WOBO: Search for words and phrases in the texts here...

From his twenty-eighth to. his thirty-fifth year, he wrote his pieces on the reduction of Sallee on the reparation of St. Paul’s; to the King on his navy the panegyric on the Queen mother; the two poems to the earl of Northumberland; and perhaps others, of which the time cannot be discovered. When he had lost all hopes of Sacharissa, he looked round him for an easier conquest, and gained a lady of the family of Bresse, or Breaux. The time of his marriage is not exactly known. It has not been discovered that his wife was won by his poetry; nor is any thing told of her, but that she brought him many children, He doubtless, says Johnson, praised some whom he would have been afraid to marry, and perhaps married one whom he would have been ashamed to praise. Many qualities contribute to domestic happiness, upon which poetry has no colours to bestow; and many airs and sallies may delight imagination, “which he who flatters them never can approve. There are charms made only for distant admiration. No spectacle is nobler than a blaze. Of this wife, however, his biographers have recorded that she gave him five sons and eight daughters, aud Aubrey says that she was beautiful and very prudent. During the long interval of parliament, he is represented as living among those with whom it was most honourable to converse, and enjoying an exuberant fortune with that independence of liberty of speech and conduct which wealth ought always to produce. Being considered as the kinsman of Hampden, he was therefore supposed by the courtiers not to favour them; and when the parliament was called in 1640, it appeared that, his political character had not been mistaken. The king’s demand of a supply produced from him a speech full” of complaints of national grievances, and very vehement; but while the great position, that grievances ought to be redressed before supplies are 'granted, is agreeable enough to law and reason, Waller, if his biographer may be credited, was not such an enemy to the king, as not to wish his distresses lightened; for he relates, “that the king sent particularly to Waller, to second his demand of some subsidies to pay off the army; and sirHenry Vane objecting against first voting a supply, because the king would not accept unless it came up to his proportion, Mr. Waller spoke earnestly to sir Thomas Jermyn, comptroller of the household, to save his master from the effects of so bold a falsity: c for,‘ he said, ’ I am but a country gentleman, and cannot pretend to know the king’s mind:' but sir Thomas durst not contradict the secretary; and his son, the earl of St. Alban’s r afterwards told Mr. Waller, that his father’s cowardice ruined the king.”

Waller, as he continued to sit, was one of the commissioners nominated by parliament to treat with the king at Oxford: and when they were presented, the king said to him, “Though you are the last, you are not the lowest, nor the least in my favour.” Whitlock, another of the commissioners, imputes this kind compliment to the king’s knowledge of the plot, in which Waller appears afterwards to have been engaged against the parliament. Fenton, with equal probability, believes that this attempt to promote the royal cause arose from his sensibility of the king’s tenderness. Of Waller’s conduct at Oxford we have no account. The attempt, just mentioned, known by the name of Waller’s plot, was soon afterwards discovered.

In consequence of this letter, the Lords ordered Portland and Waller to be confronted; when the one repeated his charge, and the other his denial. The examination of the plot being continued (July 1,) Thinn, usher of the House of Lords, deposed, that Mr. Waller having had a conference with the lord Portland in an upper room, lord Portland said, when he came down, “Do me the favour to tell my lord Northumberland, that Mr. Waller has extremely pressed me to save my own life and his, by throwing the blame upon the lord Conway and the earl of Northumberland.” Waller, in his letter to Portland, tells him of the reasons which he could urge with resistless efficacy in a personal conference; but he overrated his own oratory; his vehemence, whether of persuasion or intreaty, was returned with contempt. One of his arguments with Portland is, that the plot is already known to a woman. This woman was doubtless lady Aubigny, who, upon this occasion, was committed to custody; but who, in reality, when she delivered the commission of array, knew not what it was. The parliament then proceeded against the conspirators, and Tom,kyns*and Chaloner were hanged. The earl of Northumberland, being too great for prosecution, was only once examined before the Lords. The earl of Portland and lord Conway, persisting to deny the charge, and no testimony but Waller’s yet appearing against them, were, after a long imprisonment, admitted to bail. Hassel, the king’s messenger, who carried the letters to Oxford, died the night before his trial. Hampden escaped

nable drunke at Somerset House, where, company without drinking but Ned Waller.“The praisegiven him by St. Evremond is a proof of his reputation; for it was only by his reputation that he could be known, as a writer, to a man who, though he lived a great part of a long life upon an English pension, never condescended ta understand the language of the nation that maintained him. In parliament, Burnet says, Waller was the delight of the house, and though old, said the- liveliest things of any among them. 1 * His name as a speaker often occurs in Grey’s” Debates," but Dr. Johnson, who examined them, says he found no extracts that could be more quoted as exhibiting sallies of gaiety than cogency of argument. He was, however, of strch consideration, that his remarks were circulated and recorded; nor did he suffer his reputation to die gradually away, which might easily happen in a long life; but renewed his claim to poetical distinction, as occasions were offered, either by public events, or private incidents; and contenting himself with the influence of his* muse, or loving quiet better than influence, he never accepted any office of magistracy. He was not, however, without some attention to his fortune; for he asked from the king (in 1665) the provostship of Eton college, and obtained it; but Clarendon refused to put the seal to the grant, alleging that it could be held only by a clergyman. It is known that sir Henry Wotton qualified himself for it by deacon’s orders.

To this opposition, the author of his life in the “Biographia Britannica” imputes the violence and acrimony with which Waller joined Buckingham'! faction in the prosecution of Clarendon. If this be true, the motive was illiberal and dishonest, and shewed that more than sixty years had not been able to teach him morality. His accusation of Clarendon is such as conscience can hardly be supposed to dictate without the help of malice. “We were to be governed by janizaries instead of parliaments, and are in danger from a worse plot than that of the fifth of November; then, if the lords and commons had been destroyed, there had been a succession; but here both had been destroyed for ever.” This is the language of a man who is glad of an opportunity to rail, and ready to sacrifice truth to interest at one time, and to anger at another. who, after hearing the question argued by lawyers for tbrae days, determined that the office could be held only by a clergyman, according to the act of uniformity, since the provosts had always received institution as for a parsonage from the bishops of Lincoln. The king then said, he eould not break the law which he had made; and another (Dr. Cradock) was chosen. It is not known whether he asked any thing more, but he continued obsequious to the court through the rest of Charles’s reign.

At the accession of king James, in 1685, he was, in his eightieth year, chosen member for Saltash, in Cornwall, and wrote a “Presage of the downfall of the Turkish Empire,” which he presented to the king on his birth-day. James treated him with kindness and familiarity, of which instances are given by Fenton. One day, taking him into his closet, the king asked him how he liked one of the pictures: “My eyes,” said Waller, “are dim, and I do not know it.” The king said it was the princess of Orange. “She is,” said Waller, “like the greatest woman in the world.” The king asked who that was, and was answered, queen Elizabeth. “I wonder,” said the king, “you should think so but, I must confess, she had a wise council.” “And, sir,” said Waller, “did you ever know a fool chuse a wise one” When the king knew that he was about to marry his daughter to Dr. Birch, a clergyman, he ordered a French gentleman to tell him that “the king wondered he eould think of marrying his daughter to a falling church.” “The king,” said Waller, “does me great honour,in taking notice of my domestic affairs but I have lived long enough to observe that this falling church has got a trick of rising again.” He took notice to his friends of the king’s conduct; and said that “he would be left like a whale upon the strand.” Whether he was privy to any of the transactions which ended in the revolution, is not known. His heir joined the prince of Orange.

The character of Waller, both moral and intellectual, has been drawn by Clarendon, to whom he was familiarly known, with nicety, which certainly none to whom he was not known can presume to emulate. “Edmund Waller,” says that excellent historian, “was born to a very fair estate, by the parsimony or frugality of a wise father and mother; and he thought it so commendable an advantage, that he resolved to improve it with the utmost care, upon which in his nature he was too much intent; and, in order to that, he was so much reserved and retired, that he was scarcely ever heard of till by his address and dexterity he had gotten a very rich wife in the city, against all the recommendation, and countenance, and authority, of the court, which was thoroughly engaged on the behalf of Mr. Crofts; and which used to be successful in that age against any opposition. He had the good fortune to have an alliance and friendship with Dr. Morley, who had assisted and instructed him in the reading many good books, to which his natural parts and promptitude inclined him, especially the poets; and, at the age when other men used to give over writing verses (for he was near thirty years of a&Q when he first engaged himself in that exercise, at least that he was known to do so), he surprized the town with two or three pieces of that kind; as if a tenth Muse had been newly born to cherish drooping poetry. The doctor at that time brought him into that company which was most celebrated for good conversation; where he was received and esteemed with great applause and respect. He was a very pleasant discourser, in earnest and in jest; and therefore very grateful to all kind of company, where he was not the less esteemed for being very rich. He had been even nursed iti parliaments, where he sat when he was very young; and so, when they were resumed again (after a long intermission), he appeared in those assemblies with great advantage; having a graceful way of speaking, and by thinking much upon several arguments (which his temper and complection, that had much of melancholic, inclined him to) he seemed often to speak upon the sudden, when the occasion had only administered the opportunity of saying what he had thoroughly considered, which gave a great lustre to all he said, which yet was rather of delight than weight. There needs no more be said to extol the excellence and power of his wit, and pleasantness of his conversation, than that it was of magnitude enough to cover a world of very great faults that is, so to cover them that they were not taken notice of to his reproach viz. a narrowness in his nature to the lowest degree; an abjectness and want of courage to support him in any virtuous undertaking an insinuating and servile flattery, to the height the vainest and most imperious nature could be contented with; that it preserved and won his life from those who were most resolved to take it, and on an occasion in which he ought to have been ambitious to have lost it; and then preserved him again from the reproach and contempt that was due to him for so preserving it, and for vindicating it at such a price, that it had power to reconcile him to those whom he had most offended and provoked; and continued to his old age with that rare felicity, that his company was acceptable when his spirit was odious; and he was at least pitied, where he was most detested.”

Such is the account of Clarendon; on which it may not be improper, says Dr. Johnson, to make some remarks. He was very little known till he had obtained a rich wife in the city.*' He obtained a rich wife about the age of three-and-twenty; an age, before which few men are conspicuous much to their advantage. He was known, however, in parliament and at court; and, if he spent part of his time in privacy, it is not unreasonable to suppose that he endeavoured the improvement of his mind as well as of his fortune. That Clarendon might misjudge the motive of his retirement is the more probable, because he has evidently mistaken the commencement of his poetry, which he supposes him not to have attempted before thirty. As his first pieces were perhaps not printed, the succession of his compositions was not known; and Clarendon, who cannot be imagined to have been very studious of poetry, did not rectify his first opinion by consulting Waller’s book. Clarendon observes also, that he was introduced to the wits of the age by Dr. Morley; but the writer of his Life relates that he was already among them, when, hearing a noise in the street, and inquiring the cause, they found a son of Ben Jonson under an arrest. This was Morley, whom Waller set free at the expence of 100l. took him into the country as director of his studies, and then procured him admission into the company of the friends of literature. But of this fact, says Johnson, Clarendon had a nearer knowledge than the biographer, and is therefore more to be credited.

The care of his fortune, which Clarendon imputes to him in a degree little less than criminal, was either not constant or not successful; for, having inherited a patrimony of three thousand five hundred pounds a year in the time of James the First, and augmented it at least by one wealthy marriage, he left, about the time of the revolution, an income of not more than twelve or thirteen hundred; which, when the different value of money is reckoned, will be found perhaps not more than a fourth part of what he once possessed. Of this diminution, part was the consequence of the gifts which he was forced to scatter, and the fine which he was condemned to pay at the detection of his plot; and if his estate, as is related in his Life, was sequestered, he had probably contracted debts when he lived in exile; for we are told, that at Paris he lived in splendor, and was the only Englishman, except the lord St. Alban’s, that kept a table. His unlucky plot compelled him to sell a thousand a year; of the waste of the rest there is no account, except that he is confessed by his biographer to have been a bad ceconomist. He seems to have deviated from the common practice; to have been a hoarder in his first years, and a squanderer in his last. Of his course of studies, or choice of books, notbing is known more than that he professed himself unable to read Chapman’s translation of Homer without rapture. His opinion concerning the duty of a poet is contained in his declaration, that “he would blot from his works any line, that did not contain some motive to virtue.” For his merit as a poet, we may refer with confidence to Johnson, whose life of Waller we have generally followed in the preceding sketch, and on which he appears to have bestowed more than usual pains, and is in his facts more than usually accurate. English versification, it is universally allowed, is greatly indebted to Waller, and he is every where elegant and gay. To his contemporaries he must have appeared more rich in invention, than modern critics are disposed to allow, because, as Johnson observes, they have found his novelties in later books, and do not know or inquire who produced them first. Dr. Warton thinks it remarkable that Waller never mentions Milton, whose Comus, and smaller poems, preceded his own; and he ae* counts for this by Milton’s poetry being unsuitable to the French taste on which Waller was formed *.

We have already mentioned his Grammar of the English tongue, published in 1653. By some observations in & that work, he had been led to suppose it possible to teach the deaf and dumb to speak. On this it is probable he had wade many experiments; and communicated what he had tried to his friends, who now were desirous to bring the matter to the test. Accordingly he was persuaded to employ his skill on one Daniel Whalley of Northampton, who had been deaf and dumb from a child. About January, 1661-2, he began to teach this person, and with such success, that in little more than a year, he taught him to pronounce distinctly even the most difficult words, and to express his mind in writing. He was likewise able to read distinctly the greater part of the Bib!e, could express himself intelligibly in ordinary affairs, understand letters written to him, and write answers to them, if not elegantly, yet so as to be understood. This being known, attracted the curiosity of the public in no common degree. Whalley was brought to the Royal Society, May the 21st, 1662, and to their great satisfaction, pronounced 'distinctly enough such words as were proposed to him by the company; and though not altogether with the usual tone or accent, yet so as easily to be understood. He did the like several times at Whitehall in the presence of his “majesty, prince Rupert, and others of the nobility; and the doctor was desired to try his skill on Alexander Popham, esq. a son of lady Wharton, by her former husband, admiral Popham. His mother, it is said, when she was big with him, received a sudden fright, in consequence of which his head and face were a little distorted, the whole right side being somewhat elevated, and the left depressed, so that the passage of his left ear was quite shut up, and that of the right ear proportionally distended and too open. However Dr. Holder says, that he was not so deaf, but that he could hear the sound of a lute string, holding one end of it in his teeth; and when a drum was beat fast and loud by him, he could hear those, who stood behind him, calling him gently by his name. When he was of the age of ten or eleven years, he was recommended to the care of Dr. William Holder, then rector of Blechindon in Oxfordshire, and taken by him into his house in 1659, where he learned to speak and pronounce his name, and some other words. Of this Wood gives us the following account; that Dr. Holder” obtained a great name for his most wonderful art in making a young gentleman, Alexander Popham, who was born deaf and dumb, to speak; that he was the first that is remembered ever to have succeeded therein in England, or perhaps in the world; and because it was a wonderful matter, many, curious scholars went from Oxford to see and hear the person speak.“However this be, three years after, viz. in 1662, this young gentleman was sent by his relations to Dr. Wallis, for him to teach him to speak, as he had taught Mr. Whalley. Wood owns, that Mr. Popham being called home by his friends, he began to lose what he had been taught by Dr. Holder. And Dr. Wallis observes, that both Mr. Whalley and Mr. Popham, notwithstanding the proficiency they had made under him in learning to speak, were apt to forget, after their departing from him, much of that nicety, which before they had, in the distinct pronouncing some letters, which they would recover, when he had been occasionally with them to set them right, they wanting the help of an ear to direct their speaking, as that of the eye directs the hand in writing. 14 For which reason,” says he, “a man, who writes a good hand, would soon forget so to do, if grown blind. And therefore one, who thus learns to speak, will, for the continuance and improvement of it, need somebody continually with him, who may prompt him, when he mistakes.” Dr. Wallis remarks likewise, that Dr. Holder had attempted to teach Mr. Popham to speak, “but gave it over.” This seems very likely to be true, because his friends did not send him again to Dr, Holder, but desired Dr. Wallis to teach him. However that be, a dispute took place between the two doctors. A letter of Dr. Wallis concerning this cure was inserted in the “Philosophical Transactions” of July 1670. This was represented, as if he had vainly assumed to himself the glory of teaching this young gentleman to speak, without taking any notice of what had been before done to him by Dr. Holder, who therefore published in 1678 at London in 4to, “A Supplement to the Philosophical Transactions of July 1670, with some Reflections on Dr. Wallis’ s Letter there inserted.” To this Dr. Wallis replied the very same year, entitling his papers, which were directed to the lord viscount Brouncker, president of the Roya.1 Society, “A Defence of the Royal Society, and the Philosophical Transactions, particularly those of July 1670, in answer to the Cavils of Dr. William Holder,” London, 1673, in 4to. To this Dr. Holder made no reply. The reverend and learned Mr. John Lewis of ?crgate observes, in a ms life by him of Dr. Wallis communicated to the authors of the General Dictionary, that without lessening Dr. Holder’s great abilities, it is a plain and certain fact, that Dr. Wallis had, in his tract `De Loquela,' discovered the theory of this by considering very exactly, what few attended to, the accurate formation of all sounds in speaking; without which it were in vain to set about this task. This tract was printed no less than six years before Dr. Holder undertook to try his skill of teaching a dumb man to speak on Mr. Popham. And it is no disingenuous reflection to suppose, that Dr. Holder had seen it, and profited by it; whereas it does not appear, that Dr. Wallis could have the least hint from him, when he at first taught Mr. Whalley. But Wood, to shew how just and equitable a judge he was of this difference, tells us, that he knew full well, that Dr. Wallis at any time could make black white, and white black, for his own ends, and had a ready knack of sophistical evasions. Base reflections, which confute themselves, and expose their inventor 1“However, Dr. Wallis published his method of instructing persons deaf and dumb to speak and understand a language, which was printed in the Philosophical Transactions. And” I have,“says he,” since that time, upon the same account, taught divers persons (and some of them very considerable) to speak plain and distinctly, who did before hesitate and stutter very much; and others to pronounce such words or letters, as before they thought impossible for them to do, by teaching them how to rectify such mistakes in the formation, as by some impediment or acquired customs they had been subject to."

He was now elected member for Castle-Rising, and sat for that borough in the two short parliaments which were assembled in the last two years of the reign of king William, and soon became an active member for the whig party. In 1702 he was chosen member of parliament for King’s- Lynn, and represented that borough in several succeeding parliaments. In 1705 he was nominated one of the council to prince George of Denmark, as lord high admiral of England; in 1708 he was appointed secretary at war; and, in 1709, treasurer of the navy. In 1710 he was one of the managers of the trial of Sacheverel, but when the whig-ministry was dismissed he was removed from all his posts, and held no place afterwards during queen Anne’s reign. In 1711 he was voted by the House of Commons guilty of a high breach of trust and notorious corruption in his office of secretary at war; and it was resolved that he should be committed to the Tower, and ex- ­pelled the House. Upon a candid review of this affair, there does not appear sufficient proof to justify the severity used towards him; and perhaps his attachment to the Marlborough ministry, and his great influence in the House, owing to his popular eloquence, were the true causes of his censure and imprisonment, as they had been before of his advancement. All the whigs, however, on this occasion, considered him as a kind of martyr in their cause. The borough of Lynn re-elected him in 1714, and, though, the House declared the election void, yet they persisted in the choice, and he took a decided part against the queen’s tory-ministry. In the well-known debate relating to Steele for publishing the “Crisis,” he greatly distinguished himself in behalf of liberty, and added to the popularity he had before acquired. The schism-bill likewise soon after gave him a fine opportunity of exerting his eloquence, and of appearing in the character of the champion of civil and religious liberty. On the death of the queen a revolution of politics took place, and the whig-party prevailed both at court and in the senate. Walpole had before recoinmended himself to the house of Hanover, by his zeal for its cause when the Commons considered the state of the nation with regard to the protestant succession: and he had now the honour to procure the assurance of the House to the new king (which attended the address of condolence and congratulation), “That the Commons would make good all parliamentary funds.” It is therefore not surprising that his promotion soon took place after the king’s arrival; and that in a few days he was appointed receiver and paymaster general of all the guards and garrisons, and of all other the land forces in Gveat Britain, paymaster of the royal hospital at Chelsea, and likewise a privy counsellor. On the opening of a new parliament, a committee of secrecy vtfas chosen to inquire into the conduct of the late ministry, of which Walpole was appointed chairman; and, hy his management, articles of impeachment were read against the earl of Oxford, lord Bolingbroke, the duke of Ormond, and the earl of Stratford. The eminent service he was thought to have done the nation, and the crown, by the vigorous prosecution of those ministers who were deemed the chief instruments of the peace, was soon rewarded by the extraordinary promotions of first commissioner of the treasury, and chancellor and undertreasurer of the exchequer,

, third and youngest son of sir Robert Walpole, first earl of Orford, by his first wife Catherine Shorter, was born in 1718, and received the early part of his education at Eton, where he first became known to the celebrated Mr. Gray, whose friendship at that early period he cultivated, and whose esteem and re^ gard he retained, until the difference arose between them which we have noticed in our account of that celebrated poet. From Eton he went to KingVcollege, Cambridge; but, according to the practice of men of rank and fortune at that time, left the university without taking any degree. While there he wrote “Verses in Memory of King Henry the Sixth, founder of the college,” which are dated Feb. 2, 1738, and are probably the first production of his pen. In the same year he was appointed inspector-general of the exports and imports; a place which he soon after exchanged for that of usher of the exchequer. To these were added the post of comptroller of the pipe and clerk of the estreats; all which he held unto his death.

Finding himself disinclined to enter so early into the business of parliament, he prevailed on his father to permit him to go abroad, and Mr. Gray consented to accompany him in his travels. They left England on the 29th of March, 1739, and took their route by the way of France to Italy, viewing whatever was remarkable in the several places they visited, and at some of them, particularly Florence, residing several months. About July 1741 the two friends came to a rupture, and parted at Reggio, each pursuing his journey homewards separately. Of this quarrel, the circumstances, as we have remarked in Mr. Gray’s article, are not clearly known; but Mr. Walpole enjoined Mr. Mason to charge him with the chief blarre, confessing, that more attention, complaisance, and deference, to a warm friendship, and superior judgment and prudence, might have prevented a rupture which gave much uneasiness to them both, and a lasting concern to the survivor. A reconciliation is said to have been effected between them by a lady who wished well to both parties; but the cordiality which had subsisted between them never wholly returned, as Mr. Walpole was entirely unnoticed by Mr. Gray in his last will. Mr. Walpole, however, was the first person to whom, in 1750, Mr. Gray communicated his celebrated “Elegy in a Country Church-yard,” and by him it was communicated to several persons of distinction. In 1758, also, Walpole employed Mr. Bentley to ornament an edition of his friend’s poems with beautiful designs and engravings, and printed it at his own press at Strawberry-hill.

“The World” was a well-known periodical paper, x iri which he assisted the editor Mr. Moore, by writing Nos. 6, 8, 10, 14, 28, 103, 168, 195, and the concluding “World Extraordinary,” containing the character of Henry Fox, then secretary at war, afterwards lord Holland.

This year he set up a printing-press at Strawberry-hill, at which most of his own performances, and some curious works of other authors were printed. Its first production was Gray’s Odes, and this was followed by the edition and translation of part of Hentzner’s Travels, lord Wliitworth’s account of Russia, Life of Lord Herbert of Cherbury, &c. By limiting the number of copies of each work, and parting with them only as presents, he created a species of fame and curiosity after the productions of his press, which was then quite new, and unquestionably very gratifying to himself. We need not analyze this kind of reputation, as it is now better known in ours than in his days. In this way, in 1761, he printed at Strawberry-hill two volumes of his “Anecdotes of Painting in England,” compiled from the papers of Mr. George Vertue, purchased at the sale of the effects of that industrious antiquary. It will be allowed, that the remains of Mr. Vertue could not have fallen into better hands. In 1763, another volume was added, and also the Catalogue of Engravers; and, in 1771, the whole was completed in a fourth volume, to which was added “The History of the Modern Taste in Gardening.” In 1764, on the dismission of general (afterward marshal) Conway from the army for a vote given in parliament, he defended his friend’s conduct in a pamphlet, entitled “A Counter Address to the Public, on the late dismission of a general officer,” 8vo.

In his “Essay on Criticism,” he had given him more splendid praise, and, in the opinion of his learned commentator, sacrificed a little of his judgment to his gratitude. He died in 1708, aged forty-six years. He is known more by his familiarity with greater men than by anything done or written by himself. His works are not numerous, nor of great merit. In 1691, he published, with a preface written by his friend and advocate Dryden, “A Diaipgue concerning Women, being a Defence of the Sex,” in 8vo and, the year after, “Letters and Poems, amorous and gallant,” published in what is called “Dryden’s Miscellany.” These were republished among the “Works of the Minor Poets,” printed in 1749, with other performanceSj consisting chiefly of elegies, epitaphs, odes, and songs, in which he discovers more elegance than vigour, and seldom rises higher than to be pretty.

After his return, in 1573, he was appointed one of the principal secretaries of state, and sworn a privy-counsellor, and soon after received the honour of knighthood. He now devoted himself solely to the service of his country and sovereign; and by his vigilance and address preserved her crown and life from daily attempts and conspiracies. ID 1578, he was sent on an embassy to the Netherlands, and in 1581, went a third time ambassador to France, in order to treat of the proposed marriage between the queen and the duke of Anjou; and also to conclude a league offensive and defensive between both kingdoms He resided in France from about the middle of July to the end of the year. In 1583, he was sent into Scotland on an embassy to king James, attended with a splendid retinue of one hundred and twenty horse. The particular design of this embassy is not very clearly expressed by historians. It appears to have been partly occasioned by king James having taken into his councils the earl of Arran, a nobleman very obnoxious to queen Elizabeth. Sir James Melvil, who was at this time at the Scottish court, mentions their expecting the arrival of secretary Walsingham, “a counsellor,” he says, “of worthy qualities, who had great credit with the queen of England.” Sir James was sent to welcome him, and to inform him, “That his majesty was very glad of the coming of such a notable personage, who was known to be endued with religion and wisdom, whom he hail ever esteemed as his special friend, being assured that his tedious travel in his long voyage (being diseased as he was) tended to more substantial points for the confirmation of the amity between the queen his sister and him, than had been performed at any time before.”

After the restoration, Dr. Walton had the honour to present the Polyglott Bible to Charles II., who made him chaplain in ordinary, and soon after promoted him to the bishopric of Chester. In September 1661, he went to take possession of his see; and was met upon the road, and received with such a concourse of gentry, clergy, militia both of the city and county, and with such acclamations of thousands of the people, as had never been known upon any such occasion. This was on the 10th of September, and on the 11th he was installed with much ceremony; “a day,” says Wood, “not to be forgotten by all the true sons of the Church of England, though cursed then in private by the most rascally faction and crop-eared whelps of those parts, who did their endeavours to make it a May-game and a piece of foppery.” This glory, however, which attended bishop Walton, though it seems to have been great, was yet short-lived; for, returning to London, he died at his house in Aldersgate-street, Nov. the 29th following, and was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral, where a monument with a Latin inscription was erected to his memory, of which a broken stone now only remains, with a few words of the inscription, in the vault of St. Faith’s under St. Paul’s. Dr. Walton was twice married. His first wife was Anne, of the Claxton family of Suffolk. She died May 25, 1640, aged forty-three, and was buried in the chancel of Sundon church, where a handsome monument was erected to her memory. His second wife was Jane, daughter to the celebrated Dr. Fuller, vicar of St. Giles’s Cripplegate. Dr. Walton had published at London, in 1655, “Introdu'ctio ad lectionem Linguarum Orientalium,” in 8vo.

