MAN BORN UPRIGHT.

WHAT is man

what his true nature, rank and capacities? Is he naturally depraved, literally conceived in iniquity and born in sin? Or does he come from his Maker, less corrupt than this, but still dishonored by imperfections? Or is he an exalted and noble being by birth? Each of these opinions has decided and strenuous advocates. In some one of them, it is manifest, the truth must be found. In which shall we find it? This question is by no means an idle speculation. It is one of vital, practical concern. For, according as we view the nature we possess, will be our habitual conduct as moral beings, and our hopes of success. If we believe ourselves to occupy by birth an elevated station, that conviction, whenever and wherever we feel it, cannot but incite us to act in accordance with that station. And, on the other hand, he who regards human nature as corrupt and degraded, whenever and wherever he feels this degradation, must be affected by it in his moral practice. And those who even doubt the purity and ability of their native capacities, must, so far as that doubt produces any effect, be disheartened and betrayed by it into unworthy actions.

Other circumstances will, of course, serve, in each case, to qualify and counteract this influence. But some influ

ence each of the opinions must have. And all, be it more or less, must be good in the one case and evil in the other.

What then is human nature? How shall we ascertain its true rank among the works of God? There are but two sources of correct information on this point. They are a fair, candid, and thorough, investigation of that nature itself; and the teachings of the inspired volume. Let us examine each of these sources.

I. How shall we ascertain the place man occupies in the scale of Creation? Evidently by a survey of its inherent properties. These must be determined by the same process which gives us a knowledge of any other portion of the works of God.

The works of God on earth, so far as we can judge, may be divided into three distinct classes; matter, inert, passive matter, the inferior animals, and man. Now how do we decide upon the natural characteristics of the first two of these portions of Creation? How do we determine what is the nature of matter? We proceed to a study of its qualities, and ascertain, if we can, whether it was created for any particular Object, and what that object was, what are the true design, uses and sphere of matter. When we have come to a conclusion in regard to its essential qualities, we say these constitute its nature. If we afterward examine any portion of matter which is wanting in some one or more of these qualities, we do not straightway change our opinion of the nature of matter but say this portion of it is defective, that it wants something which belongs of right to a perfect specimen of matter.

So in relation to the inferior animals. We wish to understand their nature; for this purpose we investigate their various powers and faculties. We seek to ascertain for what Object, if any, they were given them. When by a careful study of the adaptation of these powers and faculties we have arrived at a conclusion in regard to their design and uses, we set the result down as their nature. But where do we go for information on this subject? Of course to those animals which are perfect, that is, the best specimens of their kind. The misshapen and deformed, those which exhibit qualities or dispositions evidently perverted from their original use, we at once reject. All that, either through accident, or by their own fault, or for any reason whatever, are of an inferior description, we never bring forward, but always set aside; for these we say, and rightly so, do not shew the true nature of the animal.

Proceed thus with man. What is his nature. To learn this, we must first determine, as we have in the other two cases, by an examination of his powers and faculties, whether they appear to have been formed for any particular Object, and what that object is. But how shall we conduct this investigation? What is the rational and consistent course of proceedure? Shall we look at the streams, discolored and polluted, perhaps, by the soil through which they have flowed? Or shall we repair at once to the fountain? If we pass by the best specimens of the race we depart immediately from what we thought the true mode of examining the nature of matter and of animals. By confining our researches to the bad specimens, to those who have perverted their natural faculties and failed to answer the end of their creation, we shall be led into certain error. Will you point to

the worst man you can find, or to men of ordinary qualities, or to the defects and failures of individuals, and say "that is human nature?” If this were done in relation to the inferior animals, we should all unite in saying it was an irrational and unjust course. It would be seen at once that there was no point, however low, to which the nature of the best species of animals might not be degraded by our estimate. Yet this very error, egregious as it is, we are daily committing in our judgments upon human nature. If we detect an instance of great selfishness, the cry is at once raised, "Ah, that is human nature." Does one envy the success of some neighbor; or is he puffed up with pride; or can we detect in him a latent prejudice, the sin is all laid forthwith on poor human nature. As if it were in the perversion of our powers, and the abuse of our faculties, in the indulgence of passions and propensities hostile to the developement of our best qualities, that we were to look for a knowledge of our true nature.

some weight to the betThere are good affec

In all justice we ought to give ter manifestations of character. tions and virtuous tendencies as well as evil ones in man, and why should we pass over these and look at the bad traits of character alone, and say, these are human nature? If there be selfishness, so also is there kindness, love and generosity, in man. If there be pride, so is there humility; if prejudice, so also candor, in the world; if envy, so is there magnanimity. Yet, who ever exclaims, when he witnesses a disinterested, noble act, "that is human nature"? Who, in business transactions, sets down cases of strict principle, of rare integrity and justice, to her account? This we may not do; but the moment we wit

ness a hard-driven bargain, an overreaching or a sordid spirit, the wrong deed is at once laid to her charge.

The injustice of the popular estimate of human nature becomes still plainer, when we consider that, in the actual conduct of mankind, these vile actions are far outweighed by those of an opposite character. There is, it is true, much prejudice in the world; yet there is far more of fair judgment. In the thousand instances, in which we daily pass an opinion on the actions of others, we speak and feel the simple truth. Occasionally a case arises, in which, with regard to a certain individual, and for peculiar reasons, we look with a prejudiced eye on all he says and does. It is so with envy, jealousy, revenge, and selfishness, in its manifold forms. The world in general are far less actuated by these perverse feelings than they are by pure and honorable ones.

If it be asked why men do not perceive this truth, I answer, that it is the very commonness of good qualities that makes them so often pass unappreciated, and even unobserved. While it is the rareness of the base sentiments and vile actions of mankind that makes them striking, when witnessed, and impresses them on the memory. The main current of men's deeds is correct. flows on so smoothly that we fail to remark it. A wrong action raises a ripple on its surface, and that at once draws attention to itself, and is recorded as the only noticeable phenomenon before us. The rule is forgotten; the exception recollected.

It

But admit, for the moment, that the above position is incorrect. Prove that the good deeds of mankind are more than counterbalanced by their evil ones, it is unjust to judge human nature entirely by observation, that is by taking man as he is and making his present character