A Curious Correspondence.

( "Casus Conseientias , " vol . i ., p . 405 ) . He gives the following illustration : — " An individual sets poison or a snare in a locality where his enemy , though very rarely , passes , with the express intention that he might perish if he should chance to come by . " According to him , the more accredited opinion is , that if death ensue in consequence , no moral guilt attaches to him who deliberately set the poison or the snare" becauseon the one handthe

exter-, , , nal act is not unjust , inasmuch as , in human dealings , the mere possibility of another man ' s injury has not to be taken into account , ancl , on the other hand , an internal act is not rendered unjust in virtue of intention , for intention has influence neither for the efficacy of a cause , nor for peril of injury . Consequently , the result must be said to have happened by mere accident , and of this an evil intention does not change the nature . " On the same ground Gury

justifies the owner of land who diverts a watercourse with the express intention of injuring his neighbour , provided the former can show that it caused him some annoyance , for such act , it is asserted , would be strictly within his rights ( " Ca . Cons ., " vol i ., p . 366-7 ) . In these cases the means , according to Gury ' s theory , are indifferent , while the end , by reason of the evil intention , is bad .

I shall now proceed to the subject under discussion . Gury begins by propounding the question , whether a person who has been rightly convicted of theft ancl sentenced to imprisonment is morally justified in effecting his escape by breaking out of prison . He informs us that , by common consent , a guilty person is . justified in escaping from prison before conviction ; and he adds , that many think he is equally justified in doing so after conviction , if the impi-isoment is extremely rigorous" because it would be an act of

, heroism to nndergo very severe punishment when it was possible to escape easily . " He then says : — " In all cases where it is not unlawful for a guilty individual to escape , he does no wrong in breaking open doors and perforating a wall , qui ubi licitus est finis , etiam licita sunt media per se indifferentia " ( " Ca . Consc , " p . 332 ) . Here , in Gury ' s opinion , the means are indifferent , while the end is good . He does nothoweverinform us under what circumstances

, , such an act would be " unlawful , " i . e ., morally wrong . It is p lain from the above that he uses the expression " means indifferent in themselves " in the sense of their not being in their nature necessarily wrong under all conceivable circumstances . This , however , is practically worth nothing . I contend that it is never morally perinissable for a guilty person to avoid the legal

penalty of his crime ; and that acts b y which the law is defied , public property damaged , a bad example set , ancl innocent jailors are brought into trouble , can never be considered-as "means indifferent in themselves . " Such , however , is the kind of moral teaching that Bishop Meurin defends . I do not deem it necessary to comment on the misstatements or personalities contained in the remaining portion of Bishop Meurin ' s letter . They have nothing whatever to do with the subjectand are merelthe red herring trailed

, y across the scent . I would mention that Father Daling gave his challenge to " Nemesis " as "Nemesis , " and that as "Nemesis" I have accepted it . Bishop Meurin is introducing a new condition altogether when he insists that I shall reveal my identity at this stage of the proceedings . Should the arbitrator , however , award the premium to " Nemesis , " I shall be happy to claim it in person and hand it over to some public charity . I have strictly confined my replies to

the particular points on which I have been challenged in your paper , but I have been throughout prepared to substantiate every one of my statements . Your readers have now heard the arguments on both sides , and are able to judge whether I have succeeded in proving the correctness of my application of the proverb : " Those who live in glass houses should not throw stones . " NEMESIS . - ( To be continued . )