3S8 



part of his work where Mr. Knight speaks 

 of it, he gives his readers to understand, 

 that the argument in the discussion where it 

 occurs is given to an interlocutor, who on 

 that occasion sustains my own part in the Dia- 

 logue, By this he seems to insinuate, that 

 the argument ought to have been in the 

 mouth of Mr. Hamilton, not of Mr. Sey- 

 mour ; in short that I had done what care- 

 less apothecaries, and sometimes great doc- 

 tors have been accused of ; — had put on the 

 wrong labels. But as Mr. Seymour is not 

 represented as ignorant upon any other sub- 

 ject than thatof painting, there was no reason 

 from any thing in his su pposed character, why 

 he should not argue on sensation and per- 

 ception ; and there were reasons in my judg- 

 ment, why the arguments should come from 

 him rather than from Mr. Hamilton: chiefly, 

 because they seem to lead naturally to the 

 observations and the sentiments which fol- 

 low, and which completely belong to Mr. 

 Seymour. 



I could wish that in other parts Mr. 

 Knight had paid a little more attention 

 to the labels; as possibly some of his stric« 