, a gallant naval officer, memorable for the brevity of his dispatches, appears to have been of obscure origin, nor is any thing known of his history until his appointment, in 1692, to be first lieutenant of the Devonshire, an eighty- gun ship. From this time we have only accounts of his removals from one ship to another, without any opportunity of particularly displaying his courage, until 1718, when he commanded the Canterbury of sixty guns, and was sent under the command of sir George Byng to the Mediterranean. On the 1 Ith of August, the British fleet, then off Sicily, which had during the preceding day^ and night, been in pursuit of the Spaniards, having come up so close to them as to render an engagement unavoidable, the marquis de Mari, one of their rear admirals, separated from the body of the fleet, and ran in for the Sicilian shore, with six ships of war, and all the gallies, store-ships, bomb-ketcbes, and fire-ships. Captain Walton was immediately detached after them with six ships of the line, by the commanderiri-chief, who himself pursued the remainder, and soon Jbegan the attack, the issue of which was, that he captured four Spanish ships of war, one of them mounting sixty guns, commanded by rear admiral Mari himself, one of fifty-four, one of forty, and one of twenty-four guns, with a bomb-vessel and a ship laden with arms; and burnt one ship of war mounting fifty-four guns, two of forty, and one of thirty, a fire-ship, and a bomb-ketch. It may admit of some dispute, whether this brave officer derived a greater degree of popular favour from the gallantry of his conduct, or the very singular account he rendered of it to his commander-in-chief, and to the world. The whole of his dispatches were comprised in the following laconic note "Sir, Canterbury, off Syracuse, Aug. 16, 1718.

, a celebrated writer on the art of angling, and the author of some valuable lives, was born at Stafford in August 1593. His first settlement in London, as a shopkeeper, was in the Royal Burse in Cornhill, built by sir T. Gresharn, and finished in 1567. In this situation he could scarcely be said to“have had elbow-room; for, the shops over the Burse were but seven feet and a half long, and five wide; yet he carried on his trade till some time before 1624, when” he dwelt on the north side of Fleet- street, in a house two doors west of the end of Chancery-lane, and abutting on a messuage known by the sign of the Harrow;“by which sign the old timber -house at the south-west corner of Chancery-lane, in Fleet-street, till within these few years, was known. A citizen of this age would almost as much disdain to admit of a tenant for half his shop, as a knight would to ride double; though the brethren of one of the most ancient orders of the world were so little above this practice, that their common seal was the device of two riding one horse. He married probably about 1632; for in that year he lived in a house in Chancery-lane, a few doors higher up on the left hand than the former, and described by the occupation of a sempster or milliner. The former of these might be his own proper trade; and the latter, as being a feminine occupation, might be carried on by his wife: she, it appears, was Anne, the daughter of Mr, Thomas Ken, of Furnival’s-inn, and sister of Thomas, afterwards Dr. Ken, bishop of Bath and Wells. About 1643 he left London, and, with a fortune very far short of what would now be called a eompetencv, seems to have retired altogether from business. While he continued in London, his favourite recreation was angling, in which he was the greatest proficient of his time; and, indeed, so great were his skill and experience in that art, that there is scarcely any writer on the subject since his time who has not made the rules and practice of Walton his very foundation. It is, therefore, with the greatest propriety that Langbaine calls him” the common father of all anglers." The river that he seems mostly to have frequented for this purpose was the Lea, which has it source above Ware in Hertfordshire, and falls into the Thames a little below Blackwall; unless we will suppose that the vicinity of the New River to the place of his habitation might sometimes tempt him out with his friends, honest Nat. and R. Roe, whose loss he so pathetically mentions, to spend an afternoon there. In 1662 he was by death deprived of the solace and comfort of a good wife, as appears by a monumental inscription in the cathedral church of Worcester.

Living, while in London, in the parish of St. Dunstan in the West, of which Dr. John Donne, dean of St. Paul’s, was vicar, he became of course a frequent hearer of that excellent preacher, and at length, as he himself expresses it, his convert. Upon his decease, in 1631, sir H. Wotton requested Walton to collect materials for a life of the doctor, which sir Henry had undertaken to write; but, sir Henry dying before he had completed the life, Walton undertook it himself; and in 1640 finished and published it, with a collection of the doctor’s sermons, in folio. Sir H. Wotton dying in 1639, Walton was importuned by King to undertake the writing of his life also and it was finished about 1644. The precepts of angling, that is, the rules and directions for taking fish with a hook and line, till Walton’s time, having hardly ever been reduced to writing, were propagated from age to age chiefly by tradition; but Walton, whose benevolent and communicative temper appears in almost every line of his writings, unwilling to conceal from the world those assistances which his long practice and experience enabled him, perhaps the best of any man of his time, to give, in 1653 published in a very elegant manner his K Complete Angler, or Contemplative Man’s Recreation,“in small 12mo, adorned with exquisite cuts of most of the fish mentioned in it. The artist who engraved them has been so modest as to conceal his name; but there is great reason to suppose they are the work of Lombart, who is mentioned in the” Sculptura“of Mr. Evelyn; and also that the plates were of steel.” The Complete Angler“came into the world attended with en. comiastic verses by several writers of that day. What reception in general the book met with may be naturally inferred from the dates of the subsequent editions; the second came abroad in 1655; the third in 1664; the fourth in 1668, and the fifth and last in 1676, Sir John Hawkins bad traced the several variations which the author from time to time made in these suhsequent editions, as well by adding new facts and discoveries as by enlarging on the more entertaining parts of the dialogue. The third and fourth editions of his book have several entire new chapters; and the fifth, the last of the editions published in his life-time, contains no less than eight chapters more than the first, and twenty pages more than the fourth. Not having the advantage of a learned education, it may seem unaccountable that Walton so frequently cites authors that have written only in Latin, as Gesner, Cardan, Aldrovandus, Rondeletius, and even Albertus Magnus; but it may be observed, that the voluminous history of animals, of which the first of these was author, is in effect translated into English by Mr. Edward Topsel, a learned divine, chaplain, as it seems, in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, to Dr. Neile, dean of Westminster: the translation was published in 1658, and, containing in it numberless particulars concerning frogs, serpents, caterpillars, and other animals, though not of fish, extracted from the other writers above-named, and others, with their names to the respective facts, it furnished Walton with a great variety of intelligence, of which in the later editions of his book he has carefully availed himself: it was therefore through the medium of this translation alone that he was enabled to cite the other authors mentioned above; vouching the authority of the original writers, as he elsewhere does sir Francis Bacon, whenever occasion occurs to mention his natural history, or any other of his works. Pliny was translated to his hand by Dr. Philemon Holland; as were also Janus Dubravius” de Piscinis & Piscium natura,“and Lebault’s” Maison Rustique,“so often referred to by him in the course of his work. Nor did the reputation of” The Complete Angler“subsist only in the opinions of those for whose use it was more peculiarly calculated; but even the learned, either from the known character of the author, or those internal evidences of judgment and veracity contained in it, considered it as a work of merit, and for various purposes referred to its authority. Dr. Thomas Fuller, in his” Worthies,“whenever he has occasion to speak of fish, uses his very words. Dr. Plot, in his” History ofMaffordshire,“has, on the authority of our author, related two of the instances of the voracity of the pike, and confirmed them by two other signal ones, that had then lately fallen out in that county. These are testimonies in favour of Walton’s authority in matters respecting fish and fishing; and it will hardly be thought a diminution of that of Fuller to say, that he was acquainted with, and a friend of, the person whom he thus implicitly commends. About two years after the restoration, Walton wrote the life of Mr. Richard Hooker, author of the” Ecclesiastical Polity:“he was enjoined to undertake this work by his friend Dr. Gilbert Sheldon, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, who, by the way, was an angler. Bishop King, in a letter to the author, says of this life,” I have often seen Mr. Hooker with my father, who was afterwards bishop of London, from whom, and others at that time, I have heard of the most material passages which you relate in the history of his life.“Sir William Dugdale, speaking of the three posthumous books of the” Ecclesiastical Polity,“refers the reader” to that seasonable historical discourse lately compiled and published, with great judgment- and integrity, by that much-deserving person Mr. Isaac Walton."

, a literary antiquary of great learning and accuracy, was the son of the rev. Nathanael Wanley, some time vicar of Trinity-church in Coventry. This Nathanael Wanley was born at Leicester in 1633, and died in 1680. Besides the vicarage of Trinity-church, it is probable that he had another in Leicestershire, from the following title-page, “Vox Dei, or the great duty of self reflection upon a man’s own wayes, by N. Wanley, M. A. and minister of the gospel at Beeby in Leicestershire,” London, 1658. He was of Trinity-college, Oxford, B. A. 1653, M. A. 1657, but is not mentioned by Wood. The work which now preserves his name is his “Wonders of the Little World,” 1678, fol. a work to be classed with Clark’s “Examples,” 2 vols. fol. or Turner’s “Remarkable Providences,” containing a vast assemblage of remarkable anecdotes, &c. many of which keep credulity on the stretch. As these were collected by Mr. Wanley from a number of old books, little known, or read, it is not improbable that such researches imparted to his son that taste for bibliographical studies which occupied his whole life. At least it is certain that Humphrey, (who was born at Coventry, March 21, 1671-2, and was bred first a limner, and afterwards some other trade), employed all his leisure time, at a very early period, in reading old books and old Mss. and copying the various hands, by which he acquired an uncommon faculty in verifying dates. Dr. Lloyd, then bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, sent him to Edmund-hall, Oxford, of which Dr. Mill was then principal, whom he greatly assisted in his collations of the New Testament. Hearne says, that during his stay in this hall, he attended but one lecture, which was in logic, which he swore he could not comprehend. Dr. Charlett, master of University-college, hearing of Wanley’s attention to matters of antiquity, induced him to remove to his own college, which he soon did, residing at the master’s lodgings, who, says Hearne, “employed him in writing trivial things, so that he got no true learning.” He certainly acquired the learned languages, however, although it does not appear that he attended much to the usual course of academic studies, or was ambitious of academic honours, as his name does not appear in the list of graduates. By Dr. Charlett’s means he was appointed an under-keeper of the Bodleian library, where he assisted in drawing up the indexes to the catalogue of Mss. the Latin preface to which he also wrote. Upon leaving Oxford, he removed to London, and became secretary to the society for propagating Christian knowledge; and at Dr. Hickes’s request, travelled ovor the kingdom, in search of Anglo-Saxon Mss. a catalogue of which he drew up in English, which was afterwards translated into Latin by the care of Mr. Thwaites, and printed in the “Thesaurus Ling. Vet. Septen.” Oxon. 1705, fol. He was soon after employed in arranging the valuable collections of Robert earl of Oxford, with the appointment of librarian to his lordship. In this employment he gave such particular satisfaction, that he was allowed a handsome pension by lord Harley, the earl’s eldest son and successor in the title, who retained him as librarian till his death. In Mr. Wanley’s Harleian Journal, preserved among the Lansdowne Mss. in the British Museum, are several remarkable entries, as will appear by the specimens transcribed below .

The first appearance he made in public was in 1716, when he published his map of Northumberland. In 1719 he was elected a fellow both of the Royal and Antiquary societies, and could not then, we presume, have been thought the ignoramus which he has since been represented. He remained a member of the Society of Antiquaries to the last, but was ejected from the Royal in June 1757, in consequence of not having made his annual payments for a great number of years. In June 1720 he was created Somerset herald, and appears to have been constantly at variance with the superiors of the college. In 1722-3 he published in four closely printed 4to pages, “A List of the Nobility and Gentry of the counties of Middlesex, Essex, and Hertford, who have subscribed, and ordered their coats of arms to be inscribed on a new map of those counties, which is now making by John Warburton, esq.” In August 1728, he gave notice, that “he keeps a register of lands, houses, &c. which are to be bought, sold, or mortgaged, in England, Scotland, or Wales, and if required, directs surveys thereof to be made: also solicits grants of arms, and performs all other matters relating to the office of a herald. For which purpose daily attendance is given at his chambers in the Heralds’ office, near Doctors Commons, London. He answers letters post-paid, and advertises, if required.” This quackery did not probahly raise him very high in the opinion of his brethren. In 1749, he published a map of Middlesex on two sheets of imperial atlas, with the arms of the nobility and gentry on the borders. But the earl marshal, supposing these to be fictitious, by his warrant commanded him not to take in any subscriptions for arms, nor advertise or dispose of any maps, till the right of such person respectively to such arms were first proved, to the satisfaction of one of the kings of arms. In his book of “London and Middlesex illustrated,” after observing the above injunction of the earl marshal, he subjoins, “which person’s (Anstis) partiality being well known to this author, he thought it best to have another arbitrator joined with him, and therefore made choice of the impartial public, rather than submit his performance wholly to the determination of a person so notoriously remarkable for knowing nothing at all of the matter. 7 ' After censuring the notion, that trade and gentility are incompatible, as a doctrine fitted only for a despotic government, and judiciously remarking the moral impossibility there would soon be of proving descents and arms for want of visitations, he returns to attack the heads of the college, by saying, that such proofs are obstructed by the exorbitant and unjustifiable fees of three heralds, called kings at arms, who receive each 30l. for every new grant. In his” London and Middlesex illustrated," he gave the names, residences, genealogy, and coat- armour of the nobility, principal merchants, and other eminent families, emblazoned in their proper colours, with references to authorities.

Mr. Warburton married twice: one of his wives was a widow with children, for he married her son, when a minor, to one of his daughters. Amelia, another, married Oct. 23, 1750, to captain John Elphinston, afterwards viceadmiral and commander-in-chief of the Russian fleet, who died very greatly respected by the late empress, Catherine IL who created him knight of the order of St. George: he was deservedly honoured and beloved by all who knew him. This gallant officer died in November 1789, at Cronstat, after a short illness. By his last wife, our author had John Warburton, esq. who resided many years in Dublin, and was pursuivant to the court of exchequer in Ireland: he married, in 1756, Ann-Catherine, daughter of the rev. Edward-Rowe Mores, rector of Tunstal in Kent, and sister of Edward-Rowe Mores, esq. M.A. and F.R. and A. S., so well known for his skill in antiquity, and the large collections of choice Mss. and books he left at his death, which were sold by Mr. Paterson in 1779. This Mr. W T arbarton, leaving Dublin, became one of the exons belonging to his majesty’s yeomen of the guard at St. James’s. Mr. Noble says, that going into France since the troubles in that kingdom, he was one of the few English who fell victims to the sanguinary temper of the usurpers, being guillotined for a pretended sedition, by order of the national convention committee at Lyons, in December 1793; but a correspondent in the Gentleman’s Magazine says that the Mr. Warburton, who was guillotined, was the nephew and not the son of the herald.

In the same year he published, 1. “A Letter from an author to a member of parliament, concerning Literary Property,” 8vo. 2. “Preface to Mrs. Cockburn’s remarks upon the principles and reasonings of Dr. Rutherforth’s Essay on the nature and obligations of Virtue,” &c. 8vo. 3. “Preface to a critical enquiry into the opinions and practice of the Ancient Philosophers, concerning the nature of a Future State, and their method of teaching by double Doctrine,” (by Mr. Towne), 1747, 8vo, 2d edition. In 1748 a third edition of “The Alliance between Church and State corrected and enlarged.” In 1749, a very extraordinary attack was made on the moral character of Mr. Pope from a quarter whence it could be the least expected. His “Guide, Philosopher, and Friend,” lord Bolingbroke, published a book which he had formerly lent Mr. Pope in ms. The preface to this work, written by Mr. Mallet, contained an accusation of Mr. Pope’s having clandestinely printed an edition of his lordship’s performance without his leave or knowledge. (See Pope.) A defence of the poet soon after made its appearance, which was universally ascribed to Mr. Warburton, and was afterwards owned by him. It was called “'A Letter to the editor of Letters on the Spirit of Patriotism, the Idea of a patriot King, and the State of Parties, occasioned by the editor’s advertisement;” which soon afterwards produced an abusive pamphlet under the title of “A familiar epistle to the most Impudent Man living,” &c. a performance, as has been truly observed, couched in Janguage bad enough to disgrace even gaols and garrets. About this time the publication of Dr. Middleton’s “Enquiry concerning the Miraculous Powers,” gave rise to a controversy, which was managed with great warmth and asperity on both sides. On this occasion Mr. Warburton puolished an excellent performance, written with a degree of candour and temper which, it is to be lamented, he did not always exercise. The title of it was “Julian or, a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption which defeated the emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, 1750,” 8vo. A second edition of this discourse, <c with Additions,“appeared in 1751. The critic above quoted has some remarks on this work too important to be omitted.” The gravest, the least eccentric, the most convincing of Warburton’s works, is the ' Julian, or a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption, which defeated that emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, in which the reality of a Divine interposition is shewn, and the objections to it ar are answered/ The selection of this subject was peculiarly happy, inasmuch as this astonishing fact, buried in the ponderous volumes of the original reporters, was either little considered by an Uninquisitive age, or confounded with the crude mass of false, ridiculous, or ill-attested miracles, which “with no friendly voice” had been recently exposed by Middleton. But in this instance the occasion was important: the honour of the Deity was concerned; his power had been defied, and his word insulted. For the avowed purpose of defeating a well-known prophecy, and of giving to the world a practical demonstration that the Christian scriptures contained a lying prediction, the emperor Julian undertook to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem; when, to the astonishment and confusion of the builders, terrible flames bursting from the foundations, scorched and repelled the workmen 'till they found themselves compelled to desist. Now this phenomenon was not, the casual eruption of a volcano, for it had none of the concomitants of those awful visitations: it may even be doubted whether it were accompanied by an earthquake; but the marks of intention and specific direction were incontrovertible. The workmen desisted, the flames retired, they returned to the work, when the flames again burst forth, and that as often as the experiment was repeated.

In 1751, Mr. Warburton published an edition of Pope’s “Works,” with notes, in nine volumes, octavo and in the same year printed “An Answer to a Letter to Dr. Middleton, inserted in a pamphlet entitled The Argument of the Divine Legation fairly stated,” &c. 8vo. and “An Account of the Prophecies of Arise Evans, the Welsh Prophet, in the last Century;” the latter of which pieces afterwards subjected him to much ridicule. In 1753, Mr. Warburton published the first volume of a course of Sermons, preached at Lincoln’s-inn, entitled “The Principles of natural and revealed Religion occasionally opened and explained;” and this, in the subsequent year, was followed by a second. After the public had been some time promised lord Bolingbroke’s Works, they were about this time printed. The known abilities and infidelity of this nobleman had created apprehensions, in the minds of many people, of the pernicious effects of his doctrines; and nothing but the appearance of his whole force could have convinced his friends how little there was to be dreaded from arguments against religion so weakly supported. The personal enmity, which had been excited many years before between the peer and our author, had occasioned the former to direct much of his reasoning against two works of the latter. Many answers were soon published, but none with more acuteness, solidity, and sprightliness, than “A View of Lord Bolingbroke’s Philosophy, in two Letters to a Friend,” 1754. The third a/id fourth letters were published in 1755, with another edition of the two former; and in the same year a smaller edition of the whole; which, though it came into the world without a name, was universally ascribed to Mr. Warburton, and afterwards publicly owned by him. To some copies of this is prefixed an excellent complimentary epistle from the president Montesquieu, dated May 26, 1754. At this advanced period of his life, that preferment which his abilities might have claimed, and which had hitherto been withheld, seemed to be approaching towards him. In September 1754 he was appointed one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary, and in the 'next year was presented to a prebend * in the cathedral of Durham, worth 500l. per annum, on the death of Dr. Mangey. About the same time, the degree of doctor of divinity was conferred on him by Dr. Herring, then archbishop of Canterbury; and, a new impression of “The, Divine Legation” having being called for, he printed a fourth edition of the first part of it, corrected and enlarged, divided into two volumes, with a dedication to the earl of Hardwicke. The same year appeared “A Sermon preached before his grace Charles duke of Marlborough president, and the Governors of the Hospital for the small-pox and for inoculation, at the parish church of St. Andrew, Holborn, on Thursday, April the 24th, 1755,” 4to; and in 1756 “Natural and Civil Events the Instruments of God’s moral Government, a Sermon preached on the last public Fast-day, at Lincoln’s-inn Chapel,” 4to. In 1757, a pamphlet was published, called “Remarks on Mr. David Hume’s Essay on the Natural History of Religion;” which is said to have been composed of marginal observations made by Dr. Warburton on reading Mr. Hume’s book; and which gave so much offence to the author animadverted upon, that he thought it of importance enough to deserve particular mention in the short account of his life. On Oct. 11, in this year, our author was ad­* Soon after he attained this pre- Neal’s History of the Puritans, which ferment, he wrote the Remarks on are now added to his Works. “vanced to the deanery of Bristol and in 175&republished the second part of” The Divine Legation,“divided into two parts, with a dedication to the earl of Mansfield, which deserves to be read by every person who esteems the wellbeing of society as a concern of any importance. At the latter end of next year, Dr. Warburton received the honour, so justly due to his merit, of being dignified with the mitre, and promoted to the vacant see of Gloucester. He was consecrated on the 20th of Jan. 1760; and on the 30th of the same month preached -before the House of Lords. In the next year he printed” A rational Account of the Nature and End of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper,“12mo. In 1762, he published” The Doctrine of Grace: or, the office and operations of the Holy Spirit vindicated from the insults of Infidelity and the abuses of Fanaticism,“2 vols. 12mo, one of his performances which does him least credit; and in the succeeding year drew upon himself much illiberal abuse from some writers of the popular party, on occasion of his complaint in the House of Lords, on Nov. 15, 1763, against Mr. Wilkes, for putting his name to certain notes on the infamous” Essay on Woman.“In 1765, anotber edition of the second part of” The Divine Legation“was published, as volumes III. IV. and V.; the two parts printed in 1755 being considered as volumes I. and II. It was this edition which produced a very angry controversy between him and Dr. Lowth, whom in many respects he found more than his equal. (See Lowth, p. 438.) On this occasion was published,” The second part of an epistolary Correspondence between the bishop of Gloucester and the late professor of Oxford, without an Imprimatur, i.e. without a cover to the violated Laws of Honour and Society,“1766, 8vo. In 1776, he gave a new edition of” The Alliance between Church and State;“and” A Sermon preached before the incorporated Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in foreign Parts, at the anniversary Meeting in the parish church of St. Mary-le-bow, on Friday, Feb. 21,“8vo. The next year produced a third volume of his” Sermons,“dedicated to lady Mansfield and with this, and a single” Sermon preached at St. Lawrence-Jewry on Thursday, April 30, 1767, before his royal highness Edward duke of York, president, and the governors of the London Hospital. &c.“4to, he closed his literary labours. His faculties continued unimpaired for some time after this period; and, in 1769, he gave the principal materials to Mr. Ruffhead, for his” Life of Mr. Pope." He also transferred 500l. to lord Mansfield, judge Wilmot, and Mr. Charles Yorke, upon trust, to found a lecture in the form of a course of sermons; to prove the truth of revealed religion in general, and of the Christian in particular, from the completion of the prophecies in the Old and New Testament, which relate to the Christian church, especially to the apostacy of Papal Rome. To this foundation we owe the admirable introductory letters of bishop Hurd and the well- adapted continuation of bishops Halifax and Bagot, Dr. Apthorp, the Rev. R. Nares, and others. It is a melancholy reflection, that a life spent in the constant pursuit of knowledge frequently terminates in the loss of those powers, the cultivation and improvement of which are attended to with too strict and unabated a degree of ardour. This was in some degree the misfortune of Dr. Warburton. Like Swift and the great duke of Marlborough, he gradually sunk into a situation in which it was a fatigue to him to enter into general conversation. There were, however, a few old and valuable friends, in whose company, even to the last, his mental faculties were exerted in their wonted force; and at such times he would appear cheerful for several hours, and on the departure of his friends retreat as it were within himself. This melancholy habit was aggravated by the loss of his only son, a very promising young gentleman, who died of a consumption but a short time before the bishop himself resigned to fate June 7, 1779, in the eighty-first year of his age. A neat marble monument has been lately erected in the cathedral of Gloucester, with the inscription below *.

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, was of low extraction, and born in Oxfordshire about 1667. Jacob said of him, in his Lives of the Poets, that he kept a public house in the city, but in a genteel way, which was much frequented by those who were adverse to the Whig administration. Ward, however, was affronted when he read this account, not because it made him an enemy to the Whigs, or the keeper of a public house, but because his house was said to be in the city. In a book, therefore, called “Apollo’s Maggot,” he declared this account to be a great falsity, protesting that his public house was not in the city, but in Moorfelds. Oldys says he lived a while in Gray’s-­Inn, and for some years after kept a public house in Moorfields, then in Clerkenwell, and lastly a punch-house in Fulwood’s-Rents, within one door of Gray’s-Inn, where he would entertain any company who invited him with many stories and adventures of the poets and authors he had acquaintance with. He was honoured with a place in the “Dunciad” by Pope, whom, however he contrived to vex, by retorting with some spirit. He died June 20, 1731, and was buried the 27th of the same month in St. Pancras church-yard, with one mourning-coach for his wife and daughter to attend his hearse, as himself had directed in his poetical will, which was written by him June 24, 1725. This will was printed in Appleby’s Journal, Sept. 28, 1731. Ward is most distinguished by his well-known “London Spy,” a coarse, but in some respect a true, description of London manners. He wrote one dramatic piece, called “The Humours of a Coffee-house,” and some poems in the Hudibrastic style, but not “England’s Reformation,” as asserted in Mr. Reed’s edition of the Biog. Dram. 1782. That was the production of Thomas Ward, who will be mentioned hereafter.

He had not been in this noble family long before the visitation of the university of Oxford began; the effect of which was, that many learned and eminent persons were turned out, and among them Mr. Greaves, the Savilian professor of astronomy, who had a little before distinguished himself by his work upon the Egyptian pyramids. Mr. Greaves laboured to procure Ward for his successor, whose abilities in this way were universally known and acknowledged, and effected it. Ward then entered himself of Wadham-college, for the sake of Dr. Wilkins, who was the warden; and, Oct. 1649, was incorporated master of arts. At this time there were several learned men of the university, and in the city, who often met at the warden’s lodgings in Wadham college, and sometimes elsewhere, to improve themselves by making philosophical experiments. Among these were Dr. Wilkins and Mr. Ward, Mr. Robert Boyle, Dr. Willis, Dr. Goddard, Dr. Wallis, Dr. Bathurst, Mr. Rooke, &c. Besides reading his astronomical lectures, Mr. Ward preached frequently, though not obliged to it, for sir Henry Savile had exempted his professors from all university exercises, that they might have the more leisure to attend to the employment he designed them for. Mr. Ward’s sermons were strong, methodical, and clear, and sometimes pathetic and eloquent.

