her husband.
However, her zeal for Mr. Lock's character and writings drew her again
into the public light in 1716, upon this occasion.

Dr. Holdsworth, fellow of St. John's College in Oxford, had preached on
Easter-Monday, 1719 20, before that university, a sermon on John v. 28,
29, which he published, professing in his title page to examine and
answer the Cavils, False Reasonings, and False Interpretations of
Scripture, of Mr. Lock and others, against the Resurrection of the Same
Body. This sermon did not reach Mrs. Cockburn's hands 'till some years
after; when the perusal of it forced from her some animadversions, which
she threw together in the form of a letter to the Dr. and sent to him in
May 1724, with a design of suppressing it entirely, if it should have
the desired effect upon him. After nine months the Dr. informed her,
that he had drawn up a large and particular answer to it, but was
unwilling to trust her with his manuscript, 'till she should publish her
own. However, after a long time, and much difficulty, she at last
obtained the perusal of his answer; but not meeting with that conviction
from it, which would have made her give up her cause, she was prevailed
on to let the world judge between them, and accordingly published her
Letter to Dr. Holdsworth, in January 1726 7, without her name, but said
in the title page to be by the author of, A Defence of Mr. Lock's Essay
of Human Understanding. The Dr. whose answer to it was already finished,
was very expeditious in the publication of it in June 1727, in an 8vo
volume, under the title of A Defence of the Doctrine of the Resurrection
of the same Body, &c.

Mrs. Cockburn wrote a very particular reply to this, and entitled it, A
Vindication of Mr. Lock's Principles, from the injurious Imputations of
Dr. Holdsworth. But though it is an admirable performance, and she was
extremely desirous of doing justice to Mr. Lock and herself, yet not
meeting with any Bookseller willing to undertake, nor herself being able
to support the expence of the impression, it continued in manuscript,
and was reserved to enrich the collection published after her death.

Her Remarks upon some Writers in the Controversy concerning the
Foundation of Moral Duty and Moral Obligation were begun during the
winter of the year 1739, and finished in the following one; for the
weakness of her eyes, which had been a complaint of many years standing,
not permitting her to use, by candlelight, he