think, known only to
those who enjoy, either immediately or by transmission, the light of
revelation.

Those ancient nations who have given us the wisest models of government,
and the brightest examples of patriotism, whose institutions have been
transcribed by all succeeding legislatures, and whose history is studied
by every candidate for political or military reputation, have yet left
behind them no mention of alms-houses or hospitals, or places where age
might repose, or sickness be relieved.

The Roman emperours, indeed, gave large donatives to the citizens and
soldiers, but these distributions were always reckoned rather popular
than virtuous: nothing more was intended than an ostentation of
liberality, nor was any recompense expected, but suffrages and
acclamations.

Their beneficence was merely occasional; he that ceased to need the
favour of the people, ceased likewise to court it; and, therefore, no
man thought it either necessary or wise to make any standing provision
for the needy, to look forwards to the wants of posterity, or to secure
successions of charity, for successions of distress.

Compassion is by some reasoners, on whom the name of philosophers has
been too easily conferred, resolved into an affection merely selfish, an
involuntary perception of pain at the involuntary sight of a being like
ourselves languishing in misery. But this sensation, if ever it be felt
at all from the brute instinct of uninstructed nature, will only produce
effects desultory and transient; it will never settle into a principle
of action, or extend relief to calamities unseen, in generations not yet
in being.

The devotion of life or fortune to the succour of the poor, is a height
of virtue, to which humanity has never risen by its own power. The
charity of the Mahometans is a precept which their teacher evidently
transplanted from the doctrines of Christianity; and the care with which
some of the Oriental sects attend, as is said, to the necessities of the
diseased and indigent, may be added to the other arguments, which prove
Zoroaster to have borrowed his institutions from the law of Moses.

The present age, though not likely to shine hereafter among the most
splendid periods of history, has yet given examples of charity, which
may be very properly recommended to imitation. The equal distribution of
wealth, which long commerce has produced, does not enable any single
hand to raise edifices of piety like fortifie