fellow-creatures. One of this make would be as defective, as much
wanting, considered with respect to society, as one of the former
make would be defective, or wanting, considered as an individual, or
in his private capacity. Is it possible any can in earnest think
that a public spirit, i.e., a settled reasonable principle of
benevolence to mankind, is so prevalent and strong in the species as
that we may venture to throw off the under affections, which are its
assistants, carry it forward and mark out particular courses for it;
family, friends, neighbourhood, the distressed, our country? The
common joys and the common sorrows, which belong to these relations
and circumstances, are as plainly useful to society as the pain and
pleasure belonging to hunger, thirst, and weariness are of service
to the individual. In defect of that higher principle of reason,
compassion is often the only way by which the indigent can have
access to us: and therefore, to eradicate this, though it is not
indeed formally to deny them that assistance which is their due; yet
it is to cut them off from that which is too frequently their only
way of obtaining it. And as for those who have shut up this door
against the complaints of the miserable, and conquered this
affection in themselves; even these persons will be under great
restraints from the same affection in others. Thus a man who has
himself no sense of injustice, cruelty, oppression, will be kept
from running the utmost lengths of wickedness by fear of that
detestation, and even resentment of inhumanity, in many particular
instances of it, which compassion for the object towards whom such
inhumanity is exercised, excites in the bulk of mankind. And this
is frequently the chief danger and the chief restraint which tyrants
and the great oppressors of the world feel.

In general, experience will show that, as want of natural appetite