and the last in his ’Systeme de la Nature?  It was a numerous school in the Catholic countries, while the infidelity of the Protestant took generally the form of theism.  The former always insisted that it was a mere question of definition between them, the hypostasis of which on both sides, was ‘Nature,’ or ‘the Universe’:  that both agreed in the order of the existing system, but the one supposed it from eternity, the other as having begun in time.  And when the atheist descanted on the unceasing motion and circulation of matter through the animal, vegetable, and mineral kingdoms, never resting, never annihilated, always changing form, and under all forms gifted with the power of reproduction; the theist pointing ’to the heavens above, and to the earth beneath, and to the waters under the earth,’ asked, if these did not proclaim a first cause, possessing intelligence and power; power in the production, and intelligence in the design, and constant preservation of the system; urged the palpable existence of final causes; that the eye was made to see, and the ear to hear, and not that we see because we have eyes, and hear because we have ears; an answer obvious to the senses, as that of walking across the room, was to the philosopher demonstrating the non-existence of motion.  It was in D’Holbach’s conventicles that Rousseau imagined all the machinations against him were contrived and he left, in his Confessions, the most biting anecdotes of Grimm.  These appeared after I left France; but I have heard that poor Grimm was so much afflicted by them, that he kept his bed several weeks.  I have never seen the Memoirs of Grimm.  Their volume has kept them out of our market.

I have been lately amusing myself with Levi’s book, in answer to Dr. Priestley.  It is a curious and tough work.  His style is inelegant and incorrect, harsh and petulant to his adversary, and his reasoning flimsy enough.  Some of his doctrines were new to me, particularly that of his two resurrections:  the first, a particular one of all the dead, in body as well as soul, who are to live over again, the Jews in a state of perfect obedience to God, the other nations in a state of corporeal punishment for the sufferings they have inflicted on the Jews.  And he explains this resurrection of bodies to be only of the original stamen of Leibnitz, or the human calus in semine masculino, considering that as a mathematical point, insusceptible of separation or division.  The second resurrection, a general one of souls and bodies, eternally to enjoy divine glory in the presence of the Supreme Being.  He alleges that the Jews alone preserve the doctrine of the unity of God.  Yet their God would be deemed a very indifferent man with us:  and it was to correct their anamorphosis of the Deity, that Jesus preached, as well as to establish the doctrine of a future state.  However, Levi insists, that that was taught in the Old Testament, and even by Moses himself and the prophets.  He