nected with the earth, with the element in which it breathes, and with the fun, by deriving from it cherishing and enlivening heat: the earth furnifheth aliment to plants, these to animals, and these again to other animals, in a long train of dependence that the earth is part of a greater fyftem, comprehending many bodies mutually attracting each other, and gravitating all toward one common centre, is now thoroughly explo red. Such a regular and uniform feries of connections, propagated through fo great a number of beings, and through fuch wide spaces, is wonderful and our wonder must increase, when we obferve thefe connections propagated from the minutest atoms to bodies of the most enormous fize, and widely diffufed, fo as that we can neither perceive their beginning nor their end.

That these connections are not confined within our own planetary fyftem, is certain; they are diffused over spaces ftill more remote, where new bodies and fyftems rife to our view, without end. All space is filled with the works of God, which are conducted by one plan, to anfwer unerringly one great end.

But the most wonderful connection of all, though not the most confpicuous, is that of our internal frame with the works of nature: man is obviously fitted for contemplating these works, because in this contemplation he has great delight. The works of nature are remarkable in their uniformity not lefs than in their variety;

and

and the mind of man is fitted to receive pleasure equally from both. Uniformity and variety are interwoven in the works of nature with furprifing art: variety, however great, is never without fome degree of uniformity; nor the greatest uniformity without fome degree of variety there is great variety in the fame plant, by the different appearances of its ftem, branches, leaves, bloffoms, fruit, fize, and colour; and yet, when we trace this variety through different plants, efpecially of the fame kind, there is discovered a furprising uniformity: again, where nature feems to have intended the moft exact uniformity, as among individuals of the fame kind, there ftill appears a diversity, which ferves readily to diftinguish one individual from another. It is indeed admirable, that the human visage, in which uniformity is fo prevalent, fhould yet be fo marked, as to leave no room, among millions, for miftaking one perfon for another: these marks, though clearly perceived, are generally fo delicate, that words cannot be found to defcribe them. A correspondence fo perfect between the human mind and the works of nature, is extremely remarkable. The oppofition between variety and uniformity is fo great, that one would not readily imagine they could both be relished by the fame palate; at least not in the fame object, nor at the fame time: it is however true, that the pleasures they afford, being happily adjusted to each other, and readily mixing in intimate union,

are

1

are frequently produced by the fame individual object. Nay, further, in the objects that touch us the most, uniformity and variety are constantly combined; witness natural objects, where this combination is always found in perfection: it is for that reason, that natural objects readily form themselves into groups, and are agreeable in whatever manner combined: a wood with its trees, fhrubs, and herbs, is agreeable: the mufic of birds, the lowing of cattle, and the murmuring of a brook, are in conjunction delightful; though they strike the ear without modulation or harmony. In fhort, nothing can be more happily accommodated to the inward conftitution of man, than that mixture of uniformity with variety, which the eye discovers in natural objects: and, accordingly, the mind is never more highly gratified than in contemplating a natural landscape.

CHAP.

318

CHA P. X.

CONGRUITY AND PROPRIETY.

M

AN is fuperior to the brute, not more by his rational faculties, than by those of perception and feeling. With refpect to the grofs pleasures of fense, the brutes probably yield not to men; and they may also have fome obfcure perception of beauty but the more delicate perceptions of regularity, order, uniformity, and congruity, being connected with morality and religion, are referved to dignify the chief of the terreftrial creation. Upon that account, no difcipline is more fuitable to man, nor more congruous to the dignity of his nature, than that which refines his tafte, and leads him to diftinguish in every fubject, what is regular, what is orderly, what is fuitable, and what is fit and proper *.

Nec vero illa parva vis naturæ eft rationifque, quod unum hoc animal fentit quid fit ordo, quid fit quod deceat in factis dictifque, qui modus. Itaque eorum ipforum, quæ afpectu fentiuntur, nullum aliud animal, pulchritudinem, venuftatem, convenientiam partium fentit. Quam fimilitudinem natura ratioque ab oculis ad animum transferens, multo etiam magis pulchritudinem, conftantiam, ordinem, in confiliis factifque confervandum putat, cavetque ne quid indecorè effeminatève faciat; tum in omnibus et opinionibus et fa&tis ne quid libidinosè aut faciat aut cogitet. Quibus ex rebus conflatur et efficitur id, quod quærimus, honeftum. eiis, l. 1.

Cicero de offi

It is clear from the very conception of the terms congruity and propriety, that they are not applicable to any fingle object: they imply a plurality, and obviously signify a particular relation between different objects. Thus we fay currently, that a decent garb is fuitable or proper for a judge, modest behaviour for a young woman, and a lofty style for an epic poem: and, on the other hand, that it is unfuitable or incongruous to fee a little woman funk in an overgrown farthingale, a coat richly embroidered covering coarfe and dirty linen, a mean fubject in an elevated style, an elevated fubject in a mean ftyle, a first minister darning his wife's stocking, or a reverend prelate in lawn fleeves dancing a hornpipe.

The perception we have of this relation, which feems peculiar to man, cannot proceed from any other caufe, but from a fenfe of congruity or propriety; for fuppofing us deftitute of that fense, the terms would to us be unintelligible *.

It

* From many things that pass current in the world without being generally condemned, one at firft view would imagine, that the fenfe of congruity or propriety hath scarce any foundation in nature; and that it is rather an artificial refinement of those who affect to dif tinguish themselves by a certain delicacy of taste and behaviour. The fulfome panegyrics bestow'd upon the great and opulent, in epiftles dedicatory and other fuch compofitions, lead naturally to that thought. Did there prevail in the world, it will be faid, or did nature fuggeft, a taste of what is suitable, decent, or proper, would any good writer deal in fuch compofitions, or any man of sense receive them without difguft? Can it be fuppofed, that Lewis XIV.

of