The profits on all manufacturing concerns founded with the money of the Christian church fund, should, of course, be carefully applied to keeping up that fund, and extending its usefulness, if possible, into every corner of a now miserable, starving, dragoon trampled island.

Can any man living lay his hand on his heart and truly declare, that he thinks it would be more holy, more just, and more acceptable in the sight of God, that the whole revenue of the Irish church, however disproportionate, should continue to be, as a point of conscience, heaped upon, and expended in idle pomps and excessive luxuries by a few highly connected church men, than that it should be devoted to pressing purposes of Christian charity, and the supply of human wants, such as those just enumerated.

The remaining question (one which applies as much to the English church as to the Irish) seems to be, what proportion of the church property is, in the sight of God, the property of the poor? or, by what rule of right, in harmony with the laws of God, should the joint property be, at all times, distributed? The spirit of primitive christianity would certainly reply: let each flock have one modest, unpretending shepherd, whose treasure shall be in heaven, and who would deem it a sacrilegious robbery of the altar, to appropriate to his own individual use, any more of a fund sacred to the service of God, and, therefore, to the

necessities of the poor, than was really necessary to the supply of his simplest wants. Every flock should also be furnished with a commodious, but plain and not unnecessarily expensive church, and all that remains of church property after this, instead of being impiously considered the personal property, even for life, of church men, should be held sacred, a holy thing, once offered to God, and, therefore, unalienable from his children the poor.

What is, in fact, the legitimate object of the connexion of the Church with the State? What, but to furnish these rights of the widow and the orphan with a sufficiently powerful temporal guardian, to do justice between the poor, and therefore helpless, and their ecclesiastical pastors, whose human frailty might else subject them to the temptation of appropriating more than their just share of this joint property.

When, therefore, the Church is thus connected with the State, the Church property is, by that connexion, vested in the state, as in a trustee for certain sacred purposes, namely, the spiritual wants of all the subjects of the State, and the physical wants of all who are, or shall, at any time, become the destitute. That State, then, is guilty of a most culpable breach of trust, and inexcusable neglect of stewardship, which permits any portion of that sacred fund to be appropriated to any secular purpose, such as the secular luxuries, and

secular pomps of church men, or, in short, any expenditure by them, not necessary to their efficiency as preachers of God's truth.

A perfect equality of clerical provision would also have a most salutary effect on church men themselves, as it would put an end to that political intrigue and unchristian scramble on the one hand, and to those over anxious worldly cares on the other, which now unsanctify the ministers of the church: when, neither worldly baubles could be attained by any, nor worldly wants apprehended by any, all would be more likely to devote themselves, with singleness of heart, to the holy and peaceful duties of their sacred calling.

CHAPTER XIX.

WHERE SHOULD POWER BE VESTED, IN THE HANDS OF THE FEW? OR, IN THE HANDS OF THE MANY?

To answer this question correctly, the prior very simple questions must first be put and replied to.-What is the origin, and what the use of vested power?

The origin of vested power is to be traced in the impossibility of man, without association, defending himself, or the acquisitions of his labour, from the aggressions of selfishness; the use of vested power, is to secure to all men, and the acquisitions of their labour, protection from the agressions of selfishness.

But this necessity for association being visibly of God's ordination, evidently that the meeting of this necessity might effect certain moral purposes,* the conventional laws intended to meet this necessity, are thus both commanded and defined by God, and have a standard of fitness, referable to the visible laws of God, by which they may be

* See Preliminary view of the Philosophy of Happiness.

tried.* If conventional laws do not meet this necessity, neither effect the moral purpose intended, or still worse, if they aggravate this necessity, and produce an immoral effect, they are evidently wrong. Try the question, where should power be vested by this test?

The object then of association, is to constitute some representative or representatives of the interests of all, and vest in that representative or those representatives, a power to enforce the equal justice, which, through the abuse of free-will, individuals might be tempted to warp in their own favour.

But do the few constitute a fitting representative of the interests of all ? On the contary, is not the aggregate free-will of the few, liable to all the same temptations to commit injustice, to which individual free-will is subject; while the few possess, from union, more both of physical and of influential power to execute the wrong; enabling them to commit greater wrong, and rendering struggles with them to prevent the wrong, or restore the right productive of greater mischiefs. The freewill of the few, is also less subject to the moral check of opinion, than that of any individual, as by union they keep each other in countenance, and by convention, not only affix palliative terms to the

* For any provision for which there is a visible necessity in nature, is thus both commanded and defined by the God of

nature.