In 1654, both the Savilian professors performed their exercise in order to proceed doctors in divinity; and, when they were to be presented, Wallis claimed precedency. (See Wallis.) This occasioned a dispute; which being decided in favour of Ward, who was really the senior, Wallis went out grand compounder, and by that means obtained the precedency. In 1657 he was elected principal of Jesus-college by the direction of Dr. Mansell, who had been ejected from that headship many years before; but Cromwell put in one Francis Howell, with a promise of So/. a year to Dr. Ward, which was never paid. In 1659 he was chosen president of Trinity-college, although absolutely disqualified for the office, and was therefore obliged, at the restoration, to resign it. At that time, however, he was presented to the vicarage of St. Lawrence-Jewry: for, though he was not distinguished by his sufferings during the exile of the royal family, yet he was known to be so averse to the measures of the late times, and to be so well affected to the royal cause, that his compliances were forgiven. He was installed also, in 1660, in the precentorship of the church of Exeter. In 1661 he became fellow of the Royal Society, and dean of Exeter; and the following year was advanced to the bishopric of that church. Dr. Pope tells us, he was promoted to that see, without knowing any thing of it, by the interest of the duke of Albemarle, sir Hugh Pollard, and other gentlemen, whom he had obliged during his residence at Exeter.

As an antiquary, sir James Ware must ever be held in veneration by his countrymen. He was the Camden of Ireland, and was deficient only in not understanding the Irish language; yet major Vallancey observes, that considering his ignorance of that language, he did much. “His works are the outlines and materials of a great plan, which he enjoyed neither life nor abilities to finish; and it is much to be lamented that he had not the good fortune to meet with so experienced and intelligent an amanuensis as Mac Terbiss sooner.” He found, however, an excellent editor in Walter Harris, esq. who married his grand-daughter, and published all his works, except the Annals of Ireland, in 1739 1745, 3 vols. fol. ornamented with engravings. These were reprinted in 1764, 2 vols. foi. a work which now bears a very high price. Sir James Ware’s ms collections relative to Ireland were purchased of his heir by lord Clarendon, when lord-lieutenant in 1686, and after his death by the duke of Chandos, whom the public spirited dean of St. Patrick’s in vain solicited to deposit them in the public library at Dublin. These underwent a second dispersion by public auction. Dr. Milles, dean of Exeter, whose uncle had considerable property in Ireland, purchased a large part, and deposited them in the British Museum; Dr. Rawlinson bought others, and bequeathed them to the library of St. John’s-college, Oxford, and some part fell into the hands of lord Newport, chancellor of Ireland. Of these Mss. a catalogue was printed at Dublin about 1641, and another at Oxford in 1697, in the “Catalogue of Mss. of England and Ireland.” Sir James was a man of a charitable disposition, and frequently contributed considerable sums of money to the relief of the indigent, especially to decayed royalists, whom he also often invited to his hospitable table. Harris says he always forgave the fees of office to widows, clergymen, and clergymen’s sons, as we have already noticed; and adds, that he was frequently known to lend -money, where he had no prospect of repayment, not knowing how to deny any body who asked. On one occasion, a house in Dublin, forfeited by the rebellion, being granted to him, he sent for the widow and children of the forfeiting person, and conveyed it back to them.

, knight of the order of the polar star, secretary to the royal academy of sciences at Stockholm, F. R. S. one of the eight foreign members of the academy of sciences at Paris, and member of the academies of St. Petersburg, Upsal, Gottingen, Copenhagen, and Drontheim, was born Sept. 22, 1717, and became secretary to the Stockholm academy in 1749. In this country he is probably most known from his tables for computing the eclipses of Jupiter’s satellites, which are annexed to the Nautical Almanac of 1779. We know not that he has published any separate work but in the “Transactions of the Stockholm Academy,” are 52 memoirs by him, besides several in the “Philosophical Transactions,” and in the “Acta Societatis Upsaliensis.” He died at the observatory at Stockholm, Dec. 13, 1783.

Warham now, according to lord Bacon, began much to gain upon the king’s opinion, and having executed his office of master of the rolls, as well as his other employments, with great ability, and with much reputation, he was in 1502 made keeper of the great seal of England, and on the first of January following lord high chancellor. In the beginning of 1503 he was advanced to the see of London. In the preceding year the king’s eldest son Arthur prince of Wales was married to Catherine of Arragon, but died soon after, and Henry’s avarice rendering him unwilling to restore Catherine’s dowry, which was 200,000 ducats, he proposed that she should marry his younger son Henry, now prince of Wales. But there being great reason to believe that the marriage between prince Arthur and Catherine had been really consummated, Warham remonstrated, in very strong terms, against this preposterous measure, and told the king, that he thought it was neither honourable, nor well-pleasing to God. In this, however, he was opposed by Fox bishop of Winchester, who insisted that the pope’s dispensation could remove all impediments, either sacred or civil. This marriage, it is well-known, afterwards took place, and was the cause of some of the most important events in English history.

Dr. Warner’s son, the late Dr. John Warner, was of Trinity college, Cambridge, B. A. 1758, M. A. 1761, and D. D. 1773. For many years he was preacher at a chapel in Long Acre, which was his private property. In 1771 he was presented to the united rectories of HocklifTe and Chalgrave, in Bedfordshire, and afterwards to the rectory of Stourton, in Wilts. Having resided in France at the sera of the revolution he imbibed all those principles which produced it, and although no man could be more an enemy to the atrocities which followed, they made no difference in his republican attachments. He is known in the literary world by a singular publication entitled “Metronariston,” and wrote the *' Memoirs of Mekerchus," in the Gentleman’s Magazine. He died, after a few days illness, in St. John’s-square, Clerkenwell, Jan. 22, 1800, aged sixtyfour.

ver, one of Mr. Warton’s pupils, who could not write for themselves. Kiddington, Oxon. on the presentation of George Henry earl of Litchfield, then chancellor of the university, a nobleman whose memory he afterwards honoured by an epitaph. In 1774 he published the first volume of his “History of English Poetry,” the most important of all his works, and to the completion of which the studies of his whole life appear to have been bent. How much it is to be regretted that he did not live to complete his plan, every student in ancient literature must be deeply sensible. He intended to have carried the history down to the commencement 6f the eighteenth century. A second volume accordingly appeared in 1778, and a third in 1781, after which he probably relaxed from his pursuit, as at the period of his death in 1.790, a few sheets only of the fourth volume were printed, and no part left in a state for printing. His original intention was to have comprised the whole in two or three volumes, but it is now evident, and he probably soon became aware, that five would have scarcely been sufficient if he continued to write on the same scale, and to deviate occasionally into notices of manners, laws, customs, &c. that had either a remote, or an immediate connection with his principal subject. What his reasons were for discontinuing his labours, cannot now be ascertained. It is well known to every writer that a work of great magnitude requires temporary relaxation, or a change of employment, and may admit of both without injury; but he might probably find that it was now less easy to return with spirit to his magnum opus, than in the days of more vigour and activity. It is certain that he wished the public to think that he was making his usual progress, for in 1785, when he published “Milton’s Juvenile Poems,” he announced the speedy publication of the fourth volume of the history, of which, from that time to his death, ten sheets only were finished. His brother, Dr. Joseph, was long supposed to be engaged in completing this fourth volume. In one of his letters lately published by Mr. Wooll, and dated 1792, he says, “At any leisure I get busied in finishing the last volume of Mr. Warton’s History of Poetry, which I have engaged to do, for the booksellers are clamorous to have the book finished (though the ground I am to go over is so beaten) that it may be a complete work.” Yet on his death in 1800, it did not appear that he had made any progress . Mr. Warton’s biographer has traced the origin of this work to Pope, who, according to Ruffhead, had sketched a plan of a history of poetry, dividing the poets into classes or schools; but Ruffhead’s list of poets is grossly erroneous. Gray, however, Mr. Mason informs us, had meditated a history of English poetry, in which Mason was to assist him. Their design was to introduce specimens of the Provencal poetry, and of the Scaidic, British, and Saxon, as preliminary to what first deserved to be called English poetry about the time of Chaucer, from whence their history, properly so called, was to commence. Gray, however, was deterred by the magnitude of the undertaking; and being informed that Warton was employed on a similar design, more readily relinquished his own.

of one of the colleges. Mr. Mant, who Warton’s life-time is not known. The

It is almost needless to say that the progress of Warton’s History afforded the highest gratification to every learned and elegant mind. Hitson, however, whose learning appears to have been dear to him only as it administered to his illiberality, attacked our author in a pamphlet entitled “Observations on the three first volumes of the History of English Poetry, in a familiar letter to the author,” 1782. In this, while he pointed out some real inaccuracies, for which he might have received the thanks of the historian, his chief object seems to have been to violate, by low scurrility and personal acrimony, every principle of liberal criticism, and of that decorous interchange of respect which men of learning, not otherwise acquainted, preserve between one another. What could have provoked all this can be known only to those who have dipped into a heart rendered callous by a contempt for every thing sacred and social.

To the industry which he employed in all his literary undertakings, there can be no doubt he was indebted for much of that placid temper and contentment which distinguished him as a resident member of the university. The miseries of indolence are known only to those who have no regular pursuit, nothing in view, however easy or arduous, nothing by which time may be shortened by occupation, and occupation rendered easy by habit. To all this waste of time and talent Warton was a stranger. During the long vacation, indeed, he generally resided with his brother at Winchester, but even this was a change of place rather than of occupation. There he found libraries, scholars, and critics, and could still indulge his delight in the “cloysters pale,” “the tapered choir,” and “sequester'd isles of the deep dome;” and there, as well as at home, he continued his researches, and enjoyed solitude or society in such proportions as suited his immediate inclination.

In 1751, his patron the duke of Bolton invited him to be his companion on a tour to the south of France. For this, Mr. Wooll informs us, he had two motives, “the society of a man of learning and taste, and the accommodation of a Protestant clergyman, who, immediately on the death of his duchess, then in a confirmed dropsy, could marry him to the lady with whom he lived, and who was universally known and distinguished by the name of Polly Peachum.” Whichever of these motives predominated in the duke’s mind, it is much to be regretted that our author so far forgot what was due to his character and profession as to accept the offer. But if any circumstance, besides the consciousness of doing wrong, could embitter the remembrance of this solitary blemish in his public life, it was, that, after all, the only hopes which could justify his compliance were very ungraciously disappointed. For some reason or other, he was obliged to leave his patron, and come to England before the duchess died, and when that event took place, and he solicited permission to return to the duke, he had the mortification to learn that the ceremony had been performed by Mr. Devisme, chaplain to the embassy at Turin.

The personal character of Dr. Warton continues to be the theme of praise with all who knew him. Without affectation of superior philosophy, he possessed an independent spirit; and amidst what would have been to others very bitter disappointments, he was never known to express the language of discontent or envy. As a husband and parent, he displayed the tenderest feelings mixed with that prudence which implies sense as well as affection. His manners partook of what has been termed the old court: his address was polite, and even elegant, but occasionally it had somewhat of measure and stateliness. Having left the university after a short residence, he mixed early with the world, sought and enjoyed the society of the fair sex, and tempered his studious habits with the tender and polite attentions necessary in promiscuous intercourse. In this respect there was a visible difference between him and his brother, whose manners were more careless and unpolished. In the more solid qualities of the heart, in true benevolence, kindness, hospitality, they approached more closely. Yet though their inclinations and pursuits were congenial, and each assisted the other in his undertakings, it may be questioned whether at any time they could have exchanged occupations. With equal stores of literature, with equal refinement of taste, it may be questioned whether the author of the Essay on Pope could have pursued the History of English poetry, or whether the historian of poetry could have written the papers we find in the Adventurer.

His biographer has considered his literary character under the three heads of a poet, a critic, and an instructor; but it is as a critic principally that he will be known to posterity, and as one who, in the language of Johnson, has taught “how the brow of criticism may be smoothed, and how she may be enabled, with all her severity, to attract and to delight.” A book, indeed, of more delightful variety than his Essay on Pope, has not yet appeared, nor one in which there is a more happy mixture of judgment and sensibility. It did not, however, flatter the current opinions on the rank of Pope among poets, and the author desisted from pursuing his subject for many years. Dr. Johnson said that this was owing “to his not having been able to persuade the world to be of his opinion as to Pope.” This was probably the truth, but not the whole truth. Motives of a delicate nature are supposed to have had some share in inducing him to desist for a time. Warburton was yet alive, the executor of Pope and the guardian of his fame, and Warburton was no less the active and zealous friend and correspondent of Thomas Warton; nor was it any secret that Warburton furnished Ruffhead with the materials for his Life of Pope, the chief object of which was a rude and impotent attack on the Essay. Warburton died in 1779, and in 1782, Dr. Warton completed his Essay, and at length persuaded the world that he did not differ from the common opinion so much as was supposed *. Still by pointing out what is not poetry, he gave unpardonable offence to those, whose names appear among poets, but whom he has reduced to moralists and versifiers.

The plenipotentiaries who framed the treaty of Aix la Chapelle, by leaving the boundaries of the British and French territories in North America unfixed, had sown the seeds of a new war, at the moment when they concluded a peace. The limits of Canada and Louisiana, furnished a motive, or a pretext, for one of the most successful but one of the most bloody and wasteful wars in which Great Britain had ever been engaged. In the disputes which arose between the French and English officers on this subject, major Washington was employed by the governor of Virginia, in a negotiation with the French governor of Fort du Quesne (now Pitsburgh); who threatened the English frontiers with a body of French and their Indian allies. He succeeded in averting the invasion; but hostilities becoming inevitable, he was in the next year appointed lieutenant colonel of a regiment raised by the colony for its own defence; to the command of which he soon after succeeded. The expedition of general Braddock followed in 1755; of which the fatal issue is too well known to require being described by us. Colonel Washington served in that expedition only as a volunteer; but such was the general confidence in his talents, that he may be said to have conducted the retreat. Several British officers lately alive, attested the calmness and intrepidity which he shewed in that difficult situation, and the voluntary obedience which was so cheerfully paid by the whole army to his superior mind. After having acted a distinguished part in a subsequent and more successful expedition to the Ohio, he was obliged by ill health, in 1758, to resign his military situation. The sixteen years which followed of the life of Washington, supply few materials for the biographer. Having married Mrs. Curtis, a Virginian lady of amiable character and respectable connections, he settled at his beautiful seat of Mount Vernon, of which we have had so many descriptions; where, with the exception of such attendance as was required by his duties as a magistrate and a member of the assembly, his time was occupied by his domestic enjoyments, and the cultivation of his estate, in a manner well suited to the tranquillity of his unambitious mind. At the end of this period he was called by the voice of his country from this state of calm and secure though unostentatious happiness.

It must not, however, be concealed, that some of the British commanders gave him advantages which he surely did not expect; and it has been thought that more than once they had it in their power to annihilate his army, merely by following up their victories. The issue of the contest is well known.

The government of America had none of those salutary prejudices to employ which in every other country were used with success to open the eyes of the people to the enormities of the French revolution. It had, on the contrary, to qontend with the prejudices of the people in the most moderate precautions against internal confusion, in the most measured and guarded resistance to the unparalleled insults and enormous encroachments of France. Without zealous support from the people, the American government was impotent. It required a considerable time, and it cost an arduous and dubious struggle, to direct the popular spirit against a sister republic, established among a people to whose aid the Americans ascribed the establishment of their independence. It is probable, indeed, that no policy could have produced this effect, unless it had been powerfully aided by the crimes of the French government, which have proved the strongest allies of all established governments; which have produced such a general disposition to submit to any known tyranny, rather than rush into all the unknown and undefinable evils of civil confusion, with the horrible train of new and monstrous tyrannies of which it is usually the forerunner. Of these circumstances Washington availed himself with uncommon address. He employed the horror excked by the atrocities of the French revolution for the most honest and praiseworthy purposes; to preserve the internal quiet of his country; to assert the dignity, and to maintain the rights, of the commonwealth which he governed, against foreign enemies. He avoided war without incurring the imputation of pusillanimity. He cherished the detestation of Americans for anarchy, without weakening the spirit of civil liberty, and he maintained, and even consolidated, the authority of government, without abridging the privileges of the. people.

, a very learned scholar, was born in Yorkshire in 1672, and educated at Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1694, that of master in 1698, and that of bachelor of divinity in 1707. Before this he had assisted Kuster in his edition of Suidas, as appears by a letter of his, giving an account of that eminent critic. (See Kuster.) In 1710 Wasse became more generally known to the literary world by his edition of “Sallust,” 4to, the merits of which have been long acknowledged. He amended the text by a careful examination of nearly eighty manuscripts, as well as some very ancient editions. In Dec. 1711 he was presented to the rectory of Aynhoe in Northamptonshire, by Thomas Cartwright, esq. where John Whiston (the bookseller) says “he lived a very agreeable and Christian life, much esteemed by that worthy family and his parishioners.” He had an equal regard for them, and never sought any other preferment. He had a very learned and choice library, in which he passed most of his time, and assisted many of the learned in their publications. He became at length a proselyte to Dr. Clarke’s Arianism, and corresponded much with him and with Will. Whiston, as appears by Whiston’s Life of Dr. Clarke, and his own life. According to Whiston he was the cause of Mr. Wasse’s embracing the Arian sentiments, which he did with such zeal, as to omit the Athanasian creed in the service of the church, and other passages which militated against his opinions. Whiston calls him “more learned than any bishop in England since bishop Lloyd,” and informs us of the singular compliment Bentley paid to him, “When I am dead, Wasse will be the most learned man in England.”

In 1714, he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, at the exercise for which he gave a proof of no common abilities. He chose for his first question, upon which consequently his thesis was made, “Whether Arian subscription be lawful?” a question, says Mr. Seed, worthy of him who abhorred all prevarications, and had the capacity to see through and detest those evasive arts, with which some would palliate their disingenuity. When Dr. James, the professor, had endeavoured to answer his thesis, and embarrass the question with the dexterity of a person long practised in all the arts of a subtle disputant, he immediately replied in an extempore discourse of about half an hour long, with such an easy flow of proper and significant words, and such an undisturbed presence of mind, as if he had been reading, what he afterwards printed, “The case of the Arian subscription considered.” He unravelled the professor’s fallacies, reinforced his own reasoning, and shewed himself so perfect a master of the language, the subject, and himself, that all agreed no one ever appeared to greater advantage. He was on this occasion happy in a first opponent Mr. (afterwards the celebrated bishop) Sherlock, who gave full play to his abilities, and called for all that strength of reason of which he was master. One singular consequence is said to have followed this exercise. I)r. Clarke, in the second edition of his “Scripture Doctrige,” &c. published in 17 19, omitted the following words, which were in his former edition of that book: “It is plain that a man may reasonably agree to such forms (of subscription to the thirty-nine articles) whenever he can in any sense at all reconcile them with scripture.” This is remarked by our author in the preface to his vindication of Christ’s divinity, as redounding to Dr. Clarke’s honour, and it is well known that Dr. Clarke afterwards constantly refused subscription.

, known chiefly as a translator of Horace, was born at Brechin in Scotland, 1710, and educated in St. Leonard’s college, St. Andrew’s, where he took his degrees, and was appointed professor of philosophy. When the college of St. Leonard was united by act of parliament to that of St. Salvador, 1747, he came to London, and completed his translation of Horace, 2 vols. 8vo, with notes, &c. which is in great esteem. But his dissipated life brought him into many wants, and he was frequently destitute of the common necessaries of life. In his latter years he taught the classics to private gentlemen; but his love of pleasure plunged him into new difficulties; and he sunk beneath his character as a scholar. He died in great want near London, 1756, in the forty-sixth year of his age, and was buried at the expence of the parish. Besides his translation of Horace, he wrote “The History of the Heathen Gods and Goddesses.”

, a gallant officer and able engineer, was the son of a grazier, who lived at Holbeach, in Lincolnshire, where he was born about 1737, and educated at Gosberton school. Here his genius for the mathematics soon discovered itself, and in 1753 he was a frequent contributor to the “Ladies Diary.” About this time his abilities became known to Mr. Whichcot, of HarpsweJJ, then one of the members of parliament for Lincolnshire, who introduced him to the royal academy at Woolwich; and he soon after obtained a commission in the corps of engineers. Under the celebrated mathematician, Thomas Simpson, Watson prosecuted his studies at Woolwich, and continued to write for the “Ladies Diary,” of which Simpson was at that time the editor. Such was Simpson’s opinion of Watson’s abilities, that at his decease he left him his unfinished mathematical papers, with a request that he would revise them, and make what alterations and additions he might think necessary; but of this privilege it seems to be doubted whether he made the best use. (See Simpson, p. 20.)

For near ten years colonel Watson was the chief engineer of Bengal, Bahar, aod Orissa, The East India company, in a great measure, owe their valuable possessions in that quarter to his unexampled exertions; for, in spite of party dispute, of bribery on the part of the nations then at war with the company, and of the numerous cabals which perplexed and embarrassed their councils, he executed the works of Fort- William, which will long remain a monument of his superior skill and, for its strength, this may justly be styled the Gibraltar of India. Nor are the works at Buge Buge, and Melancholy Point, constructed with less judgment. But he did not confine his studies to the military sciences. In 1776 he published a translation of Euler’s “Theorie complete de la construction et de la niancpuvre des vaisseaux,” with a supplement upon the action of oars, which he received in manuscript from Eulerjust before he had finished the translation of what was published. This translation he has enriched with many additions and improvements of his own; and he intended to have enlarged the work in a future edition, by making experiments for discovering the resistance of bodies when moving in a fluid; but it is not known if he left any papers on the subject.

This book, which is almost the only one of the kind in the English language, is of great importance in ship-building; for though the subjects are handled scientifically, yet such practical rules for constructing vessels to advantage might be drawn therefrom, as would amply repay the trouble of a close perusal. The colonel gave the best proof of this in the Nonsuch and Surprise frigates; the first of 36, the other of 32 guns. These were built under his particular direction by Mr. G. Louch, and a few black carpenters at Bengal, at his own expence, and proved the swiftest sailers of any ships hitherto known.

Mr. Watson’s other publications were, 1. “A Discourse preached at Halifax church, July 28, 1751, 8vo, entitled Moderation, or a candid disposition towards those that differ from us, recommended and enforced,” 8vo. This passed through a second edition. 2. “An Apology for his conduct yearly, on the 30th of January,” 8vo. To this is annexed, a sermon preached at Ripponden chapel, on Jan. 30, 1755, entitled “Kings should obey the Laws.” 3. “A Letter to the Clergy of the Church, known by the name of Unitas Fratrum, or Moravians, concerning a remarkable book of hymns used in their congregations, pointing out several inconsistencies and absurdities in the said book,” 1756, 8vo. 4. “Some account of a Roman station lately discovered on the borders of Yorkshire.” 5. “A mistaken passage in Bede’s Ecclesiastical History explained.” 6. “Druidical remains in or near the parish of Halifax, &c.” These three last are printed in the Archæologia. He had also made collections for the antiquities of Chester and of a part of Lancashire. The late Mr. Gilbert Wakefield, who married his niece, says, Mr. Watson was one of the hardest students he ever knew. His great excellence was a knowledge of antiquities, t>ut “he was by no means destitute of poetical fancy; had written, some good songs, and was possessed of a most copious collection of bon-mots, facetious stories, and humorous compositions of every kind, both in verse and prose, written out with uncommon accuracy and neatness.” From the same authority we learn that Mr. Watson had once a hudibrasric controversy with Dr. Byrom of Manchester.

At this time he had become a preacher; and a vacancy having happened in one of the churches of St. Andrew’s, he offered himself a candidate for that living, but was dis^­appointed, yet he succeeded in what proved more advantageous. Mr. Henry Rymer, who then taught logic at St. Salvador’s college, was in a very infirm state of health, and entertaining thoughts of retiring. Mr. Watson purchased, for no great sum of money, what, in familiar phraseology, may be termed the good-will of Mr. Rymer’s place; and with the consent of the other masters of St. Salvador’s, was appointed professor of logic. He obtained also a patent from the crown, constituting him professor of rhetoric and belles-lettres. The study of logic in St. Andrew’s, as in most other places, was at this time confined to syllogisms, modes, and figures. Mr. Watson, whose mind had been opened by conversation, and by reading the writings of the literati who had begun to flourish in the Scotch capital, prepared, and read to his students, a course of metaphysics and logic on the most enlightened plan; in which he analyzed the powers of the mind, aod entered deeply into the nature of truth or knowledge. Oil the death of principal Tullidelph, Dr. Watson, through the interest of the earl of Kinnoul, was appointed his successor, in which station he lived only a few years, dying in 1780. He is chiefly known in the literary world by his “History of Philip II.” a very interesting portion of history, and in which the English, under queen Elizabeth, had a considerable share. He wrote also the history of Philip III. but lived only to complete four books; the last two were written, and the whole published in 4to, 1783 (afterwards reprinted in 2 vols. 8vo), by Dr. William Thomson, at the desire of the guardians of Dr. Watson’s children, whom he had by his wife, who was daughter to Mr. Shaw, professor of divinity in St. Mary’s-college, St. Andrew’s.

Jn 1768 Dr. Watson published “An account of a series of Experiments, instituted with a view of ascertaining the most successful method of inoculating the Small-pox,” 8vo. These experiments were designed to prove whether there was any specific virtue in preparing medicines; whether the disease was more favourable when the matter was taken from the natural or the artificial pock; and whether the crude lymph, or the highly concocted matter, produced different effects. The result was, what succeeding and ample experience confirmed, that after due abstinence from animal food, and heating liquors, it is of small importance what kind of variolous matter is used; and that no preparatory specifics are to be regarded. Dr. Watson also published various papers in “The London Medical Observations,” and other similar works, of which it is unnecessary to give a detailed account, as they are well known to medical practitioners.

This son, the eldest of nine children, was a remarkable instance of early attention to books. He began to learn Latin at the age of four, probably at home, and was afterwards taught Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, by the Rev. John Pinhorne, master of the free-school at Southampton, rector of All-Saints in the same place, prebendary of Leekford, and vicar of Eling in the New Forest. To this gentleman Mr. Watts afterwards inscribed an elegant Latin ode, which is inserted among his “Lyric Poems.” The proficiency he made at this school induced some persons of property to raise a sum sufficient to maintain him at one of the universities; but his determination was soon fixed to remain among the dissenters, with whom his ancestors had long been connected. In 1690, he went to an academy superintended by the Rev. Thomas Rowe, where he had for his companions Hughes the poet, and Horte, afterwards archbishop of Tuam, Mr. Samuel Say, afterwards an eminent preacher among the dissenters, and other persons of literary eminence. It is well known that Dr. Watts strove to wean Hughes from his attachment to the stage. In 1693, he joined the congregation which was under the care of Mr. Rowe, as a communicant.

While in this afflictigg situation, he was received into the house of sir Thomas Abney, of Newington, knight, and alderman of London, where he was entertained with the utmost tenderness, friendship, and liberality, for the space of thirty-six years. Sir Thomas died about eight years after Dr. Watts became an inmate in his family: but he continued with lady Abney, and her daughters, to the end of his life. Lady Abney died about a year after him; and the last of the family, Mrs. Elizabeth Abney, in 1782. “A coalition like this,” says Dr. Johnson, “a state in which the notions of patronage and dependence were overpowered by the perception of reciprocal benefits, deserves a particular memorial; and I will not withhold from the reader Dr. Gibbons’s representation, to which regard is to be paid, as to the narrative of one who writes what he knows, and what is known likewise to multitudes besides.”

