ASSAILANT. 1. The assailant maintains, that numerous errors have been committed in former times; and that, immemorial possession of property, can be of no service to the defendant. 2. The assailant cannot, and does not deny the authenticity of the titles of the defendant, but he reserves to himself the privilege of making them speak, contrary to the highest authorities and the rules of sound criticism, whatever he pleases, as we shall have frequent occasion to observe. 3. The assailant pretends that no regard whatever ought to be paid to the evidence of witnesses, how numerous and respectable soever they may be; that he is by no means disposed to be governed by other men, in determining the meaning of an instrument; and that his own meaning ought to be adopted, in preference to any other. 4. As to the public records, and decisions of divers courts, "he looks upon them with suspicion, as having been made by men, subject to error and prejudice." DEFENDANT. 1. The defendant proves to the fullest satisfaction of the court, that he has had a peaceable and undisturbed possession from time immemorial, of the said property in question 2. The defendant produces his clear and indisputable titles to the same property; titles acknowledged authentic by the very confession of the adverse party. 3. The defendant produces a great number of the most reputable witnesses, who, both by word of mouth and in writing, unanimously testify, that his titles were at all times understood in the sense and meaning which he gives to them. 4. The defendant substantiates the fixed and invariable meaning of his titles, by public records; by the public, and solemn decisions of several tribunals of judicature; in fine, by the united testimony of the country at large, there being found not one dis senting voice. Now the case being thus stated, it will not be difficult to anticipate the decision of the court; and, methinks, I see the judges scarce able to contain their indignation at the unblushing impudence of the assailant.-What, sir, (so they would deservedly address him,) are you in your senses? Can you dare pretend that immemorial possession, the deposition of witnesses, the solemn acts of public tribunals, are to be no longer noticed; and that all differences and causes arising amongst men, are no longer to be determined by prescription, by the authority of witnesses, or public acts of the established authorities, but by the private meaning, which the litigating party is pleased to affix to the law? If immemorial possession be no longer a title to the possessor, how few will remain unmolested, in the possession of their estates; how uncertain will the possession of most property become. If the evidence of witnesses is to be disregarded, how, sir, shall private and public affairs be settled? How shall justice be administered, innocence protected, or crime punished? If suits are to be decided, not by the laws, interpreted by judges appointed for that purpose, but by the private interpretation of the parties, what suit will ever come to an end, since each party will make the law speak, willingly or unwillingly, in such a manner as to favour his pretensions? You lay claim to the property of the defendant, but every thing speaks against you; and, on the contrary, every thing declares in favour of the defendant himself; his immemorial possession, his authentic titles, the number and respectability of his witnesses, public records, and the decisions of courts depart, therefore, from this court, sir, and beware of troubling us, henceforward, with such unreasonable preten sions. Such would be the decision of any well-regulated court of justice, in the case alluded to; such, therefore, must likewise be the sentence which good sense and sound logic will pronounce, in the trial which is brought by our Unitarian assailants, against the christian defendants: for the two cases are perfectly parallel; and, if there be any shade of difference between them, it is altogether in favour of the latter, as will be seen by the following sketch. LXI. Sketch of the respective, grounds on which both Christians and Unitarians rest their cause, and on their respective mode of pleading it. First. The christians demonstrate, beyond the possibility of a doubt, that those fundamental dogmas, which are denied by the Unitarians, such as the existence of Original Guilt; of the Trinity; of the Divinity of Christ; of the Mystery of the Redemption; of the Necessity of Supernatural Grace: were constantly, uniformly, and universally believed, all over the christian world, since the time of the apostles down to us, for the space of eighteen hundred years; that, of course, they have been in the quiet and undisturbed possession of said doctrines for eighteen centuries. They corroborate this their assertion, First, by the most authentic monuments of the remotest antiquity. Secondly, From the very constant and uninterrupted practice and worship of the universal church, from the very era of christianity to this day; the above doctrines not being merely speculative tenets, but practical mysteries, interwoven with the very nature of their divine institute, with the use of their sacraments, with their discipline, ceremonies, and divine worship. Thirdly, They