difference in the arrangement of the commandments between Protestants and Catholics; but as I am better acquainted with the former, I will take them as they stand in their Catechism. [ shall commence with the fifth commandment, it being the first that makes any mention of the duties that are reciprocally required.-5." Honour thy father, and thy mother, that thy days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God giveth thee." As a contradiction to this look at some of the "excellent maxims in the New Testament, it does not matter whether they be inspired or not."-" If any man come to me and hate not his father and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, yea and his own life also; he cannot be my disciple." (Luke c. 14, v. 26). This was no theoretical "maxim;" Jesus himself using a part of it practically; for we no where read, that he either honoured or respected his parents.-6. "Thou shalt not kill." What use could there be in giving such a precept, when there are so many others that are diametrically opposed to it. Look into the Old Testament, and you will find that more than one-half of it sanc tions murder; even express commands are given by "Jehovah" to murder innocent children." Thou shalt kill-thou shalt smite with the edge of the sword-thou shall surely put to death men, women, and children, oxen, sheep, and ASSES."-7th. Thou shalt not commit adultery." If we except old Daddy Adam, there is scarcely any person of note mentioned in the Bible, but either springs from, or commits adultery. Abraham was guilty of adultery with Hagar, his own servant-maid, and lends his wife to Abimelech. Lot was guilty of incest and adultery with his two daughters; he being seduced and dead drunk at the time. Jacob committed adultery with his two servant-maids. Consequently a part of the "Jewish patriarchs" were bastards, begotten in cuckoldy. David was the legitimate king of adulterers, and the man according to God's own heart. But Solomon outSolomon's them all in the number of his adulteries. If he ever was married to any he must have committed adultery nine hundred and ninety times at the lowest calculation. I have been often led to admire the superior wisdom of Solomon in managing such a seraglio of women, for few men now-a-days can be found to manage one woman, far less a THOUSAND. Jehovah himself committed adultery with the young wife of Joseph, of which adulterous intercourse Jesus Christ was born.-8. “Thou shalt not steal." Petty thefts seem to have been beneath the notice of the most part of the Bible heroes; it was only on a large scale that they practised it. However, a few instances might be selected to shew that some of them descended so low as to be guilty of petty thefts. The Iraelites stole jewels and other valuable things belonging to the Egyptians. Rebekah stole her father's gods. Micah stole some metal and made it into gods. Samson killed thirty Philistines for the purpose of stealing their shirts. David

killed two hundred Philistines for the purpose of stealing their foreskins. Jesus Christ and his Disciples went into a field and stole corn; also, they went into a village and stole an ass or asses.-9. "Thou shalt not bear false witness against thy neighbour."-As far as this commandment alludes to wilful lying it is abominably deviated from in the Bible." The Lord promises not to perform that which he had previously sworn to perform," (Numb. c. 14, v. 30)." The Lord sent a lying spirit into the mouths of all the prophets," (1 Kings, c. 22, v. 23).- O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I am greatly deceived," (Jer. c. 20, v. 7). "Wilt thou be altogether unto me as a liar, and as waters that fail," (Jer. c. 15, v. 8).—“ O Lord God, surely thou hast greatly deceived this people and Jerusalem," (Jer. c. 4, v. 10).—“ If a prophet is deceived, I the Lord have deceived that prophet, and I will stretch out my hand and destroy him from the midst of my people Israel," (Ezek. c. 14, v. 9). For this cause God shall send them strong delusions that they might believe a lie; that they might be damned," (2 Thess. c. 2, v. 11).-" For if the truth of God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also judged as a sinner?" (Rom. c. 3, v. 70.) I might produce sufficient authority from the Bible to bear against the tenth commandment; but as the selections that have been brought against the eighth are equally applicable to both, and as it is notoriously broken by Christians of the present day, I will forbear saying any thing about it. Now, Sir, what do you think of your Decalogue;" your "excellent maxims?" Are they not a fine piece of contradictory stuff? The Bible and Christian religion are standing jests on the credulity of mankind. Here we have commands to honour our parents, and commands to hate them; commands to kill, and commands not to kill; commands not to commit adultery, and examples for committing adultery; commands not to steal; commands to steal, and examples for stealing. Commands not to lie, and examples for lying.