, a celebrated printer in Paris, began to print Greek authors in 1530, and flourished for more than twenty years. His editions were so extremely correct, that not above two faults were sometimes found in a folio volume, which was probably owing to his having had Sylburgius, one of the best scholars and critics then in Germany, for the corrector of his press. He was brought into trouble in 1534 for having sold a book of Erasmus, “De esu interdicto carniuui,” which had been censured by the faculty of divinity and, according to father Garasse, he fell into poverty for his impiety, in printing an anonymous book, in favour of the salvation of infants dying before baptism. However, from the flourishing circumstances of his son, Bayle infers that he was not reduced to poverty. The time of his death is not known; but we are not able to trace him beyond 1552.

It was about 1760 that he began his improvements in the Staffordshire potteries, and not only improved the composition, forms, and colours of the old wares, but likewise invented, in 1763, a new species of ware, for which he obtained a patent, and which being honoured by her majesty’s approbation and patronage, received the name of queen’s ware. Continuing his experimental researches, Mr. Wedgwood afterwards invented several other species of earthen-ware and porcelain, of which the principal are: 1. A terra cotta; resembling porphyry, granite, Egyptian pebble, and other beautiful stones of the siliceous or crystalline order. 2. Basaltes, or black ware; a black porcelain biscuit of nearly the same properties with the natural stone, receiving a high polish, resisting all the acids, and bearing without injury a very strong fire. 3. White porcelain biscuit; of a smooth wax-like appearance, of similar properties with the preceding. 4. Jasper; a white porcelain of exquisite beauty, possessing the general properties of basaltes; together with the singular one of receiving through its whole substance, from the admixture of metallic calces, the same colours which those calces give to glass or enamels in fusion; a property possessed by no porcelain of ancient or 1 modern composition. 5. Bamboo, or cane-coloured biscuit porcelain, of the same nature as the white porcelain biscuit. And 6. A porcelain biscuit remarkable for great hardness, little inferior to that of agate; a property which, together with its resistance to the strongest acids, and its impenetrability to every known liquid, renders it well adapted for the formation of mortars, and many different kinds of chemical vessels. The above six distinct species of ware, together with the queen’s ware first noticed, have increased by the industry and ingenuity of different manufacturers, and particularly by Mr. Wedgwood and his son, into an almost endless variety of forms for ornament and use. These, variously painted and embellished, constitute nearly the whole of the present fine earthen-wares and porcelains of English manufacture.

In another note, it is maliciously recorded that he received at one time the sum of five hundred pounds for secret service, among the other excellent authors hired to write anonymously for the ministry. That sum did certainly pass through his hands; but it is now well known that it was for the use of sir Richard Steele. And in a piece, said, but falsely, to have been written by Mr. Welsted, called “The Characters of the Times,” printed in 1728, 8vo, he is made to say of himself, that “he had, in his youth, raised so great expectations of his future genius, that there was a kind of struggle between the two universities, which should have the honour of his education; to compound this, he civilly became a member of both, and, after having passed some time at the one, he removed to the other. Thence he returned to town, where he became the darling expectation of all the polite writers, whose encouragement he acknowledged, in his occasional poems, in a manner that will make no small part of the fame of his protectors. It also appears from his works, that he was happy in the patronage of the most illustrious characters of the present age Encouraged by such a combination in his favour, he published a book of poems, some in the Ovidian, some in the Horatian, manner in both which the most exquisite judges pronounced he even rivalled his masters. His love- verses have rescued that way of writing from contempt. In translations he has given us the very soul and spirit of his authors. His odes, his epistles, his verses, his love-tales, all are the most perfect things in all poetry.” If this pleasant representation of our author’s abilities were just, it would seem no wonder, if the two universities should strive with each other for the honour of his education. Our author, however^ does not appear to have been a mean poet; he had certainly, from nature, a good genius; but, after he came to town, he became a votary to pleasure; and the applauses of his friends, which taught him to overvalue his talents, perhaps slackened his diligence; and, by making him trust solely to nature, slight the assistance of art. Prefixed to the collection of his poems is “A Dissertation concerning the Perfection of the English language, the State of Poetry,” &c.

That his genius was better adapted to his present than his former situation, and that, in fact, he had hitherto been only acting a part ^ soon appeared from his conduct as president of the council of York. The council of York, or of the North, was peculiarly suited to the genius of an absolute monarchy. The same forms of administering justice' had prevailed in the four northern counties, as in other parts of England, till the thirty-first year of Henry VIII.; when an insurrection, attended with much bloodshed and disorder, induced that monarch to grant a commission of oyer and terminer to the archbishop of York, with some lawyers and gentlemen of that county, for the purpose of investigating the grounds of those outrages, and bringing the malefactors to punishment according to the laws of the land. The good effects of the commission in restoring tranquillity, caused its duration to be prolonged; and, on the re-appearance of commotions in those quarters, it was, in succeeding times, frequently renewed. An abuse gradually arose out of a simple expedient. Elizabeth, and after her, James, found it convenient to alter the tenour of the commission, to increase the sphere of its jurisdiction, and to augment its circumscribed legal authority by certain discretionary powers. And to such an ascendancy was this court raised, by the enlarged instructions granted to Wentworth, that the council of York now engrossed the whole jurisdiction of the four northern counties, and embraced the powers of the courts of common law, the chancery, and even the exorbitant authority of the star-chamber. Convinced that the monarch would in vain aspire to an independent supremacy, without imparting his unlimited powers to his subordinate officers, Wentworth still felt his extensive authority too circumscribed, and twice applied for an enlargement of its boundaries. His commission, says Clarendon, “placed the northern counties entirely beyond the protection of the common law; it included fifty-eight instructions, of which scarcely one did not exceed or directly violate the common law; and by its natural operation, it had almost overwhelmed the country under the sea of arbitrary power, and involved the people in a labyrinth of distemper, oppression, and poverty.” It is allowed also that the office had a bad effect on his temper, which, although naturally warm, had been long corrected by a sound and vigorous judgment; but now his passions often burst forth with a violence, neither demanded by the importance of the occasion, nor consistent with the former moderation of his character. In 1631 he was appointed lord-deputy of Ireland; and the following year, after burying his second wife and marrying a third, he went over to his new government, invested with more ample powers than had been granted to his predecessors. This, however, did not prevent him from soliciting a farther extension of those powers; and which accordingly he obtained. He found the revenue of Ireland under great anticipations, and loaded with a debt of 106,000l. This occasioned the army to be both ill clothed and ill paid, and the excesses of the soldiers were great. He set himself, however, in a short time, to remedy these inconveniences; and having procured the continuance of the voluntary contribution of the nobility, gentry, and freeholders, he was very punctual in the payment of the soldiers, which put a stop to many of their'disorders; and he was very successful in restoring military discipline. In July 1634, he assembled a parliament at Dublin, which granted six subsidies, payable out of lands and goods, each subsidy consisting of about 45, Ooo/. to be raised in four years; the greatest sum ever known to be granted to the crown in that kingdom. The disposal of this money being entirely left to lord Wentworth, he judiciously employed it in paying the army, in reducing the incumbrances upon the public, and in all branches of government. These services greatly recommended lord Wentworth to the king, who testified his satisfaction in what he had done; but it has been complained that his government was not equally acceptable to the people. He had greater abilities than policy, and by a haQghty behaviour irritated some of the most considerable persons in the kingdom.

Before he had been many months in Ireland, he solicited the king to raise him to the dignity of an earl, but had the mortification to meet with a repulse. The king seems to have been unwilling to bestow this honour on one who had incurred a considerable share of popular odium, and whose misconduct his majesty would have been thought to approve had he given such a decided proof of royal favour. About two years after, he made the same application to the king, who again declined the request, but now in a manner so pointed and decisive as seemed to bar all hopes of compliance. He assured Wentworth that the cause of his request, namely, to refute the malicious insinuations of his enemies, and prove that his majesty disbelieved their calumnies, would, if known, rather encourage than silence his enemies, who would become more bold and dangerous when they found that they were feared. But this did not reconcile Wentworth to the disappointment, which he continued to feel bitterly, until the king sending for him in September 1639, he was in January following raised to his long-desired dignity, the earldom of Stratford. At the same time he was raised from the title of deputy to that of lord-lieutenant of Ireland, and was likewise made a knight of the garter.

, an English divine, of whom some account may be acceptable, preparatory to that of his more celebrated son, was the son of a nonconformist minister, ejected in 1662. He was born about 1662. He was educated in nonconformist sentiments, which he soon relinquished, owing to the violent prejudices of some of his sect in favour of the murder of Charles I. He spent some time at a private academy, and at the age of sixteen walked to Oxford, and entered himself of Exeter college, as a servitor. He had at this time no mure than two pounds sixteen shillings, nor any prospect of 'future supply but from his own exertions. But by industry, and probably by assisting his fellow students, he supported himself until he took his bachelor’s degree, without any preferment or assistance from ^his friends, except five shillings. He now came to London, having increased his little stock to 10l. 15s. Here he was ordained deacon, and obtained a curacy, which he held one year, when he was appointed chaplain of the Fleet. In this situation he remained but a year, and returned to London, where he again served a curacy for two years, during which time he married and had a son. He now wrote several pieces which brought him into notice and esteem, and a small living was given him in the country, that, if we mistake not, of South Ormesby, in the county of Lincoln. He was strongly solicited by the friends of James II. to support the measures of the court in favour of popery, with promises of preferment if he would comply with the king’s desire. But he absolutely refused to read the king’s declaration; and though surrounded with courtiers, soldiers, and informers, he preached a bold and pointed discourse against it, from Daniel iii. 17, 18. “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” When the revolution took place he wrote a work in defence of it, dedicated to queen Mary, who, in consequence of it, gave him the living of Epworth, in Lincolnshire, about 1693; and in 1723 he was presented to the living of Wroote, in the same county, in addition to Epworth, which last he held upwards of forty years.

In 1732 we find Mr. Wesley at London, whence he went to Putney, on a visit to the celebrated William Law, with whose writings he was greatly captivated. From this time also he began to read the “Theologia Germanica,” and other mystic writers, with whose opinions he coincided, as making religion to consist chiefly in contemplation, and inward attention to our own mind; but, says his biographer, it does not appear that he was less diligent in the instituted means of grace, nor less active in doing good to others than before. He was now known to many pious and respectable persons in London, who began to take notice of him. He heartily approved of the conduct of those welldispoaed persons who associated together to carry on a plan. for the suppression of vice, and spreading religion and virtue among the people; and in August 1732 was admitted into the society for the propagation of Christian knowledge.

, a gentleman of literary talents, and long known for his fine library and museum, was the son of Richard West, esq. of Alscott, in Warwickshire, said to be descended, according to family tradition, frona Leonard, a younger son of Thomas West, lord De la Warr, who died in 1525. He was educated at Baliol college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1726. He had an early attachment to the study of antiquities, and was elected F. S. A. in 1726, and was afterwards one of the vice-presidents. Of the Royal Society likewise he became a fellow in the same year, and was first treasurer, from Nov. 1736 to Nov. 1768, when he was elected president, and held that honourable office until his death, July 2, 1772. In 1741 he was chosen one of the representatives in parliament for St. Alban’s, and, being appointed one of the joint secretaries of the treasury, he continued in that office until 1762. His old patron, the duke of Newcastle, afterwards procured him a pension of 2000l. For what services so large a sum was granted, we are not told.

, lord-chancellor of Ireland, a lawyer of whom we have very little information, studied his profession in one of the Temples. He married Elizabeth, one of the two daughters of bishop Burnet. He was appointed king’s counsel the 24th of October, 1717; and in 1725, advanced to the office of lord-chancellor of Ireland. This high post he did not long enjoy, but died the 3d of December, 1726, in circumstances not adequate to the dignity which he had possessed. He left one son, a very promising young gentleman, who is sufficiently known to the public by his friendship with Mr. Walpole, afterwards lord Orford, in whose works is his correspondence, and with the celebrated poet Gray. Our author, the chancellor, wrote, “A Discourse concerning Treasons and Bills of Attainder,” 1714. He also compiled, chiefly from the Petyt Mss. in the Inner-Temple library, entitled “De Creatione Nobilium,” 2 vols. fol. a work called “An Inquiry into the Manner cf creating Peers/ 7 1719. He wrote some papers in the” Freethinker,“a periodical essay; and Whincop says, he was supposed to have written,” Hecuba," a tragedy, 1726, 4to,

The son of bishop Weston, styled from his being a privy counsellor, the Right Hon. Edward Weston, was born and educated at Eton, and afterwards studied and took his degrees at King’s college, Cambridge. His destination was to public life, at the commencement of which be became secretary to lord Townshend at Hanover during the king’s residence there in 1729, and continued several years in the office of lore! Harrington, as his secretary. He was also transmitter of the state papers, and one of the clerks of the signet. In 1741 he was appointed gazetteer; and in 1746, when he was secretary to lord Harrington, lord lieutenant of Ireland, he became a privy-counsellor of that kingdom. Our authorities do not give the date of his death, but it happened in the early part of the present reign. In 1753 he published a pamphlet on the memorable Jew bill; in 1755, “The Country Gentleman’s advice to his Son;” and in 1756, “A Letter to the right rev. the lord bishop of London,” on the earthquake at Lisbon, and the character of the times. He published also “Family Discourses, by a country gentleman,” re-published in 1776 by his son, Charles, under the title of “Family Discourses, by the late right hon. Edward Weston,” a name, we are properly told, “very eminently distinguished for abilities and virtue, and most highly honoured throughout the whole course of life, by the friendship and esteem of the best and greatest men of his time.” He left two sons, Charles, a clergyman, who died in Oct. 1801, and the rev. Stephen Weston, now living, well known as one of the most profound scholars, and what seldom can be said of men of that character, one of the first wits of the age.

In 1730 Wetstein published, in 4to, “Prolegomena ad Novi Testamenti Grseci editionem accuratissimam e vetustissimis Codd. Mss. denuo procurandam.” Before the publication of these- “Prolegomena,” some divines, from a dread of having the present text unsettled, had procured a decree from the senate of Basil, that Mr. Wetstein’s “undertaking was both trifling and unnecessary, and also dangerous;” they added too, but it does not appear upon what foundation, that his “New Testament savoured of Socinianism.” They now proceeded farther, and, by various means procured his being prohibited from officiating as a minister. Upon this, he went into Holland, being invited by the booksellers Wetsteins, who were his relations; and had not been long at Amsterdam before the remonstrants, or Arminians, named him to succeed Le Clerc, now superannuated and incapable, in the professorship of philosophy and history. But though they were perfectly satisfied of his innocence, yet they thought it necessary that he should clear himself in form before they admitted him and for this purpose he went to Basil, made a public apology, got the decree against him reversed, and returned to Amsterdam in May 1733. Here he went ardently on with his edition of the New Testament, sparing nothing to bring it to perfection, neither labour, nor expence, nor even journeys; for he came over a second time to England in 1746, when Mr. Gloster Ridley accommodated him with his manuscript of the Syriac version of the New Testament. At last he published it; the first volume in 1751, the second in 1752, folio. The text he left entirely as he found it; the various readings, of whwch he had collected more than any one before him, or all of them ^together, he placed under the text. Under these various readings he subjoined a critical commentary, containing observations which he had collected from an infinite number of Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, writers. At the end of his New Testament he published two epistles of Clemens Romanus, with a Latin version and preface, in which he endeavours to establish their genuineness. These epistles were never published before, nor even known to the learned, but were discovered by him in a Syriac manuscript of the New Testament.

In 1692 he published, in 8vo, “A Defence of Pluralities,” in which the subject is handled with great ingenuity; and the same year was printed, in two volumes folio, his “Anglia Sacra, sive Collectio Historiarum, partim antiquitus, partim recenter, scriptarum, de Archiepiscopis &, Episcopis Anglise, a prima Fidei Christianas susceptione ad annum MDXL.” He has been generally commended for having done great service to the ecclesiastical history of this kingdom by this work yet bishop Burnet, in his “Reflections” on Atterbury’s book of “The Rights, Powers, and Privileges, of an English Convocation,” tells us, that “he had in his hands a whole treatise, which contained only the faults of ten leaves of one of the volumes of the ‘ Anglia Sacra.’ They are, indeed,” adds he, “so many, and so gross.^ that often the faults are as many as the lines: sometimes they are two for one.” This may be perhaps asserting too much, but unquestionably the errors in transcription, from haste, or from employing improper amanuenses, are so considerable as to render it necessary to peruse it with great caution, otherwise it is a truly valuable collection. There is a copy of it in the Bodleian? library, among Mr. Gough’s books, with an immense addition of ms notes by bishop Kennet. Jn 1693, Wharton published, in 4to, “Bedae Venerabilis Opera queedam Theologica, nunc primum edita; nee non Historica antea semel edita:” and the same year, under the name of Anthony Harmer, “A Specimen of some errors and defects in the History of the Reformation of the Church of England, written by Gilbert Burnet, D. D.” 8vo. In the answer to this, addressed by way of letter to Dr. Lloyd bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, Dr. Burnet observes, that “he had not seen any one thing relating to his history which had pleased him so much as this specimen. It is plain,” says he, “that here is a writer, who has considered those times and that matter with much application; and that he is a master of this subject. He has the art of writing skilfully; and how much soever he may be wanting in a Christian temper, and in the decency that one who owns himself of our communion owed to the station I hold in it, yet in other respects he seems to be a very valuable man; so valuable, that I cannot, without a very sensible regret, see such parts and such industry like to be soured and spoiled with so ill a temper.” And afterwards, in his “Reflections’ 1 upon Atterbury’s book just mentioned, he speaks of the specimen in these words” Some years ago, a rude attack was made upon me under the disguised name of Anthony Harmer. His true name is well enough known, as also who was his patron: but I answered that specimen with the firmness that became me; and I charged the writer home to publish the rest of his “Reflections.” He had intimated, that he gave then but the sample, and that he had great store yet in reserve. I told him upon that, I would expect to see him make that good, and bring out all he had to say; otherwise, they must pass for slander and detraction. He did not think fit to write any more upon that, though he was as much solicited to it by some as he was provoked to it by myself.“In 1695 he published, in folio,” The History of the Troubles and Trials of Archbishop Laud;“the second part or volume of which was published after his death by his father, the Rev. Edmund Wharton, in 1700. This is one of the most useful collections of facts illustrative of the times in which Laud lived, that we are in possession of. He published also a new edition of Becatelli’s Life of Cardinal Pole, in Latin, with the confest between the ambassadors of England and France at the council of Constance. He published in 8vo,” Historia deEpiseopis & Decanis Londinensilxus, nee non de Episcopis & Decanis Assavensibus, a prima sedis utriusque fundatione ad annum MDXL.“Besides these works he left several pieces behind him, about which he had taken great pains: and two volumes of his” Sermons“have been printed in 8vo since his death. Among his Mss, are several English historians not yet published, which he had transcribed and collated with the originals, and prepared for the press; viz. 1.” Benedictus Abbas de Gestis Henrici secundi Regis Angliae, A. D. U70.“2.” Chronicon Nicolai Tribettt (vulgo de Trebeth) Dominicani, ab ann. 1136 ad ann, 1307.“3?” Chronicon Petri Ickham, Compilatio de Gestis Britonum & Anglorum.“4.” Stephani Birchington Monachi Cantuariensis Historia de regibus Angliae post conquestum.“5.” Liber nonus de miraculis Anglorum.“In some of these are contained vast collections out of the ancient and modem records relating to church affairs. Among his manuscripts was likewise” An Account of the Mss. in Lambeth Library“in which, besides giving a most exact catalogue of them, he had under every book transcribed all those treatises contained in them which were not yet published. Among the printed books, towards a new and more correct edition of which Wharton had considerably contributed, were the following: 1.” Historia Matt. Parkeri Archiepiscopi Cantuar. de antiquitate Britaonicae Ecclesiae,“&c. enlarged with notes, collections, and additions, partly made by Parker himself, and partly by others, and several by Wharton; together with the Life of the said Archbishop, as also that of St. Austin of Canterbury, written by George Acworth. 2.” Franciscus Godwinus de Praesulibus Angliae," with some notes. 3. Florentius Wigorniensis and Matthew of Westminster, both with many notes, corrections, and additions. He had likewise made notes on several of his own books already published by him; which it is probable were designed for additions to those books whenever they should receive a new impression. All these, which were purchased by archbishop Tenison, are now in the Lambeth Library.

, a learned traveller, was the son of colonel Wheler of Charing in Kent, and born in 1650 at Breda in Holland, his parents being then exiles there for having espoused the cause of Charles I. In 1667 he became a commoner of Lincolncollege in Oxford, under the tuition of the learned Dr. Hi kes, the deprived dean of Worcester,; but, before he had a degree conferred upon him. went tq travel; and, in the company of Dr. James Spon of -Lyonsj tpok a voyage from Venice to Constantinople, through the Lesser Asia, and from Zante through several parts of Greece tg Athens, and thence to Attica, Corinth, &c. They made great use of Pausanias as they journeyed through- the >; $jpumries of Greece and corrected and explained several traditions by means of this author. The primary object of these leaned travellers was to copy the inscriptions, and describe the antiquities and coins of Greece and Asia Minor, and particularly of Athens, where they sojourned a month. Some time after his return, he presented to Lincoln college, Oxford, a valuable collection of Greek and Latin Mss. which he had collected in his travels; upon which, in 1683, the degree of master of arts was conferred upon him, he being then a knight. He then took orders; and, in 1634, was installed into a prebend of the church of Durham. He was also made vicar of Basingstoke, and afterwards presented to the rich rectory of Houghton-le-Spring by bishop Crew his patron. He was created doctor of divinity by diploma, May 18, 1702; and died, Feb. 18, 1723-4.“He was interred at the west end of the nave of Durham cathedral, and by his own desire, as near as possible to the tomb of the venerable Bede, for whom he had an enthusiastic veneration In 1682, he published an account of his” Journey into Greece, in the company of Dr. Spoil of Lyons, in six books," folio. These travels are highly valued for their authenticity, and are replete with sound and instructive erudition to the medallist and antiquary. Sir George also appears, on all occasions, to have been attentive to the natural history of Greece, and particularly to the plants, of which he enumerates several hundreds in this volume, and gives the engravings of some. These catalogues sufficiently evince his knowledge of the botany of his time. He brought fVom the East several plants which had not been cultivated in Britain before. Among these, the Hypericum-Olympicum, (St. John’s Wort of Olympus) is a well-known plant, introduced by this learned traveller. Ray, JVJorison, and Plukenet, all acknowledge their obligations for curious plants received from him.

Sir George married a daughter of sir Thomas Higgohs of Grewell in Hampshire, who died in 1703, and left a numerous issue. The rev. Granville Wheler, of Otterdenplace, Kent, and rector of Leak in Nottinghamshire, who died in 1770, was his third son, and became his heir. He likewise distinguished himself as a gentleman of science, and a polite scholar. He was the friend and patron of Mr, Stephen Gray, who, jointly with him, contributed to revive the study of electricity in England. Sir George Wheler’s name is preserved in London, from his having built a chapel on his estate in Spital-fields, known by the name of sir George Wheler’s chapel, which has lately been repaired and refitted for public worship.

, is an author of whom very little is known. From the circumstance of his being a kinsman to serjeant Fleetwood, recorder of London, it is probable that he was of a good family. It appears that he first tried his fortune at court, where he consumed his patrimony in fruitless expectation of preferment. Being now destitute of subsistence, he commenced soldier, and served abroad, though in what capacity is unknown. Such, however, was his gallant behaviour, that his services were rewarded with additional pay. He returned from the wars with honour, but with little profit; and his prospect of advancement was so small, that he determined to turn farmer, but being unsuccessful in that undertaking, was under the necessity of applying to the generosity of his friends. This he found to be “a broken reed, and worse than common beggary of charity from strangers. Now craft accosted him in his sleep, and tempted him with the proposals of several professions; but for the knavery or slavery of them, he rejected all: his munificence constrained him to love money, and his magnanimity to hate all the ways of getting it.” At last he resolved to seek his fortune at sea, and accordingly embarked with sir Humphrey Gilbert in the expedition to Newfoundland, which was rendered unsuccessful by an engagement with the Spanish fleet. From this period, Mr. Whetstone seems to have depended entirely on his pen for subsistence. Where or when he died has not been ascertained. He is entitled to some notice as a writer whose works are in request as literary curiosities, but of little intrinsic value. Mr. Steevens pronounced him “the most quaint and contemptible writer, both in prose and verse, he ever met with.” He wrote, 1. “The Rock of Regard,” a poem in four parts. 2. “The Life of George Gascoigne,” 1577, 4to. A reprint of this may be seen in the late edition of the “English Poets,” 1810, 21 vols. 8vo. The only original copy known of late years, was purchased by Mr. Maione for forty guineas! 3. “Promus and Cassandra,” a comedy, 1578, 4to, on this play Shakspeare founded his “Measure for Measure.” 4. “Heptameron of civil discourses,” 1582, 4to. 5. “The remembrance of the life and death of Thomas, late earl of Sussex,” 1583, 4to. 6. “A mirrour of true honour, &c. in the life and death, &c, of Francis earl of Bedford,” &c. 1,585, 4to. 7. “The English mirror, wherein all estates may behold the conquest of error,” 1586. This contains much of the state history of the times. 8. “Censure of a dutiful subject of certain noted speech and behaviour of those fourteen noted traytors at the place of execution on the 20th and 21st of Sept.” no date. 9. A poem “on the life and death of sir Philip Sidney” by him, and supposed unique, a very few leaves only, was lately sold at Messrs. King and Lochee’s to Mr. Harding for 261. 5s. An account of some of these curiosities may be seen in our authorities.

