On the Tie of Relationfoip.—Punétuation. 
ference of mind, if mutualwant be, as is 
already obferved, the foundation of -mu- 
tual accommodation. In thale clafles of 
fociety where great opulence, and. great 
luxury prevail, relations, not having many 
inducements to conciliate affection, will 
generally fee lefs of each other, than in- 
the middle rank of life: and this circum- 
ftance may reafonably be expected to ge- 
nerate indifference of attachment, if friend- 
fhip arife from frequent intercourfe. For, 
although an unvaried intercourfe may 
fometimes produce fatiety and difgutt 
among friends; yet an habitual abfence 
’ will be equally apt to occafion coldnefs 
-of efteem, fince it is only in the middle 
point of conduét, that we may juftly look 
- tor warm affections. ‘* Virtus eff medium 
villorum, et utringue reduum.? Indivi- 
duals in the middle department cf life, 
are generally aware, that if they part 
with thofe connexions, which nature-or 
chojce has given them, they may find it 
no eafy matter to procure others: the 
opulent can perceive, that they no fooner 
lofe one fet of friends, than they find an- 
other ready to fucceed them. Great dif- 
parity of fortune is another principal 
caufe of coldnefs between relations. There 
may be difparity of fortune, where there 
is no abfolute want: for rich, and poor, 
are only relative terms, as we learn from 
Bifhop Watfon. Under thefe circum- 
{tances, it not unfrequently happens, that 
while the richer party require too much, 
the poor concede too little. Hence jea- 
loufies, and fecret prejudices {pring up. 
Comparifons are made’ between relations, 
and ftrangers, unfavourable to the former. 
For whilit relations are but too apt to 
receive as matter of right, what is intend- 
ed, and indeed ought to be confidered, as 
matter of favour; ftrangers, by the affi- 
duity of their attentions, and the warmth 
of their acknowledgments, endeavour, at 
leaft outwardly, to exprefs a juft fenfe of 
obligation. In fhort, fir, it will not, I 
flatter myfelf, be going too far, to affert, 
that fome of the greateit errors in huma 
conduct arife from our not difcriminating 
nicely the fhades of duty which fubfiit 
between the two extremes, of aCtions of 
abfolute neceffity, and, actions of ab~~ 
folute choice. It muft be obvious to 
every thinking perfon, that*many duties 
occur in our intercourfe with fociety, in 
which, though we are phyfically free, 
yet we are morally bound: cafes, with 
refpeét to which, though the municipal 
laws of our country are filent, yet the 
laws of reafon, and the fenfe of mankind, 
fpeak plainly. Of this defcription, are 
ATI 
the duties which relations mutually owe 
to one anonher. I fubmit thefe hints, 
Mr, Editor, to your judgment, upon a 
fubjest both interefting, and. practical. 
Interefting, becaufe there is no man, but 
what has fome fhare in the obligations of 
confanguinity; practical, becaule it re- 
gards offices which require daily to be 
put in practice. Every man has fome 
duties to pay to his relations ; or fome 
fervices to receive from them. If we 
take the advantages of fociety, we muft 
conform to the difadvantages of it; if 
difadvantages they can be called. If we 
expect that relations fhould ferve us, we 
muft be ready, in return, to ferve them. 
From thefe fentiments of benevolence to- 
wards friends, and relations, aries that 
rational, and beautiful fyftem ef Chriftian 
philanthropy, fubordination, and focial af- 
te€tion, which, beginning with thofe who 
are more immediately connected with us 
by the ties of blood, extends itfelf gra- 
dually to thofe who are more diftantly 
connected with us, by the ties of country, 
or government ; and ultimately reaches to 
all who participate in the fame common 
nature. Private virtues are the beft fe- 
curity for public duties. A bad man in 
the relations of private life, can {carcely 
be expected to be ftrictly virtuous in his 
public capacity: there is no feparating 
the two charaéters. For, the apoftle 
beautifully, and conclufively argues,“ If 
man love not his brother whom he hath 
feen, how can he love God whom he hath 
not: feen?”’ If he forget the duties he- 
owes to his kindred, which are immedi- 
ate, and natural, how fhall he remember 
thofe he owes to his country, which are 
abftra&ted, and artificial? But, after all, 
let every man, with becoming gratitude 
to his friends, learn to place his chief 
hopes of fuccefs in life, on his own good 
conduct, arid his own induftry.- “ Faber 
quifque fortune proprie,” fays my Lord 
Bacon, from Plautus ; and, I believe, 
with great truth. Relations, or friends, 
may, afford the plan, but our own exer- 
tions muft fupply the foundation on which 
to build the fuperftructure of our fortune. 
I am, fir, &c. &c. 
Fune 2, 1798. ARISTIPPUS. 

To the Editor of the Monibly Magazine. 
SIR, 
S it is a curious ftudy to trace the 
different gradations by which lite~- 
rature has arrived at its prefent height; 
and asthe epoch of the introduétion of © 
points and ftops is not the leaft important, 
I beg 
