felf-defence; alfo the confideration of drunkenness and fuicide, as offences against that care of our faculties, and prefervation of our person, which we account duties, and call duties to ourJelves.

CHAP.

CHA P. I.

THE RIGHTS OF SELF-DEFENCE.

T has been afferted, that in a state of nature

IT

we might lawfully defend the most infignificant right, provided it were a perfect determinate right, by any extremities which the obftinacy of the aggreffor rendered neceffary. Of this I doubt; because I doubt whether the general rule be worth fuftaining at fuch an expence; and because, apart from the general confequence of yielding to the attempt, it cannot be contended to be for the augmentation of human happiness, that one man should lofe his life, or a limb, rather than another a pennyworth of his property. Nevertheless, perfect rights can only be distinguished by their value; and it is impoffible to ascertain the value, at which the liberty of using extreme violence begins. The perfon attacked must balance, as well as he can, between the general confequence of yielding, and the particular effect of resistance.

RIGHTS OF SELF-DEFENCE

However, this right, if it exift in a state of nature, is fufpended by the establishment of civil fociety; becaufe thereby other remedies are provided against attacks upon our property, and becaufe it is neceflary to the peace and fafety of the community, that the prevention, punishment, and redrefs of injuries be adjusted by public laws. Moreover, as the individual is aflifted in the recovery of his right, or of a compenfation for his right by the public strength, it is no less equitable than expedient, that he fhould fubmit to public arbitration, the kind as well as the measure of the fatisfaction which he is to obtain.

There is one cafe in which all extremities are juflifiable, namely, when our life is affaulted, and it becomes neceffary for our preservation to kill the affailant. This is evident in a state of nature; unless it can be fhewn, that we are bound to prefer the aggreffor's life to our own, that is to fay, to love our enemy better than ourselves, which can never be a debt of justice, nor any where appears to be a duty of charity. Nor is the cafe altered by our living in civil fociety; because, by the fuppofition, the laws of fociety cannot interpofe to prote& us, nor by the nature of the cafe compel reftitution. This liberty is refrained

reftrained to cafes, in which no other probable means of preserving our life remain, as flight, calling for affittance, difarming the adverfary, &c.. The rule holds, whether the danger proceed from a voluntary attack, as by an enemy, robber, or affaffin; or from an involuntary one, as by a madman, or perfon finking in the water, and dragging us after him; or where two perfons are reduced to a fituation, in which one or both of them muft perifh; as in a fhipwreck, where two feize upon a plank, which will fupport only one: although, to fay the truth, thefe extreme cafes, which happen feldom, and hardly, when they do happen, admit of moral agency, are scarcely worth mentioning, much lefs difcuffing at length.

The inftance which approaches the nearest to the prefervation of life, and which feems to juftify the fame extremities, is the defence of chastity.

In all other cafes, it appears to me the fafeft to confider the taking away of life as authorized by the law of the land; and the perfon who takes it away, as in the fituation of a minifter or executioner of the law.

In which view, homicide, in England, is juf

tifiable:

B 3

1. To

6

RIGHTS OF SELF-DEFence.

1. To prevent the commiffion of a crime, which, when committed, would be punishable with death. Thus it is lawful to shoot a highwayman, or one attempting to break into a house by night; but not fo if the attempt be made in the day-time which particular diftinction, by a confent of legislation that is remarkable, obtained alfo in the Jewish law, as well as in the laws both of Greece and Rome.

2. In neceffary endeavours to carry the law into execution, as in fuppreffing riots, apprehending malefactors, preventing escapes, &c.

I do not know, that the law holds forth its authority to any cafes befide thofe which fall within one or other of the above descriptions; or that, after the exception of immediate danger to life or chastity, the deftruction of a human being can be innocent without that authority. The rights of war are not here taken into the

account.

CHAP.

T