and the like, many had condemned her; all those indeed who brought her to Jesus. If then a judicial sentence was what Christ meant by condemning in the question, the common use of language requires us to suppose that he meant the same in his reply, "Neither do I condemn thee," i. e. I pretend to no judicial character or authority over thee; it is no office or business of mine to pronounce or execute the sentence of the law.

When Christ adds, "Go, and sin no more," he in effect tells her that she had sinned already but as to the degree or quality of the sin, or Christ's opinion concerning it, nothing is declared, or can be inferred either way.

Adultery, which was punished with death during the Usurpation, is now regarded by the law of England only as a civil injury; for which the imperfect satisfaction that money can afford, may be recovered by the husband.

In order to preserve chastity in families, ich we tween persons of different sexes, broughiination living together in a state of unreserved int from it is necessary by every method possible to opinion an abhorrence of incestuous conjunctiothe other. abhorrence can only be upholden by rly in the reprobation of all commerce of the saple, and all near relations. Upon this principle, down and as well as other cohabitations of broth Pharisees ters, of lineal kindred, and of all who ultery: and the same family, may be said to be forbiv say unto ultery, in

law of nature.

Restrictions which extend to remoter manded kindred than what this reason makes it not thou to prohibit from intermarriage, are founded authority of the positive law which ordains them,

and can only be justified by their tendency to diffuse wealth, to connect families, or to promote some political advantage.

The Levitical law, which is received in this country, and from which the rule of the Roman law differs very little, prohibits* marriage between relations, within three degrees of kindred; computing the generations, not from, but through the common ancestor, and accounting affinity the same as consanguinity. The issue, however, of such marriages are not bastardized, unless the parents be divorced during their lifetime.

The Egyptians are said to have allowed of the marriage of brothers and sisters. Amongst the Athenians,a very singular regulation prevailed: brothers and sisters of the half-blood, if related by the father's side, might marry; if by the mother's side, they were prohibited from marrying. The same custom also probably obtained in Chaldea so early as the age in which Abraham left it; for he and Sarah his wife stood in this relation to each other: "And yet, indeed, she is my sister; she is the daughter of my father, but not of my mother; and she became my wife." Gen. xx. 12.

CHAP. VI.
Polygamy.

THE equality in the number of males and females born into the world, intimates the intention of God, that one woman should be assigned to one man; or, if to one man be allowed an exclusive right to ive or more women, four or more men must be de

* The Roman law continued the prohibition to the descendants if brothers and sisters without limits. In the Levitical and Engish law, there is nothing to hinder a man from marrying his greatsjece.

†This equality is not exact. The number of male infants exeeds that of females in the proportion of nineteen to eighteen, or ereabouts: which excess provides for the greater consumption of les by war, seafaring and other dangerous or unhealthy occupa the

prived of the exclusive possession of any; which could never be the order intended.

It seems a significant indication of the Divine will, that he at first created only one woman to one man. Had God intended polygamy for the species, it is probable he would have begun with it; especially as, by giving to Adam more wives than one, the multiplication of the human race would have proceeded with a quicker progress.

Polygamy not only violates the constitution of nature, and the apparent design of the Deity, but produces to the parties themselves, and to the public, the following bad effects: contests and jea lousies amongst the wives of the same husband; distracted affections, or the loss of all affection, in the husband himself; a voluptuousness in the rich, which dissolves the vigour of their intellectual as well as active faculties, producing that indolence and imbecility both of mind and body, which have long characterized the nations of the East; the abasement of one half of the human species, who, in countries where polygamy obtains, are degraded into mere instruments of physical pleasure to the other half; neglect of children; and the manifold, and sometimes unnatural mischiefs, which arise from a scarcity of women. To compensate for these evils, polygamy does not offer a single advan tage. In the article of population, which it has been thought to promote, the community gain nothing:* for the question is not, whether one man