But his character is drawn most at length by Tillotson in his funeral sermon. “I shall not,” says Tillotson, “insist upon his exemplary piety and devotion towards God, of which his whole life was one continued testimony. Nor will I praise his profound learning, for which he was justly had in so great reputation. The moral improvements of his mind, a god-like temper and disposition' (as he was wont to call it), he chiefly valued and aspired after; that universal charity and goodness, which he did continually preach and practise. His conversation was exceeding kind and affable, grave and winning, prudent and profitable. He was slow to declare his judgment, and modest in delivering it. Never passionate, never peremptory; so Car from imposing upon others, that he was rather apt to yield. And though he had a most profound and well-poised judgment, yet he was of all men I ever knew the most patient to hear others differ from him, and the most easy to be convinced, when good reason was offered; and, which is seldom seen, more apt to be favourable to another man’s reason than his own. Studious and inquisitive men commonly at such an age (at forty or fifty at the utmost) have fixed and settled their judgments in most points, and as it were made their last understanding; supposing that they have thought, or read, or heard what can be said on all sides of things; and after that they grow positive and impatient of contradiction, thinking it a disparagement to them to alter their judgment. But our deceased friend was so wise, as to be willing to learn to the last, knowing that no man can grow wiser without some change of his mind, without gaining some knowledge which he had not, or correcting some error which he had before. He had attained so perfect a mastery of his passions, that for the latter and greatest part of his life he was hardly ever seen to be transported with anger; and as he was extremely careful not to provoke any man, so not to be provoked by any, using to say `If I provoke a man, he is the worse for my company; and if I suffer myself to be provoked by hira, I shall be the worse for his.‘ He very seldom reproved any person in company otherwise than by silence, or some sign of uneasiness, or some very soft and gentle word; which yet from the respect men generally bore to him did often prove effectual. For he unr derstood human nature very well, and how to apply himself to it in the most easy and effectual ways. He was a great encourager and kind director of young divines, and one of the most candid hearers of sermons, I think, that ever was; so that though all men did mightily reverence his judgment, yet no man had reason to fear his censure. He never spake of himself, nor ill of others, making good that saying of Pansa in Tully, ’ Netninem alterius, qui suae confideret virtuti, invidere,' that no man is apt to envy the worth and virtues of another, that hath any of his own to trust to. In a word, he had all those virtues, and in a high degree, which an excellent temper, great condescension, long care and watchfulness over himself, together with the assistance of God’s grace (which he continually implored and mightily relied upon) are apt to produce. Particularly he excelled in the virtues of conversation, humanity, and gentleness, and humility, a prudent and peaceable and reconciling temper.” Tillotson likewise informs us that as he had a plentiful estate, so he was of a very charitable disposition; which yet was not so - well known to many, because in the disposal of his charity he very much affected secrecy. He frequently bestowed his alms on poor house-keepers, disabled by age or sickness to support themselves, thinking those to bethe most proper objects of it. He was rather frugal in expence upon himself, that so he might have wherewithal to relieve the necessities of others. And he was not only charitable in his life, but in a very bountiful manner at his death, bequeathing in pious and charitable legacies to the value of a thousand pounds: to the library of the university of Cambridge fifty pounds, and of King’s college one hundred pounds, and of Emanuel college twenty pounds; to which college he had been a considerable benefactor before, having founded three several scholarships there to the value of a thousand pounds, out of a chanty with the disposal whereof he was intrusted, and which not without great difficulty and pains he at last received. To the poor of the several places, where his estate lay, and where he had been minister, he gave above one hundre4 pounds. Among those, who had been his servants, or were so at his death, he disposed in annuities and legacies in money to tlje value of above three hundred pounds. To other charitable uses, and among his poor relations, above three hundred pounds. To every one of his tenants he left a legacy according to the proportion of the estate they held by way of remembrance of him; and to one of them, who was gone much behind, he remitted in his will seventy pounds. And as became his great goodness, he was ever a remarkably kind landlord, forgiving his tenants, and always making abatements to them for hard years or any other accidental losses that happened to them. He made likewise a wise provision in his will to prevent lawsuits among the legatees, by appointing two or three persons of the greatest prudence and authority among his relations final arbitrators of all differences that should arise.

Three more volumes of Dr. Whichcote’s sermons were published by Dr. Jeffery, archdeacon of Norwich, in 1701—3, and a fourth by Dr. Samuel Clarke in 1707. The best edition of the whole was published in 1751, at Aberdeen, in 4 vols. 8vo, under the superintendence of Drs. Campbell and Gerard, two well-known names in the literary history of Scotland. Dr. Jeffery also published in 1703, “Moral and religious Aphorisms” collected from Dr. Whichcote’s manuscript papers. Of these an elegant edition was reprinted in 1753 by Dr. Samuel Salter, with large additions, and a correspondence with Dr. Tuckney which we have already noticed in our account of that divine. Long before this, in 1688, some " Observations and Apophthegms’ 7 of Dr. Whichcote’s, taken from his own mouth by one of his pupils, were published in 8vo, and passed through two editions, if not more. Whichcote excelled in moral aphorisms, and many might be collected from his sermons.

, an English divine of very uncommon parts and more uncommon learning, but of a singular and extraordinary character, was born Dec. 9, 1667, at Norton near Twycrosse, in the county of Leicester; of which place his father Josiah Whiston, a learned and pious man, was rector. He was kept at home till he was seventeen, and trained under his father; and this on two accounts: first, because he was himself a valetudinarian, being greatly subject to the flatus hypocondriaciis in various shapes all his life long; secondly, that he might serve his father, who had lost his eye-sight, in the quality of an amanuensis. In 1684, he was sent to Tamvvorth school, and two years after admitted of Clare-hall in Cambridge, where he pursued his studies, and particularly the mathematics, eight hours a day, till 1693. During this time, and while he was under-graduate, an accident happened to him, which he relates for a caution and benefit to others in the like circumstances. He observed one summer, that his eyes did not see as usual, biU dazzled after an aukward manner. Upon which, imagining it arose fro'm too much application, he remitted for a fortnight, and tried to recover his usual sight, by walking much in green fields; but found himself no better. At that time he met with an account of Mr. Boyle’s having known a person, who, having new-whited the wall of his chamber on which the sun shone, and having accustomed himself to read in that glaring light, thereby lost his sight for some time; till, upon hanging the place with green, he recovered it again: and this, he says, was exactly his own case, in a less degree, both as to the cause and the remedy.

In the beginning of the last century he was called to be sir Isaac Newton’s deputy, and afterwards his successor in the Lucasian professorship of mathematics; when he resigned his living, and went to Cambridge. In 1702 he published “A short view of the Chronology of the Old Testament, and of the Harmony of the Four Evangelists,” in 4to; and in March 1702-3, “Tacquet’s Euclid, with select theorems of Archimedes, and practical corollaries,” in Latin, for the use of young students in the university. This edition of Euclid was reprinted at Cambridge in 1710; and afterwards in English at London, under his own inspection. He tells us that it was the accidental purchase of Tacquet’s own Euclid at an auction, which occasioned his first application to mathematical studies. In 1706 he published an “Essay on the Revelation of St. John;” in 1707, “Proslectiones astronomicae;” and sir Isaac Newton’s “Arithmetic* Universalis,” by the author’s permission. The same year, 1707, he preached eight sermons upon the accomplishment of Scripture Prophecies, at the lecture founded by the honourable Mr. Boyle; which he printed the year alter, with an appendix to the same purpose. About August, 1708, he drew up an “Essaly upon the Apostolical Constitutions,” and offered it to the vicechancellor, for his licence to be printed at Cambridge; but was refused it. He tells us that he had now read over the two first centuries of the church; and found that the Eusebian, or commonly called Arian, doctrine was, for the main, the doctrine of those ages; and, as he thought it a point of duty to communicate what he had thus discovered, so his heterodox notions upon the article of the Trinity were now very generally known.

Whiston was now settled with his family in London; and though it does not appear that he had any certain means of subsisting, yet he continued to write books, and to propagate his primitive Christianity, with as much cheerfulness and vigour as if he had been in the most flourishing circumstances. During March 1711-12, prince Eugene of Savoy was in England; and because Whiston believed himself to have discovered, in his “Essay on the Revelation of St. John,” that some of the prophecies there had been fulfilled by that general’s victory over the Turks in 1697, or by the succeeding peace of Carlowitz in 1698, he printed a short dedication, and fixing it to the cover of a copy of that essay, presented it to the prince. The prince has been said to have replied, that “he did not know he had the honour of having been known to St: John;” however, he thought proper to take so much notice of Whiston' s well-meant endeavours, a to send him a present of fifteen guineas. The dedication runs thus:

It was, as we have seen, in June 1708, that he began to be first heard of as a reputed Arian. In the August following, he offered a small essay on the apostolical constitutions to the licenser of the press at Cambridge, and was refused the licence. In 1709 he published a sermon against the eternity of hell-punishments. In 1710 he boldly asserted the apostolical constitutions to be “of equal authority with the four gospels themselves;” and a tract included in them, and called the doctrine of the apostles, to be “the most sacred of the canonical books.” In 1712 he published in favour of the Anabaptists; and the next year printed “A book of Common Prayer,” that had been reformed the backward way into Anabaptism and Arianism, and, two years afterward, set up a meeting-house for the use of it; having strangely drawn up his liturgy before he had provided his church. But he had still farther to go in his novelties. In 1723 he published a dissertation to prove the Canticles not a canonical book of scripture; in 1727 another, to prove the apocryphal book of Baruch canonical; in the same year another, to prove the epistle of Baruch to the nine tribes and a half equally canonical; jn the same year another, to prove the second book of Esdras, equally canonical; in the same year another, to prove eighteen psalms of a second Solomon equally canonical; in the same year another, to prove the book of Enoch equally canonical; in the same year another, to prove “The Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs” equally canonical; and another to prove an epistle of the Corinthians to St. Paul, with St. Paul’s answer to it, equally canonical. In 1745 he published his “Primitive New Testament in English, in four parts,” and added a page at the end “exhibiting the titles of the rest of the books of the New Testament, not yet known by the body of Christians/' Among these were specified, besides, the works above recited, <: the Epistles of Timothy to Diognetus, and the Homily;” the “two Epistles of Clement to the Corinthians;” “Josephus’s homily concerning Hades;” the “Epistles of Barnabas, Ignatius, and Polycarp;” the “Shepherd of Hernias,” and the “Martyrdom of Polycarp.” He thus, according to his own enumeration, enlarged the number of the canonical books in the New Testament, from twenty-seven to fiftysix. In 1749 he gradually reached (says the historian of Arianism) the highest point of heretical perfection. He gravely asserted, first, that “neither a bishop, a presbyter, nor a deacon, ought to be more than once married that” primitive Christianity also forbad either bishops, presbyters, or deacons, to marry at all after their ordination and that, “in the days of the apostles, a fourth marriage was entirely rejected, even in the laity.” He also ventured upon the bold presumption of ascertaining the very year, “according to the scripture prophecies,” for certain events of the highest consequence to the world; and, sucli was the ingenuous simplicity of the man, was confident enough to name a year at no great distance. In this wayhe prophesied that the Jews were to rebuild their temple, and the millenium was to commence before the year 1766. But such a spirit as Whiston’s could not stop even here, and in the same year he ventured to assert the falsehood of some things in St. Paul’s epistles, as “no part of Christ’s revelation to him,” namely, where the apostle speaks of original sin. Whiston says, they are rather “weak reasonings of his own, accommodated to the weak Jews at that time only!”

In criticism, (where writing anonymously he would probably have written with the less restraint) we find him for the most part candid and good-natured, not sparing of censure, yet lavish of applause; and affording, in numerous instances, the most agreeable proofs of genuine benevolence. Even in the instance of Gibbon, where he has been thought severe beyond all former example, we have a large mixture of sweet with the bitter. It was his critique on Gibbon which contributed principally to the reputation of the “English Review;” in which Mr. W. was the author of many valuable articles. To his pen. also the “British Critic,” and “The Antijacobiu Review,*' were indebted for various pieces of criticism. But the strength of his principles is no where more apparent than in those articles where he comes forward, armed with the panoply of truth, in defence of our civil and ecclesiastical Constitution. He was also a poet. That he contributed some fine pieces of poetry to” The Cornwall and Devon Poets,“is well known. These were published in two small octavo volumes. He occasionally displayed his powers in the several departments of the Historian, the Theologist, the Critic, the Politician, and the Poet. Versatility like Whitaker’s is, in truth, of rare occurrence. But still more rare is the splendor of original genius, exhibited in walks so various. Not that Mr. W. was equally happy in them all. His characteristic traits as a writer were, acute discernment, and a Velocity of ideas which acquired new force in composition, and a power of combining images in a manner peculiarly striking, and of flinging on every topic of discussion the strongest illustration. With little scruple, therefore, we hazard an opinion, that though hi* chief excellence be recognized in antiquarian research, he would have risen to higher eminence as a poet, had he cultivated in early youth the favour of the Muses. Be this, however, as it may; there are none who will deny him the praise of a” great“literary character. That he was” good“as well as great, would sufficiently appear in the recollection of any period of his life; whether we saw him abandoning preferment from principle, and heard him” reasoning of righteousness and judgment to come,“until a Gibbon trembled; or whether, among his parishioners, we witnessed his unaffected earnestness of preaching, his humility in conversing with the poorest cottagers, his sincerity in assisting them with advice, his tenderness in offering them consolation, and his charity in relieving -their distresses. It is true, to the same warmth of temper, together with a sense of good intentions, we must attribute an irritability at times destructive of social comfort; and an impetuousness that brooked not opposition, and bore down all before it. This precipitation was in part also to be traced to his ignorance of the world; to his simplicity in believing others like himself precisely what they seemed to be; and, oo the detection of his error, his anger at dissimulation or hypocrisy. But his general good humour, his hospitality, and his convivial pleasantry, were surely enough to atone for those sudden bursts of passion, those flashes, which betrayed his human frailty, but still argued genius. And they who knew how” fearfully and wonderfully he was made," could bear from a Whitaker what they would certainly have resented in another. We should add, that in his family Mr. Whitaker was uniformly regular; nor did he suffer, at any time, his literary cares to trench on his domestic duties.

, one of the most eminent divines of the sixteenth century, was born at Holme, in the parish of Burnley in Lancashire, in 1547, and was the descendant of an ancient family. His mother was Elizabeth Nowell, sister to the celebrated Dean of St. Paul’s, who married Thomas Whitaker, gentleman, in 1530, and sur* vived her marriage the wonderful period of seventy-six years. He acquired the elements of grammar at Burnley, where Mr. William Hargrave was at that time master, to whom in his declining years he was a kind benefactor. He was sent for, in his thirteenth year, by Dean Nowell, who maintained him in his own house, and placed him at St. Paul’s school, where he made snch rapid and satisfactory progress that, at the age of eighteen, his pious kinsman sent him to Trinity college, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. afterwards Dr. Robert West. His progress here being equally admired, he was first chosen scholar and then fellow. He soon procured high esteem and great fame by his learned disputations and other exercises, which afforded a proof both of his talents and application. It was his practice, and that of several other eminent persons of his time, to stand while employed in study. In 1569 he published the Prayers of the Church of England in Greek, a small volume printed by Reynold Wolf; a circumstance which requires to be mentioned, because most of his biographers assert that he was first known by his translation of Nowell’s catechism; but that translation was not printed till 1573, four years after this version of the Prayers. He had about this time suffered long and severely by a quartan ague; and as he could not live without some literary employment, he made choice of this. The book contains the morning and evening prayers, the litany, the catechism, the collects, and, to fill a vacant page or two, the prayer after receiving the holy communion, accompanied with the Latin version, (the work, as is supposed, of Walter Haddon,) which had been published by the queen’s authority a fewyears before. It is dedicated, in a prefatory address in Latin, to his uncle and patron, the dean of St. Paul’s; from whom he had received, from his childhood, innumerable favours; to whom therefore, he says, of right belonged whatsoever he could perform; and he intreats him to protect his labours, and expresses a hope, that, if he is indulgent in this his first attempt, he may one day produce something not unworthy of his acceptance. The translation achieved under such circumstances, when the author, a bachelor of arts, had barely entered his twenty- first year, must have raised great hopes, which his future progress and celebrity did not disappoint.

In 1587 he resigned the chancellorship of St. Paul’s, for what reason does not appear; but in 1591 Dr. Goad, provost of King’s college, presented a request to dean Nowell, in behalf of Dr. Whitaker, that he might be preferred tq some more valuable benefice. The venerable dean, anxious to serve his friend and kinsman, forwarded Dr. Goad’s letter, the day he received it, together with one of his own, to the lord treasurer; reminding his lordship of Dr. Whitaker’s great learning, well known at Cambridge by the productions of his pen in Greek and Latin; and not unknown to his lordship, to whom several of his works had been dedicated. His fitness for presiding over a learned society (Trinity college was in view, then about to be vacant) had partly appeared, from the quietness and good order which had been established in St. John’s college since he became master; and as to his circumstances, they were so far from bn no affluent, that the dean, in consideration of his poverty, had now for two years past taken upon him the maintenance of one of his sons. This application, however, lor whatever reason, proved unsuccessful.

Mr. White is known to the learned world by a very elegant publication “The Natural History and Antiquities of Selborne, in the county of Southampton. In a series of letters to the hon. Daines Barrington and Thomas Pennant, esq.” 1789, 4to. Mr. White’s idea of parochial history was, that it should consist of natural productions and occurrences, as well as antiquities. He has accordingly directed his attention to the former, and from a long series of obr servations made and repeated with care and skill, has enlarged our knowledge of natural history, and may be considered as no unequal successor of Ray and Derham. At the same time he has not neglected the antiquities of his favourite village, and in his history of the priory of Selborne has proved himself a very able antiquary. What renders the book more valuable than works of this kind generally are, is that it consists principally, if not entirely, of original matter, or information derived from records to which the public have no access. In 1713 a new edition of this work was published in a splendid form, with considerable additions, and the above brief memoir of the author’s life.

, an amiable and ingenious poet, untimely snatched from the world, was the second son of John and Mary White, and was born at Nottingham, March 21, 1785. From his third until his fifth year he learned to read at the school of a Mrs. Garrington, who had the good sense to perceive his extraordinary capacity, and spoke of what it promised with confidence. At a very early age his love oi reading was decidedly manifested, and was a passion to which every thing else gave way. When about six years old, he was placed under the rev. John Blanchard, who kept at that time the best school in Nottingham, and here he learned writing, arithmetic, and French. When he was about eleven, he one day wrote a separate theme for every boy in the class, which consisted of about twelve or fourteen. The master said he had never known them write so well upon any subject before, and could not refrain from expressing his astonishment at young White’s. It was considered as a great thing for him to be at so good a school, yet there were some circumstances which rendered it less advantageous to him than it might have been. Mrs. White had not yet overcome her husband’s intention of breeding him up to his own business (that of a butcher), and by an arrangement which took up too much of his time, one whole day in the week, and his leisure hours on the others, were employed in carrying the butcher’s basket. Some differences at length arose between his father and Mr. Blanchard, in consequence of which Henry was removed. It is remarkable that one of the ushers, when he came to receive the money due for tuition, represented to Mrs. White, either from stupidity or malice, what an incorrigible son she had, and that it was impossible to make the lad do any thing. This unfavourable impression, however, was soon removed by a Mr. Shipley, under whose care he was next placed, and who having discovered that he was a boy of quick perception, and very admirable talents, came with joy to relieve the anxiety and painful suspicions of his family. But while his school-masters were complaining that they could make nothing of him, he discovered what nature had made him, and wrote satires upon them. These pieces were never shewn to any, except his most particular friends, who say that they were pointed and severe, and it appears that he afterwards destroyed them.

Besides his skill in the law, he is said to have been an able antiquary, and in this character is chiefly known by his “Historiarum Britannise insulae ab origine mundi ad ann. Dom. octingentesimum, libri noveui,” Douay, 1602. The object of this history, according to Nicolson, is to assert the rights of the papacy in this kingdom; and therefore, having settled religion by Augustine, the monk, and other emissaries, he ends his story in the year 800, He is said to have been first noticed by the learned world for the explanation he gave of the well-known enigmatical epitaph near Bononia in Italy. This he published under the title of “Ælia Laelia Crispis. Epitaphium antiquum in agro Bononiensi adhuc videtur a diversis interpretation varienovissime autem a Richardo Vjto Basingstochio, amicorum precibus explicatum.” Padua, 4to, 1568. Two other publications are attributed to him, “Orationes quinque,” 1596, 8vo, which was read as a classic at Winchester school; “Notse ad leges Decemvirorum in xii tabulas,” 159.7, 8vo; “Explicatio brevis privilegiorum juris et consuetudinis circa ven. sacramentum eucharistiae,” Douay, 1609, 8vo; and “De reliquiis et veneratione Sanctorum,” ibid. 1609. It is said there is a tenth and eleventh book of his history in existence, a copy of which was in Mr. West’s Catalogue.

At what time he first projected the foundation of a college is not known. His original intention was to have founded it at Reading, but he relinquished tliatin favour of Oxford, and on May 1, 1555, obtained a licence from Philip and Mary, empowering him, to the praise and honour of God, the Virgin Mary, and St. John Baptist, to found a college, for divinity, philosophy, and the arts; the members to be, a president, thirty scholars, graduate or non-graduate, or more or less as might be appointed in the statutes; and the site to be Bernard-college, in the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, without the north-gate of the city of Oxford, and to be called St. John Baptist college in the university of Oxford.

, an eminent person among the Quakers, was born at Snnbigg in the parish of Orton, Westmoreland, about 1636, and received his education at the free school of Blencoe in Cumberland. After leaving school he was for a time engaged in the instruction of youth, but before he had attained the age of eighteen, the journal of his life exhibits him travelling in different parts of England, propagating with zeal, as well as success, the principles of the Quakers, then recently become known as a distinct religious denomination. Of the Quakers and their tenets, he had obtained some information a considerable time before an opportunity occurred for his being at any of their meetings. At the first which he attended, it happened that there was a young person present, who feeling deep distress of mind, went out of the meeting, and seated on the ground, unaware or regardless of being observed, cried out “Lord, make me clean; O Lord, make me clean!” an ejaculation which, he says, affected him more than any preaching he had ever heard. Continuing to attend the meetings of the Quakers, he became united with them in profession, and, as has been mentioned, a promnlgator of their doctrine. His first journey was southward, and his first imprisonment, for to one in, this character imprisonment may be mentioned as then almost an event in course, was in the city of Norwich. Another imprisonment of fourteen or fifteen months followed not long after at Edinondsbury, attended with circumstances of much hardship. From this he was released by virtue of an order from the Protector; but was soon again apprehended while preaching at Nayiand in Suffolk, and by two justices sentenced to be whipped, under pretence of his being a* vagabond; which was executed with severity, but neither the pain nor the ignominy of the punishment damped the fervency of the sufferer; and as persecution commonly defeats its own object, so in this case the report of the treatment he had met with spreading in the country, the resort to hear his preaching was increased.

, another English poet, of a more estimable character, was born at Cambridge in the beginning of 1715. His father was a baker in St. Botolph’s parish, and at one time must have been a man of some property or some interest, as he bestowed a liberal education on his eldest son, John, wtio after entering into the church, held the living of Pershore in the diocese of Worcester. He would probably have been enabled to extend the same care to William, his second son, had he not died when the boy was at school, and left his widow involved in debts contracted by extravagance or folly. A few acres of land, near Grantchester, on which he expended considerable sums of money, without, it would appear, expecting much return, is yet known by the name of White head’s Folly* William received the first rudiments of education at some common school at Cambridge, and at the age of fourteen was removed to Winchester, having obtained a nomination into that college by the interest of Mr. Bromley, afterwards lord MonttorC. Of his behaviour while at school his biographer, Mr. Mason, received the following account from Dr. Balguy. " He was always of a delicate turn, and though obliged to go to the hills with the other boys, spent his time there in reading either plays or poetry; and was also particularly fond of the Atalantis, and all other books of private history or character. He very early exhibited his taste for poetry; for while other boys were contented with shewing up twelve or fourteen lines, he would till half a sheet, but always with English verse. This Dr. Burton, the master, at first discouraged; but, after some time, he was so much charmed, that he spoke of them with rapture. When he was sixteen he wrote a whole comedy. In the winter of the year 1732, he is said to have acted a female part in the Andria, under Dr. Burton’s direction. Of this there are some doubts; but it is certain that he acted Marcia, in the tragedy of Cato, with much applause. In the year 1733, the earl of Peterborough, having Mr. Pope at his house near Southampton, carried him to Winchester to shew him the college, school, &c. The earl gave ten guineas to be disposed of in prizes amongst the boys, and Mr. Pope set them a subject to write upon, viz. Peterborough. Prizes of a guinea each were given to six of the boys, of whom Whitehead was one. The remaining sum was laid out for other boys in subscriptions to Pine’s Horace, then about to be published. He never excelled in writing epigrams, nor did he make any considerable figure in Latin verse, though he understood the classics very well, and had a good memory. He was, however, employed to translate into Latin the first epistle of the Essay on Man; and the translation is still extant in his own hand. Dobson’s success in translating Prior’s Solomon had put this project into Mr. Pope’s head, and he set various persons to work upon it.

William, third earl of Jersey, was at this time making inquiries after a proper person to be private tutor to his second son, the late earl, and Whitehead was recommended by Mr. commissioner Graves as a person qualified for this important charge. Mr. Whitehead accepted the offer, as his fellowship would not necessarily be vacated by it, and in the summer of 1745, removed to the earl’s house in town, where he was received upon the most liberal footing. A young friend of the family, afterwards general Stephens, was also put under his care, as a companion to the young nobleman in his studies, and a spur to his emulation. Placed thus in a situation where he could spare some hours from the instruction of his pupils, he became a frequenter of the theatre, which had been his favourite amusement long before he had an opportunity of witnessing the superiority of the London performers. Immediately on his coming to to.vvb, he had written a little ballad farce, entitled, “The Edinburgh Ball,” in which the young Pretender is held up to ridicule. This, however, was never performed or printed. He then began a regular tragedy, “The Roman Father,” which was produced on the stage in 1750. He appears to have viewed the difficulties of a first attempt with a wary eye, and had the precaution to make himself known to the public by the “Lines addressed to Dr. Hoadly.” Those to Mr. Garrick, on his becoming joint patentee of Drury-lane theatre, would probably improve his interest with one whose excessive tenderness of reputation was among the few blemishes in his character.

The next production of our author was the “Hymn to the Nymph of the Bristol Spring,' 7 in 1751,” written in the manner of those classical addresses to heathen divinities of which the hymns of Homer and Callimachus are the archetypes.“This must be allowed to be a very favourable specimen of his powers in blank verse, and has much of poetical fancy and ornament.” The Sweepers,“a ludicrous attempt in blank verse, would, in Mr. Mason’s opinion, have received more applause than it has hitherto done, had the taste of the generality of readers been founded more on their own feelings than on mere prescription and authority. It appears to us, however, to be defective in plan: there is an effort at humour in the commencement, of which the effect is painfully interrupted by the miseries of a female sweeper taken into keeping, and passing to ruin through the various stages of prostitution. About this time, if we mistake not, for Mr. Mason has not given the precise date, he wrote the beautiful stanzas on” Friendship,“which that gentleman thinks one of his best and most finished compositions. What gives it a peculiar charm is, that it comes from the heart, and appeals with success to the experience of every man who has imagined what friendship should be, or known what it is. The celebrated Gray, according to Mr. Mason’s account,” disapproved the general sentiment which it conveyed, for he said it would furnish the unfeeling and capricious with apologies for their defects; and that it ought to be entitled A Satire on Friendship.“Mr. Mason repeated this opinion to the author, who, in consequence, made a considerable addition to the concluding part of the piece.” Still, however, as the exceptionable stanzas remained, which contained an apology for what Mr. Gray thought no apology ought to be made, he continued unsatisfied, and persisted in saying, that it had a bad tendency, and the more so, because the sentiments which he thought objectionable were so poetically and finely expressed."

, an ingenious English philosopher, was born at Congleton in the county of Cheshire, the 10t.h of April 1713, being the son of a clock and watchmaker there. Of the early part of his life but little is known, he who dies at an advanced age leaving few behind him to communicate anecdotes of his youth. On his quitting school, where it seems the education he received was very defective, he was bred by his father to his own profession, in which he soon gave hopes of his future eminence.

May the 13th, 1779, he was elected and admitted a fellow of the royal society. He was also a member of some other philosophical societies, which admitted him of their respective bodies without his previous knowledge; but so remote was he from any thing that might savour of ostentation, that this circumstance was known only to a very few of his most confidential friends. Before he was admitted a member of the royal society, three several papers of his had been inserted in the Philosophical Transactions, viz. Thermometrical Observations at Derby, in vol. LVII. an Account of a Machine for raising Water at Oulton in Cheshire, in vol. LXV.; and Experiments on ignited Substances, in vol. LXVI.; which three papers were printed afterwards in the collection of his works in 1792.

