; Ꝙ

₰

S ꝑ

Oſervat ons on Lord Boling of nature. 35 Sutr it 10 5, 2 niir and ol the meaneſt under)i that men cannot l about it. Tbe contrar)y 1ſ edν‿n from his owon« ment. He makes ſeij wbhich our moral quli poſes univerſ⸗ of our nature. He the lawy of nature to

and addreſs ourſel ves to ☚Q 7

conſiſtent with thbe principles Le

½r⁵ς Poly¹ 2y to be fou ded zu

Will nol all t there i5 a. 2) ſuck H!t

27 727⸗6q 7 5

ſpame or modéſty!. The account be gives of the of the law of nature, c red. He adnits noſe of tbat law with reſpelt to individuals. quences of his ſcheme io the intereſts of m

1Q‧ ſu Virtue, Tepreſented.

F K

2

F AROM the obſetva tions that have been made in the fore-

rul

going letters, l think it ſufficiently appears that Lord Bo- gbroke hath esdeavoured to ſubvert, or at leaſt to perplex

d confound ſome of the main principles of what is uſually call 5

count he

aine the a of the law of nature conſidered 6 fewn aently ſpeaks in the higheſt terms of

——, dal r 7 OHoood ed natural rellgi on. I lhal now procced to T.

e G duty

the clearneſs, the ſu ufnlen ncy, and d verieston of that law. He

Teprefents it as the Ol

t0

Ve

But our author ſeems not at all ſatisfied with what they ha

WI

66

evelation of the will of Sverh other revelarion needleſs. ry learned and able men have treated of the law of nature:

mankind, and which

3

itten on that ſubject. He ſays,“ they have ben more in- tent to ſhew their learning and acuteneſs, than to ſet their

6½