tor, it is become, we must allow, productive of fatal evils through our abuse of it. On the one hand, they, whose condition is the most brilliant, are dazzled with their own brightness; they study the articles, which elevate them above their fellow-creatures, and they choose to be ignorant of every thing that puts themselves on a level with them; they persuade themselves, that they are beings incomparable, far more noble and excellent than those vile mortals, on whom they proudly tread, and on whom they scarcely deign to cast a haughty eye. Hence provoking arrogance, cruel reserve, and hence tyranny and despotism. On the other hand, they, who are placed in inferior stations, prostrate their imaginations before these beings, whom they treat rather as gods than men; them they constitute arbiters of right and wrong, true and false; they forget, while they respect the rank, which the supreme governor of the world hath given to their superiors, to maintain a sense of their own dignity. Hence come soft compliances, base submissions of reason and conscience, slavery the most willing and abject to the high demands of these phantoms of grandeur, these imaginary gods.

To rectify these different ideas, to humble the one class, and to exalt the other, it is necessary to shew men in their true point of view; to convince them that diversity of condition, which God hath been pleased to establish among them, is perfectly consistent with equality; that the splendid condition of the first includes nothing, that favours their ideas of selfpreference; and that there is nothing in the low condition of the last, which deprives them of their real

dignity, or debases their intelligences formed in the image of God. I design to discuss this subject today. The men, who compose this audience, and among whom providence hath very unequally divided the blessings of this life; princes, who command, and to whom God himself hath given authority to command subjects; subjects, who obey, and on whom God hath imposed obedience as a duty; the rich, who give alms, and the poor, who receive them; all, all my hearers, I am going to reduce to their natural equality, and to consider this equality as a source of piety. This is the meaning of the wise man in the words of the text, "The rich and the poor meet together: the Lord is the maker of them all."

Let us enter into the matter. We suppose two truths, and do not attempt to prove them. First, That although the wise man mentions here only two different states, yet he includes all. Under the general notion of rich and poor, we think, he comprehends every thing, that makes any sensible difference in the conditions of mankind. Accordingly, it is an incontestible truth, that what he says of the rich and poor may be said of the nobleman and plebeian, of the master and the servant. It may be said, the master and the servant, the nobleman and the plebeian "meet together; the Lord is the maker of them all:". and so of the rest.

It is not unlikely, however, that Solomon, when he spoke of the rich and poor, had a particular design in choosing this kind of diversity of condition to illustrate his meaning in preference to every other.

Although I can hardly conceive, that there ever was a period of time, in which the love of riches did fascinate the eyes of mankind, as it does in this age, yet it is very credible, that in Solomon's time, as in ours, riches made the grand difference among men. Strictly speaking, there are now only two conditions of mankind, that of the rich, and that of the poor. Riches decide all, yea those qualities, which seem to have no concern with them, I mean, mental qualifications. Find but the art of amassing money, and you will thereby find that of uniting in your own person all the advantages, of which mankind have entertained the highest ideas. How mean soever your birth may have been, you will possess the art of concealing it, and you may form an alliance with the most illustrious families; how small soever your knowledge may be, you may pass for a superior genius, capable of deciding questions the most intricate, points the most abstruse; and, what is still more deplorable, you may purchase with silver and gold a kind of honour and virtue, while you remain the most abandoned of mankind, at least, your money will attract that respect, which is due to nothing but honour and virtue.

The second truth, which we suppose, is, that this proposition, "the Lord is the maker of them all," is one of those concise, I had almost said, one of those defective propositions, which a judicious auditor ought to fill up in order to give it a proper meaning. This style is very common in our scriptures; it is peculiarly proper in sententious works, such as this out of which we have taken the text. The design of

Solomon is to teach us, that whatever diversities of conditions there may be in society, the men who compose it are essentially equal. The reason that he assigns, is, "the Lord is the maker of them all." If this idea be not added, the proposition proves nothing at all. It does not follow, because the same God is the creator of two beings, that there is any resemblance between them, much less that they are equal. Is not God the creator of pure unembodied intelligences, who have faculties superior to those of mankind? Is not God the author of their existence as well as of ours? Because "God is the Creator of both," does it follow that both are equal? God is no less the creator of the organs of an ant, than he is the creator of the sublime geniusses of a part of mankind. Because God hath created an ant and a sublime genius, does it follow, that these two beings are equal? The meaning of the words of Solomon depends then on what a prudent reader supplies. We may judge what ought to be supplied by the nature of the subject, and by a parallel passage in the book of Job. "Did not he that made me in the womb, make my servant? and did he not fashion us alike?"* chap. xxxi. 15. To the words of our text, therefore, "The Lord is the maker of them all," we must add, the Lord hath fashioned them all alike. Nothing but gross ignorance, or wilful treach

*This reading of the French bible differs a little from our translation: but a comparison of the two translations with the original, and with the scope of the place, will give the preference to the French reading. Nonne disposuit nos in utero unus atque idem? Vid. Poli Synops. in loc.

ery, can incline an expositor to abuse this liberty of making up the sense of a passage, and induce him to conclude, that he may add to a text whatever may seem to him the most proper to support a favourite opinion, or to cover an unworthy passion. When we are inquisitive for truth, it is easy to discover the passages of holy scripture, in which the authors have made use of these concise imperfect sentences.

Of this kind are all passages, which excite no distinct ideas, or which excite ideas foreign from the scope of the writer, unless the meaning be supplied. For example, we read these words in the eleventh chapter of St. Paul's second epistle to the Corinthians, ver. 4. "If he that cometh preacheth another Jesus, whom we have not preached, or if ye receive another spirit, which ye have not received, or another gospel, which ye have not accepted, ye might well bear with him." If we attach such ideas to these words, as they seem at first to excite, we shall take them in a sense quite opposite to the meaning of St. Paul. The apostle aimed to make the Corinthians respect his ministry, and to consider his apostleship as confirmed of God in a manner as clear and decisive as that of any minister, who had preached to them. Is the proposition, that we have read, any thing to this purpose, unless we supply what is not expressed? But if we supply what is understood, and add these words, but this is incredible, or any others equivalent, we shall perceive the force of his reasoning, which is this: If there hath been among you any one, whose preaching have revealed a Redeemer, better adapted to your wants than he, whom