In 1787 he published “An Attempt toward obtaining invariable Measures of Length, Capacity, and Weight, from the Mensuration of Time,” His plan is, to obtain a measure of the greatest length that conveniency will permit, from two pendulums whose vibrations are in the ratio of 2 to 1, and whose lengths coincide nearly with the English standard in whole numbers. The numbers which he has chosen shew much ingenuity. On a supposition that the length of a seconds pendulum, in the latitude of London, is 39-i inches, the length of one vibrating 42 times in a minute must be 80 inches; and of another vibrating 84 times in a minute must be 20 inches; and their difference, 60 inches, or 5 feet, is his standard measure. By the experiments, however, the difference between the lengths of the two pendulum rods was found to be only 59.892 inches, instead of 60, owing to the error in the assumed length of the seconds pendulum, 39^ inches being greater than the truth, which ought to be 3) very nearly. By this expement Mr. Whitehurst obtained a fact, as accurately as may he in a thing of this nature, viz. the difference between the lengths of two pendulum rods whose vibrations are known; a datum from whence may be obtained, by calculation, the true lengths of pendulums, the spaces through which heavy bodies fall in a given time, and many other particulars relating to the doctrine of gravitation, the figure of the earth, &c. &c. The work concludes with several directions, shewing how the measure of length may be applied to determine the measures of capacity and weight; and with some tables of the comparative weights and measures of different nations; the uses of which, in philosophical and mercantile affairs, are self-evident.

However respectable Mr. Whitehurst may have been in mechanics, and those parts of natural science which he more immediately cultivated, he was of still higher account with his acquaintance and friends on the score of his moral qualities. To say nothing of the uprightness and punctuality of his dealings in all transactions relative to business; few men have been known to possess more benevolent affections than he, or, being possessed of such, to direct them more judiciously to their proper ends. He was a philanthropist in the truest sense of that word. Every thing tending to the good of his kind, he was on all occasions, and particularly in cases of distress, zealous to forward, considering nothing foreign to him as a man that relates to man. Though well known to many of the great, he never once stooped to flattery, being a great enemy to every deviation from truth.

In vSept. 1651 Whitelocke was appointed, with three other members of parliament, to go out of town to meet Cromwell, then on his way to London, and congratulate him upon his victory at Worcester. Shortly after Whitelocke was. present at a; meeting at the speaker’s house, where several members of parliament, and principal officers of the army were assembled, by Cromwell’s desire, to consider about settling the affairs of the kingdom (See Cromwell, p. 57), and soon after he had a private conference in the Park with the usurper, who seemed to pay much regard to his advice, but, not finding him so pliable as he could wish, contrived to get him out of the way by an ap< parently honourable employment, and therefore procured him to be sent ambassador to Christina, queen of Sweden. This appointment was preceded by some singular circumstances very characteristic of the times. Whoever has looked into Whitelocke' s “Memorials” will perceive the language of religion and devotion very frequently introduced. That in this he was sincere, we have no reason to doubt,“' but it would appear that he had not come up exactly to the standard of piety established under the usurped government. When the council of state reported to the parliament that they had fixed upon Whitelocke as a fit person for the Swedish embassy, a debate arose in the house, and one of the members objected,” that they knew not whether he were a godty man or not,“adding, that” though he might be otherwise qualified, yet, if he were not a godly man, it was not fit to send him ambassador.“To this another member, who was known not to be inferior in godliness to the objector, shrewdly answered,” that godJiness was now in fashion, and taken up in form and words for advantage sake, more than in substance for the truth’s sake; that it was difficult to judge of the trees of godliness or ungodliness, otherwise than by the fruit; that those who knew Whitelocke, and his conversation, were satisfied thathe lived in practice as well as in a profession of godliness; and that it was more becoming a godly man to look into his own heart, and to censure himself, than to take upon him the attribute of God alone, to know the heart of another, and to judge him.“After this curious debate, it was voted,” that the lord commissioner Whitelocke be sent ambassador extraordinary to the queen of Sweden."

Lord Burleigh, in another letter, still insisting that he would not call his proceedings rigorous and captious, but that they were scarcely charitable, the archbishop sent him, July 15, a defence of his conduct in a paper entitled “Reasons why it is convenient that those which are culpable in the articles ministered judicially by the archbishop of Canterbury and others, her majesty’s commissioners for causes ecclesiastical, shall be examined of the same articles upon their oaths.” In this paper he maintained, 1. That by the ecclesiastical laws remaining in force, sucli articles may be ministered: this is so clear by all, that it was never hitherto called into doubt, 2. That this manner of proceeding has been tried against such as were vehemently suspected, presented, and detected by their neighbours, or whose faults were notorious, as by open preaching, since there hath been any law ecclesiastical in this realm. 3. For the discovery of any popery it hath been used in king Edward’s time, in the deprivation of sundry bishops at that time, as it may appear by the processes, although withal for the proof of those things that they denied, witnesses were also used. 4. In her majesty’s most happy reign, even/rom the beginning, this manner of proceeding has been used against the one extreme and the other as general, against all the papists, and against all those who would not follow the Book of Common Prayer established by authority; namely, against Mr. Sampson and others; and the lords of the privy council committed certain to the Fleet, for counselling sir John Southwood and other papists not to answer upon articles concerning their own facts and opinions, ministered unto them by her highness’s commissioners for causes ecclesiastical, except a fame thereof were first proved. 5. It is meet also to be done ex officio mero, because upon the confession of such offences no pecuniary penalty is set down whereby the informer (as in other temporal courts) may be considered for his charge and pains, so that such faults would else be wholly unreformed. 6. This course is not against charity, for it is warranted by law as necessary for reforming of offenders and disturbers of the unity of the church, and for avoiding delays and frivolous exceptions against such as otherwise should inform, denounce, accuse, or detect them; and because none are in this manner to be proceeded against, but whom their own speeches or acts, the public fame, and some of credit, as their ordinary or such like, shall denounce, and signify to be such as are to be reformed in this behalf. 7. That the form of such proceedings by articles ex officio mero is usual; it may appear by all records in ecclesiastical courts, from the beginning; in all ecclesiastical commissions, namely, by the particular commission and proceedings against the bishops of London and Winton, in king Edward’s time, and from the beginning of her majesty’s reign, in the ecclesiastical commission, till this hour; and therefore warranted by statute. 8, If it be said that it be against law, reason, and charity, for a man to accuse himself, quia nemo ienetur seipsum prodere aut propriam turpitudmem revelare, I answer, that by all charity and reason, Proditus per denundationem alterius sive per famam, tenetur seipsum ostendere, ad evitandum scandalum, et seipsum pur gandum. Prælatus potest inquirere sine prævia fama, ergo a fortiori delegati per principem possunt; ad hæc in istis articulis turpitudo non inquiritur aut flagitium, sed excessus et errata clericorum circa publicam functionem ministerii, de quibus ordinario rationem reddere coguntur. (The purport of our prelate’s meaning seems to be, that although no man is obliged to inform against himself, yet, if informed against by others, he is bound to come forwards, in order to avoid scandal, and justify himself; that a bishop may institute an inquiry upon a previous fame, much more delegates appointed by the sovereign; and besides, that in these articles no inquiry is made as to tur-' pitude or criminality, but as to the irregularities and errors of the clergy, in matters relating to their ministerial functions, an account of which they are bound to render to their ordinary) 9. Touching the substance of the articles, first, is deduced there being deacons and ministers in the church, with the lawfulness of that manner of ordering; secondly, the establishing the Book of Common Prayer by statute, and the charge given to bishops and ordinaries for seeing the execution of the said statute; thirdly, the goodness of the book, by the same words by which the statute of Elizabeth calls and terms it. Fourthly, several branches of breaches of the book being de propriis factis. Fifthly, is deduced detections against them, and such monitions as have been given them to testify their conformity hereafter, and whether they wilfully still continue such breaches of law in their ministration. Sixthly, Their assembling of conventicles for the maintenance of their factious dealings. Jo. For the second, fourth, and sixth points, no man will think it unmeet they should be examined, if they would have them touched for any breach of the book. 11. The article for examination, whether they be deacon or minister, -ordered according to the law of the land> is most necessary; first, for the grounds of the proceeding, lest the breach of the book be objected to them who are not bound to observe it; secondly, to meet with such schismatics, whereof there is sufficient experience, which either thrust themselves into the ministry without any lawful calling at all, or else to take orders at Antwerp, or elsewhere beyond the seas. 12. The article for their opinion of the lawfulness of their admission into the ministry is to meet with such hypocrites as, to be enabled for a living, will be content to be ordained at a bishop’s hands, and yet, for. the satisfaction of their factious humour, will afterwards have a calling of Certain brethren ministers, with laying on of hands, in a private house, or in a conventicle, to the manifest slander of the Church of England, and the nourishing of a flat schism; secondly, for the detection of such as not by private, but by public speeches, and written pamphlets spread abroad, do deprave the whole order ecclesiastical of this church, and the lawfulness of calling therein; advouching no calling lawful but where their fancied monstrous signorie, or the assent of the people, do admit into the ministry. 13. The sequel that wo^ild follow of these articles being convinced or proved, is not -so much as deprivation from ecclesiastical livings, if there be no obstinate persisting, or iterating the same offence; a matter far different from the bloody inquisition in time of popery, or of the six articles, where death was the sequel against the criminal. 14. It is to be considered, what encouragement and probable appearance it would breed to the dangerous papistical sacraments, if place be given by the chief magistrates ecclesiastical to persons that tend of singularity, to the disturbance of the good peace of the church, and to the discredit of that, for disallowing whereof the obstinate papist is worthily punished. 15, The number of these singular persons, in comparison of the quiet and conformable, are few, and their qualities are also, for excellence of gifts in learning, discretion, and considerate zeal, far inferior to those other that yield their conformity; and for demonstration and proof, both of the numbers, and also of the difference of good parts and learning in the province of Canterbury, there are but — hundred that refuse, and — thousands that had yielded their conformities. These sentiments of the archbishop, although the detail of them may seem prolix, will serve to shew the nature of that unhappy dispute between the church and the puritans which, by the perseverance of the latter, ended in the fatal overthrow both of church and state in the reign of Charles I. They also place the character of Whitgift in its true light, and demonstrate, that he was at least conscientious in his endeavours to preserve the unity of the church, a,nd was always prepared with arguments to defend his conduct, which could not appear insufficient in the then state of the public mind, when toleration was not known to either party. That his rigorous protection of the church from the endeavours of the puritans to new mould it, should be censured by them and their descendants, their historians and biographers, may appear natural, but it can hardly be called consistent, when we consider that the immediate successors of Whitgift, who censured him as a persecutor, adopted every thing, that was contrary to freedom and toleration in his system, established a high commission-court by a new name, and ejected from their livings the whole body of the English clergy who would not conform to their ideas of church-government: and even tyrannized over such men as bishop Hall and others who were doctrinal puritans, and obnoxious only as loving the church that has arisen out of the asbes of the martyrs.

, the puritan dean of Durham, the son of William Whittingham, esq. by a daughter of Haughton, of Haughton Tower, was born in the city of Chester, in 1524. In his sixteenth year he became a commoner of Brasenose college, Oxford, where he made great proficiency in literature. After taking his degree of bachelor of arts, he was elected fellow of All Souls in 1545, and two years afterwards was made one of the seniors of Christ-church, on the foundation oi Henry VIII. In May 1550, having obtained leave to travel for three yearsj he passed his time principally at Orleans, where he married the sister of Calvin. He returned to England in the latter end of the reign of Edward VI. but, as he was a staunch adherent to the doctrines of the reformation, he found it necessary to leave home, when queen Mary came to the throne, and joined the exiles at Francfort. Here he became one of those who took part against the ceremonies of the Church of England being observed among the exiles, and afterwards became a member of the Church of Geneva. On the Scotch reformer, Knox, leaving that society to return to his own country, Whittingham was prevailed upon by Calvin to take orders in the Geneva form, and was Knox’s successor. While here, he undertook, along with other learned men of the same society, an English translation of the Bible, which was not completed when those employed upon it had an opportunity to return to England, on the accession of queen Elizabeth. Whittingham, however, remained at Geneva to finish the work, during which time he translated into metre five of the Psalms, inscribed W. W. of which the 119th was one, together with the ten commandments, and a prayer, all which make part of the collection known by the names of Sternhold and Hopkins. Soon after his return to England, he was employed to accompany Francis, earl of Bedford, on his embassy of condolence for the death of the French king, in 1560. And he attended Ambrose, earl of Warwick, to Havre de Grace, to be preacher there, while the earl defended it against the French; and Wood says, he preached nonconformity in this place. Warwick appears to have had a very high opinion of him, and it was by his interest that Whittingham was promoted to the deanery of Durham in 1563, which he enjoyed for sixteen' years. During this time he was one of the most zealous opponents of the habits and ceremonies, and so outrageous in his zeal against popery, as to destroy some of the antiquities and monuments in Durham cathedral, and even took up the stone coffins of the priors of Durham, and ordered them to be used as troughs for horses to drink in.

, famous for his embassies and his writings, was a Hollander, and born in 1598; but it is not certain at what place, though some have mentioned Amsterdam. He left his country very young, and went and settled in France, where he applied himself diligently to political studies, and sought to advance himself by political services. Having made himself known to the elector of Brandenburg, this prince appointed him his resident at the court of France, about 1626 and he preserved this post two- and-thirty years, that is, till 1658. Then he fell into disgrace with cardinal Mazarin, who never had much esteem for him, and particularly disliked his attachment to the house of Conde. The cardinal accused him of having sent secret intelligence to Holland and other places; and he was ordered to leave the court and the kingdom: but, before he set out, he was seized and sent to the Bastille. M. le Teilier wrote at the same time tp the elector of Brandenburg, to justify the action; which he did by assuring him that his minister was an intelligencer in the pay of several princes. The year after, however (1659), he was set at liberty, and escorted by a guard to Calais; whence he passed over to England, and thence to Holland. There De Witt, the pensionary, received him affectionately, and protected him powerfully: he had indeed been the victim of De Witt, with whom he had carried on a secret correspondence, which was discovered by intercepted letters. He reconciled himself afterwards to France, and heartily espoused its interests; whether out of spite to the prince of Orange, or from some other motive; and the count d'Estrades reposed the utmost confidence in him. JFor the present, the duke of Brunswic-Liwienburg made him his resident at the Hague; and he was appointed, besides this, secretary-interpreter of the States General for foreign dispatches.

He continued under restraint till 1679, and then contrived to escape by the assistance- of one of his daughters, who ran the risk of her own liberty in order to procure his. By exchanging clothes with the lady, he went out, and took refuge at the court of the duke of Zell; from which be withdrew in 1681, disgusted, because that prince would not act with more zeal in procuring his sentence to be reversed at the Hague. It is not known what became of him after; but he is said to have died in 1682. His “L'Ambassadeur et ses Fonctions,” printed at the Hague, 1681, in 2 vols. 4to, is his principal work, and is a very curious miscellany of facts and remarks, the latter not always profound, but often useful. He published also in 1677, during his imprisonment, “Memoires touchant les Ambassadeurs et les Ministres publics.” He translated some books of travels from the German into French and also from the Spanish, “L'Ambassade de D. Garcias de Silva f igueroa en Perse, contenant la Politique de ce grand Empire,” &c. These works, which Wicquetort was at the pains to translate, are said to contain many curious and interesting things.

, a voluminous German writer who has been complimented with the title of the Voltaire of Germany, was born in 1733, at Biberach. Of his life no authentic account has, as far as we know, reached this country, but the following few particulars, gleaned from various sources, may perhaps be genuine, His father was a clergyman, who gave him a good education, and his attachment to the Muses discovered itself very early. At the age of fourteen, he wrote a poem on the destruction of Jerusalem, Two years after he was sent to Erfurt to study the sciences, where he became enamoured of Sophia de Gusterman, afterwards known by the name of Madame de la Roche. The youthful lovers swore eternal fidelity to each other, but Wieland’s father thought proper to interrupt the connection, and sent his son to Tubingen to study law. For this he probably had little inclination, and employed most of his thoughts and time on poetry, producing at the age of eighteen an “Art of Love” in the manner of Ovid, and a poem “On the nature of things,” in which we are told he combined the philosophy of Plato and Leibnitz. After this he appears to have devoted himself entirely to study and writing, and acquired considerable reputation as a poet of taste and fancy. For some time he appears to have resided in Swisserland, and in 1760 he returned to his native place, where he was appointed to the office of director of the chancery, and during his leisure hours wrote some of those works which completely established him in the opinion of his countrymen, as one or the greatest geniuses of the age, and honours were liberally bestowed upon him. The elector of Mentz made him professor of philosophy and polite literature at Erfurt, and he was soon after appointed tutor to the two young princes of Saxe Weimar; he was also aulic counsellor to the duke, who gave him a pension; and counsellor of government to the elector of Mentz. In 1765 he married a lady at Augsburgh, of whom he speaks so highly that we may conclude ke had overcome or moderated his attachment to the object of his first love. In 1808 Bonaparte sent him the cross of the legion of honour, and after the battle of Jena, partook of a repast with Wieland, and, we are gravely told, “conversed with him at great length on the folly and horrors of war and on various projects for the establishment of a perpetual peace!” Wieland’s latter days were employed in translating Cicero’s Letters. A paralysis of the abdominal viscera was the prelude to his death, which took place at Weimar, in January 1813, in the eighty-first year of his age.

One of his very amiable qualities was to consider himself as a citizen of the world, and mankind in general as his brethren and friends; consequently, he endeavoured to do them all the good in his power. I think I may also safely say, the great rule of his life and conduct was to be a true disciple and follower of all the beneficent actions of our Saviour, and to interweave his examples into his daily exercise and practice. He used to rise early, and was a very great oeconomist of his time; labouring to keep a most exact account of all his domestic concerns, and every thing that belonged to his receipts and expenditure. Even his numerous gifts and charities, I believe,were daily committed to paper, and all looked over in the evening, and balanced, noting every error and deficiency; and if he did not perceive he had done one or more acts of charity and beneficence, he thought he had lost a dayl He was the most dutiful and affectionate son, the most kind nephew, cousin, or relation to all who stood in any degree of “kindred. To servants, workmen, and tenants, the most gentle and beneficent; and to his poor neighbours an affectionate father, paying for schooling for their children, and even erecting schools, which is, perhaps, too well known to require mentioning. When travelling, he would inquire at the inns, who was in sickness or necessity in the place, leaving money for their relief. He frequently released debtors from prison, and had great charity to beggars. He frequently sent medical assistance to the sick, and gave large sums to hospitals; when abroad, he gave large sums also to poor convents, and to the necessitous of all countries and religions. He was always ready to assist every increase or improvement of learning, witness the very large and laborious share he took in assisting the collation of the Hebrew text of the Bible, by opening many of the foreign libraries in Europe, through his interest and labour, and employing professors to collate at his own expence. His humanity to the brute creation was very great, and his tenderness even to insects. He preserved a reverential respect for the place of his nativity, for the places where he had received his education, and for those who hail been companions of his youth; likewise fortne memory of those who had been in any way instrumental in forming his morals and perfecting his learning; and this was preserved even to their friends and posterity.”

, a tailor, who, from an extraordinary love of study, became a professor of the Oriental languages, was born in the city of Norwich about 1684, where he was educated at a grammar-school till he was almost qualified for the university; but his friends, wanting fortune and interest to maintain him there, bound him apprentice to a tailor, with whom he served seven years, and afterwards worked seven years more as a journeyman. About the end of the last seven years, he was seized with a fever and ague, which continued with him two or three years, and at last reduced him so low as to disable him from working at his trade. In this situation he amused himself with some old books of controversial divinity, in which he found great stress laid on the Hebrew original of several texts of scripture; and, though he had almost lost the learning he had obtained at school, his strong desire of knowledge excited him to attempt to make himself master of that language. He was at first obliged to make use of an English Hebrew grammar and lexicon; but, by degrees, recovered the knowledge of the Latin tongue, which he had learned at school. On the recovery of his health, he divided his time between his business and his studies, xvhich last employed the greatest part of his nights. Thus, self-taught, and assisted only by his great genius, he, "by dint of continual application, added to the knowledge of the Hebrew that of all or most of the oriental Ianguages, but still laboured in obscurity, till at length he was accidentally discovered. The worthy Dr. Prideaux, dean of Norwich, being offered some Arabic manuscripts in parchment, by a bookseller of that city, thinking, perhaps, that the price demanded for them was too great, declined buying them; but, soon after, Mr. Wild hearing of them, purchased them; and the dean, on calling at the shop and inquiring for the manuscripts, was informed of their being sold. Chagrined at this disappointment, he asked of the bookseller the name and profession of the person who had bought them; and, being told he was a tailor, he bad him instantly to run and fetch them, if they were riot cut in pieces to make measures: but he was soon relieved from his fears by Mr. Wild’s appearance with the manuscripts, though, on the dean’s inquiring whether he would part with them, he answered in the negative. The dean then asked hastily what he did with them: he replied, that he read them. He was desired to read them, which he did. He was then bid to render a passage or two into English, which he readily performed, and with great exactness. Amazed at this, the dean, partly at his own expence, and partly by a subscription raised among persons whose inclinations led them to this kind of knowledge, sent him to Oxford; where, though he was never a member of the university, he was by the dean’s interest admitted into the Bodleian library, and employed for some, years in translating or making extracts out of Oriental manuscripts, and thus bad adieu to his needle. This appears to have been some time before 1718. At Oxford, he was known by the name of the Arabian tailor. He constantly attended the library all the hours it was open, and, when it was shut, employed most of his leisure-time in teaching the Oriental languages to young gentlemen, at the moderate price of half a guinea a lesson, except for the Arabic, for which he had a guinea, and his subscriptions for teaching amounted to no more than 20 or 30l. a year. Unhappily for him, the branch of learning in which he excelled was cultivated but by few; and the reverend Mr. Gagnier, a Frenchman, skilled in the Oriental tongues, was in possession of all the favours the university could Bestow in this way, being recommended by the heads of colleges to instruct young gentlemen, and employed by the professors of these languages to read public lectures in their absence.

Mr. Wild’s person was thin and meagre, and his stature moderately tall. He had an extraordinary memory; and, as his pupils frequently invited him to spend an evening with them, he would often entertain them with long and curious details out of the Roman, Greek, and Arabic, histories. His morals were good; he was addicted to no vice, but was sober, temperate, modest, and diffident of himself, without the least tincture of vanity. About 1720 he removed to London, where he spent the remainder of his life under the patronage of Dr. Mead. When he died is not known, but in 1734, which is supposed to have been after his death, was published his translation from the Arabic of “Mahomet’s Journey to Heaven,” which is the only piece of his that was ever printed. The writer of his life informs us that it was once suspected that he was a Jesuit in disguise, but for this there appears to have been no foundation. Before he went to Oxford, we have the following notice respecting him in a letter from Dr. Turner to Dr. Charlett, dated Norwich, March 4, 1714. “A taylor of this town, of about thirty years of age, ha within seven years, mastered seven languages, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, Syriac, Arabic, and Persic. Mr. Professor Ockley being here since Christmas has examined him, and given him an ample testimonial in writing of his skill in the Oriental languages. Our dean also thinks him very extraordinary. But he is very poor, and his landlord lately seized a Polyglot Bible (which he had made shift to purchase) for rent. But there is care taken to clear his debts, and if a way could be thought of to make him more useful, I believe we could get a subscription towards part of his maintenance.” This we find by the above narrative was accordingly done.

Though so skilful in mathematics, he did not favour the world with any separate publication bearing his own name, and often used the signature of Eumenes; but he poured much light upon the regions of science through the medium of those periodical publications which are chietiy devoted to mathematical researches. He contributed a number of valuable articles to Martin’s “Miscellaneous Correspondence,” between the years 1755 and 1763, particularly an excellent paper, in which he made it his business to prove that the moon’s orbit was always concave, with respect to the sun He began his contributions to the “Gentleman’s Diary” in 1759, when that performance was conducted by Mr. T. Peat. In the same year he commenced his communications to the “Ladies’ Diary,” which was edited by professor Simpson, of Woolwich. In 1773 and 1774 hecarried on a spirited but amicable controversy, in Dr Hutton’s “Miscellanea Mathematica,” with Mr. John Dawson, of Sedbergh, a gentleman well known at Cambridge, and the tutor of many pupils who have been senior-wrangiers of that university. The subject of this controversy was “the velocity of water issuing from a vessel when put in motion.” In 1780 his friend Dr. Hutton procured for him the editorship of the “Gentleman’s Diary,” an honour which he had long wished to attain, and he was highly gratified by the circumstance. From that period his valuible communications to this publication always appeared under the character of Eumenes, and those in the Ladies’ Diary under that of Amicus. The prize-question in the Diary for 1803 is by Mr. Wildbore, and is a very curious and intricate question in the diophantine algebra.

In 1749 he married Miss Mead, heiress of the Meads of Buckinghamshire, from which marriage probably originated his connection with that county. This lady was about ten years older than himself, that is, about thirtytwo. Their dispositions, we are told, were perfectly dissimilar, yet he treated her for a time with decent respect. Afterwards he became quite alienated from her, and a final separation took place in 1757. So depraved were his morals, and so destitute was he of a sense of honour, that amidst the distresses which his loose pleasures brought upon him, he endeavoured to defraud this lady of the annuity stipulated in the articles of separation; but this was prevented by a law-suit. In April 1754-, he offered himself as a candidate to represent in parliament the borough of Berwick, and addressed the electors in terms not ill according with that political spirit which afterwards marked his public conduct. He was not, however, successful, but in July 1757, was elected burgess for Aylesbury, and was again chosen at the general election in 1761 for the same place. Before this period he had formed connections with various inen of rank, but not of the purest character for morals, who seem to have admitted him into their society as a companion who was not likely to lay them under any restraint. He had, however, formed some connections of a better stamp. It appears that as early as 1754 he was known to lord Temple, and to Mr. Pitt, afterwards lord Chatham.

In the mean time being found guilty on both informalions, and neglecting to make any personal appearance, when called upon to receive the judgment of the court of King’s Bench, he Was, towards the close of the year, outlawed. He had again repaired to France, whence he addressed a letter, in defence of his conduct, to the electors of Aylesbury, which, like all his publications, was read with much avidity. It was in this year (1764), and when at Paris, that he addressed those letters to his friends, of which we have already given extracts, to prove that, whatever his popularity, he had no very high expectations from it, and had sense. enough to perceive that his deranged circumstances could be restored only by making peace with administration. His terms, we have seen, were not exorbitant, and might probably have been agreed to, had they been known, which it is doubtful whether they were.

Wilkes was perhaps the most popular political character that ever had been known, or perhaps will ever be known again, for, by imposing on the credulity, he has added to the experience of mankind, and it will be difficult, although we have seen it tried, for any other pretender to imitate Wilkes with equal effect. At one period of his life, he obtained a very dangerous influence over the minds of the people; his name was sufficient to blow up the flames of sedition, and excite the lower orders of the community to acts of violence against his opponents in a manner something allied to madness. After great vicissitudes of fortune, he found himself placed in a state of independence and affluence; gradually declined from the popularity he had acquired, and at last terminated a turbulent life in a state of neglected quiet. Reviewing the present state of the country, and comparing it with that in which he began his exertions, though some advantages may be placed to his account, we hesitate in giving him credit for those beneficial consequences which his admirers are apt to ascribe to him. We believe he was a patriot chiefly from accident, a successful one it must be owned, but not originating in principle. This was thought even in his life-time, but it has been amply confirmed by two publications which have since appeared; the one “Letters from the year 1774 to the year 1796 of John Wilkes, esq. addressed to his daughter,” 1804, 4 vols. 12mo, with a well-written memoir of his life, of which we have occasionally availed ourselves; the second, “The Correspondence of John Wilkes, esq. with his friends, printed from the original manuscripts, in which are introduced Memoirs of his Life, by John Almon,” 1805, 5 vols. 8vo, a publication in which Mr. Almon is the greatest admirer and the greatest enemy to Mr. Wilkes’s character he ever had.