13. I might pass over this paragraph in silent contempt, as it can have no reference to my conduct either public or private. Ichallenge you to produce a case, where I was the first to commence a discussion on religious opinions. Instead of "browbeating" and "invading the peace of my neighbour," have I not been persecuted, vilified, and calumniated? Sayings related of me that I never said; actions laid to my charge that I never did; and you, Sir, have not failed in acting your part of the drama. Instead of being "actuated by the most perverse of human passions" after the treatment that Mr. Carger (to whom you likewise allude, he having strayed from your fold) and myself have experienced, the only wonder is, that we should have any passions at all that the passion of revenge did not absorb all the others, and leave us nothing but the passion of retaliation. Have I not been complimented by some of your brother dupes on the fairness

of my mode of argumentation; although at the same time they felt the severity of my remarks.

14. I have left myself little to say regarding this paragraph, it being anticipated in the former; only you contradict by mere assertion what I said in a note to a "Well-wisher." I will give you something better than assertion to support what I then stated. Constantine published a violent edict against the heretics, (Gib. vol. iii. p. 307.) afterwards persecuted the Arians and Athanasians, (vol, iii. p. 348.) Constantine demolished the temples of the heathens, and prohibited their sacrifices, (Lardner, vol. iv. p. 437.) Hear the words of Nestorius, a monk of Antioch: "Give me, give me, O Cæsar, the earth purged of heretics, and I will give thee in exchange the kingdom of Heaven," (Gib. vol. vi. p. 19.) Cyril, patriarch of Alexandria, caused the Jewish temples to be destroyed, (vol. vi. p. 16.) Again, Cyril says, "These who divide Christ, may they be divided by the sword; may they be hewn in pieces; may they be burned alive," (p. 32.) I must have something better than your word to contradict these historical facts.

15 and 16. I think I have shewn in these observations, that the Christian religion has had no tendency, nor can it have any, to ameliorate the condition of mankind; but rather to make them what they really are-the passive slaves of vice and crime. You ask me a series of questions, taking care to give such answers as best suits yourself. It is but fair that I should give my own answers. I will therefore answer your questions by asking others. "Who made man?" Was he ever made?"How came he into the world?" Was he ever out of the world?" Are men, and beasts, and insects, of the same nature?" Are the component parts of "men, and beasts, and INSECTS," of a different nature? Can you exist as a living animal without voiding "excrements?" "What are virtue and vice?" Religion is vice; can you prove it to be otherwise? Virtue is that particular mode of action that confers the greatest amount of happiness no the greatest number of persons. "What are murders?" &c. I have clearly proved, that they are all sanctioned in the Bible, consequently, they must be "part and parcel" of Christianity. You have nothing to fear, even should you be guilty of them all. Repent, when it is no longer in your power to do any harm; you will then receive a passport from the Priest to the regions of bliss, where you will enjoy the company of a God like a stone, a DEAD SHEEP, "INSECTS," and beasts full of eyes. You ask me, what I have to give in exchange for a Supreme Being, &c.: I make no pretensions to systemmaking. If I can shew the fallacy and unreasonableness of yours, it is enough for me. But to give my opinion of what would be most beneficial to mankind; science instead of religion; philosophy instead of Priests; and morality instead of mass, or long prosing sermons.

17. There is nothing in this paragraph but what has been al

ready noticed; only you have shewn me in the " twinkling of an eye" what the sign of a spirit is. You have shewn me a series of natural effects, and then lustily shouted, here is the "sign of a spirit." BRAVO! In conclusion, suffice it for me to say, that till once he can shew me intelligence existing independent of matter, or that intelligence is not a necessary result of the animal organization, my arguments stand incontrovertible.

