asserted in the Charge) God's being the first Cause and prime
           Mover of the Universe. That the Author's Words could have no
           such Meaning as they stand connected, is to me so evident,
           that I could pledge on this Head, not only my small Credit as
           a Philosopher, but even all my Pretensions to Trust or Belief
           in the common Affairs of Life.

           V. As to the fifth Article; The Author has not anywhere that I
           remember denied {30} the Immateriality of the Soul in the
           common Sense of the Word. He only says, That that Question did
           not admit of any distinct Meaning; because we had no distinct
           Idea of Substance. This Opinion may be found everywhere in Mr.
           Lock, as well as in Bishop Berkley.

           VI. I come now to the last Charge, which, according to the
           prevalent Opinion of Philosophers in this Age, will certainly
           be regarded as the severest, viz. the Author's destroying all
           the Foundations of Morality.

           He hath indeed denied the eternal Difference of Right and
           Wrong in the Sense in which Clark and Woolaston maintained
           them, viz.. That the Propositions of Morality were of the same
           Nature with the Truths of Mathematicks and the abstract
           Sciences, the Objects merely of Reason, not the Feelings of
           our internal Tastes and Sentiments. In this Opinion he concurs
           with all the antient Moralists, as well as with Mr. Hutchison
           Professor of Moral Philosophy in the University of Glasgow,
           who, with others, has revived the antient Philosophical
           Discourse, in order to throw an Odium on the Author!

           When the Author asserts that Justice is an artificial not a
           natural Virtue, he seems {31} sensible that he employed Words
           that admit of an invidious Construction; and therefore makes
           use of all proper Expedients, by Definitions and Explanations,
           to prevent it. But of these his Accuser takes no Notice. By
           the natural Virtues he plainly understands Compassion and
           Generosity, and such as we are immediately carried to by a
           natural Instinct, a certain Reflection on the general
           Interests of Human Society, and a Combination with others. In
           the same Sense, Sucking is an Action natural to Man, and
           Speech is artificial. But what is there in this Doctrine that
           can be supposed in the least pernicious? Has he not expresly
           asserted, That Justice, in another Sense of the Word, is so
           natural to Man, that no Society of Men, and even no individual
           Member of any Society, was ever entirely devoid of all Sense
           of it? Some Persons (tho' without any Reason, in my Opinion)
           are displeased with Mr. Hutchison's Philosophy, in sounding
           all the Virtues so much on Instinct, and admitting so little
           of Reason and Reflection. Those should be pleased to find that
           so considerable a Branch of the Moral Duties are founded on
           that Principle.

           The Author has likewise taken care in {32} positive Terms to
           assert, That he does not maintain that Men ly under no
           Obligation to observe Contracts, independent of Society; but
           only, that they never would have formed Contracts, and even
           would not have understood the Meaning of them, independent of
           Society. And whereas it is observed in the Specimen, That our
           Author offers further to prove, that, suppose a Promise was
           intelligible before Human Conventions had established it, it
           would not be attended with any Moral Obligation. The most
           careless Reader must perceive that he does not understand
           Moral in such an extended Sense, as to deny the Obligation of
           Promises, independent of Society; seeing he not only asserts
           what is above-represented, but likewise that the Laws of
           Justice are universal, and perfectly inflexible. It is
           evident, that suppose Mankind, in some primitive unconnected
           State, should be some Means come to the Knowledge of the
           Nature of those Things which we call Contracts and Promises;
           that this Knowledge would have laid them under no such actual
           Obligation, if not placed in such Circumstances as give rise
           to these Contracts.

           I am sorry I should be obliged to cite from my Memory, and
           cannot mention Page and Chapter so accurately as the Accuser.
           I came hither by Post, and brought no {33} Books along with
           me, and cannot now provide myself in the Country with the Book
           referred to.

           This long Letter, with which I have troubled you, was composed
           in one Morning, that I might gratify your Demand of an
           immediate Answer to the heavy Charge brought against your
           Friend; and this, I hope, will excuse any Inaccuracies that
           may have crept into it. I am indeed of Opinion, that the
           Author had better delayed the publishing of that Book; not on
           account of any dangerous Principles contained in it, but
           because on more mature Consideration he might have rendered it
           much less imperfect by further Corrections and Revisals. I
           must not at the same Time omit observing, that nothing can be
           wrote so accurately or innocently, which may not be perverted
           by such Arts as have been imployed on this Occasion. No Man
           would undertake so invidious a Task as that of our Author's
           Accuser, who was not actuated by particular Interests; and you
           know how easy it is, by broken and partial Citations, to
           pervert any Discourse, much more one of so abstract a Nature,
           where it is difficult, or almost impossible, to justify one's
           self to the Publick. The Words which have been carefully pickt
           out from a large Volume will no doubt have a dangerous Aspect
           to careless {34} Readers; and the Author, in my Apprehension,
           cannot fully defend himself without a particular Detail, which