Mr. Campbell, who has been long a settled and reputable inhabitant in many eminent parts of the city of London, cannot, I am sure, be looked upon as one of those these Acts of Parliament were made against, unless we first strip the Acts themselves of their own natural, express, and plain meaning, and clothe them with that which is more obscure, unnatural, forced, and constrained a practise; which, if allowed, would make them wound the innocent and clear the guilty, and render them not our defence but our greatest evil; they would, by that means, become a perfect enigma, and be so far from being admired for their plainness, that they would be even exploded like the oracles of the heathen for their double meaning.
If Mr. Campbell has the second-sight, as is unquestionable, from the allowed maxim, that what has been may be again, and by that means can take a view of contingences and future events; so long as he confines these notices of approaching occurrences to a good purpose, and makes use of them only innocently and charitably to warn persons from doing such things, that according to his conceptions would lead them into misfortune, or else in putting them upon such arts that may be of use and benefit to themselves and posterity, always having a strict regard to morality and religion, to which he truly adheres; certainly, I think, he ought so much the more to be admired for the same, by how much the more this his excellent knowledge is surpassing that of other men, and not be therefore unjustly upbraided with the injurious character of a cheat, or an ill man: however, this I will presume to affirm, and I doubt not but to have my opinion confirmed by the learned sages of the law, that this his innocent practice, and I venture to add, honest one too, doth by no means entitle him to the penalties of the before-mentioned laws made against fortune-tellers, and such sort of profligate wretches; which it is as great an absurdity to decry, as it would be to call him, who is a settled and reputable inhabitant, a stroller or wandering beggar.
Again; it is true that Mr. Campbell has relieved many that have been supposed to have been bewitched, as is related and well attested in the book of his life; but will any one from thence argue that he himself is a real conjurer, or wizard, because he breaks the chains by which those unhappy wretches were bound? No, surely; for if that were the case, we might then as well indict the physician who drives away a malignant distemper, and roots out its latent cause by his mysterious skill in plants and drugs; or conclude that the judge, who condemns a criminal, is for the same reason guilty of the self-same crime for which the offender is so by him condemned. Persons who delight in such unnatural conclusions, must certainly be in love with the greatest absurdities, and must entirely abandon their natural reason before they can be brought to conclude that the Prince of Darkness would assist men in destroying his own power.
The best answer I can afford those men is silence; for if they will not argue upon the principles of reason, or be guided by her dictates, I think them no more fit to be contended with in a rational and decent manner than bedlamites, and such who are bereft of all understanding. A rod is the best argument for the back of a fool, and contempt the best usage that ought to be shown to every headstrong and ignorant opponent.
In a word, I know of no branch of Mr. Campbell's practice that bears the least resemblance to those crimes mentioned in the foregoing Acts. That he can and doth tell people's names at first sight, though perfect strangers to him, is confessed by all who have made the curious inquiry at his hands; but what part of the Acts, I would fain know, is that against? Knowledge, and a clear sight into things not common, is not only an allowable, but a commendable qualification; and whether this knowledge in him be inherent, accidental, or the result of a long study, the case is still the same; since we are assured he doth it by no unlawful intelligence, or makes use of the same to any ill purpose, and therefore is undoubtedly as lawful as to draw natural conclusions from right premises. Hard is the fate of any man to be ignorant, but much harder would his lot be if he were to be punished for being wise; and, like Mr. Campbell, excelling others in this kind of knowledge.
Much more might be said in defence of Mr. Campbell and the art he professeth, but as the arguments which are brought against him by his enemies on the one hand, are trivial and ill-grounded, I therefore think they deserve no farther refutation; so on the other, his innocency is too clear to require it.
After having thus taken a survey of Mr. Campbell's acts, with regard to their legality according to the statutes and the laws of the nation wherein he lives, we will consider next, whether, according to the stated rules of casuistry, among the great divines eminent for their authority, it may be lawful for Mr. Campbell to predict, or for good Christian persons to visit his house, and consult him about his predictions. I have upon this head examined all the learned casuists I could meet with in ancient times, for I cannot meet, in my reading, with any moderns that treat thoroughly upon this case, or I should rather have chosen them, because, perhaps, the second-sight was less known in those ancient days than it has been since, and so might escape their notice.
My design is first to give the reader a distinct summary of all that has been said of this matter, and to do it as succinctly and briefly as possible, and then to argue myself from what they agree upon as to this man's particular case.
That the reader may have recourse to the authors themselves, if they have a curiosity, and find that I do not go about to impose upon their judgments, I will here tell the reader where he may find the whole contents of the following little abstract of divinity and casuistry, because it would be a tedious piece of work to set down the words of each of them distinctly, and quote them every one round at the end of their several different sentences, which tend to the same meaning, but I will strictly keep to the sense of them all; and I here give the reader their names, and the places, that he may consult them himself, if his inclination leads him to be so curious: Thomas Aquinas, iv. Distin. 34. Quæstio. 1. Art. 3; Bona, ii. Dist. 7. Art. 2. Quæst. 1; Joannes Major, iv. Dist. 34. Quæst. 2; Sylvester, Verbo Malefico. Quæst. 8; Rosella, Verb Impedimentum, xv. cap. 18; Tabiena, Verb. Impedimentum, 12 vers.; Cajetan, tom. ii. Opusc. 12. de Malefic; Alphonsus, a Cast. lib. x. de Justa Hæreticorum Punitione, cap. 15; Cosmus Philiarchus, de Offic. Sacerdot, p. 2. lib. iii. cap. 11; Toletus, in Summa. lib. iv., cap. 16; Spineus, in Tract. de Strigibus; Petrus Binsfield, in Tract. de Confessionibus Maleficorum.
These divines have generally written upon impious arts of magic, which they call by the name of divination; and this divination, as they term it, they divide into two kinds; the one, in which the devil is expressly invoked, to teach hidden and occult things; the other, in which he is tacitly called upon to do the same. An express invocation is made by word or deed, by which a real pact is actually made with the devil, and that is a sin that affects the death of the soul, according to the laws of theology, and ought to affect the death of the body, according to civil and political laws. The tacit invocation of demons is then only, when a man busies himself so far with such persons, that it is meet and just that the devil should be permitted to have to do with him, though it was opposite to the intention of the man.