66

Had these letters been written in a more legible manner, I might have condensed these observations into less compass: Lut God, in his "infinite mercy and goodness," has blessed me with eyes almost infinitely" bad, to whom be glory and honour, dominion and power,' for ever, Amen. I conclude, by hoping that Mr. Tootal's head may not dwindle into a spirit, and thereby lose the possibility of being fully mad.

JOHN CAMERON.

MR. STEWART'S FAREWELL;

AND ACCOMPLISHMENT OF PHILOSOPHIC THEORIES.

My long habit of intense thinking impairs my muscular force, and seenis to threaten a derangement of mental power at my advanced age. I mean this, therefore, to be my last effort of intellect to complete my system of philosophy through the press, and propose to give rest to my mind in confining its operations to familiar and explanatory conversation during the rest of my life.

Mirabeau, in his System of Nature, says, mau is unhappy only because he is ignorant of the laws of nature. Man, he says, would be a metaphysician instead of a physician; that is, he reasoned without any object of sense or idea, and concluded his opinions on the configurations of inane fancy which held bim in perpetual discord with man and nature.

There can be no intelligence but in physics of substance or physics of power; that is, substance and its action. When any matter is in action from simple motion of fermentation to the most complete action of organic intellect, all the different degrees are just as much the objects of sense, or idea, as the substance itself that causes that action; and it is ridiculous to call substance physics, and power or action metaphysics, that is beyond nature or intelligence, when reason, if properly used, makes them equally intelligible ideas. When a ball rolls, or a man reasons, my senses are equal witnesses of both actions; that is, they are both facts of sensation or perception on which to reason things with their inferences, relations, and analogies with different degrees of probability, though the facts are all equally certain, because power

and substance are attested by the same evidence of the six senses; and this is the first law of nature on which to be found the harmony of human opinion relative to universal being, as parts and whole of one infinite and immortal mass of matter com. posing and decomposing to all eternity in the identity of interest, essence, and power of self and nature; that is, the integer nature, and its component modes, or parts, circulating into each other. whether in chaos or organism to all eternity, which proves the identity of all being; and till man is conscious of this fact, or knowledge, Spinosa declares he can have no use whatever of his understanding.

The moderns have far surpassed the ancients in science, but they have not digested it into sense; that is, they have not applied it to moral knowledge or the system of well-being of all feeling life procured by the agency of intellectual power in the application of chemistry to the knowledge of self and nature, which Pope says, is the whole of knowledge, and all our knowledge is ourselves to know, in comparison with which all learning and science is intellectual trifling.

The science of chemistry applied to oral as identified with physical science, teaches us through mathematical demonstration, that man, or self, is identified with all surrounding being in interest, essence, and power, to all eternity, through the incessant circulation of all matter, or bodies, from one to all, and all to one; which fact equalizes all pain and pleasure to the great whole of nature and its component parts or modes, in time and futurity.

The great agent of good or evil, man, is alternately a personal agent and a universal patient; that is, what matter does in one person it suffers or enjoys the consequence of any single act in one moment and one person, by circulating successively into all feeling life, either in this planet or throughout the boundless space of the universe itself; and the agent of a point, or mode, becomes the patient of the great circle of all sensitive life throughout the universe.

As in mathe

There is in moral knowledge a pons asiaorum. matical knowledge the mere animal man, or sensationist without conception, cannot pass this bridge, he stumbles at the entrance on this maxin, Man can feel no pain beyond his organic body, and therefore he can have no interest in other bodies, although he or his materiality must circulate, both in life and death, into all surrounding being.

I think I can remove this stumbling block by the following solution of the momentous problem of self-knowledge.

The substance or matter of man is identic, and not the mind, or action of that matter, which is changeable and annihilated like a shadow at every motion or change of the body that causes it. Idemand, what is personal self? Nothing more than organized mat