In the same year (1704) but somewhat previous to Toland, Dr. Coward had published his “Grand Essay, or a vindication of reason and religion against impostures of philosophy; proving according to those ideas and conceptions of things human understanding is capable of forming itself. 1st. That the existence of an immaterial substance is a philosophic imposture and impossible to be conceived. 2ndly That all matter has originally created in it, a principle of internal or self motion. 3rdly That matter and motion must be the foundation of thought in men and brutes.” Dodwell and Toland had learning enough and so had Blount to throw some light on the history of this question, and the author of second thoughts has many observations well adapted to the question he discusses, but very little is to be gained from a perusal of Coward’s book. Dr. Hartley’s great work, (great, not from the bulk, but the importance of it) was first published in 1749. The direct and manifest tendency of the whole of his first volume is to destroy the common hypothesis of an immaterial soul: and this he does with a mass of fact and a force of reasoning irresistible. He shews clearly how all the faculties ascribed to the soul, thought, reflection, judgement, memory, and all the passions selfish and benevolent, may be resolved into one simple undeniable law of animal organization, without the necessity of any hypothesis such as that of a separate soul. Yet he does not appear distinctly to have seen the full weight and tendency of his own reasoning, and he adopts a theory on the subject, loaded with more difficulties and absurdities, than even the common hypothesis. In 1757 was published a philosophical and scriptural inquiry into the nature and constitution “of mankind considered only as rational beings, wherein the antient opinion asserting the human soul to be an immaterial, immortal and thinking substance is found to be quite false and erroneous, and the true nature state and manner of existence of the power of thinking in mankind is evidently demonstrated by reason and the sacred scriptures.” Author J. R. M. I. Who this author really was I know not. But from the perusal of his book it is probable that he was a physician, and had been travelling. The above work he terms the philosophic or first part, and refers to a longer work of his own in manuscript which it seems he could not procure to be published. There is very little new in the book so far as I could judge.