, an English antiquary and physician, was the eldest son of Mr. Richard Wilkes, of Willenhall, in the county of Stafford, a gentleman who lived upon his own estate, and where his ancestors had been seated since the time of Edward IV. His mother was Lucretia, youngest daughter of Jojias Asteley, of Woodeaton, in Staffordshire, an ancient and respectable family. He was born March 16, 1690-91, and had his school-education at Trentham. He was entered of St. John’s college, Cambridge, March 13, 1709- 10, and was admitted scholar in 1710. On April 6, 1711, he attended Mr. Saunderson’s mathematical lectures, aud ever after continued a particular friendship with that gentleman. In the preface to “Saunderson’s Elements of Algebra,” the reader is told, that whatever materials had been got together for publishing Saunderson’s life, had been received, among other gentlemen, from Mr. Richard Wilkes. He took the degree of B.A. January 1713-14; and was chosen fellow Jan. 21, 1716-17; and April 11, 1716, was admitted into lady Sadler’s Algetra Lecture, and took the degree of M. A. at the commencement of 1717; also July 4, 1718, he was chosen Linacre Lecturer. It does not appear that he ever took any degrees in medicine. He seems to have taken pupils and taught mathematics in the college from 1715 till tfet time thathe left it. It is not known when he took deacon’s orders, but a relation of his remembered his having preached at Wolverhampton. He also preached some time at Stow, near Chartley. The disgust he took to the ministry has been imputed to his being disappointed in the hope of preferment in the church, and he thought he could make his talents turn to better account, and accordingly began to practise physic at Wolverhampton, Feb. 1720, and became veryeminent in his profession. On the 24th June 1,725, he married Miss Rachel Manlove, of Lee’s-hill, near Abbots Bromley in Staffordshire, with whom he had a handsome fortune, and from that time he dwelt with his father at Willenhall. In the beginning of 1747 he had a severe fit of illness, during which, among other employments, he composed a whimsical epitaph on himself, which may be seen in Shaw’s History of Staffordshire. His wife dying in May 1756, he afterwards married in October the same year, Mrs. Frances Bendish (sister to the late Rev. sir Richard Wrottesley, of WYottesley, bart.) who died Dec. 24, 1798, at Froxfield, Hampshire, at a very advanced age. Dr. Wilkes died March 6, 1760, of the gout in his stomach, greatly lamented by his tenants, to whom he had been an indulgent landlord, and by the poor to whom he had been a kind and liberal physician and friend.

He published an excellent “Treatise on the Dropsy,” and during the time that the distemper raged in Staffordshire among the horned cattle, he published a pamphlet, entitled “A Letter to the Gentlemen, Farmers, and Graziers, in the county of Stafford,” calculated to prevent, or cure that terrible plague. Among other things, he meditated a new edition of Hudibras, with notes, &c. As an antiquary he is principally known by his valuable collections for the history of Staffordshire. His chef-d'oeuvre, says Mr Shaw, is a general history from the earliest and most obscure ages to his own times, drawn up with great skill and erudition, which Mr. Shaw has made the basis of his own introduction. This, with his other manuscripts, were long supposed to have been lost, and were not indeed brought to light until 1792, when they fell into the hands of Mr. Shaw, who has incorporated them in his valuable history.

Wilkins had two characteristics, neither of which was calculated to make him generally admired: first, he avowed moderation, and was kindly affected towards dissenters, for a comprehension of whom he openly and earnestly contended: secondly, he thought 'it right and reasonable to submit to the powers in being, be those powers who they would, or let them be established how they would. And this making him as ready to swear allegiance to Charles II. after he was restored to the crown, as to the usurpers, while they prevailed, he was charged with being various and unsteady in his principles; with having no principles at all, with Hobbism, and every thing that is bad. Yet the greatest and best qualities are ascribed to him, if not unanimously, at least by many eminent and good men. Dr. Tillotson, in the preface to some “Sermons of Bishop Wilkins,” published by him in 1682, animadverts upon a slight and unjust character, as he thinks it is, given of the bishop in Mr. Wood’s “Historia & Antiquitates Universitatis Oxoniensis;” “whether by the author,” says he, “or by some other hand, I am not curious to know:” and concludes his animadversions in the following words: “Upon the whole, it hath often been no small matter of wonder to me, whence it should come to pass, that so great a man, and so great a lover of mankind, who was so highly valued and reverenced by all that knew him, should yet have the hard fate to fall under the heavy displeasure and censur6 of those who knew him not; and that he, who never did any thing to make himself one personal enemy, should have the ill fortune to have so many. I think I may truly say, that there are or have been very few in this age and nation so well known, and so greatly esteemed and favoured, by so many persons of high rank and quality, and of singular worth and eminence in all the learned professions, as our author was. And this surely cannot be denied him, it is so well known to many worthy persons yet living, and hath been so often acknowledged even by his enemies, that, in the late times of confusion, almost all that was preserved and kept up, of ingenuity and good learning, of good order and government in the university of Oxford, was chiefly owing to his prudent conduct and encouragement: which consideration alone, had there been no other, might bave prevailed with some there to have treated his memory with at least common kindness and respect.” The other hand, Dr. Tillotson mentions, was Dr. Fell, the dean of Christ church, and under whose inspection Wood’s Athenæ Oxonienses“was translated into Latin and who, among other alterations without the privity of that compiler, was supposed to insert the poor diminishing character of bishop Wilkins, to be found in the Latin version. The friendship which subsisted between our author and Dr. Tillotson is a proof of their mutual moderation, for Wilkins was in doctrine a strict and professed Calvinism We need quote no more to prove this, than what has been already quoted by Dr. Edwards in his” Veritas Redux,“p. 553.” God might (says Dr. Wilkins) have designed us for vessels of wrath; and then we had been eternally undone, without all possible remedy. There was nothing to move him in us, when we lay all together in the general heap of mankind. It was his own free grace and bounty, that madehim to take delight in us, to chuse us from the rest, and to sever us from those many thousands in the world who shall perish everlastingly.“Gift of Prayer, c, 28. In his” Ecclesiastes,“section 3, he commends to a preacher, for his best authors, Calvin, Jiuiius, P. Martyr. Musculus, Pargeus, Piscator, Rivet, Zanchius, &c. 9” most eminent for their orthodox sound judgement.“Burnet, in his Life of Sir Matthew Hale, printed irt 1682, declares of Wilkins, that” he was a man of as great a mind, as true a judgement, as eminent virtues, and of as good a soul, as any he ever knew “and in his” History“he says, that, though” he married Cromwell’s sister, yet he made no other use of that alliance but to do good offices, and to cover the university of Oxford from the sourness of Owen and Goodwin. At Cambridge he joined with those who studied to propagate better thoughts, to take men off from being in parties, or from narrow notions, from superstitious conceits, and fierceness about opinions. He was also a great observer and promoter of experimental philosophy, which was then a new thing, and much looked after. He was naturally ambitious, but was the wisest clergyman I ever knew. He was a lover of mankind, and had a delight in doing good.“The historian mentions afterwards another quality Wilkins possessed in a supreme degree; and that was, says he,” a courage, which could stand against a current, and against all the reproaches with which ill-natured clergymen studied to load him."

His name was not put to either of these works; but they were so well known to be his, that Langrenus, in his map of the moon, dedicated to the king of Spain, calls one of the lunar spots after Wilkins’s name. His third piece, in 1641, is entitled “Mercury; or, the secret and swift Messenger; shewing how a man may with privacy and speed communicate his thoughts to a friend at any distance,” in 8vo. His fourth, -in 1648, “Mathematical Magic; or, the Wonders that may be performed by Mechanical Geometry,” in 8vo. All these pieces were published entire in one volume, 8vo, in 1708, under the title of “The Mathematical and Philosophical Works of the Right reverend John Wilkins,” &c. with a print of the author and general title-page handsomely engraven, and an account of his life and writings. To this collection is also subjoined an abstract of a larger work, printed in 1668, folio, and entitled “An Essay towards a real Character and a philosophical Language.” This he persuaded Ray to translate into Latin, which he did, but it never was published; and the ms. is now in the library of the Royal Society. These are his mathematical and philosophical works. He was also the inventor of the Perambulator, or Measuring wheel. His theological works are, 1. “Ecclesiastes; or, a Discourse of the Gift of Preaching, as it falls under the rules of Art,” 1646. This no doubt was written with a view to reform the prevailing taste of the times he lived in; from which no man was ever farther than Wilkins. It has gone through nine editions, the last in 1718, 8vo. 2. “Discourse concerning the beauty of Providence, in all the rugged passages’ of it,” 1649. 3. “Discourse concerning the Gift of Prayer, shewing what it is, wherein it consists, and how far it is attainable by industry,” &c. 1653. This was against enthusiasm, and fanaticism. These were published in his life-time; after his death, in 1675, Tillotson published two other of his works. 4. “Sermons preached on several occasions” and, 5. “Of the principles and duties of Natural Religion,” both in 8vo. Tillotson tells us, in the preface to the latter, that “the first twelve chapters were written out for the press in his life-time; and that the remainder hath been gathered and made up out of his papers;”

In the year 1796, Dr. Willan commenced a series of monthly reports, after the manner of those which Dr. Fothergill had formerly given to the publick , containing a brief accouut of the state of the weather, and of the prevalent diseases in the metropolis. These reports were published in the “Monthly Magazine,” and were continued to 1800, when he collected them into a small volume, and published them in 1801, under the title of “Reports on the Diseases in London.” This little work is pregnant with important and original medical observations; but, from its unassuming pretensions, and desultory arrangement, has not been sufficiently known and valued by the profession.

, an eminent divine among the dissenters, aud a munificent benefactor to their and other societies, both of the learned and charitable kind, was born about 1644, at Wrexham, in the county of Denbigh, in North Wales. No particulars are known of his parents, or of his early years, but it appears that he laboured under some disadvantages as to education, which, however, he surmounted by spirit and perseverance. He says of himself, that “from five years old, he had no employment, but his studies, and that by nineteen he was regularly admitted a preacher.” As this was among the nonconformists, it is probable that his parents or early connections lay among that society. As he entered on his ministry about 1663, when the exercise of it was in clanger of incurring the penalties of the law, he was induced to go to Ireland, and was there invited to be chaplain to the countess of Meath. Some time after he was called to be pastor to a congregation f dissenters assembling in Wood-street, Dublin, in which situation he continued for nearly twenty years, and was highly approved and useful. Here he married Ins first wife, a lady of family and fortune, which last, while it gave him a superior rank and consequence to many of his brethren, he contemplated only as the means of doing good.

This hospitable and splendid manner of living gave offence to the court, as he was publicly known to be out of favour there. It was said, that such a mode of living was very improper for a man in disgrace. To which he replied, that “he knew not what he had done, to live the worse for their sakes, who did not love him.” His family was the nursery of several noblemen’s sons; particularly those of the marquis of Hertford, and of the earls of Pembroke, Salisbury, and Leicester. These, together with many other young gentlemen, had tutors assigned them, of whom our prelate took an account, how their pupils improved in virtue and learning. To those who were about to be removed to the universities, before he parted with them, he read himself a brief system of logic, which lectures even his own servants might attend Who were capable of such instruction: and he took particular care that they should be thoroughly grounded in the principles of religion. He was exceedingly liberal to poor scholars in both universities; and his disbursements this way are said every year to have amounted to a thousand, and sometimes to twelve hundred pounds. He was also very generous to learned foreigners. When Dr. Peter du Moulin fled to England, to avoid persecution in France, bishop Williams hearing of him, sent his chaplain, Dr. Hacket, to pay him a visit, and supposing that he might be in want, bade him carry him some money, not naming any sum. Hacket said, that he supposed he could not give him less than twenty pounds. “1 did demur upon the sum,” said the bishop, “to try you. Is twenty pounds a fit gift for me to give to a man of his parts and deserts? Take an hundred, and present it from me, and tell him, he shall not want, and I will come shortly and visit him myself;” which he afterwards did, and supplied Du Moulin’s wants while he was in England. He was also a liberal patron of his countryman John Owen, the epigrammatist, whom he maintained for several years, and when he died he buried him, and erected a monument for him at his own expence.

In the mean time, the duke of Buckingham was not content with having removed our prelate from all power at court, but for a long time laboured to injure him, although some time before his death he appears to have beet) rather reconciled to him. With Laud, however, Williams found all reconciliation impossible, for which it is not easy to assign any cause, unless that their political principles were in some respects incompatible, and that Laud was somewhat jealous of the 'ascendancy which Williams might acquire, if again restored at court. In consequence of this animosity, besides being deprived of the title of privycounsellor, Williams was perpetually iiarassecl with lawsuits and prosecutions; and though nothing criminal could be proved against him, yet he was, by these means, put to great trouble and expence. Amongst other prosecutions, one arose from the following circumstances, as related by his biographer Hacket. “In the conference which the bishop had with his majestv, when he was admitted to kiss his hand, after the passing of the petition of Right, the king conjuring his lordsh;p to tell him freely, hovr he might best ingratiate himself with the people, his lordship replied, ‘ that the Puritans were many and strong sticklers and if his majesty would give but private orders to his ministers to connive a little at their party, and shew them some indulgence, it might perhaps mollify them a little, and make them more pliant; though he did not promise that they would be trusty long to any government.’ And the king answered, that ‘ he had thought upon this before, and would do so.’ About two months after this, the bishop at his court at Leicester acted according to this counsel resolved upon by his majesty; and withal told sir John Lamb and Dr. Sibthorp his reason for it, ‘ that it was not only his own, but the Royal pleasure.’ Now Lamb was one, who had been formerly infinitely obliged to the bishop: but, however, a breach happening between them, he and Sibthorp carried the bishop’s words to bishop Laud, and he to the king, who was then at Bisham. Hereupon it was resolved, that upon the-deposition of these two, a bill should be dra-wn up against the bishop for revealing the king’s secrets, being a sworn counsellor. That in formation, together with some others, being transmitted to the council-table, was ordered for the present to be sealed up, and committed to the. custody of Mr. Trumbal, one of the clerks of the council. Nevertheless the bishop made a shift to procure a copy of them, and so the business rested for some years. However, the bishop was still more and more declining in favour, by reason of a settled misunderstanding between him and bishop Laud, who looked upon Williams as a man who gave encouragement to the Puritans, and was cool with respect to our church-discipline; while, on the other hand, Williams took Laud to be a great favourer of the papists. Laud’s interest at court was now so great, that in affairs of state, as well as of the church, he governed almost without controul; so that a multitude of lesser troubles surrounded bishop Williams, and several persons attacked him with a view to ingratiate themselves at court. Abundance of frivolous accusation and little vexatious law-suits were brought against hirn daily; and it was the height of his adversaries policy to empty his purse, and clip his wings, by all the means they could invent, that so at last he might lie wholly at their mercy, and not be able to shift for himself. Notwithstanding all which, what with his innocency, and what with his courage springing from it, he bore up against them all> and never shewed any grudge or malice against them. But his lordship, perceiving himself to be thus perpetually harassed, asked the lord Cottington, whether he could tell him, what he should do to procure his peace, and such other ordinary favours as other bishops had from his majesty. To which the lord Cottington answered, that the splendor in which he lived, and the great resort of company which came to him, gave offence; and that the king must needs take it ill, that one under the height of his displeasure should live at so magnificent a rate. In the next place, his majesty would be better satisfied, if he would resign the deanery of Westminster, because he did not care that he should be so near a neighbour at Whitehall. As for the first of these reasons, his natural temper would not suffer him to comply with it, and to moderate his expences in house-keeping; and he was not so shortsighted as to part with his deanery upon such precarious terms;” for,“said he,” what health can come from such a remedy? Am I like to be beholden to them for a settled tranquillity, who practise upon the ruin of my estate, and the thrall of my honour? If I forfeit one preferment for fear, will it not encourage them to tear me in piecemeal hereafter? It is not my case alone, but every man’s; and if the law cannot maintain my right, it can maintain no man’s.“So, in spite of all their contrivances to out him, he kept the deanery till the king received it from him at Oxford in 1644. But they did all they could, since he was resolved to hold it, to make him as uneasy as possible in it. In this uneasy situation he continued several years; and now it was sufficiently known to all people how much he was out of favour; so that it was looked upon as a piece of merit to assist in his ruin. And this perhaps might be some incitement to what sir Robert Osborn, high sheriff of Huntingdonshire, acted against him in the levying of the ship-money. The bishop, for his part, was very cautious to carry himself without offence in this matter; but sir Robert, laying a very unequal levy upon the hundred wherein Bugden was, the bishop wrote courteously to him to rectify it, and that he and his neighbours would be ready to see it collected. Upon this sir Robert, catching at the opportunity, posts up to the court, and makes an heavy complaint against the bishop, that he not only refused the payment of ship-money himself, but likewise animated the hundred to do so too. And yet for all that, when the bishop afterwards cleared himself before the lords of the council, and they were satisfied that he had behaved himself with duty and prudence, sir Robert was not reprehended, nor had the bishop any satisfaction given him, nor was the levy regulated. After this, was revived the long and troublesome trial against the bishop in the Star-chamber, which commenced in the fourth year of king Charles I. upon some informations brought against him by Lamb and Sibthorp. Here he made so noble a defence of himself, that the attorney-general, Noy, grew weary of the cause, and slackened his prosecution; but that great lawyer dying, and the information being managed by Kilvert a solicitor, the bishop, when the business came to a final determination, was fined 10,000l. to the king, and to suffer imprisonment during his majesty’s pleasure, and withal to be suspended by the high commission court from all his dignities, offices, and functions. In his imprisonment in the Tower, hearing that his majesty would not abate any thing of his fine, he desired that it might be taken up by 1000l. yearly, as his estate would bear it, till the whole should be paid; but he could not have so small a favour granted. Upon which Kilvert, the bishop’s avowed enemy, waTs ordered to go to Bugclen and Lincoln, and there to seize upon all he could, and bring it immediately into the exchequer. Kilvert, being glad of this office, made sure of all that could be found; goods of all sorts, plate, books, and such like, to the value of iO.Ooo/. of which he never gave account but of 800l. The timber he felled; killed the deer in the park; sold an organ, which cost \2Ql. for 10l.; pictures, which cost 400l. for 5l.; made away with what books he pleased, and continued revelling for three summers in Bugden-house. For four cellars of wine, cyder, ale, and beer, with wood, hay, corn, and the like, stored up for a year or two, he gave no account at all. And thus a large personal estate was squandered away, and not the least part of the king’s fine paid all this while; whereas if it had been managed to the best advantage, it would have been sufficient to discharge the whole. It were endless to repeat all the contrivances against his lordship during his confinement; the bills which were drawn up, and the suits commenced against him, as it were on purpose to impoverish him, and to plunge him into debt, that so, if he procured his enlargement from this prison, he might not be long out of another. However, he bore all these afflictions with the utmost patience; and if a stranger had seen his lordship in the Tower, he would never have taken him for a prisoner, but rather for the lord and master of the place. For here he lived with his usual cheerfulness and hospitality, and wanted only a larger allowance to give his guests an heartier welcome; for now he was confined to bare 500l. a year, a great part of which was consumed in the very fees of the Tower. He diverted himself, when alone, sometimes with writing Latin poems; at other times with the histories of such as were noted for their sufferings in former ages. And for the three years and a half that he was confined, he was the same man as elsewhere, excepting that his frequent law-suits broke his studies often; and it could not be seen that he was the least altered in his health or the pleasantness of his temper.”

When the earl of StrafFord came to be impeached in parliament, Williams defended the rights of the bishops, in a very significant speech, to vote in case of blood, as Racket relates; but lord Clarendon relates just the contrary. He says, that this bishop, without communicating with any of his brethren, very frankly declared his opinion, that '< they ought not to be present; and offered, not only in his own name, but for the rest of the bishops, to withdraw always when that business was entered upon:“and so, adds the noble historian, betrayed a fundamental right of the whole order, to the great prejudice of the king, and to the taking away the life of that person, who could not otherwise have suffered. Shortly after, when the king declared, that he neither would, nor could in conscience, give his royal assent to that act of attainder; and when the tumultuous citizens came about the court with noise and clamour for justice; the lord Say desired the king to confer with his bishops for the satisfaction of his conscience, and with bishop Williams in particular, who told him, says lord Clarendon, that” he must consider, that as he had a private capacity and a public, so he had a public conscience as well as a private: that though his private conscience, as a man, would not permit him to do an act contrary to his own understanding, judgment, and conscience, yet his public conscience as a king, which obliged him to do all things for the good of his people, and to preserve his kingdom in peace for himself and his posterity, would not only permit him to do that, but even oblige and require him; that he saw in what commotion the people were; that his own life, and that of the queen and the royal issue, might probably be sacrificed to that fury: and it would be very strange, if his conscience should prefer the right of one single private person, how innocent soever, before all those other lives and the preservation of the kingdom. This,“continues lord Clarendon,” was the argumentation of that unhappy casuist, who truly, it may be, did believe himself:“yet he reveals another anecdote, which shews, at least if true, that bishop Williams could have no favourable intentions towards the unfortunate earl of Strafford. It had once been mentioned to the bishop, when he was out at court, whether by authority or no was not known, says the historian, that” his peace should te made there, if he would resign his bishopric and deanery of Westminster, and take a good bishopric in Ireland:“which he positively refused, and said,” he had much to do to defend himself against the archbishop (Laud) here; but, if he was in Ireland, there was a man (meaning the earl of Strafford) who would cut off his head within one month."

After the king was beheaded, the archbishop spent hig days in sorrow, study, and devotion; and is said to have risen constantly every night out of his bed at midnight, and to have prayed for a quarter of an hour on his bare knees, without any thing but his shirt and waistcoat on. He lived not much above a year after, dying the 25th of March 1650 he was buried in Llandegay church, where a monument was erected to him by his nephew and heir, sir Griffith Williams. Besides several sermons, he published a book against archbishop Laud’s innovations in church-matters and religious ceremonies, with this title, “The Holy Table, Name, and Thing, more antiently, properly, and literally, used under the New Testament, than that of Altar. Written long ago by a minister in Lincolnshire, in answer to D. Coel, a judicious divine of queen Marie’s dayes. Printed for the diocese of Lincoln, 1637;” in quarto. Lord Clarendon, though far from being favourable 10 this prelate, yet represents this “book so full of good learning, and that learning so closely and solidly applied, tnough it abounded with too many light expressions, that it gained him reputation enough to be able to do hurt; and shewed, that in his retirement he had spent his time with his books very profitably. He used all the wit and all the malice he could, to awaken the people to a jealousy of these agitations, and innovations in the exercise of religion; not without insinuations that it aimed at greater alterations, for which he knew the people would quickly find a name: and he was ambitious to have it believed, that the archbishop Laud was his greatest enemy, for his having constantly opposed his rising to any government in the church, as a man whose hot and hasty spirit he had long known.”

A Dutch physician, named Schelhammer, in a book “De Auditu,” printed at Leyden in 1684, took occasion to animadvert upon a passage in Dr. Willis’s book “de Anima Brutorum,” printed in 1672; and in such a manner as reflected not only upon his skill, but also upon his integrity. But Dr. Derham observes, “that this is a severe and unjust censure of our truly-famous countryman, a man of known probity, who hath manifested himself to have been as curious and sagacious an anatomist, as great a philosopher, and as learned and skilful a physician as any of his censurers; and his reputation for veracity and integrity was no less than any of theirs too.” It remains to be noticed, that his “Cerebri Anatome” had an elegant copy of verses written in it by Mr. Phillip Fell, and the drawings for the plates were done by his friend Dr. Christopher Wren, the celebrated architect.

In 1710, when Mr. Gale published his “History and Antiquities of Winchester Cathedral,” Willis supplied him with the history of Hyde abbey,- and lists of the abbots of Newminster and Hyde, published in that work. In 1715 and 1716 he published his “Notitia Parliamentaria, or an History of the Counties, cities and boroughs in England and Wales,” 2 vols. 8vo, to which he added a third in 1730. The first volume was reprinted in 1730, with additions; and a single sheet, as far as relates to the borough of Windsor, was printed in 1733, folio. In 1717, 'he published^ without his name, a kind of abridgment of * The Whole Duty of Man,“” for the benefit of the poorer sort.“In the same year,” A Survey of the Cathedral Church of St. David’s, and the edifices belonging to it, as they stood in the year 1715,“8vo. In 1718 and 1719,” An History of the mitred Parliamentary abbies and conventual cathedral churches,“2 vols. 8vo. In 1719, 20, and 21,” Surveys of the Cathedral churches of Llandaff, St. Asaph, and Bangor, &c.“8vo. This led to his greatest and most important work,” Survey of the Cathedrals of England, with the Parochialc Anglicanmn^ illustrated with draughts of the cathedrals," 3 vols. 4to, 1727, 1730, and 1733. These volumes contain the history of the cathedrals of York, Durham, Carlisle, Chester, Man, Lichfield, Hereford, Worcester, Gloucester, Bristol, Lincoln, ifty, Oxford, and Peterborough*. These were first published by Mr. Francis Gosling, afterwards the banker and founder of the well-known and highly respected firm of that name, who, on giving up the bookselling business, sold the remaining copies to Osborne, who prefixed a title with the date 1742, and advertised them as containing a history of all the cathedrals. Against this roguish trick, Willis thought proper to guard the public in an advertisement in the public papers. It is to be regretted, however, that he did not extend his labours to all the cathedrals, for he had during his long life visited every cathedral in England and Wales except Carlisle, which journies he used to call his pilgrimages.

, a celebrated natural historian, was the only sort of sir Francis Willughby, knt, and was born in 1635. His natural advantages, with regard to birth, talents, and fortune, he applied in such a manner as to procure to himself honours that might more truly be called his own. He was addicted to study from his childhood, and was so great an ceconomist of his time, that he was thought by his friends to have impaired his health by his incessant application, By this means, however, he attained great skill in all branches of learningand got deep insight into the most abstruse kinds of knowledge, and the most subtle parts of the mathematics. But observing, in the busy and inquisitive age in which he lived, that the history of animals was in a great measure neglected by his countrymen, he applied himself particularly to that province, and used all diligence to cultivate and illustrate it. To prosecute this purpose more effectually, he carefully read over what had been written by others on that subject; and in 1660, we find him residing at Oxford for the benefit of the public library. But he had been originally a member of Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of A. B. in 1656, and of A. M. in 1659. After leaving Oxford, he travelled, in search of natural knowledge, several times over his native country; and afterwards to France, Spain, Italy, Germany, and the Low-Countries, attended by his ingenious friend Mr. John Ray, and others; in all which places, says Wood, he was so inquisitive and successful, that not many sorts of animals, described by others, escaped his diligence. He died July 3, 1672, aged only thirty-seven; to the great loss of the republic of letters, and much lamented by those of the Royal Society, of which he was an eminent member and ornament. He left to Mr. Ray the charge of educating his two infant sons, with an annuity of 70/, which constituted ever after the chief part of Ray’s income. A most exemplary character of him may be seen iti Ray’s preface to his “Ornithology;” whence all the particulars are concisely and elegantly summed up in a Latin epitaph, on a monument erected to his memory in the church of Middleton in Warwickshire, where he is buried with his ancestors. His works are, “Ornithologiae libri tres: in quibus aves omnes hactenus cognitse in methodum naturis suis convenientem redactoe accurate describuntur, descriptiones iconibus elegantissimis, & vivarnm avium simillimis atri incisis illustrantur,” 1676, folio. This was prepared for the press, corrected and digested into order, by Hay, afterwards by him also translated into English, with an appendix, and figures engraved at the expense of Mr. Willaghby, but of inferior merit, 1673, folio. 2. “Historiae Piscium libri quatuor, &c.” 1686, folio. This was revised and digested by Ray, with engravings of many species, not then known in England. 3. “Letter containing some considerable observations about that kind of wasps called Ichneumones, &c. dated Aug. 24, 1671.” See the Phil. Trans. N* 76. 4. “Letter about the hatching a kind of bee lodged in old willows, dated July 10, 1671.” Trans. N fl 47. 5. “Letters of Francis Wiilughby, esq.” added to “Philosophical Letters between the late learned Mr. Ray and several of his correspondents,” 8vo, By William Derham.

