a term of relation applicable to those from whom we immediately derive our being. See Mo-RAL Philosophy, No 129, and 137.

To this article belongs an inquiry into, 1. The legal duties of parents to their legitimate children. 2. Their power over them.

1. The duties of parents to legitimate children consist in three particulars; their maintenance, their protection, and their education.

1. The duty of parents to provide for the maintenance Blackft. of their children, is a principle of natural law; an obli-Comment. gation, says Puffendorf, laid on them not only by na-ture herself, but by their own proper act, in bringing them into the world; for they would be in the highest manner injurious to their issue, if they only gave their children life, that they might afterwards see them per-ish. By begetting them, therefore, they have entered into a voluntary obligation, to endeavour, as far as in them lies, that the life which they have bestowed shall be supported and preserved. And thus the children will have a perfect right of receiving maintenance from their parents. And the prudent Montesquieu has a very just observation upon this head, that the establishment of marriage, in all civilized states, is built on this natural obligation of the father to provide for his children; for that affirms and makes known the person who is bound to fulfil this obligation; whereas, in promiscuous and illicit conjunctions, the father is unknown; and the mother finds a thousand obstacles in her way; shame, remorse, the constraint of her sex, and the rigour of laws, that stifle her inclinations to perform this duty; and besides, she generally wants ability.

The municipal laws of all well regulated states have taken care to enforce this duty: though Providence has done it more effectually than any laws, by implanting in the breast of every parent that natural sevgn, or in-superable degree of affection, which not even the deformity of person or mind, not even the wickedness, ingratitude, and rebellion of children, can totally suppress or extinguish.

The civil law obliges the parent to provide main-tenance for his child; and if he refuse, index de ea re cognoscet. Nay, it carries this matter so far, that it will not suffer a parent at his death totally to dis-inherit his child, without expressly giving his reason for so doing; and there are 14 such reasons reckoned up, which may justify such disinherition. If the parent al-leged no reason, or a bad, or a false one, the child might set the will aside, tanquam testamentum inofficio-sum, a testament contrary to the natural duty of the parent. And it is remarkable under what colour the children were to move for relief in such a case; by fug-gestting, that the parent had lost the use of his reason when he made the inofficious testament. And this, as Puffendorf observes, was not to bring into dispute the testator's power of disinheritting his own offspring; but to examine the motives upon which he did it; and if they were found defective in reason, then to set them aside. But perhaps this is going rather too far: every man has, or ought to have, by the laws of society, a power over his own property: and, as Grotius very well distinguishes, natural right obliges to give a ne-ceffary century maintenance to children; but what is more than that, they have no right to, than as it is given by the favour of their parents, or the positive constitutions of the municipal law.

Let us next see what provision our own laws have made for this natural duty. It is a principle of law, that there is an obligation on every man to provide for those descended from his loins; and the manner in which this obligation shall be performed, is thus pointed out. The father and mother, grandfather and grandmother, of poor impotent persons, shall maintain them at their own charges, if of sufficient ability, according as the quarter sessions shall direct; and, if a parent runs away, and leaves his children, the church wardens and overseers of the parish shall seize his rents, goods, and chattels, and dispose of them towards their relief. By the interpretations which the courts of law have made upon these statutes, if a mother or grandmother marries again, and was before such second marriage of sufficient ability to keep the child, the husband shall be charged to maintain it; for this being a debt of her's, when single, shall, like others, extend to charge the husband. But, at her death, the relation being dissolved, the husband is under no farther obligation.

No person is bound to provide a maintenance for his issue, unless where the children are impotent and unable to work, either through infancy, disease, or accident; and then is only obliged to find them with necessaries, the penalty on refusal being no more than 20s. a month. For the policy of our laws, which are ever watchful to promote industry, did not mean to compel a father to maintain his idle and lazy children in ease and indolence; but thought it unjust to oblige the parent against his will, to provide them with superfluities, and other indulgencies of fortune; imagining they might tru't to the impulse of nature, if the children were deserving of such favours. Yet, as nothing is so apt to stifle the calls of nature as religious bigotry, it is enacted, that if any Popish parent shall refuse to allow his Protestant child a fitting maintenance, with a view to compel him to change his religion, the lord chancellor shall by order of court constrain him to do what is just and reasonable. But this did not extend to persons of another religion, of no less bitterness and bigotry than the Popish: and therefore, in the very next year, we find an instance of a Jew of immense riches, whose only daughter having embraced Christianity, he turned her out of doors; and on her application for relief, it was held she was entitled to none. But this gave occasion to another statute, which ordains, that if Jewish parents refuse to allow their Protestant children a fitting maintenance, suitable to the fortune of the parent, the lord chancellor, on complaint, may make such order therein as he shall see proper.

