n's displeasure when the name of Dr.
Priestley was mentioned; for I know no writer who has been suffered to
publish more pernicious doctrines. I shall instance only three. First,
_Materialism_; by which _mind_ is denied to human nature; which, if
believed, must deprive us of every elevated principle. Secondly,
_Necessity_; or the doctrine that every action, whether good or bad, is
included in an unchangeable and unavoidable system; a notion utterly
subversive of moral government. Thirdly, that we have no reason to think
that the _future_ world, (which, as he is pleased to _inform_ us, will
be adapted to our _merely improved_ nature,) will be materially
different from _this_; which, if believed, would sink wretched mortals
into despair, as they could no longer hope for the 'rest that remaineth
for the people of GOD' [_Hebrews_, iv.9], or for that happiness which is
revealed to us as something beyond our present conceptions; but would
feel themselves doomed to a continuation of the uneasy state under which
they now groan. I say nothing of the petulant intemperance with which he
dares to insult the venerable establishments of his country.

As a specimen of his writings, I shall quote the following passage,
which appears to me equally absurd and impious, and which might have
been retorted upon him by the men who were prosecuted for burning his
house. 'I cannot, (says he,) as a _necessarian_, [meaning
_necessitarian_] hate _any man_; because I consider him as _being_, in
all respects, just what GOD has _made him to be_; and also as _doing
with respect to me_, nothing but what he was _expressly designed_ and
_appointed_ to do; GOD being the _only cause_, and men nothing more than
the _instruments_ in his hands to _execute all his pleasure_.'--
_Illustrations of Philosophical Necessity_, p. 111.

The Reverend Dr. Parr, in a late tract, appears to suppose that _'Dr.
Johnson not only endured, but almost solicited, an interview with Dr.
Priestley_. In justice to Dr. Johnson, I declare my firm belief that he
never did. My illustrious friend was particularly resolute in not giving
countenance to men whose writings he considered as pernicious to
society. I was present at Oxford when Dr. Price, even before he had
rendered himself so generally obnoxious by his zeal for the French
Revolution, came into a company where Johnson was, who instantly left
the room. Much more would he have reprobated Dr. Priestley. Whoever
wishes to see a pe