(_p_) “His other objection against this distinction of the acts of the will into _elicit_ and _imperate_, is obscurity. ‘Might it not,’ saith he, ‘have been as easily said in English, _a voluntary action_?’ Yes it might have been said as easily, but not as truly, nor as properly.” He says, _actus imperatus_ is when a man opens or shuts his eyes at the command of the will. I say, when a man opens and shuts his eyes according to his will, that it is a voluntary action; and I believe we mean one and the same thing. Whether of us speak more properly or more truly, let the reader judge. (_q_) “But his mistakes are so thick, &c., I will do my duty to shew him the right way. First, no acts which are properly said to be compelled, are voluntary. Secondly, acts of terror, &c.” This is nothing but Tohu and Bohu. NO. XXI. [Sidenote: The Bishop’s reply.] _J. D._ “The rest are umbrages quickly dispelled. First, the astrologer steps up, and subjects liberty to the motions of heaven, to the aspects and ascensions of the stars: ----Plus etenim fati valet hora benigni, Quam si nos Veneris commendet epistola Marti. “I stand not much upon them, who cannot see the fishes swimming beside them in the rivers, yet believe they see those which are in heaven; who promise great treasures to others, and beg a groat for themselves. The stars at the most do but incline, they cannot necessitate. “Secondly, the physician subjects liberty to the complexion and temperature of the body. But yet this comes not home to a necessity. Socrates, and many others, by assiduous care have corrected the pernicious propensions, which flowed from their temperatures.” _T. H._ In the rest of his discourse he reckoneth up the opinions of certain professions of men, touching the causes wherein the necessity of things, which they maintain, consisteth. And first, he saith, the astrologer deriveth his necessity from the stars. Secondly, that the physician attributeth it to the temper of the body. For my part, I am not of their opinion; because neither the stars alone, nor the temperature of the patient alone is able to produce any effect without the concurrence of all other agents. For there is hardly any one action, how casual soever it seem, to the causing whereof concur not whatsoever is _in rerum natura_. Which, because it is a great paradox, and depends on many antecedent speculations, I do not press in this place.