have been transcribed by Solon from the laws of Moses. Sir Matthew Hale, in his History of the Common Law of England, affirms, "that among the Grecians, the laws of descents resemble those of the Jews."

It will be universally conceded that the Roman, or Civil Law, as collected and digested by the order of Justinian, has exerted a powerful influence even on the institutions of modern times. Nor is it to be supposed that this intelligent people, who had long suffered under the evils of unwritten laws, when they turned their attention to the formation of a more certain and permanent code, would not consult the existing laws of the wisest nations. Both ancient and modern writers of Roman history, therefore affirm, that the individuals commissioned by the senate and tribunes to form the Twelve Tables, were directed to examine the laws of Athens and the Grecian cities. So that the Ro man law must have been not a little indebted to the Mosaic.

Sir Matthew Hale remarks, "that among the many preferences which the laws of England have above others, the two principal ones are, the hereditary transmission of property, and the trial by jury." And who does not see that these originated with the Jews? By the law of Moses, the succession, in the descending line, was all to the sons, except that the oldest son had a double portion. If the son died in his father's lifetime, the grandson succeeded to the portion of his father. Daughters

had no inheritance so long as there were sons, or descendants of sons. Where the father left only daughters and no sons, the daughters succeeded equally. And was there nothing in the administration of penal justice among the Hebrews, that suggested at least the trial by jury? I mean the publicity of their trials in the gates of the city, where their judges, though elders and Levites, were taken from the general mass of the citizens. Sir Matthew Hale, in the work to which reference has already been made, has another remark in relation to the influence which the Bible generally has exerted upon the laws of England. In speaking of the difficulties of ascertaining the origin of the common law, among the rest he enumerates the "growth of Christianity in the kingdom, introducing some new laws, or abrogating some old ones, that seemed less consistent with Christian doctrines." A portion of the common law as it now stands was first collected by Alfred the Great; and it is asserted by Sismondi, in his History of the Fall of the Roman Empire, that when this prince "caused a republication of the Saxon laws, he inserted several laws taken from the Judaical ritual into his statutes, as if to give new strength and cogency to the principles of morality." And hence it is no uncommon thing in the early English reporters to find frequent references to the Mosaic law. Sismondi also states that one of the first acts of the clergy under Pepin and Charlemagne of France, was to introduce into the legislation of the

Franks, several of the Mosaic laws found in the books of Deuteronomy and Leviticus.

I need not say, that the entire code of civil and judicial statutes throughout New England, as well as throughout those states first settled by the descendants of New England, shows nothing more distinctly than that its framers were familiar with the Bible, and substantially adopted "the judicial laws of God, as they were delivered by Moses, as binding and a rule to all their courts?" And why should not this sacred book, so full of the counsels of wisdom, and itself a law to man, exert a paramount influence on all human laws, wherever it is known and revered? "The Scripture," says the judicious Hooker, "is fraught even with the laws of nature, insomuch that Gratian, defining natural right, termeth it that which the books of the law and the gospel do contain. Neither is it vain that the Scripture aboundeth with so great store of laws of this kind; for they are such as we of ourselves could not easily have found out; and then the benefit is not small to have them readily set down to our hands; or if they be so clear and manifest, that no man endued with reason can lightly be ignorant of them, yet the Spirit, as it were, borrowing them from the school of nature, and applying them, is not without most singular use and profit for men's instruction."

It was from God himself that one nation, and one only immediately received their laws. And they are worthy to be regarded as the model for

all succeeding ages. There is no comparison between the laws of this people and the laws of other ancient nations, except as the latter were borrowed from the institutions of Moses. The learned Michaelis, who was professor of law in the univer sity of Gottengen, remarks, "that a man who con siders laws philosophically, who would survey them with the eye of a Montesquieu, would never overlook the laws of Moses." Goguet, in his elaborate and learned treatise on the Origin of Laws, observes, that "the more we meditate on the laws of Moses, the more we shall perceive their wisdom and inspiration. They alone have the inestimable advantage never to have undergone any of the revolutions common to all human laws, which have always demanded frequent amendments; sometimes changes; sometimes additions; sometimes the retrenching of superfluities. There has been nothing changed, nothing added, nothing retrenched from the laws of Moses for above three thousand years." Milman, in his history of the Jews, remarks, that “the Hebrew lawgiver has exercised a more extensive and permanent influence over the destinies of mankind, than any other individual in the annals of the world." It was the opinion of that distinguished statesman and jurist, the late Fisher Ames, clare et venerabile nomen, that "no man could be a sound lawyer who was not well read in the laws of Moses."

This venerable code claims our reverence, if it were for nothing but its high antiquity. But it

has higher claims. Taken as a whole, it contains more sublime truths, and maxims more essentially connected with the well-being of our race, than all the profane writers of antiquity could furnish. They were perfect at their formation; uniting all that is authoritative in obligation, with all that is benevolent in their tendency, and not less conducive to the glory of the lawgiver, than to the happiness of his subjects. That bold personification of law in the abstract made by Hooker, may with strong propriety be applied to the system of legislation revealed in the Bible. "Of law there can be no less acknowledged, than that her seat is the bosom of God, her voice the harmony of the world. All things in heaven and earth do her homage; the very least as feeling her care, and the greatest as not exempt from her power. Both angels and men, and creatures of what condition soever, though each in a different sort and name, yet all with one uniform consent, admire her as the mother of their peace and joy."

A portion of this law was designed to be authoritatively binding on the Jews alone; another portion of it is equally binding on us; and "though heaven and earth pass away, shall never pass away." "Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself." The nature and extent of this law, and our everlasting responsibilities to it as the creatures of God, as intelligent and responsible agents, it becomes us, my young friends gravely to investigate, both as it re