[To TEE EDITOR OF THE " SPECTATOR. "] Sin,—Your article in
the Spectator of March 17th deserves, the thanks of every humane person. Surely every creature of God has its rights by virtue of its creation. None but the Creator can limit those rights. The Creator has himself limited them to three purposes,—for food, for clothing, and for help in his labours. Two-thirds of man's diseases are due to his infraction of God's laws, and to look for an alleviation of some of its consequences at the expense of torture inflicted upon unoffending creatures is opposed to the most elementary principles of ordinary justice. Where does the Rev. J. S. Vaughan derive his remarkable dogma that all animal crea- tion exists for the use of man P Surely they existed for un- told ages before man came upon the scene, and modern science teaches us that the Rev. J. S. Vaughan may trace his ancestry to the same simian prototype as his unhappy relation, of whose diabolical torments he is the unnatural advocate. I can tell him that there is in the bush of Northern Queens- land the most beautifully plumaged bird, who, so far from living for man's delectation, vanishes at once upon his appear- ance on the scene ; just as there are myriads of fish in the great ocean, which contribute nothing to man's convenience. If we are asked, Why then were they created ? our answer should be, " Just for the same reason that the beautiful flora of the tropical regions of the earth exist," described in " Westward Ho," which the eye of man has never seen,—not for our sake) but "for Thy sake they are and were created, for Thou halt created all things." I much prefer this view of creation, held by the Elders in the Book of the Revelations (Rev. iv. 11), to that which is held by the Rev. J. S. Vaughan.—I am, Sir, &c.,
Previous page
