appointment of cities of refuge, whither persons, who had accidentally or wilfully taken away the life of a fellow-creature, might flee for safety till the matter should be examined, and the judgment of the con- gregation declared respecting it.
This enactment, which is to be the subject of the present Discourse, may be considered in a two-fold view ; namely, as a civil ordinance, and as a typical institution.
I. First, let us consider the appointment of cities of refuge as a civil ordinance : and for the sake of perspicuity we will begin with explaining the nature and intent of the ordinance, and then make such remarks upon it as our peculiar cir- cumstances require — The ordinance was simply this. There were to be six cities separated at convenient distances, three on either side of Jordan, that any persons who had occasioned the death of a fellow-creature might flee to one or other of them for safety, till the circum- stances of the case should be investigated, and his guilt or innocence be ascertained. The person next of kin to him that was killed, was permitted to avenge the blood of his relation in case he overtook the slayer before he reached the place of refuge ; but, when the slayer had got within the gates of the city, he was safe : nevertheless the magistrates were to carry him back to the town or village where the transaction had taken place ; and to institute an in- quiry into his conduct. Then, if it appeared that he had struck the deceased person in wrath or malice, (whether with any kind of weapon, or without one,) he was adjudged to be a murderer, and was delivered up to justice ; and the near relative of the murdered person was to be his executioner : if, on the contrary, it was found that he had been unwittingly and unin- tentionally accessary to the person's death, he was restored to the city whither he had fled, and was protected there from any further apprehensions of the avenger's wrath. Nevertheless he was, as it were, a prisoner at large in that city : he was on no account