THE GOODNESS OF THE DEITY. 269 



scheme ; is, that, in each species, the fecundity bears a 

 proportion to the smallness of the animal, to the weakness, 

 to the shortness of its natural term of life, and to the 

 dangers and enemies by which it is sui rounded. An ele- 

 phant produces but one calf: a butterfly lays six hundred 

 eggs. Birds of prey seldoin produce more than two eggs: 

 the sparrow tribe, and the duck tribe, frequently sit upon 

 a dozen In the rivers, we meet with a thousand minnows 

 for one pike ; in the sea, a mdlion of herrings ibr a single 

 shark. Compensation obtains throughout. Defenceless- 

 ness and devastation are repaired by fecundity. 



We have dwelt the longer upon these considerations, be- 

 cause the subject to which they apply, namely, tiiat of ani- 

 mals devouring one another, forms the chief, if not the only 

 instance, in the works of the Deity, of an ecpnomy, stamp- 

 ed by marks of design, in which the character of utility can 

 be called in question. The case oi venomous animals is of 

 much mferioi consequence to the case of prey, aiid, in some 

 degree, is also included unier it. To both cases it is prob- 

 able that many more reasons belong, than those of which 

 we are in possession. 



Our Jirst proposition, and that which we have hitherto 

 been defending, was, " that in a vast plurality of instances, 

 in which contrivance is perceived, the design of the contri- 

 vance is beneficial." 



Our second proposition is, " that the Deity has added 

 pleasure to animal sensations, beyond what was necessary 

 for any other purpose, or when the purpose, so far as it was 

 necessary, might have been effected by the operation of 

 pain." 



This proposition may be thus explained. The capaci- 

 ties, which, according to the established course of nature, 

 are necessary to the support or preservation of an animal, 

 however manifestly they may be the result of an organiza- 

 tion contrived for the purpose, can only be deemed an act 

 or a part of the sa-ne will, as that which decreed the exis- 

 tence of the animal itself; because, whether the creation 

 proceeded from a benevolent or a malevolent being, these 

 capacities must have been given, if the animal existed at 

 all. Animal properties therefore, which fall under this de- 

 scription, do not strictly prove the goodness of God. They 

 may prove the existence of the Deity ; they may prove a. 

 high degree of power and intelligence ; but they do not 

 prove his goodness : forasmuch as they must hare been 

 Z 



