68 Wisconsin Academy of Sciences, Arts, and Letters. 
the Free-Thinkers (1738) has a scattered attack on Shaftesbury, 
wrote to Dr. Hurd, January 30, 1749-50, '‘Mr. Pope told me, that, 
to his knowledge, the Characteristics had done more harm to Re¬ 
vealed Religion in England than all the works of Infidelity put to¬ 
gether.Skelton,.in Deism Bevealed^^ asserts that Shaftesbury 
“labours to strike out and establish a new system of morality, un¬ 
happily founded on a notorious falsehood. ’ His teachings as to 
rewards and punishments he brands as “nothing else in effect but 
downright practical Atheism. 
But the attacks and defenses were not yet at an end. John 
Brown, realizing the seriousness of Shaftesbury ^s vogue, brought 
out his popular Essays on the Characteristics in 1751.^^ Taste is 
again thought to be too vague a criterion for the morality of the 
generality of mankind; only the orthodox belief in rewards and 
punishments can deter man from vice. Despite the general fair¬ 
ness of Brown, his book only served to fan the fire of admiration 
that had never died in the hearts of the friends of Shaftesbury. 
Almost immediately Charles Bulkley, a dissenting minister, came 
to the fore with A Vindication of Lord Shaftesbury on the Sub¬ 
jects of Morality and Beligion; and an anonymous writer pro¬ 
duced the well-written Animadversions on Mr. Brownes Three 
Essays on the Characteristics. 
That curious respect that even the enemies of Shaftesbury had 
for his person and his works is typically stated by Leland in View 
of the Principal Deistical Writers (1754). “It gives me real con¬ 
cern, that among the writers who have appeared against revealed 
religion, I am obliged to take notice of the noble author of the 
Characteristics .^And yet these books “are so generally read, 
and by many so much admired, that it is necessary to take notice 
of those things in them which seem to have a bad aspect on religion, 
and to be of dangerous influence and tendency. ’ Having spoken 
of his style, his opposition to Hobbes, and his refined sentiments 
on virtue, Leland admits with regret that these “have very much 
prejudiced many persons in his favor, and prepared them for re- 
See Nichols' Literary Anecdotes, II, 212; or Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary, arti¬ 
cle on John Brown. 
Published in 1749 and 1751. 
3«Vol. I, p. 134, 
IMd. 
»8 Republished in 1752, 1764. 
88 1757 edition, I, p. 48, 
*»I, p. 49. 