Our law has made no provision to prevent the disinheritting of children by will; leaving every man's property in his own disposal, upon a principle of liberty in this as well as every other action; though perhaps it had not been amiss if the parent had been bound to leave them at the least a necessary subsistence. Indeed, among persons of any rank or fortune, a competence is generally provided for younger children, and the bulk of the estate settled upon the eldest by the marriage articles. Heirs also, and children, are favourites of our courts of justice, and cannot be disinherited by any dubious or ambiguous words; there being required the utmost certainty of the testator's intentions to take away the right of an heir.

2. From the duty of maintenance we may easily pass to that of protection; which is also a natural duty, but rather permitted than enjoined by any municipal laws; nature, in this respect, working so strongly as to need rather a check than a spur. A parent may, by our laws, maintain and uphold his children in their law-suits, without being guilty of the legal crime of maintaining quarrels. A parent may also justify an assault and battery in defence of the persons of his children; nay, where a man's son was beaten by another boy, and the father went near a mile to find him, and there revenged his son's quarrel by beating the other boy, of which beating he afterwards unfortunately died; it was not held to be murder, but manslaughter merely. Such indulgence does the law show to the frailty of human nature, and the workings of parental affection.

3. The last duty of parents to their children is that of giving them an education suitable to their station in life: a duty pointed out by reason and of far the greatest importance of any. For, as Puffendorf very well observes, it is not easy to imagine or allow, that a parent has conferred any considerable benefit upon his child by bringing him into the world, if he afterwards entirely neglects his culture and education, and suffers him to grow up like a mere beast, to lead a life useless to others, and shameful to himself. Yet the municipal laws of most countries seem to be defective in this point, by not constraining the parent to bestow a proper education upon his children. Perhaps they thought it punishment enough to leave the parent who neglects the instruction of his family, to labour under those griefs and inconveniences which his family, so uninstruc'd, will be sure to bring upon him. Our laws, though their defects in this particular cannot be denied, have in one instance made a wise provision for breeding up the rising generation: since the poor and laborious part of the community, when past the age of nurture, are taken out of the hands of their parents, by the statutes of apprenticing poor children; and are placed out by the public in such a manner as may render their abilities, in their several stations, of the greatest advantage to the commonwealth. The rich indeed are left at their own option, whether they will breed up their children to be ornaments or dragoons to their family. Yet in one case, that of religion, they are under peculiar restrictions; for it is provided that if any person sends any child under his government beyond the seas, either to prevent its good education in England, or in order to enter into, or reside in, any Popish college, or to be instructed, persuaded, or strengthened in the Popish religion; in such case, besides the disabilities incurred by the child so sent, the parent or person sending shall forfeit 100l. which shall go to the sole use and benefit of him that shall discover the offence. And if any parent, or other, shall send or convey any person beyond sea, to enter into, or be resident in, or trained up in, any priory, abbey, nunnery, Popish university, college or school, or house of Jesuits or priests, or in any private Popish family, in order to be instructed, persuaded or confirmed, in the Popish religion; or shall contribute any thing towards their maintenance when abroad by any pretext whatever, the person both lending and sent shall be disabled to sue in law or equity, or to be executor or administrator to any person, or to enjoy any legacy or deed of gift, or to bear any office in the realm, and shall forfeit all his goods and chattels, and likewise all his real estate for life. See Nonconformists.

II. The power of parents over their children is derived from the former consideration, their duty; this authority being given them, partly to enable the parent more effectually to perform his duty, and partly as a recompense for his care and trouble in the faithful discharge of it. And upon this score the municipal laws of some nations have given a much larger authority to the parents than others. The ancient Roman laws gave the father a power of life and death over his children; upon this principle, that he who gave had also the power of taking away. But the rigour of these laws was softened by subsequent constitutions: so that we find a father banished by the emperor Hadrian for killing his son, though he had committed a very heinous crime; upon this maxim, that patris potestas in pietate debet, non in atrocitate, consilire. But still they maintained to the last a very large and absolute authority: for a son could not acquire any property of his own during the life of his father; but all his acquisitions belonged to the father, or at least the profits of them for his life.

The power of a parent by the English law is much more moderate; but still sufficient to keep the child in order and obedience. He may lawfully correct his child, being under age, in a reasonable manner: for this is for the benefit of his education. The consent or concurrence of the parent to the marriage of his child under age, was also directed by our ancient law to be obtained: but now it is absolutely necessary; for without it the contract is void. And this also is another means which the law has put into the parent's hands, in order the better to discharge his duty; first, of protecting his children from the snares of artful and designing persons; and next of settling them properly in life, by preventing the ill consequences of too early and precipitate marriages. A father has no other power over his son's estate, than as his trustee or guardian: for though he may receive the profits during the child's minority, yet he must account for them when he comes of age. He may indeed have the benefit of his children's labour while they live with him and are maintained by him; but this is no more than he is entitled to from his apprentices or servants. The legal power of a father (for a mother, as such, is entitled to no power, but only to reverence and respect), the power of a father, we say, over the persons of his children ceases at the age of 21; for they are then enfranchised by arriving at years of discretion, or that point which the law has established (as some must necessarily be established) when the empire of the father, or other guardian, gives place to the empire of reason. Yet, till that age arrives, this empire of the father continues even after his death; for he may by his will appoint a guardian to his children. He may also delegate part of his parental authority, during his life, to the tutor or schoolmaster of his child; who is then in loco parentis, and has such a portion of the power of the parent committed to his charge, viz. that of restraint and correction, as may be necessary to answer the purposes for which he is employed.

