THE GOODNESS OF THE DEITY. 
267 
state of the organ in which it resides, a felicitous adapta¬ 
tion of the ofgan to the object, will be confessed by any 
one, who may happen to have experienced-that vitiation of 
taste which frequently occurs in fevers, when every taste is 
irregular, and every one bad. 
In mentioning the gratifications of the palate, it may be 
said, that we have made choice of a trifling example. I am 
not of that opinion. They afford a share of enjoyment to 
man: but to brutes, I believe that they are of very great 
importance. A horse at liberty passes a great part of his 
waking hours in eating. To the ox, the sheep, the deer, 
and other ruminating animals, the pleasure is doubled. 
Their whole time almost is divided between browsing upon 
their pasture and chewing their cud. Whatever the pleas¬ 
ure be, it is spread over a large portion of their existence 
If there be animals, such as the lupous fish, which swallow 
their prey whole, and at once, without anytime, as it should 
seem, for either drawing out, or relishing the taste in the 
mouth, is it an improbable conjecture, that the seat of taste 
with them is in the stomach? or, at least, that a sense of 
pleasure, whether it be taste or not, accompanies the disso¬ 
lution of the food in that receptacle, which dissolution in 
general is carried on very slowly ? If this opinion be right, 
they are more than repaid for their defect of palate. The 
feast lasts as long as the digestion. 
In seeking for argument, we need not stay to insist upon 
the comparative importance of our example; for the obser¬ 
vation holds equally of all, or of three at least, of the other 
senses. The necessary purposes of hearing might have 
been answered without harmony; of smell, without fra¬ 
grance; of vision, without beauty. Now, “ If the Deity 
had been indifferent about our happiness or misery, we 
must impute to our good fortune (as all design by this suppo¬ 
sition is excluded) both the capacity of our senses to receive 
pleasure, and the supply of external objects fitted to excite 
it.” I allege these as two felicities, for they are different 
things, yet both necessary: the sense being formed, the 
objects which were applied to it might not have suited it; 
the objects being fixed, the sense might not have agreed 
with them. A coincidence is here required, which no acci¬ 
dent can account for. There are three possible suppositions 
upon the subject, and no more. The first, that the sense, 
by its original constitution, was made to suit the object: the 
second, that the object, by its original constitution, was 
made to suit the sense: the third, that the sense is so con- 