reason thus:-If the above doctrines did not emanate from Jesus Christ himself, and if they had not been taught by the apostles, then they must have been introduced after the apostolic age; and if so, it will then be in the power of the Unitarians to point out, first, who it was that ushered these dogmas iuto the world; secondly, in what age they were first forged and palmed upon mankind; thirdly, in what country the innovation began; by what Pontiff, or in what council they were first promulgated; who they were that opposed the daring innovator, and who they were that adhered to him: for ecclesiastical history bears witness, that not even the smallest innovation ever took place in the church, but the said circumstances can be clearly pointed out. If, then, the above doctrines had, at any period posterior to that of the apostles, been broached, it would be an easy task for the Unitarians to fix with precision on their origin, the name of their author, the place of his birth, the number of his adherents, and of those that impugned the impostor. But christians, without the least fear of contradiction, defy the Unitarians to show the least vestige of such an innovation, with regard to the said mysteries; or to point out any of the circumstances just alluded to; therefore, they maintain themselves with reason in the enjoyment of the full possession of the said dogmas, against any invaders, who, after an eighteen hundred years' prescription, rise up, without any title or right whatever in hand, to dispute the sacred inheritance. Christians go further, and triumphantly assert, that, had the above dogmas not been revealed by the God of truth, and handed down by the very founders of christianity, it would never have been in the power of any man, or of any number of men, to palm them, at any given posterior period, upon the whole christian world, and to cause them to be believed so constantly, so uniformly, so universally. For, even, aside from the solemn promises of perpetual assistance, made by Christ to his church,* such is the nature of men, such their pride and love of independence, such, in fine, their natural abhorrence of all kind of restraint, either mental or corporeal, that it would have been morally impossible for any impostor, or any number of impostors, tamely, and without an obstinate "Thou art Peter, (the Rock,) and upon this rock will I build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against her."-Math. xvi. 18. "Behold! I am with you all days, even to the consummation of time."-St. Mat. xviii. "He that heareth you, heareth me; and he that despiseth you, despiseth me."-Luke x. 16. "The holy Ghost, the comforter, will teach you all truth, and lead you into all truth, and will abide with you for ever."—John xvi. 13. "The church of God is the pillar and foundation of truth.”—1st Tim. iii. 13; from all which scriptural evidences, it is clearer than noonday that the church of Christ can as little err, as Christ, the only begotten Son of God can be wanting to his sacred word. resistance, to captivate the minds of the christian world, into the firm belief of dogmas, of which, on the Unitarian suppo sition, they had never heard before, and which, by their unin telligibility, were so repugnant to the pride of human reason. An attempt of this nature would have thrown the christian world into combustion, and would have met with universal op. position; as was actually the case, when, as early as the third century, the Divinity of Christ was impugned by Arius, and Original Sin, together with the Necessity of Grace, in the fourth century, by Pelagius; when the whole christian world rose up with indignation against these profane novelties. Let Unitarians show that the supposed posterior introduction of the said doctrines, excited any thing like disturbances of that nature; but, there is not even a shadow of such troubles discoverable in the annals of the church; therefore, the said doctrines, being traced up through an uninterrupted possession to the very Apostolic ages, were not posteriorly introduced, but were received from the very mouth of Jesus Christ; and, of course, they are divine. Indeed, the public will readily grant, that, if lawful prescription has at all times, and is now consi dered in all the courts of the world, as the best title to the posa sessor, there was never produced, in any human tribunal, a prescription as immemorial, as universal, and as illustrious as that, which christians produce against Unitarians, in vindica tion of their divine doctrines. LXII. The Christians next exhibit their titles, (the scrip tures,) which are so authentic, so indisputable, and in fine, so venerable, that their very adversaries, the Unitarians, are for ced to admit them as incontrovertible. And the grand ques The tion here arises, how these titles are to be understood. Unitarians maintain that these titles ought to be taken in their sense; and that thus interpreted, they do not contain the doctrines for which christians contend. Christians, on the other hand, make it clearly appear, that they cannot, agréeably to reason and good sense, be distorted to any meaning different from that in which the whole christian world has hitherto understood them. They prove their assertion, |