affection which has thus been briefly noticed, nature has instituted the filial affection, or that affection which children bear to their parents. The filial affection, although it agrees with the parental in the circumstance of its being implanted or connatural in the human mind, differs from it in some of its traits.It is understood, among other things, to possess less strength. And it is undoubtedly the fact, that it does not, as a general thing, flow forth towards its object with the same burning, unmitigated intensity. And this is just what we might expect, on the supposition that the human mind comes from an Author who possesses all wisdom. The great practical object for which the parental affection is implanted in the bosoms of parents is to secure to their offspring that close attention and care, which are so indispensable in the incipiient stages of life. The responsibility which rests upon them in the discharge of their duties to their children, is, in the variety of its applications and in the aggregate of its amount, obviously greater than that which rests upon children in the discharge of their duty to their parents. Nothing could answer, so far as we are able to judge, the requisitions which are constantly made on the parent to meet the child's condition of weakness, suffering, and want, and to avert its liabili ties, both mental and bodily, to error, but the wakeful energy of a principle stronger even than the love of life. But it is different on the part of the children. As a general thing, no such calls of constant anxiety and watchfulness in the behalf of another are made upon them, at least in the early part of their life. Hence their love to their parents, although unquestionably strong enough for the intentions of nature, burns with a gentler ray.

§ 169. The filial affection original or implanted.

We took occasion, in the preceding section, to remark incidentally, that the filial affection, as well as the parental, is original or implanted, in distinction from the doctrine of its being of an associated or sec

ondary formation. It is not our purpose, however, to enter minutely into this inquiry; and yet there are one or two trains of thought, having a bearing upon it, which we are unwilling wholly to omit.-Our first remark is, that if the filial affection were wholly voluntary and not implanted; in other words, if it were based wholly upon reason and reflection, there is no question that it would be extinguished much more frequently than it is in point of fact. But that mere reason and reflection are not the entire basis of the affection seems to be evident from the fact that we continue to love our parents under circumstances when reason, if we consulted that alone, would probably pronounce them unworthy of love. Our parents, as is sometimes the case, may treat us with great and unmerited neglect; they may plunge into the commission of crimes; they may become degraded and despised in the eyes of the community; but they still have a pure and elevated place, which nature has furnished for them in their children's hearts.-This train of thought (which, it is proper to remark in passing, is equally applicable to parental love, and tends to confirm the views brought forward under that head) goes with no small weight to show that the affection before us has an instinctive or natural basis.

Our second remark, which is also equally applicable to the parental affection, is, that men, with scarcely an exception, 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 in 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 filial 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.

§ 170. 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 for parents so much 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 po litical 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 extremely interesting. His father had been dragged, for I know not what offence, from Tscherkask to Petersburg, and there closely impris oned. 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 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 imprisonment, but have willingly 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 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 *Kotzebue's Exile, p. 254.

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."

§ 171. 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 af fection.

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 intensity. But there is a single fact, which furnishes an answer to the doctrine, that