In the Gentleman's Magazine for 1759, we have the following case of conscience. "A person has his own parents and his own children living, both parties equally indigent, both equally incapable of affording themselves, and both equally earnest in calling upon him for relief. Things are so circumstanced that he can possibly assist but one party, and not both. Query, Which party has the greatest claim to his affiance, and to which is he obliged, by all ties human and divine, to give the preference?" One solves this difficulty, by informing us of a pretty print done at Rome, representing a young woman suckling her aged father, on which the following lines are quoted.

My child and father vital nurture crave, Parental, filial, fondness both would save, But if a nurfling only one can live, I choose to save the life I cannot give.

Here we find the preference given to the parent; and another correspondent gives the same decision in these words. "The obligations arising from nature, and natural affection, seem to be in this case reciprocal and equipollent; the child is as strongly attracted to the parent, as the parent to the child. But will not filial gratitude operate and decide in favour of the parents? Does not the person, either immediately or immediately, owe his present power and abilities to relieve, to his parents? and are not they on that account best entitled to relief? Does not the fifth commandment declare more strongly in favour of the parents, than any other divine precept does in favour of the children? If a person had an opportunity given him of delivering either his parent or his child (but not both) from certain death, I dare say the voice of nature and of mankind would applaud him that saved his parent, and condemn him that should prefer his child. There is more of selfishness in preferring the child; and to save the parent seems to me to be much the more generous, noble, and exalted conduct. It is indeed, upon the whole, a melancholy alternative; but if both parties continue unfortunate, and neither will relinquish their claims in favour of the other, I say relieve the parent." There are two correspondents, however, who think differently, and their reasons are as follows:

"A person's children have the greatest claim to his affiance, and he is obliged by all ties to prefer them, in that respect, to his parents. It is true, when a man's parents are in want, they have a claim to his affiance; but that claim is not equal to that which his children have. His parents he has of necessity; his children, of choice. It is his duty, before he beget children, to consider how he is to provide for them; and by being wilfully the cause of their existence, he comes under such an obligation to provide for their comfortable subsistence, as must be stronger than any obligation of that kind he can be under to persons with whom his connexion is involuntary. But nature and reason point it out as the duty of all parents to provide for their children; but not vice versa. If a man's parents happen to be indigent, and he himself able, he is bound to maintain them out of respect and gratitude: but his obligation to provide for his children is a debt of strict justice; and therefore ought to be preferred. Nevertheless the description of the case to which the query is subjoined, is so general, that it is easy to figure a case according to that description in which the person ought to prefer his parents. This obligation to provide for his children may have been dissolved by monstrous ingratitude, such as their plotting against his life; or he may have given them proper education, and ample provisions, which they have riotously squandered away: in either of which cases it is thought he is undoubtedly discharged from his obligation. But if they have lost their portion purely by misfortunes, without their fault, it is thought his obligation to assist them is not wholly extinguished; and in that case their claim to his affluence, or that of his parents, is preferable." "I find (says the author of the 'last answer') that all your correspondents agree, that the life of the parent is to be preferred. It is very certain, that the relation between me and my child is exactly equal to that which is between me and my parent; and therefore relation cannot decide in favour of the one or the other: I must then be determined by a different consideration; and I know of none more weighty than the following. If I preserve the life of my child, I am instrumental in giving life to all his descendants, which may, perhaps, be very numerous; but if I preserve the life of my parent, I preserve a single life only, and that a short one. I therefore say, relieve the child. But it is thought that the voice of nature will applaud the person who preserves the parent: if so, nature must applaud a rule which the herself does not observe: it is natural for old men to die before young ones. Besides, the command, Be fruitful and multiply, and replenish the earth, may be opposed to the fifth commandment." Still, however, it is doubtless difficult to determine in such cases when they occur, as there are no fixed rules whereby to decide. With respect to the power of parents and the duty of children, much may be said. There are, however, scarcely any instances where both are oftener abused than with respect to marriage. This, as it is the most important event in the civil life either of a man or woman, so it is often rendered peculiarly unfortunate, by precipitate folly and want of duty in children; and as often through the unreasonable severity of parents. As a child is bound not to give unreasonable offence to a parent in the choice of a partner; so neither ought the parent to impose any improper or arbitrary restraint upon the child.

