Conway, Life of Paine, vol. I, p

91. Pol. Just., Book V, chap. xv (2e éd., vol. II, p. 125 note) : This principle has since (probably without being suggested by the writings of Rousseau) been expressed with great perspicuity and energy, but not developed, by Thomas Paine, in the Ist page of his Common Sense.

52. V. plus haut le sermon de Rebert Hall: — son ami le docteur Parr rompt avec lui : A Spital Sermon, preached at Christ Church, upon Easter Tuesday, april 15, 1800 ; par Samuel Parr, L. L. D. contient une réfutation de la critique des affections domestiques et des sentiments de bienveillance irréfléchie. Parr oppose Bentham avec éloge à à Godwin.— Godwin répondra à Parr, Thoughts, etc., 1801.

53. Priestley, utilitaire et démocrate, et victime, en même temps que Paine, plus cruellement encore, des fureurs contre-révolutionnaires, approuve les principes de Godwin, mais a peur d'en tirer avec Godwin toutes les conséquences. V. la lettre de Godwin, du 23 mars 1793, citée par Kegan Paul, William Godwin, his life and friends,, p. 116 : « Dr. Pries tley says my book contains a vast extent of ability. — Monarchy and Aristocracy, to be sure, were never so painted before. — He agrees with me respecting gratitude and contracts absolutely considered, but thinks the principles too relined for practice. — He felt uncommon approbation of

my investigation of the first principles of government, which were never so well explained before. — He admits fully my first principle of the omnipotence of instruction, and that all vice is error. — He admits äll my principles, but cannot follow them into all my conclusions with me respecting self-love. — He thinks mind will never so far get the better of matter as I suppose. He is of opinion that the book contains a great quantity of original thinking, and will be uncommonly useful. »

54. An examination of the leading principle of the new sysiem of morals, as that principle is stated and applied in Mr. Godwin’s Enquiry, etc., in a letter to a friend, 2°ed. 1799. — Parmi les précurseurs de Godwin, l’auteur cite Law, Brown, Paley, Hume, Helvétius ; pas un mot de Bentham.