Gudin, De La Brenellerie, Paul Philip

, a French writer who attained some share of reputation among the encyclopedists, was born at Paris June 6, 1738, in which city he died Feb. 26, 1812. His countrymen have as yels given us very little of his history, except that he was, either by talents or interest, advanced to be a member of the academies of Marseilles and Lyons, an associate of the Frencij institute, and a member of that of Auxerre. He was intimately connected with Beaumarehais, whom he often assisted with his pen, and passed for his secretary. In political sentiments he was a disciple of Rousseau, and eagerly promoted those opinions which led to the revolution. Besides three tragedies of no great merit, he published, i. “Graves observations stir les bonnes moeurs,” | in poetical tales, published under the name of Frere Prul, Paris> 1777. 2. “Discours,” likewise in verse, o h abolition of slavery, Paris, 1781, in which he compli acnti Henry IV. as

“Seul roi de qui le pauvre ait garde la incmoirc.” 3. “Essai sur le progres des arts et de l’esprit sous le regne de Louis XV.” Deux Fonts, 1776, Lausanne, 1777. 4. “Supplement a, la maniere d‘ecrire l’histoire,” Kiel, 1781, against the abbe Mably’s method of writing history. 5. “Essai sur l‘histoire de Cornices de Rome, des etats generaux de France, et du parlement d’Angleterre,” Paris, 1789, 3 vols. 8vo. This was held in such esteem as to gain the prize of the French academy in 1790. 6. “Supplement au Contrat Social,” Paris, 1790, in which he endeavours to recommend Rousseau’s principles. 7. “La Conquete de Naples,” Paris, 1801, 3 vols. 8vo, but written in the reign of Louis XV. 8. “L’ Astronomic,” a poem, Paris, 1801, and reprinted with additions and corrections in 1811. There are some beautiful lines in this poem, which shews, likewise, an intimate knowledge of the subject. 9. “Contes,” 1804, 2 vols. vhich have been highly praised by some of the French critics and as severely censured by others. Among the manuscripts he Jeft is said to be a “History of France,” which, if written on his principles, is not now likely to be thought worthy of the press. ¹