According to this opinion of Leibnitz, the operative motive in the choice of the present system being the attribute of Benevolence in the Almighty, the existence of all that we term _evil_, is with respect to him, and his preordination of it, _good_; for the whole intention and motive of its permission is founded in perfect goodness guided by perfect wisdom. With respect to the finite beings, by whom evil is permitted to take place, there can be no doubt on this scheme, but the balance of existence will be happiness even to them, whenever by proper discipline they are fitted to enjoy it. Perhaps it may be doubted without infringing on the reverence due to the supreme disposer of all events, whether it would be consistent with his justice, knowingly and voluntarily to bring into existence, a sentient being, destined to be permanently miserable. The question of Materialism, has been discussed since the disquisition of Dr. Priestley, by Mr. Cooper, who adopts the same side. Dr. Ferriar of Manchester, has rendered it dubious how far the sentient principle ought to be confined to the brain, though the facts he adduces, apply with equal force against the common hypothesis of a separate soul, acting by means of the body. The doctrine of Necessity has been opposed by Dr. Gregory of Edinburgh, but with a weakness of argument, and a petulance of language, that places his work in the lowest rank among the writers who have adopted the same side of the question. It hardly deserved the notice of so good an advocate as Dr. Crombie, who has been the latest author on the subject. Indeed, the question must now be considered as settled; for those who can resist Collins’s philosophical enquiry, the section of Dr. Hartley on the Mechanism of the mind, and the review of the subject taken by Dr. Priestley and his opponents, are not to be reasoned with. _Interest reipublicæ ut denique sit finis litium_, is a maxim of technical law. It will apply equally to the republic of letters; and the time seems to have arrived, when the separate existence of the human soul, the freedom of the will, and the eternal duration of future punishment, like the doctrines of the Trinity, and Transubstantiation, may be regarded as no longer entitled to public discussion.