tion, show, by their judgments and treatment of this affection, that they regard it as constitutional or implanted. It is evident that they expect us to treat our parents with great forbearance and kindness under all circumstances. If another person should insult and injure us, public sentiment would probably justify us in inflicting some sort of punishment. But it would not justify us, under precisely the same circumstances of provocation, in inflicting punishment upon, or even showing marked disrespect to a parent, because it would be a violation of nature. Not merely the disapprobation, but the contempt and abhorrence of mankind, inflicted with scarcely the possibility of a failure, is the fearful penalty which nature has attached to a want of parental love, even when the conduct of the parent himself has been reprehensible. This is evidently the work of nature. Men act in this case as their nature prompts them. But nature is never at variance with herself. If she in this way distinctly intimates that she requires us to love our parents at all times, in adversity and in prosperity, in honour and in degradation, in good and in evil report, it is obvious that she has not left the affection to mere reason and reflection, for it is impossible that love so unchangeable could be sustained in such a manner, but supports it upon an instinctive or constitutional basis.

We merely add, leaving it to the reader himself to make the application of the remark, that nearly all the considerations which were brought forward to show the connatural origin of the parental affection, might be properly adduced to show the same thing in the case of the filial affection.

361. Illustrations of the filial affection.

Interesting instances of the results of the filial affection are to be found wherever there are men. And while it is admitted that there are some unfavourable tendencies in human nature, it is pleasant to contemplate it in an aspect so amiable and honourable. It is the fact, indeed, that children, as a general thing, do not appear to be willing to labour and suffer so much for parents as the parents do for the children. There are more frequent instances of a

failure of filial than of parental love. Nevertheless, in all ages of the world, the filial affection has sustained itself in such a way as to bring honour to the Being that implanted it. Children have not only supported and consoled their parents in the ordinary duties and trials of life, but, in multitudes of instances, have followed them with their presence and their consolations into banishment and to prison.

At the accession of the late Emperor Alexander of Russia, many prisoners, who had been confined for political and other reasons in the preceding reign, were set at liberty." I saw," says Kotzebue, who was in Russia at this interesting period, "an old colonel of the Cossacks and his son brought from the fortress to Count de Pahlen's apartments. The story of this generous youth is exremely interesting. His father had been dragged, for I know not what offence, from Tscherkask to Petersburg, and there closely imprisoned. Soon afterward his son arrived, a handsome and brave young man, who had obtained, in the reign of Catharine II., the cross of St. George and that of Wolodimer. For a long time he exerted himself to procure his father's enlargement by solicitations and petitions; but, perceiving no hopes of success, he requested, as a particular favour, to be allowed to share his captivity and misfortunes. This was in part granted to him; he was committed a prisoner to the fortress, but was not permitted to see his father; nor was the unfortunate old man ever informed that his son was so near him. On a sudden the prison bolts were drawn; the doors were opened; his son rushed into his arms; and he not only learned that he was at liberty, but, at the same time, was informed of the noble sacrifice which filial piety had offered. He alone can decide which information gave him most delight."*

It is true, there have been instances of parents who have done more than this; who have not only been ready to suffer banishment or imprisoment, but have willingy and joyfully offered their lives for the welfare of their children. In the time of the French Revolution, General Loizerolles, availing himself of a stratagem in order to * Kotzebue's Exile, p. 254.

effect the object, died upon the scaffold in the place of his son. It might not be easy to bring instances, although some such have probably existed, of children dying for their parents. But history furnishes some affecting cases, where the child has poured back into the parental bosom the fountain of life which had been received." The mother of a woman," says the writer referred to, § 168, "in humble life, being condemned at Rome, the jailer, rather than execute the sentence, wished from humanity to let her perish of famine. Meantime no one but her daughter was admitted to the prison, and that after she was strictly searched. But the curiosity of the man being aroused by the unusual duration of her survivance, he watched their interview, and discovered the daughter affectionately nourishing the author of her days with her own milk. The people among whom this incident occurred were not insensible of its virtue, and a temple dedicated to Piety was afterward erected on the spot. So was an aged father, under similar circumstances, preserved by similar means: he, too, was thus nourished by his daughter."

