To this she replied, ‘A regularity of conduct is for the interest of all, even were their prospects terminated by the enjoyments of this life. We cannot doubt that the virtuous Seneca enjoyed more happiness than Nero, his cruel and tyrannical master. So far as inward peace of conscience depends on virtue, it is its own reward. But we do not find that its ends are commensurate with its exertions. Honest industry does not always bring even a moderate support. It therefore appears evident to me, that there would not be sufficient reward for, nor consequently sufficient excitement to, the sacrifices which virtue requires, without the hope of a future life. God, by the influences of his spirit, brings home the truths of the Gospel upon the mind, and makes them the spring of new, and right principles. Hence Divine Revelation informs us, “by his own will begat he us by the word of truth.” If we look for nothing beyond the grave, too many will say, “what advantageth it me?” Dr Doddridge observes, “there are some sufferings of flesh and blood, to which good men for conscience’ sake have been exposed, so extreme, that without some extraordinary support from God, it would be really impossible that the pleasures of a rational thought should be enjoyed by them.” Such support must arise from a view of a future state, and from a conviction that afflictions are but for a moment, and are “working out for them a far more exceeding, even an eternal weight of glory.” Not that I mean to say, we are to expect Heaven as a _reward_ for our virtue, independent of the free grace of God. But he has promised a glorious inheritance to those who do well, and this ought to stimulate men to the greatest industry in his service. Love to God is the great principle of christian virtue.’ On another occasion she was applied to by a friend, who was placed in an embarrassing situation, for her sentiments on the subject of forming a connexion, without mutual attachment. The following observations are extracted from her reply. ‘It has been readily allowed, that marriage, without great congeniality, must render a person of sensibility extremely wretched. Novel writers have general urged the impropriety of this connexion from this motive. But as this life is only a passport to a better, the principal objection ought to arise from a nobler source. ‘Both religion and morality require that there should be a conformity between our words and actions; and, that in both we should always be entirely true. Now when two people marry, they virtually and publicly declare, that they prefer each other to all the world. If that preference be wanting, this declaration is a capital breach of sincerity. It is the declaration of an untruth before Heaven and earth.