104 NATURAL THEOLOGY. 



do. But we have a different way of thinking. We 

 court distinction. That is not the worst : we see 

 nothing but what has distinction to recommend 

 it. This necessarily contracts our views of the 

 Creator's beneficence within a narrow compass ; 

 and most unjustly. It is in those things which are 

 so common as to be no distinction, that the ampli- 

 tude of the Divine benignity is perceived. 



But pain, no doubt, and privations exist, in nu- 

 merous instances, and to a great degree, which 

 collectively would be very great, if they were com- 

 pared with any other thing than with the mass of 

 animal fruition. For the application, therefore, of 

 our proposition to tha Xmixed state of things which 

 these exceptions induce, two rules are necessary, 

 and both, 1 think, just and fair rules. One is, that 

 we regard those effects alone which are accompa- 

 nied with proofs of intention : The other, that when 

 we cannot resolve all appearances into benevo- 

 lence of design, we make the few give place ta 

 the many ; the little to the great ; that we take our 

 judgement from a large and decided preponderancy„ 

 if there be one.^ 



^''This passage, with others which afterwards occur in this 

 work, as well as the part here quoted from the author's Moral 

 Philosopliy, has been, it should seem, somewhat misunderstood 

 by several excellent authors, who have treated him as if he were 

 denying; the existence of evil ; and have referred, though without 

 any sk(!ptical view, to the old dilemma of the Epicureans, stated by 

 Lactantius : — " Aut vulf, et non potest ; aut potest et non vult tol- 

 Icre mala." But Dr. Palcy's whole discourse upon this subject 

 must be taken as an attempt, and a successful one, to diminish 

 the apparent amount of evil, by showing that many of the tbings^ 



