chance to procure the attention of the public; and I could think of none more proper than irony; which, when well executed, is almost univerfally pleafing. Befides, I must acknowledge, that the conduct of the prevailing party did often appear to me in a very ridiculous light; and never more so, than when the Characteristics were published. Moderation had been long a fashionable or cant phrafe among them; and yet they were running headlong into the most violent and tyrannical measures. They made great pretences to charity, and a large manner of thinking; and, as a teftimony of it, very modeftly fupposed, that all who did not form the fame opinions in religion and government with themselves, were weak filly fools, except two or three knaves who had the direction of the reft. This, I do affirm, was not barely hinted, but openly and confidently afferted; fo that I never knew greater bigots, in the proper and genuine fenfe of that word. How far my attempt would be fuccessful, could only be gueffed at; but I imagined, that if I could exhibit them to the public in the fame light in which they appeared to myfelf, they would make a pretty comical figure: and fo it happened in fact. My first intention was only to have publifhed, in May 1753, a half heet, containing the maxims themselves, under the title of, "A "list of self-evident truths:" but that having been neglected,

M 4

neglected, upon the provocation hinted at above, the illuftrations were added, and fent abroad a few months afterwards, in the form they now bear.

Another circumstance which feemed to render this way of writing neceflary, was the little regard that had been paid to feveral well-written treatifes of a ferious kind. The perfons chiefly pointed at in the Characteristics had greatly relaxed difcipline in point of morals; had, by a courfe of decifions, planted the country with ufelefs minifters; and though the whole office of ordination proceeds upon the fuppofition of a call from the people, gravely admitted them without any call at all. This, when done as a part of the public worship of God, as it always is, muft be confidered by every impartial perfon, not only as a piece of grofs abfurdity, and mocking of the people, but a piece of flagrant impiety, and mocking of God. Confcientious minifters abfented themfelves from thefe pretended ordinations, till at laft it came into the heads of their enemies to force them to be prefent under pain of the highest cenfures of the church. They had the hardinefs all the while to affirm, that this was abfolutely neceflary to fupport the constitution; although every man muft agree, that if any of our fathers, who lived about fifty years ago, were to rife up out of his grave, he would say, it was the conftitution turned upfide down. Many at

tempts

I

tempts had been made to reafon with them, and clear appeals to the history and standing acts of the church; but all were trodden under foot by the decifions of the annual affemblies, in their judicative capacity. Nay, they at last became fo confident of their own power, and fo deaf to all reasoning on the subject, that they refused even to read what was written by those of different fentiments; and when they did read it, disdained to make any answer to it, or attempt to convince them any other way than by the unanswerable argument of depofition. This induced me to write in a manner that has obliged them to hear whether they will or not; and though it has not been fo happy as to bring them to conviction, I am fure it was no more than well merited correction.

One other reason I fhall mention for making choice of this way of writing, was drawn from the modern notions of philofophy, which had fo greatly contributed to the corruption of the clergy. The great patron and advocate for these was Lord Shaftsbury, one of whofe leading principles it is, that "Ridicule is the teft of truth." This principle of his had been adopted by many of the clergy; and there is hardly any man converfant in the literary world, who has not heard it a thousand times defended in conversation. I was therefore willing to try how they themselves could ftand

M 5

ftand the edge of this weapon; hoping, that if it did not convince them of the folly of the other parts of their conduct, it might at least put them out of conceit with this particular opinion. The laft of thefe, I do really think the publication of the Characteriftics has, in a great measure effected; at leaft within my narrow fphere of converfation. It is but seldom we now hear it pretended, that ridicule is the teft of truth. If they have not renounced this opinion, they at least keep it more to themselves, and are lefs infolent upon it in their treatment of others.

I hope the reader will not imagine, that, by wrefting this principle out of the hands of my adverfaries, I intend to adopt it myself. There may be truth in it in an equivocal fenfe; for to be fure nothing that is true can be really ridiculous but there are few things more pernicious than this principle, as it is commonly understood and applied. It is moft certain, that many things both true and excellent may, by a perfon poffeffed of the talent of humour, be made apparently ridiculous and this will have its full effect upon the bulk of mankind, who are not able to discover where the fallacy lies. Dr. Brown, in his Effays on the Characteristics, says with great propriety, That ridicule is not fitted for the difcovery of truth; for, fo far as it is distinguished from reafoning, it is only putting imagination " in

in the place of reafon;" than which few things are more ready to lead us aftray. But he allows, that it is very proper to" difgrace known falf"hood:" and as the application of it to this purpose is warranted by the judgment and example of the beft and wifeft men in all ages,. there was nothing to hinder me from making ufe of the fame privilege. In the mean time, if there has been any character of real worth, or any meafure truly commendable, ridiculed in the treatise now under confideration, let this be shown by clear and plain deductions of reason, and I am ready to repent of it, and renounce it.

III. This leads me to the third and laft part of my defence, viz. To fhow what occafion was given for such a treatise among us. This I confess to be abfolutely neceffary, as it is plainly applied, in the title page, to the church of Scotland. It will be in vain to have fhown, that there is nothing finful or hurtful in attacking the characters of clergymen, where they act in a manner unworthy of their office, or that this may lawfully be done even in the way of ridicule. The queftion will still be, Have the minifters of the church of Scotland really deferved it? Very great difficulties, however, prefent themselves in this branch of the fubject. There are many things demonftrably true, which it is dangerous to affirm, at least in fome places. Upon the fup,' M 6 pofition