THE CfOODNESS OF THE BEITY. ^63 



Qfuous animals, and of animals preying upon one anotheF„ 

 These properties of animals, wherever they are found, must, 

 I think, be referred to design ; because there is, in all 

 eases of the first, and most cases of the second, an express 

 and distinct organization provided for the producmg of them. 

 Under the first head, the fangs of vipers, the stings of wasps 

 and scorpions, are as clearly intended for their purpose, as 

 any animal structure is for any purpose the most incontest- 

 ably beneficial. And the same thing must, under the se- 

 cond head, be acknowledged of the talons and beaks of 

 birds, of the tusks, teeth, and claws of beasts of prey, of the 

 shark's mouth, of the spider's web, and of numberless wea- 

 pons of offence belonging to different tribes of voracious in- 

 sects. We cannot, therefore, avoid the difficulty by say- 

 ing, that the effect was not intended. The only question 

 open to us is, whether it be ultimately evil. From the con- 

 fessed and felt imperfection of our knowledge, we ought to 

 presume, that there may be consequences of this economy 

 which are hidden from us : from the benevolence v/hich 

 pervades the general designs of nature, we ought also to 

 presume, that these consequences, if they could enter into 

 our calculation, would turn the balance on the favourable 

 side. Both these I contend to be reasonable presumptions. 

 Not reasonable presumptions, if these two cases were the 

 only cases which nature presented to our observation ; bufc 

 reasonable presumptions under the reflection, that the cases 

 in question are combined with a multitude of intentions, 

 all proceeding from the same author, and all, except these, 

 directed to ends of undisputed utility. Of the vindications, 

 however, of this economy, which we are able to assign, 

 such as most extenuate the difficulty are the following : 



With respect to venomous bites and stings, it may be ob- 

 served, 



1. That, the animal itself being regarded, the faculty 

 complained of is good: being conducive, in all cases, to 

 the defence of the animal ; in some cases, to the subduing 

 of its prey ; and, in some probably, to the killing of it, when 

 caught, by a mortal wound inflicted in the passage to the 

 stomach, which may be no less merciful to the victim, than 

 salutary to the devourer. In the viper, for instance, the 

 poisonous fang may do that, which in other animals of prey, 

 is done by the crush of the teeth. Frogs and mice might 

 he swallowed alive without it. 



2. But it will be said, that this provision, when it comes 

 to the case of bites, deadly even to human bodies and to 



