tion of superhuman wisdom, standing out in such bright contrast with the statutes of the heathen world, as to constitute a most satisfactory and conclusive demonstration of their divine original. The calmest profound study of them does entirely justify the declaration of Moses himself to his countrymen in reference to their observance : Keep therefore and do them: for this is your wisdom and your understanding in the sight of the nations, which shall hear all these statutes, and say, Surely this great nation is a wise and understanding people. For what nation is there so great, who hath God so nigh unto them, as the Lord our God is in all things that we call upon him for? And what nation is there so great, that hath statutes and judgments so righteous, as all this law, which I set before you this day ?"* While, therefore, we do not resort to this code as the foundation or necessary support of any part of our argument, we shall have occasion to advert to it as a source of most important light in our examination of the subject. Meanwhile, the inconsiderate manner, in which proof from the Mosaic books is sometimes pronounced upon, has seemed to demand, first of all, these preceding observations. The direct argument from Scripture commences with the ordinance against bloodshed communicated to Noah ; this being the first instance of divine legislation with the punishment of death annexed as its sanction. Taken with the context, it reads thus: "And surely your blood *Deut. iv. 6-8. THE NOACHIC STATUTE. 127 of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man. Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed for in the image of God made he man.”* literally, Shedding man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed. In the Septuagint translation the pronoun is distinguished, as in our English translation, Whoso sheddeth, &c. Ὁ ἐκχέων αἷμα ἀνθρώπου, ἀντὶ τοῦ αἵματος αὐτοῦ ἐκχυθήσεται. Our common English version is the natural translation of the Hebrew construction; any other translation is forced and unnatural. If the sentence were given forth from our English Bible, Whoso sheddeth man's blood, &c., to be translated literally into the Hebrew, the same construction would be used as is used in the original text. Our common English version is the one almost universally sanctioned; and where it is departed from, it is not to avoid the application of the passage with the penalty to the murderer, but to extend and confirm it. Attempts have been made to neutralize the power of this ordinance, by the use of the pronoun whatsoever instead of whosoever, in the translation. We believe * Gen. ix. 5, 6. CHAPTER X. Objects of the Punishment of Crime.--What constitutes the The Ends of Punishment further considered.-False View of Fearfulness and Efficacy of the Punishment by Death.--Causes of the Dread of Death.-Prospect of the Guilty in Eternity.- Objection considered, of cutting off the Criminal in his Sins. -The Answer of Grotius.-Answer from Fact and Experi- ence. Also from the Divine Providence and from Expedi- Occasion of the prejudice against Capital Punishment. Inju rious consequences of the severity of sanguinary codes.- Difference between the reformation of penal codes, and the annihilation of penalty. The abrogation of the punishment Tendency of the common reasonings against Capital Punish- ment, to weaken the sanctions of the Divine Government.- Retributive justice a reality.-Prophetic aspect of the penalty PAGE UNIV. OF CALF INTRODUCTION. On the Sabbath succeeding the execution of two men for piracy, in New Orleans, in the year 1820, an eloquent minister of the Gospel, Rev. Sylvester Larned, preached a sermon with reference to the solemn spectacle, on the execution of the penalty of the Divine Law. He opened his discourse with the following remarks:→→→ "The principle, upon which the recent execution was grounded, is one of the most impressive and imposing charac ter. In the judicial act of hurrying two fellow-beings into eternity, we have not been looking on the infliction of revenge, we have not been viewing a sacrifice to the mere excitement of public feeling, we have not been witnessing the fate of persons too abandoned for reformation. None of this. The one single principle presiding over the necessity and the sternness of so mournful a scene has been the unbending majesty of law; of law, which knows none of the impulses of mercy, which puts away from it every sympathy with the suffering it demands. While then the laws of man evince so much severity, , suppose we carry our contemplation higher, and look at the similar relation, in which all of us stand to the laws of the Godhead. Do not call this an unnatural transition to another subject. It is essentially the same subject. If there be any truth in the Bible, "sentence has passed upon all men to condemnation," and surely, when sentence has issued, we need not be told that somewhere a law must exist, and that it has been violated, and that it has put forth its penalties against the transgressor. Upon those who have had the means of knowing the Book of God's Revelation, it will enforce all its penalties, and inflict all its punishments. It will move forward to complete and rigid execution in spite of the ridicule, the neglect, and the complaints of mankind.” The view here taken, the connections opened out, and the light shed upon the subject, were most salutary and impressive. The effect produced, manifested the salutariness of the punishment of death for murder, upon a community where men are disposed, instead of endeavouring to bring contempt and odium upon the law and its penalty, to consider it in its true and proper character and relations. We have endeavoured so to present it in these Essays. We have taken the Divine statute, and examined the light shed upon it in the whole course of the Divine revelation, together with its connections with the Divine government. We have also gone into a full discussion of the question of its expediency. We have taken up objections, and gone over the whole field of the argument. One or two minor points we have not noted, but may speak of them here. It is argued by our opponents that the statute in Genesis is simple and merely permissive, but not an injunction. But it follows, according to this construction, that God gives to any and every man the permission to kill the murderer. Now God declares that private revenge is sinful; 86 avenge not yourselves, but rather give place unto wrath." And yet this constructive argument compels our opponents to the assumption that God here authorizes any and every individual to take into his own hands the avenging the crime of murder |