PHI LOS 0 P H Y . - Classic Works of Apologetics Online

or frOD1 an invoIOI'!i2..ry f)L"i:, ~~ hy a madman: ~!
person sinking in the wat~r and cragging us after
him; or where two persons are reduccl to a ~iruabon,
in whi~h one or both of them must peri~b; as
in a shipwreck, where two seize upon a plank, wh.;ro
will support only one: althoogh, to say the truth,
these extreme cases, which il.appen seldom, and bard.
ly, when tht!J do happen, admit of moral agency7
are scarcely worth mentioning, m9ch less discussing
at iength.
The instance, which approaches the nearest to the
preservation of life, and which.seems to justify the
same extremities, is thE' defence of cha~tity.
In all other ca.~, it appears to me the safest to
cOIL.cider the taking away of life as authorized by the
law of the land; and the ~n who taW it away,
~ in the situation of a minister or e&ccutioner of
the law.
In which view homicide, In Englond, is justifiable,
). To prevent the commission of a crime, which,
when committed, would be punishable with death.
Thus it is lawful to shoot a highwayman, or one attempting
to break into a house by night; hilt not
so if the attempt be made in the day-time; which
particular distinction, by a consent of legislation that
is remarkable, obtained also in the J'~JJjJh law, as
,,·{-lJ as in tile laws both of Greeci and Rcme.
~. In necessarY endeayo~s to carrY the Jaw into
~ J
execution, as in suppre5sing riots, apprehending malefactors,
preventing escapes, &c.
I do not k!!ow that tile law holds forth its authorit,-
to any cases beside those \,~hich
., ..
fall within one
or other of the above descriptiollS; or that, after
the (;xcept;on of immediate danger to life or chasti.
IV, f1le destructicn of a hUDlan being can be inno-
~ .
Ct:Jlt \,-ithout that authonty.
The rights of war arc not here taken into the
account.