§ 362. Of the nature of the fraternal affection.

There is one other affection connected with the family or domestic relation, which bears the marks, although, perhaps, somewhat less distinctly than in the cases already mentioned, of a natural or implanted origin. We refer, as will be readily understood, to the Fraternal Affection, or the love of brothers and sisters. The love which we bear to our brothers and sisters, although, in the basis or essentiality of its nature, it is the same with any other love, has something peculiar about it, a trait not easily expressed in words, which, in our internal experience or consciousness of it, distinguishes it from every other affection.

We are aware that some will endeavour to explain the origin of this affection by saying, that it is owing to the circumstance of brothers and sisters being brought up together beneath the same roof, and thus participating in an early and long companionship. Nor are we disposed to deny, that this circumstance probably has some weight in imparting to it an increased degree of inten

sity. But there is a single fact, which furnishes an answer to the doctrine, that denies a distinct nature to the Fraternal Affection, and regards it as a mere modification of love in general, occasioned by the circumstance of early and long-continued intercourse. It is this. When other persons, not members of the same family, are brought up beneath the same roof, although we love them very much, yet we never have that peculiar feeling (distinct from every other and known only by experience) which flows out to a brother or sister. There is something in having the same father and mother, in looking upward to the same source of origin, in being nourished at the same fountain in infancy, in feeling the same lifeblood course through our veins, which constitutes, under the creative hand of nature, a sacred tie unlike any other.

There are other views of the subject, besides that which has just been noticed, which contribute to show the connaturalness and permanency of this affection. A number of the remarks which have been made in support of the implanted or connatural origin of the Parental and Filial affections, will apply here. But we leave the subject to the decision of such reflections, as will be likely to suggest themselves to the mind of the reader himself

363. On the utility of the domestic affections.

In the institution of the affections which have now passed under a rapid and imperfect review, and which, taken together, may be spoken of under the general denomination of the Domestic affections, we have evidence of that benevolence and wisdom which are seen so frequently in the arrangements of our mental nature. These affections are not only sources of happiness to individuals and families, diffusing an undefinable but powerful charm over the intercourse of life; they also indirectly exert a great influence in the support of society generally.

It was, indeed, a strange notion of some of the ancients, of Plato in particular, that the domestic affections are at variance with the love of country; and that, in order to extinguish these affections, children should be taken from their parents at their birth, and transferred to the state to be educated at the public expense. But the

domestic affections are too deeply planted, particularly that of parents, to be generally destroyed by any process of this kind; and if it were otherwise, the result would be as injurious to the public as to individual happiness. It is unquestionable, that one of the great supports of society is the family relation. Who is most watchful and diligent in his business? Who is the most constant friend of public order, and is most prompt in rallying to the standard of the law? Who, as a general thing, is the best friend, the best neighbour, and the best citizen? Not he who is set loose from family relationships, and wanders abroad without a home; but he, however poor and unknown to fame, who has a father and mother, wife and children, brothers and sisters; who sees his own sorrows and happiness multiplied in the sorrows and happiness of those around him; and who is strong in the advocacy and support of the common and public good; not only because it involves his own personal interest, but the interest and happiness of all those who are linked arm in arm with himself by the beauty and sacredness of domestic ties.

364. Of the moral character of the domestic affections, and of the benevolent affections generally.

One of the most interesting inquiries in connexion with the domestic affections, and the benevolent affections generally, and one, too, on which there has been a great diversity of opinion, is, whether these affections possess a moral character, and what that character is. The more common opinion seems to have been, that all affections which are truly benevolent are necessarily, and from the mere fact of their being benevolent, morally good or virtuous. Nor is it perhaps surprising, that this opinion should be so often entertained. Certainly, as compared with the other active principles, coming under the general head of the Natural or Pathematic sensibilities, they hold the highest rank; and we frequently apply epithets to them which indicate our belief of their comparative pre-eminence. We speak of them, not only as innocent and useful, but as interesting, amiable, and lovely; and from time to time apply other epithets, which equally show the favourable place which they occupy in our re