*Nothing, I mean, compared with a state in which marriage is nearly universal. Where marriages are less general, and many women unfruitful from the want of husbands, polygamy might at first add a little to population; and but a little for, as a vari ety of wives would be sought chiefly from temptations of volup tuousness, it would rather increase the demand for female beauty than for the sex at large. And this little would soon be made less by many deductions. For, first, as none but the opulent can main tain a plurality of wives, where polygamy obtains, the rich indalg in it, while the rest take up with a vague and barren incontinency And, secondly, women would grow less jealous of their virtue when they had nothing for which to reserve it, but a chamber in the haram when their chastity was no longer to be rewarded with the rights and happiness of a wife, as enjoyed under the marriage of on woman to one man. These considerations may be added to what i mentioned in the text, concerning the easy and early settlement children in the world.

will have more children by five or more wives than by one; but whether these five wives would not bear the same or a greater number of children to five separate husbands. And as to the care of the children when produced, and the sending of them into the world in situations in which they may be likely to form and bring up families of their own, upon which the increase and succession of the human species in a great degree depend; this is less provided for, and less practicable, where twenty or thirty children are to be supported by the attention and fortunes of one father, than if they were divided into five or six families, to each of which were assigned the industry and inheritance of two parents.

Whether simultaneous polygamy was permitted by the law of Moses, seems doubtful;* but whether permitted or not, it was certainly practised by the Jewish patriarchs,both before that law, and under it. The permission, if there were any, might be like that of divorce," for the hardness of their heart," in condescension to their established indulgences, rather than from the general rectitude or propriety of the thing itself. The state of manners in Judea had probably undergone a reformation in_this_respect before the time of Christ, for in the New Testament we meet with no trace or mention of any such practice being tolerated.

For which reason, and because it was likewise forbidden amongst the Greeks and Romans, we cannot expect to find any express law upon the subject in the Christian code. The words of Christt (Matt. xix. 9.) may be construed by an easy implication to prohibit polygamy: for, if" whoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another, committeth adultery," he who marrieth another without putting away the first, is no less guilty of adultery: because the adultery does not consist in the repudiation of the first wife, (for, however unjust or cruel that may be, it is not adultery,) but in entering into a second marriage during the legal existence and obligation of the first. The several pas.

*See Deut. xvii. 17. xxi. 15.

"I say unto you, Whosoever shall put away his wife, except it be for fornication, and shall marry another, committeth adultery,"

4

sages in St. Paul's writings, which speak of mar-
riage, always suppose it to signify the union of one
man with one woman. Upon this supposition he
argues, Rom. vii. 1-3: "Know ye not, brethren,
(for I speak to them that know the law,) how that
the law hath dominion over a man, as long as
he liveth? For the woman which hath a husband,
is bound by the law to her husband so long as he
liveth; but if the husband be dead, she is loosed
from the law of her husband: so then, if while her
husband liveth she be married to another man, she
shall be called an adulteress." When the same
apostle permits marriage to his Corinthian converts,
(which," for the present distress," he judges to be
inconvenient,) he restrains the permission to the
marriage of one husband with one wife :-"It is
good for a man not to touch a woman: neverthe-
less, to avoid fornication, let every man have his
own wife, and let every woman have her own hus-
band."

The manners of different countries have varied
in nothing more than in their domestic constitu-
tions. Less polished and more luxurious nations
have either not perceived the bad effects of polyga.
my, or, if they did perceive them, they who in such
countries possessed the power of reforming the
laws have been unwilling to resign their own grati.
fications. Polygamy is retained at this day among
the Turks, and throughout every part of Asia in
which Christianity is not professed. In Christian
countries, it is universally prohibited. In Sweden,
it is punished with death. In England, besides the
nullity of the second marriage, it subjects the offend-
er to transportation, or imprisonment and brand-
ing, for the first offence, and to capital punishment
for the second. And whatever may be said in be-
half of polygamy when it is authorized by the law
of the land, the marriage of a second wife during,
the lifetime of the first, in countries where such a
second marriage is void, must be ranked with the
most dangerous and cruel of those frauds, by which
a woman is cheated out of her fortune, her person,
and her happiness.

The ancient Medes compelled their citizens, in one canton, to take seven wives; in another, each