The power of a parent in China is very great; for a father, while living, has the power of an absolute despotic tyrant, and after his death is worshipped as a god. Let a son become ever so rich, and a father ever so poor, there is no submission, no point of obedience, that the latter cannot command, or that the former can refuse. The father is absolute master, not only of his son's estate, but also of his concubines and children, who, whenever they displease him, he may fell to strangers. If a father accuses his son before a mandarin, there needs no proof of his guilt; for they cannot believe that any father can be so unnatural as to bring a false accusation against his own son. But should a son be so insolent as to mock his father, or arrive at such a pitch of wickedness as to strike him, all the province where this shameful act of violence is committed is alarmed; it even becomes the concern of the whole empire; the emperor himself judges the criminal. All the mandarins near the place are turned out of their posts, especially those of the town where he lived, for having been so negligent in their instructions; and all the neighbours are reprimanded for neglecting, by former punishments, to put a stop to the wickedness of the criminal before it arrived at such flagitiousness. As to the unhappy wretch himself, they cut him into a thousand pieces, burn his bones, level his house to the ground, and even those houses that stand near it, and set up monuments and memorials of the horrid deed.

The emperor of China, who is one of the most powerful and despotic monarchs upon earth, pays the greatest attention to his mother. An instance of this Pere Amyot relates as having happened at Pekin, A.D. 1752, when the emperor's mother entered her 60th year, which, among the Chinese, is accounted a very remarkable period. Grosier likewise particularly describes the homage the emperor pays his mother every new-year's day in the palace, at which ceremony all the great officers of his court assist. See CHILDREN, FAMILIAL Piety, PARENTAL Affection, &c.

Anthony, a mathematician, was born at Paris in 1666. He showed an early propensity to mathematics. He accustomed himself to write remarks upon the margins of the books which he read; and he had filled a variety of books with a kind of commentary at the early age of thirteen. At fourteen he was put under a master, who taught rhetoric at Chartres. It was here that he happened to see a dodecahedron, upon every face of which was delineated a fun dial, except the lowest wherein it flood. Struck as it were instantaneously with the curiosity of these dials, he attempted drawing one himself; but having a book which only showed the practical part without the theory, it was not till after his matter came to explain the doctrine of the sphere to him that he began to understand how the projection of the circles of the sphere formed fun dials. He then undertook to write a Treatise upon Gnomonics. The piece was indeed rude and unpolished; but it was entirely his own, and not borrowed. About the same time he wrote a book of Geometry, in the same taste, at Beauvois. His friends then sent for him to Paris to study the law; and, in obedience to them, he studied a course in that faculty; which was no sooner finished, than, urged by his passion for mathematics, he flung himself up in the college of Dormans, that no avocation might take him from his beloved study; and, with an allowance of less than 200 livres a-year, he lived content in this retreat, from which he never stirred but to the Royal College, in order to hear the lectures of M. de la Hire or M. de Sauveur. When he found himself capable of teaching others, he took pupils: and fortification being a branch of mathematics which the war had brought into particular notice, he turned his attention to it; but after some time began to entertain scruples about teaching what he had never seen, and knew only by the force of imagination. He imparted this scruple to M. Sauveur, who recommended him to the marquis d'Aligre, who luckily at that time wanted to have a mathematician with him. Parent made two campaigns with the marquis, by which he instructed himself sufficiently in viewing fortified places; of which he drew a number of plans, though he had never learned the art of drawing. From this period he spent his time in a continual application to the study of natural philosophy, and mathematics in all its branches, both speculative and practical; to which he joined anatomy, botany, and chemistry. His genius managed every thing, and yet he was incessant and indefatigable in his application. M. de Bilettes, who was admitted into the Academy of Sciences at Paris in 1699, with the title of their mechanician, nominated for his disciple Parent, who excelled chiefly in this branch. It was soon discovered in this society, that he engaged in all the various subjects which were brought before them; and indeed that he had a hand in every thing. But this extent of knowledge, joined to a natural impetuosity of temper, raised in him a spirit of contradiction, which he indulged on all occasions; sometimes to a degree of precipitancy highly culpable, and often with but little regard to decency. Indeed the same behaviour was shewn to him, and the papers which he brought to the academy were often treated with much severity. He was charged with obscurity in his productions; and he was indeed so notorious for this fault, that he perceived it himself, and could not avoid correcting it. The king had, by a regulation in 1716, suppressed the class of scholars of the academy, which seemed to put too great an inequality betwixt the members. Parent was made a joint or assistant member for geometry: but he enjoyed this promotion but a short time; for he was taken off by the smallpox the same year, at the age of 50. He was author of a great many pieces, chiefly on mechanics and geometry.