raised in his mind. As there is nothing in the letter which can lead to an unfavourable reflection, either on the understanding, or on the disposition of the writer, (for to me it appears to have an opposite tendency), and as it assigns his own reasons for not engaging farther in the controversy, I have been induced, in justice both to him and to myself, to publish it. I say, in justice to him, for I am convinced, that Mr Hume would not have considered it as redounding to his honour, to have the construction above mentioned put upon his silence. Yet it must be owned, that, to those who have never heard himself on the subject, it is by far the most plausible construction. The letter is word for word as follows: 66 SIR, "It has so seldom happened, that controversies "in philosophy, much more in theology, have been "carried on without producing a personal quarrel "between the parties; that I must regard my pre"sent situation as somewhat extraordinary, who "have reason to give you thanks for the civil and obliging manner in which you have conducted "the dispute against me, on so interesting a sub 66 66 ject as that of miracles. Any little symptoms of "vehemence, of which I formerly used the freedom "to complain, when you favoured me with a sight 66 of the manuscript, are either removed, or explain"ed away, or atoned for by civilities, which are far beyond what I have any title to pretend to. It "will be natural for you to imagine, that I will fall upon some shift to evade the force of your argu"ments, and to retain my former opinion in the 66 66 point controverted between us: But it is impos"sible for me not to see the ingenuity of your per"formance, and the great learning which you have displayed against me. I consider myself as very "much honoured in being thought worthy of an "answer by a person of so much merit; and, as I "find that the public does you justice, with regard "to the ingenuity and good composition of your piece, I hope you will have no reason to repent 66 66 66 engaging with an antagonist, whom perhaps, in strictness, you might have ventured to neglect. "I own to you that I never felt so violent an in"clination to defend myself as the present, when I am thus fairly challenged by you; and I think I "could find something specious, at least, to urge 66 ❝ in my own defence: But as I had fixed a resolu ❝tion, in the beginning of my life, always to leave "the public to judge between my adversaries and 66 .66 66 66 me, without making any reply, I must adhere inviolably to this resolution, otherwise my silence, future occasion, would be construed to be on any an inability to answer, and would be matter of triumph against me *. "It may perhaps amuse you to learn the first hint "which suggested to me that argument which you "have so strenuously attacked. I was walking in "the Cloysters of the Jesuits College of La Fleche, 66 (a town in which I passed two years of my youth), * As far as I recollect, Mr Hume, whose curious theories have raised many able opponents, has, except in one instance, uniformly adhered to this resolution. But what no attack on his principles, either religious or philosophical, could effectuate, has been produced by a difference on an historical question, a point which has indeed been long and much controverted; but, as to which, we may say with truth, that it would not be easy to conceive how the interests of individuals, or of society, could, at present, be affected by the decision, on which ever side it were given. I believe Mr Hume's best friends wish, for his own sake, as I do sincerely, (for I respect his talents) that he had given no handle for this exception. "and was engaged in conversation with a Jesuit of "some parts and learning, who was relating to me, "and urging some nonsensical miracle performed lately in their Convent; when I was tempted "to dispute against him; and as my head was full "of the topics of my Treatise of Human Nature, "which I was at that time composing, this argu "ment immediately occurred to me, and I thought "it very much gravelled my companion. But at "last he observed to me, that it was impossible for "that argument to have any solidity; because it operated equally against the Gospel as the Ca"tholic miracles; which observation I thought prò 66 66 per to admit as a sufficient answer. I believe you "will allow, that the freedom at least of this reason 66 ing makes it somewhat extraordinary to have been "the produce of a Convent of Jesuits; though perhaps you may think that the sophistry of it sa"vours plainly of the place of its birth. I beg my 66 66 compliments to Mrs Campbell; and am, with "great regard, "SIR, "Your most obedient humble servant, "Edin. June 7. 1762." "DAVID HUME. The reader will perceive, from this letter, that Mr Hume had not only read my book, since the publication, but had perused the manuscript before. The fact was, I had sent my papers to a very respectable Clergyman in Edinburgh, still living, who was well acquainted with that author, and who has; since that time, eminently distinguished himself in the world, by his own writings; of whose judgment, as I had a high and just esteem, I was desirous to have his opinion of my piece, in respect both of argument and of composition, before I should venture to lay it before the public. This gentleman, in return, after giving his opinion in a candid and friendly manner, added, that, as he knew I was myself a little acquainted with Mr Hume, there would be at least no impropriety, if I consented, in his showing him the manuscript. To this I heartily, agreed; and did it the more readily, as I thought it very possible that, in some things, I might have mistaken that author's meaning; in which case, he was surely better qualified than any other person to set me right. That, however, had not been the case; for, though Mr Hume remarks very freely on my examination of his Essay, he does not, in a single instance, charge me with either misunderstanding or |