them is very narrow and ſcanty, who cannot make that uſe of them, which is permitted to another. Should any one who is, abſolute lord of a country, have bidden our author ſubdue the earth, and given him dominion over the creatures in it, but not have permitted him to have taken a kid or a lamb out of the flock, to ſatisfy his hunger, I gueſs, he would ſcarce have thought himſelf lord or proprietor of that land, or the cattle on it ; but would have found the difference between having dominion, which a ſhepherd may have, and having full property as an owner. So that, had it been his own cafe, Sir Robert, I believe, would have thought here was an alteration, nay, an enlarging of property ; and that Noah and his children had by this grant, not only property given them, but ſuch a property given them in the creatures, as Adam had not : For however, in reſpect of one another, men may be allowed to have propriety in their diſtinct: portions of the creatures ; yet in reſpect of God the maker of heaven and earth, who is ſole lord and proprietor of the whole world, man's propriety in the creatures is nothing but that liberty to uſe them, which God has permitted ; and ſo man's property may be altered and enlarged, as we ſee it was here, after the flood, when other uſes of them are allowed, which before were not. From all which I ſuppoſe it is clear, that neither Adam, nor
