« PreviousContinue »
gar materialism of the soul is founded, by identifying the original, external and internal Agent. This is the link in the chain of being which completes the universal circle and connects us with Deity. It demonstrates that All is of One Original, and our individual Essence a particle of the Universal, in whom we 'live, move, and have our being,' with all its Ethical consequences. In fine, it evinces the Omnipotence of the Creator, who could thus from the same principles produce Matter, Sense and Soul !
No analogy of Nature, no perception of Sense, no power of Reason can teach us how Spirit can move Body, if they have not a community of nature or principles ; in truth, the mutual affections of Matter and Mind, Body and Spirit, are not even rationally conceivable
upon the common notion of their absolute difference and independence; we are bound therefore either to elevate Matter to Mind, and give the Universe an Internal or lutellectual subsistence alone, as the IDEALIST does; or to sink Mind into Matter, and allow only a Physical or External world, like the MATERIALIST; or finally to assign them a common concurring nature ; for it is not possible a reasonable being can run to the absurdest extreme of Scepticism, by doubting the fact of their reciprocal action and affection.
Since therefore Mind and Matter cannot act reciprocally unless they have a common nature, it follows that the dispute of the Metaphysicians concerning their mutual causality is mere logomachy ; but if either of these principles have superiority or precedence, it must be mind or the active principle.
So much for the principle of the Universe ; and if we look to its end or chief purpose, which is Moral,' we must again give the precedent to Mind; and if, finally, between these extremes, we regard the means or relations by which the Universe is connected as a whole, we must also assign them to MIND, the Active, formative and ruling principle, the beginning, middle, and the end.
AN EM BASS Y
THE BRITISH GOVERNMENT
COURT OF CHINA
IN THE YEAR 1816.
BY THE REV. DR. ROBERT MORRISON,
AUTHOR OF THE CHINESE DICTIONARY, GRAMMAR, &c. &c.
AND ATTACHED TO THE EMBASSY.
As individuals are improved by an amicable intercourse with each other; and as parts of the same empire are gradually ameliorated in proportion as they have an easy intercourse amongst themselves; so separate and independent nations are mutually benefitted by a liberal and an amicable intercourse. Those governments which with sincere minds endeavour to extend the friendly intercourse of nations, deserve the thanks of mankind. Whilst they pursue the good of their own country, they promote the welfare of the species.
As the productions of human labor, and of the surface of the earth, are exceedingly various, and generally superabundant in que thing, whilst there is a deficiency or a total want of another ; it comes to pass that the exchange of commodities, or commercial intercourse, tends to ameliorate the temporal condition of the whole human family.
Human ability being limited, the whole business of a community is best effected by different persons devoting themselves to different parts of the general concern. The agriculturist, the manufacturer, and the merchant, are alike usefully employed; and it is probably as necessary a part of the duty of government to exert its influence with the rulers of foreign nations in behalf of its merchants, as to encourage and protect the agriculturist and manufacturer at home.
Further, as an exchange of commodities, on a small scale, is best effected under an idea of the perfect equality and reciprocity of the dealers ; not under the relation of slave and master; or a dependant and his lord; so national and commercial intercourse will proceed best under an idea of the equality and reciprocity of the two countries. The idea that the one owes and yields homage to the other is likely to be prejudicial to the fair commercial intercourse between the two nations.
What are called ceremonies, sometimes affect materially the idea of equality. They are not always mere forms and nothing else, but speak a language as intelligible as words; and it would be just as conclusive to affirm, it is no matter what words are used, words are but wind; as to affirm, it is nomatter what ceremonies are submitted to, ceremonies are but mere forms, and nothing else. Some ceremonies are perfectly indifferent, as whether the form of salutation be taking off the hat and bowing the head, or keeping it on and bowing low with the hands folded before the breast, these, the one English, and the other Chinese, are equally good. There is however a difference of submission and devotedness expressed by different postures of the body; and some nations feel an almost instinctive reluctance to the stronger expressions of submission. As for instance, standing and bowing the head is less than kneeling on one knee; as that is less than kneeling on two knees, and that less again than kneeling on two knees and putting the hands and forehead to the ground; and doing this once, is, in the apprehension of the Chinese, less than doing it three times, or six times, or nine times. Waving the question whether it be proper for one human being to use such strong expressions of submission to another or not, when any, even the strongest of these forms are reciprocal, they do not interfere with the idea of equality, or of mutual independence; if they are not reciprocally performed, the last of these forms expresses, in the strongest manner, the submission and homage of one person or state to another : and in this light, the Tartar family now on the throne of China considers the ceremony called San-kwei-kew-kow;' thrice kneeling and nine times beating the head against the ground. Those nations of Europe who consider themselves tributary and yielding homage to China, should perform the Tartar ceremony ; those who do not consider themselves so, should not perform the ceremony.
The English Embassador, Lord Macartney, appears to have understood correctly the meaning of the ceremony, and proposed the only alternative, which could enable him to perform it, viz. a Chinese of equal rank performing it to the King of England's pieture. Or perhaps a promise from the Chinese Court that should an Embassador ever go from thence to England, he would perform it in the King's presence, might have enabled him to do it.
"It is otherwise called the Kä-tow, which strictly denotes only once kneeling