1. The doctrine of the last section might stand even in the mind of one who held that all punishment is probational, and destined for the amendment of him who undergoes it, to humble him, to awaken his sense of guilt, and to make him fear to transgress again. On this theory of punishment, the man who in his last probational suffering refuses to amend, must be let drop out of existence as incorrigible, and so clearly his final state is one of misery. The theory is not inconsistent with _final_ punishment, but with _eternal_ punishment, unless indeed we can suppose a creature for all eternity to refuse, and that under stress of torment, a standing invitation to repentance. It is however a peculiar theory, and opposite to the common tradition of mankind, which has ever been to put gross offenders to death, not as incorrigible, not simply as refuse to be got rid of, but that their fate may be a _deterrent_ to others. Punishment, in this view, is _medicinal_ to the individual, and _deterrent_ to the community. Eternal punishment has been defended on the score of its _deterrent_ force. Both these functions of punishment, the _medicinal_ and the _deterrent_ function, are prospective. But there is asserted a third function, which is retrospective: punishment is said to be _retributive_. It is on this ground that the justification of eternal punishment mainly rests. We are however here concerned, not with that eternity, but in an endeavour to give a full and adequate view of punishment in all its functions. 2. If punishment is never _retributive_, the human race in all countries and ages has been the sport of a strange illusion. Everyone knows what _vengeance_ means. It is a desire to punish some one, or to see him punished, not prospectively and with an eye to the future, for his improvement, or as a warning to others, but retrospectively and looking to the past, that he may suffer for what he has done. Is then the idea of vengeance nothing but an unclean phantom? Is there no such thing as vengeance to a right-minded man? Then is there an evil element, an element _essentially_ and _positively_ evil, in human nature. No one will deny that the idea, and to some extent the desire, of vengeance, of retaliation, of retrospective infliction of suffering in retribution for evil done, of what we learn to call in the nursery _tit for tat_, is natural to mankind. It is found in all men. We all respond to the sentiment: Mighty Fates, by Heaven's decree accomplish, According as right passes from this side to that. For hateful speech let speech of hate be paid back: Justice exacting her due cries this aloud: For murderous blow dealt let the murderer pay By stroke of murder felt. Do and it shall be done unto thee: Old is this saying and old and old again.