On the Origin of Evil as it was written by Lord Henry Brougham 1778 to 1868 as it was Published in 1839

According to all the systems as well as this one, evil is of two kinds, physical and moral. To the former class belong all the sufferings to which sentient beings are exposed from the qualities and affections of matter independent of their own acts; the latter class consists of the sufferings of whatever kind which arise from their own conduct. This division of the subject, however, is liable to one serious objection; it comprehends under the second head a class of evils which ought more properly to be ranged under the first. Nor is this a mere question of classification: it affects the whole scope of the argument. The second of the above-mentioned classes comprehends both the physical evils which human agency causes, but which it would have no power to cause unless the qualities of matter were such as to produce pain, privation and death; and also the moral evil of guilt which may possibly exist independent of material agency, but which, whether independent or not upon that physical action, is quite separable from it, residing wholly in the mind. Thus a person who destroys the life of another produces physical evil by means of the constitution of matter, and moral evil is the source of his wicked action. The true arrangement then is this: Physical evil is that which depends on the constitution of matter, or only is so far connected with the constitution of mind as that the nature and existence of a sentient being must be assumed in order to its mischief being felt. And this physical evil is of two kinds; that which originates in human action, and that which is independent of human action, befalling us from the unalterable course of nature. Of the former class are the pains, privations and destruction inflicted by men one upon another; of the latter class are diseases, old age and death. Moral evil consists in the crimes, whether of commission or omission, which men are guilty of, including under the latter head those sufferings which we endure from ill-regulated minds through want of fortitude or self-control. It is clear that as far as the question of the origin of evil is concerned, the first of these two classes, physical evil, depends upon the properties of matter, and the last upon those of mind. The second as well as the first subdivision of the physical class depends upon matter; because, however ill-disposed the agent's mind may be, he could inflict the mischief only in consequence of the constitution of matter. Therefore, the Being, who created matter enabled him to perpetrate the evil, even admitting that this Being did not, by creating the mind also give rise to the evil disposition; and admitting that, as far as regards this disposition it has the same origin with the evil of the second class, or moral evil, the acts of a rational agent.

It is quite true that many reasoners refuse to allow any distinction between the evil produced by natural causes and the evils caused by rational agents, whether as regards their own guilt, or the mischief it caused to others. Those reasoners deny that the creation of man's will and the endowing it with liberty explains anything; they hold that the creation of a mind whose will is to do evil, amounts to the same thing, and belongs to the same class, with the creation of matter whose nature is to give pain and misery. But this position, which involves the doctrine of necessity, must, at the very least, admit of one modification. Where no human agency whatever is interposed, and the calamity comes without any one being to blame for it, the mischief seems a step, and a large step, nearer the creative or the superintending cause, because it is, as far as men go, altogether inevitable. The main tendency of the argument, therefore, is confined to physical evil; and this has always been found the most difficult to account for, that is to reconcile with the government of a perfectly good and powerful Being. It would indeed be very easily explained, and the reconcilement would be readily made, if we were at liberty to suppose matter independent in its existence, and in certain qualities, of the divine control; but this would be to suppose the Deity's power limited and imperfect, which is just one horn of the Epicurean dilemma, 'Aut vult et non potest;' and in assuming this, we do not so much beg the question as wholly give it up and admit we cannot solve the difficulty. Yet obvious as this is, we shall presently see that the reasoners who have undertaken the solution, and especially King and Law, under such phrases as 'the nature of things,' and 'the laws of the material universe,' have been constantly, through the whole argument, guilty of this petitio principii, (begging the question), or rather this abandonment of the whole question, and never more so than at the very moment when they complacently plumed themselves upon having overcome the difficulty.

Henry Peter Brougham, born on the 19th of September in the year 17.78, in Edinburgh. and died on the 7th of May in 18.68. was the first Baron Brougham and Vaux, He was also a British writer, scientist, lawyer, Whig politician and abolitionist.

Brougham was born into an influential Cumberland family! being the eldest son of Henry Brougham, of Brougham Hall in Westmorland, and Eleanora, daughter of the Reverend James Syme.

Brougham was educated at the Royal High School, in Edinburgh, and continued his education at the University of Edinburgh, where he chiefly studied mathematics, and the natural sciences, along with law.

Brougham published several scientific papers through the Royal Society, gaining such a reputation, that in 18O3 he was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, even though he was only 25. Despite this honor, it was law that Brougham chose as his profession, In the year 1800, he was admitted to the Faculty of Advocates. It was five years later that he was called to the Bar.

Brougham was not a monitarily wealthy man, and so he turned to journalism as a means of supporting himself financially through these trying years. His journalism was the doorway by which he became one of the founding fathers of the Edinburgh Review, as well as being its foremost contributor, with articles on everything from science, politics, colonial policy, literature, poetry, surgery, mathematics and the fine arts.

Brougham became a man of mark from his first arrival in London, because of the success of the Edinburgh Review. It was there that he met several leading Whig politicians and in 18O6 the Foreign Secretary, Charles James Fox, appointed him to the possition of secretary to a diplomatic mission in Portugal, which was led by James St Clair-Erskine, the 2nd Earl of Rosslyn and John Jervis, the 1st Earl St Vincent.

The aim of the Portugal mission was to counteract the anticipated French invasion of Portugal. It was during these years that he became a close supporter of the movement for the abolition of slavery, which was to remain a dominting passion of his for the rest of his life.

It was in 1810, that he was elected for Camelford, which was controlled by the Duke of Bedford. He then quickly gained a reputation as one of the most frequent speakers in the House of Commons, and was regarded by those in authority, as a potential future leader of the Whig Party.

In 1812, standing as one of two Whig candidates for Liverpool, he was heavily defeated, which caused him to remain out of the Parliament until 1816, when he was returned for Winchelsea, where he quickly regained his position as one of the most forceful speakers of the House of Commons, where he advocated a programme for the education of the poor, and for legal reform, while also being the chief adviser to Caroline, the Princess of Wales, the estranged wife of George, Prince of Wales, Prince Regent and future George IV.

It was in April of 1820, that Caroline, who was living abroad, appointed Brougham as her Attorney-General. Earlier that year George the 4th had succeeded to the throne, on the death of his long incapacitated father, George the 3rd. This brought Caroline back to England for appearances only, but the king immediately began divorce proceedings against her.

George the 4th initiated the Pains and Penalties Bill before the House of Lords, which was aimed at dissolving his marriage to Caroline and stripping her of her Royal title on the grounds of adultery. However, Brougham, eloquently defended the Princess, and the bill was defeated by 123 votes to 95. The British public had mainly been on the Princessa€™s side, and the outcome of the trial made Brougham one of the most famous men in England. As a rsult his legal practice on the Northern Circuit rose five-fold.

In August of the year 1830, he became one of four representatives for Yorkshire. In the following November, the Whigs came to power under Lord Grey, when the Tory government fell.

On the 22nd of November he became the Baron Brougham, of Brougham in the County of Westmorland. He was to remain at this post for four years, after which the post was conferred to Charles Pepys, 1st Baron Cottenham, in January 1836.

For the next thirty years he continued to take an active part in the judicial business of the House of Lords, while also devoting much of his time to writing, continuing to contribute to the Edinburgh Review.

In 1860 Brougham was again given the title of Baron Brougham and Vaux, of Brougham in the County of Westmorland and of High Head Castle in the County of Cumberland.

Lord Brougham and Vaux died in May of the year 1868, in Cannes France, at the age of 89, and was buried in the Cimetičre du Grand Jas.

Free Curency Converter