The earl of Rochester, before he travelled, had given somewhat into that disorderly and intemperate way of living which the joy of the whole nation, upon the restoring of Charles II. had introduced; yet during his travels he bad at least acquired a habit of sobriety. But, falling into court-company, where excesses were continually practised, he soon became intemperate, and the natural heat of his fancy, being inflamed with wine, made him so extravagantly pleasant, that many, to be more diverted by that humour, strove to engage him deeper and deeper in intoxication. This at length so entirely subdued him, that, as he told Dr, Burnet, he was for five years together conttnually drunk: not all the while under the visible effect of liquor, but so inflamed in his blood, that he was never cool enough to be master of himself. There were two principles in the natural temper of this lively and witty earl, which carried him to great excesses; a violent love of pleasure, and a disposition to extravagant mirth. The one involved him in the lowest sensuality, the other led him to many odd adventures and frolics. Once he had disguised himself so, that his nearest friends could not have known him, and set up in Tower-street for an Italian mountebank, where he practised physic for some weeks. He disguised himself often as a porter, or as a beggar; sometimes to follow some mean amours, which, for the variety of them, he affected. At other times, merely for diversion, he would go about in odd shapes; in which he acted his part so naturally, that even those who were in the secret, and saw him in these shapes, could perceive nothing by which he might be discovered. He is said to have been a generous and good-natured man in cold blood, yet would go far in his heats after any thing that might turn to a jest or matter of diversion; and he laid out himself very freely in libels and satire*, in which he had so peculiar a talent of mixing wit with malice, that all his compositions were easily known. Andrew Marvell, Ivho was himself a great wit, used to say, “that Rochester was the only man in England who had the true vein of satire.”

“Wood and Burnet give us reason to believe, that much was imputed to him which he did not write. It is not known by whom the original collection was made, or by what authority its genuineness was ascertained. The first edition was published. in the year of his death, with an air of concealment, professing in the title-page to be printed at Antwerp. Of some of the pieces, however, there is no doubt. The Imitation of Horace’s Satire, the Verses to lord Mulgrave, the Satire against Man, the verses upon Nothing, and perhaps some others, are I believe genuine, and perhaps most of those which the collection exhibits. As he cannot be supposed to have found leisure for any course of continued study, his pieces are commonly short, such as one fit of resolution would produce. His songs have no particular character; they tell, like other &ongs, in smooth and easy language, of scorn and kindness, dismission and desertion, absence, and inconstancy, with the common-places of artificial courtship. They are commonly smooth and easy; but have little nature, and little sentiment. His imitation of Horace on Lucilius is not inelegant or unhappy. In the reign of Charles the Second began that adaptation, which has since been very frequent, of ancient poetry to present times; and perhaps few will be found where the parallelism is better preserved than in this. The versification is indeed sometimes careless, but it is sometimes vigorous and weighty. The strongest effort of his muse is his poem upon” Nothing.“Another of his most vigorous pieces is his lampoon upon sir Carr Scrope. Of the satire against Man, Rochester can only claim what remains when all Boileau’s part is taken away. In all his works there is sprightliness and vigour, and every where may be found tokens of a mind which study might have carried to excellence. What more can be expected from a life spent in ostentatious contempt of regularity, and ended before the abilities of many other men began to be displayed?” The late George Steevens, esq. made the selection of Rochester’s poems which appears in Dr. Johnson’s edition; but Mr. Malone observes, that the same task had been performed in the early part of the last century by Jacob Tonson.

We are not acquainted with any interesting particulars of Mr. Wilmot’s life between the period of his leaving the university and his being in a considerable degree of practice as a barrister: but as duty and filial piety, more than inclination, had induced him to embrace the profession of the law, his pursuit after its emoluments was not eager, though his study of it was unremitted. He was regular in his attendance on the terms, but his practice was at this, time chiefly confined to jhe county of Derby, where he was much respected. In town his business was not great; jet in those causes in which he was engaged, his merit, learning, and eloquence, were universally acknowledged, and gained him the esteem and approbation of some of the greatest ornaments of the profession, among whom were sir Dudley Ryder, then attorney-general, and the lord chancellor Hardwicke. In 1753, the chancellor proposed to make him one of his majesty’s counsel, and afterwards king’s serjeant: but both these he declined, chiefly from a disinclination to London business, and a wish, that never left him, of retiring altogether into the country. On this he was so determined that in 1754, he actually made what he called his farewell speech in the court of exchequer, which he had of late years attended more than any other. Perhaps his disposition was not calculated for forensic disputation, though his profound knowledge and indefatigable labour, as well as ability and penetration, had made him, in the opinion of those who knew him, one of the best lawyers of his time. He had more than one offer of a seat in the House of Commons about this period, bat he uniformly djeclined every temptation of this kind. He had not however long enjoyed his retirement in Derbyshire before he received a summons to town to succeed sir Martin Wright, as judge of the court of King’s Bench. With much persuasion, aided perhaps by the increase of his family, consisting now of five children, he was induced to accept this preferment in February 1755, which was accompanied, as usual, with the honour of knighthood. It is not known to what interest he owed this promotion, and it seems most fair to conclude that a sense of his merit only must have induced his patrons to send to the country for one so resolute on retirement, when so many, at hand, would have been glad to accept the office.

In 1783, he was made a master in chancery, having been chosen for Tiverton, in Devonshire, in the two preceding parliaments. Though seldom taking an active part in the debates of those times, he was always attentive to the important duties of a member of parliament, and constant in his attendance in the House. He uniformly opposed the American war, and though at the termination of that coatest, when the claims of the American loyalists were to be inquired into, and satisfied, it was most natural to suppose that some gentleman on the other side of the House would have been appointed commissioner for that purpose, yet Mr. Wilmot’s known abilities, integrity, and benevolence, were so universally acknowledged, that his nomination to that arduous office gave perfect satisfaction. How far the labours of himself and colleagues were crowned with success, the universal approbation of this country, and of America, sufficiently testify.

, known in his own time, among scholars, by the name of Florentius Volusenus, was born at Elgin, in Scotland, about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and was educated in his native place, whence he removed for academical studies to the university of Aberdeen. On quitting coHege, he went to England, where his talents recommended him to the notice of cardinal Wols^y, who made him preceptor to his nephew, whom he afterwards accompanied to Paris for education, and remained with him till the death of Wolsey, which for a time; eclipsed his prospects. He was soon afterwards taken under the protection of the learned cardinal du Bellai, archbishop of Paris, but here again the disgrace at court of this second patron proved a severe disappointment. Wilson,' however, adhered to the cardinal, and would have accompanied him to Rome, but he fell sick at Avignon, and the cardinal being obliged to leave him, his finances were too much exhausted to allow any thoughts of his accomplishing the journey alone, and his patron’s change of fortune having probably put the offer of sufficient assistance out of his power, Mr. Wilson found himself compelled to abandon a project, in which both affection and curiosity had so warmly interested his heart.

It is not known at what time he returned to England, but he was in London in 1758, and resided over the north arcade of the piazza, Covent-garden, at whjch time he had gained great celebrity as a landscape-painter. To the first exhibition of 1760, he sent his picture of Niobe, which is now in the possession of his royal highness the duke of Gloucester. Sir Joshua Reynolds, in his last lecture but one, has offered some strictures on the figures introduced in this celebrated picture, in which Mr. Fuseli seems to agree, but which Edwards labours to oppose; and even to trace sir Joshua’s opinion to private pique. In 1765, Wilson exhibited, with other pictures, a view of Rome, from the villa Madama, a capital performance, which was purchased by the late marquis of Tavistock, and is probably in the collection of the duke of Bedford. When the Royal Academy was instituted, he was chosen one of the founders, and, after the death of Hayman, was made librarian; an office which his necessities rendered desirable, and which he retained until his decayed health compelled him to retire to his brother’s in Wales, where he died in May 1782. Mr. Opie says, in his “Lectures,” that Wilson, though second to no name of any school or country in classical and heroic landscape, succeeded with difficulty, by pawning some of his works at the age of seventy (sixty-seven or sixty-height), in procuring ten guineas to carry him to die in unhonoured and unnoticed obscurity in Wales.“Edwards informs us, that” though be had acquired great fame, yet he did not find that constant employment which his abilities deserved. This neglect might probably result from his own conduct; for it must be confessed, that Mr. Wilson was not very prudentially attentive to his interest; and though a man of strong sense, and superior education to most of the artists of his time, he certainly did not possess that suavity of manners which distinguished many of his contemporaries. On this account, his connexions and employment insensibly diminished, and left him, in the latter part of his life, in comfortless infirmity.“This appears to us but a sorry excuse for the neglect Wilson met with for what has patronage to do with the temper of anartist Wilson’s taste was so exquisite, says Fuseli, and his eye so chaste, that whatever came from his easel bore the stamp of elegance and truth. The subjects he chose were such as did credit to his judgment. They were the selections of taste; and whether of the simple, the elegant, or the sublime, ^they were treated with an equal felicity. Indeed, he possessed that versatility of power, as to be one minute an eagle sweeping the heavens, and the next, a wren twittering a simple note on the humble thorn. His colouring was in general vivid and natural; his touch, spirited and free; his composition, simple and elegant; his lights and shadows, broad and well distributed; his middle tints in perfect harmony, while his forms in general produced a pleasing impression. Wilson has been called the English Claude; a comparison which Mr. Fuseli cannot admit, from the total dissimilarity of their style.” Claude,“he adds,” little above mediocrity in all other branches of landscape-painting, had one great prerogative, sublimity; but his powers rose and set with the sun, he could only be serenely sublime or romantic. Wilson, without so great a feature, had a more varied and more proportionate power: he observed nature in all her appearances, and had a characteristic touch for all her forms. But though in effects of dewy freshness and silent evening lights few equalled, and fewer excelled him, his grandeur is oftener allied to terror, bustle, and convulsion, than to calmness and tranquillity. Figures, it is difficult to say, which of the two introduced or handled with greater infelicity: treated by Claude or Wilson, St. Ursula with her Virgins, and yneas Landing, Niobe with her family, or Ceyx drawn on the shore, have an equal claim to our indifference or mirth."

Sir Thomas Wilson wrote, 1. “Epistola de vita et obita duorum fratrum SufFolciensium, HenricietCaroli Brandon,” Lond. 1552, 4to, prefixed to a collection of verses written on their deaths by several scholars of Oxford and Cambridge. Of this rare book there are only three copies known, one in the Bodleian, another in the British museum, and a third in the magnificent library of earl Spencer. 2. “The rule of Reason, containing the art of Logic,” 1551, 1552, 1553, 1567, 4to. 3. “The art of Rhetoric,” 1553, 4to, often reprinted. 4. “Discourse upon Usury,” Lond. 1572, a work much praised by Dr. Lawrence Humphrey, the queen’s professor of divinity at Oxford, in his life of Jewell. Wilson also translated from Greek into English, <c The three Orations of Demosthenes, chief orator among the Grecians,“Lond. 1570. Of his” Art of Logic,“Mn Warton says that such a” display of the venerable mysteries of this art in a vernacular language, which had hitherto been confined within the sacred pale of the learned tongues, was esteemed an innovation almost equally daring with that of permitting the service of the church to be celebrated in English; and accordingly the author, soon, afterwards happening to visit Rome, was incarcerated by the inquisitors of the holy see, as a presumptuous and dangerous heretic.“Of his” Art of Rhetoric," Mr. Wartori says, it is liberal and discursive, illustrating the arts of eloquence by example, and examining and ascertaining the beauties of composition with the speculative skill and sagacity of a critic. It may therefore be justly considered as the first book or system of criticism in our language. This opinion Mr. Warton confirms by very copious extracts.

, D. D. only surviving son of the preceding, was born. Aug. 24, 1703, in the parish of Kirk-­Michael, in the Isle of Man, and after such an institution there as he must have received under the eye of so excellent a father, was entered of Christ Church, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. Dec. 16, 1727. On the 10th of May, 1739, having previously become possessed of his mother’s jointure, which devolved to him on her decease, he accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. May 10, 1739, when he went out grand compounder. He was many years senior prebendary of Westminster, and minister of St. Margaret’s there; and rector of St. Stephen’s, Walbrook, forty-six years; in which last he succeeded Dr. Watson, on the presentation of lord-chancellor Hardwicke. In 1761 was published a pamphlet entitled “The Ornaments of Churches considered; with a particular view to the late decoration of the parish church of St. Margaret, Westminster. To which is subjoined an appendix, containing the history of the said church, an account of the altar-piece and stained glass window erected over it, a state of the prosecution it has occasioned, and other papers,” 4to. To the second edition of this pamphlet was prefixed a view of the inside of St. Margaret’s church, with the late excellent speaker, Arthur Onslow, in his seat. This pamphlet has been by some ascribed to a son of Dr. Shebbeare, as published under Dr. Wilson’s inspection. The reason for such conjecture is not given, and the fact is therefore doubtful. We know of no son of Dr. Shebbeare’s, and at this time Dr. Shebbeare himself was a well-known writer, and sufficiently practised in deceptions, had any been necessary. Another report is that the work was chiefly the composition of the late archdeacon Hole; Dr. Wilson having borrowed a ms treatise on the subject written by the archdeacon, and then printed almost the whole of it, inserting here and there a few notes, c. of his own. This assertion is made by an anonymous writer in the Gent. Mag. for 17S6, but who the late archdeacon Hole was, we haye not been able to discover; Mr. William Hole, archdeacon of Sarum, was then alive, and died in 1791. Another pamphlet ascribed to Dr. Wilson was, “A review of the project for building a new square at Westminster, said to be for the use of Westminster-school. By a Sufferer. Part I.” 1757, 8vo. The injury here complained of was the supposed undervaluation of the doctor’s prebendal house, which was to have made way for the project alluded to. He was also the supposed author of a pamphlet entitled “Distilled Liquors the bane of the nation;” which recommended him to sir Joseph Jekyil, then master of the rolls, who interested himself in procuring him his rectory. Even concerning this a doubt has been suggested, as Dr. Hales printed a pamphlet with exactly the same title. That elaborate and excellent work of Dr. Leland’s, entitled “A view of the principal Deistical Writers,” was originally addressed in a series of letters, in the form they now appear, to Dr. Wilson, who finding that the booksellers would not give the author any adequate remuneration (50l. only were offered) printed the first edition at his own risk.

, a learned dissentingdivine, was born May 15, 1693, at Hutton-John, in the parish of Graystock, in Cumberland, where his father was a farmer. He was educated in grammatical learning at Penruddock, and in his fifteenth year began his divinity and philosophy studies at a dissenting academy at Whitehaven, where he had for his contemporaries Dr. Rotheram of Kendal, and Mr. John Taylor of Norwich, author of the Hebrew-English Concordance. From Whitehaven, Mr. Winder removed to Dublin, where for two years he applied very closely to the study of divinity under the rev. Mr. Boyse. After passing the usual examinations, he became a preacher, but returned to England, and in 1714, when only twenty-two years of age, succeeded Mr. Edward Rothwell, as pastor of a congregation at Tunley in Lancashire, and in 1716 was ordained. In 1718 he was chosen pastor of the meeting at Castle-hey in Liverpool, where it appears that he had some trouble with his congregation, during certain disputes on liberty, charity, and the rights of conscience, whiqh he endeavoured to compose by referring them to the Bible as the only standard of orthodoxy, not sufficiently adverting to the fact that this is what all sects profess to do, without any approach towards harmony of sentiment. In 1740, when he was on a visit at Glasgow, the degree of D. D. was conferred upon him by that university. He continued to preside over his congregation at Liverpool, with great approbation, until his death, Aug. 9, 1752. As a testimony of his esteem for his people, he bequeathed his wellchosen library for the use of his successors. Dr. Winder is known in the literary world by an ingenious and elaborate work, published a second time in 1756, 2 vols. 4to, entitled “A critical and chronological History of the Rise, Progress, Declension, and Revival of Knowledge, chiefly religious; in two periods, the period of tradition from Adam to Moses, and the period of Letters from Moses to Christ.” To this are prefixed memoirs of his life by the rev. Dr. George Benson.

* When about to visit that country in perhaps I make the time shorter than his official capacity, he called on Dr. it was. Such conversation I shall not Johnson and in the course of con- have again till I come back to the reversation lamented that he should be gions of Literature, and there Windunder the necessity of sanctioning ham is inter stellas luna. minores.“Alpractices of which he could not ap- though e have said that illness was prove.” Don't be afraid, sir,“said the cause of Mr. Windham’s resignathe tioctor, with a pleasant smile, tion, his biographer affords some rea­”you will soon in -ke a very pretty son to think that it really arose from rascal.“Dr. Johnson in a letter to the conscientious scruples which Dr. Dr. Bruckle.-'by, written an Ashbourne Johnson thought might soon vanish, in 1784 says:” Mr. Wjiuiham has and that it was owing to his being been here to see me he came, [ dissatisfied with some part of the lord think, forty miles ou of his Vay, lieutenaut’s conduct, and staid about a day aud a half; Although from the time of his coming into parliament, he usually voted with the opposition of that day, he never was what is called a thorough party-man, frequently deviating from those to whom he was in general attached, when, in matters of importance, his conscience directed him to take a different course from them; on which account his virtues and talents were never rightly appreciated by persons of that description, who frequently on this ground vainly attempted to undervalue him. After thq rupture between Mr. Fox and Mr. Burke, in consequence of the French revolution, Mr. Windham attached himself wholly to the latter, with whom he had for many years lived in the closest intimacy; and of whose genius and virtues he had always the highest admiration. Being with him thoroughly convinced of the danger then impending over his country from the measures adopted by certain classes of Englishmen, in consequence of that tremendous convulsion, he did not hesitate to unite with the duke of Portland, lord Spencer, and others, in accepting offices under the administration in which Mr. Pitt then presided. On this arrangement Mr. Windham was appointed secretary at war, with a seat in the cabinet, an honourable distinction which had never before been annexed to that office. This station he continued to fill with the highest reputation from that time (17S4) till 1801, when he, lord Spencer, lord Grenville, and Mr. Pitt, resigned their offi-r ces; and shortly afterwards Mr. Addington (now lord viscount Sidmouth) was appointed chancellor of the exchequer and first lord of the treasury. On the preliminaries of peace with France being acceded to by that statesman aod his coadjutors, in 1801, Mr. Windham made his celebrated speech in parliament, which was afterwards (April 1802) published, with an Appendix, containing a character of the Usurper of the French throne, which will transmit to posterity the principal passages of his life up to that period, in the most lively colours. On Mr. Addington being driven from the helm, in 1805, principally by the battery of Mr, Windham’s eloquence, a new administration was again formed by Mr. Pitt, which was dissolved by his death, in 1806; and shortly afterwards, on lord Grenville’s accepting the office of first lord of the Treasury, Mr. Windham was appointed secretary of state for the war department, which he held till his majesty in the following year thought fit to constitute a new administration. During this period he carried into a law his bill for the limited service of those who enlist in our regular army; a measure which will ever endear his name to the English soldiery. But it is not our purpose to detail the particular measures which either originated from him, or in which he took a part. This indeed would be impossible within any prescribed limits; and would involve the history of perhaps the whole of the war. It may suffice to notice that his genius and talents were universally acknoxvledged. He was unquestionably not inferior, in many respects, to the most admired characters of the age that is just gone by. He had been in his earlier years a very diligent student, and was an excellent Greek and Latin scholar. In his latter years, like Burke and Johnson, he was an excursive reader, but gathered a great variety of knowledge from different books, and from occasionally mixing, like them, with very various classes and descriptions of men. His memory was most tenacious. In his parliamentary speeches his principal object always was to convince the understanding by irrefragable argument, which he at the same time enlivened by a profusion of imagery, drawn sometimes from the most abstruse parts of science, but oftener from the most familiar objects of common life. But what gave a peculiar lustre to whatever he urged, was his known and uniform integrity, and a firm conviction in the breasts of his hearers, that he always uttered the genuine and disinterested sentiments of his heart. His language, both in writing and speaking, was always simple, and he was extremely fond of idiomatic phrases, which he thought greatly contributed to preserve the purity of our language. He surveyed every subject of importance with a philosophic eye, and was thence enabled to discover and detect latent mischief, concealed under the plausible appearance of public advantage. Hence all the clarnourers for undefined and imaginary liberty, and all those who meditate the subversion of the constitution under the pretext of Reform, shrunk from his grasp; and persons of this description were his only enemies. But his dauntless intrepidity, and his noble disdain of vulgar popularity, held up a shield against their malice; and no fear of consequences ever drove him from that manly and honourable course, which the rectitude and purity of his mind induced him to pursue. As an orator, he was simple, elegant, prompt, and graceful. His genius was so fertile, and his reading so extensive, that there were few subjects on which he could not instruct, amuse, and persuade. He was frequently (as has justly been observed) “at once entertaining and abstruse, drawing illustrations promiscuously from familiar life, and the recondite parts of science; nor was it unusual to hear him through three adjoining sentences, in the first witty, in the second metaphysical, and in the last scholastic.” But his eloquence derived its principal power from the quickness of his apprehension, and the philosophical profundity of his mind. In private life no man perhaps of any age had a greater number of zealous friends and admirers. In addition to his extraordinary ta-^ lents and accomplishments, the grace and happiness of his address and manner gave an irresistible charm to his conversation; and few, it is believed, of either sex (for his address to ladies was inimitably elegant and graceful) ever partook of his society without pleasure and admiration, or quitted it without regret. His brilliant imagination, his various knowledge, his acuteness, his good taste, his wit, his dignity of sentiment, and his gentleness of manner (for he never was loud or intemperate) made him universally admired and respected. To crown all these virtues and accomplishments, it mav be added, that he fulfilled all the duties. of life, the lesser as well as the greatest, with the most scrupulous attention; and was always particularly ardent in vindicating the cause of oppressed merit. But his best eulogy is the general sentiment of sorrow which agitated every bosom on the sudden s and unexpected stroke which terminated in his death. During the nineteen days of his sickness, his hall was daily visited by several hundred successive inquirers concerning the state of his health; and that part of Pall Mall in which his house was situated, was thronged with carriages filled with ladies, whom a similar anxiety brought to his door. Every morning, and also at a late hour every evening, when his physicians and surgeons attended, several apartments in his house were filled with friends, who anxiously waited to receive the latest and most accurate accounts of the progress or abatement of his disorder. This sympathetic feeling extended almost through every class, and even reached the throiio, for his majesty frequently inquired concerning the state of his health, pronouncing on him this high eulogy, that “he was a genuine patriot, and a truly honest man.” Of the fatal malady which put an end to his invaluable life, erroneous accounts have been published, but the fact was, that on the 8th of July 1809, Mr. Windham, returningon foot at twelve o'clock at niiht from the house of a friend, as he passed by the end of Conduit-street, saw a house on fire, and instantly hastened to the spot, with a view to assist the sufferers; and soon observed that the house of the Hon. Mr. Frederic North was not far distant from that which was then on fire. He therefore immediately undertook to save his friend’s library, which he knew to be very valuable. With the most strenuous activity he exerted himself for four hours, in the midst of rain and the playing of the fire-engines, with such effect that, with the assistance of two or three persons whom he had selected from the crowd assembled on this occasion, he saved four parts out of five of the library; and before they could empty the fifth book room, the house took fire. The books were immediately removed, not to Mr. Windham’s house, but to the houses of the opposite neighbours, who cook great care of them. In removing same heavy volumes he accidentally fell, and suffered a slight contusion on his hip, of which, however, he unfortunately took no notice for some months, when an indolent encysted tumour was formed, which, after due consultation, it was judged proper to cut out. The operation was accordingly performed apparently with success on May 17, 1810, but soon after unfavourable symptoms came on, and terminated fatally June 4, to the unspeakable regret of all who knew him.

In one of his letters, dated 1754, he gives an account of his change of religion, which too plainly appears to have been guided by motives of interest, in order to make his way to Rome, and gain a better livelihood. At Dresden he published, 1755, “Reflections on the Imitation of the Works of the Greeks,” 4to, translated into French the same year, and republished 1756, 4to. At Rome he made an acquaintance with Mengs, first painter to the king of Poland, afterwards, in 1761, appointed first painter to the house of Spain, with an appointment of 80,000 crowns, a house, and a coach; and he soon got access to the library of cardinal Passionei, who is represented as a most catholic and respectable character, who only wanted ambition to be pope. His catalogue was making by an Italian, and the work was intended for Winkelman. Giacomelli, canon of St. Peter, &c. had published two tragedies of Æschylus and Sophocles, with an Italian translation and notes, and was about a new edition of “Chrysostom de Sacerdotio;” and Winkelman had joined with him in an edition of an unprinted Greek oration of Libanius, from two Mss. in the Vatican and Barberini libraries. In 1757 he laments the calamities of his native country, Saxony, which was then involved in the war between the emperor and the king of Prussia. In 1758 he meditated a journey over the kingdom of Naples, which he says could only be done on foot, and in the habit of a pilgrim, on account of the many difficulties and dangers, and the total want of horses and carriages from Viterbo to Pisciota, the ancient Velia. Jn 1768 we find him in raptured with the idea of a voyage to Sicily, where he wished to make drawings of the many beautiful earthen vases collected by the Benedictines at Catana. At the end of the first volume of his letters, 1781, were first published his remarks on the ancient architecture of the temple of Girgenti. He was going to Naples, with 100 crowns, part of a pension from the king of Poland, for his travelling charges, and thence to Florence, at the invitation of baron Sto&ch. Cardinal Archinto, secretary of state, employed him to take care of his library. His “Remarks on Ancient Architecture' 7 were ready for a second edition. He was preparing a work in Italian, to clear up some obscure points in mythology and antiquities, with above fifty plates; another in Latin, explanatory of the Greek medals that are least known; and he intended to send to be printed in England” An Essay on the Style of Sculpture before Phidias.“A work in 4to appeared at Zurich, addressed to Mr. Wrnkelman, by Mr. Mengs, but without his name, x entitled,” Thoughts on Beauty and Taste in Painting,“and was published by J. C. Fuesli. When Cardinal Albam succeeded to the place of librarian of the Vatican, he endeavoured to get a place for the Hebrew language for Winkelman, who refused a canonry because be would not take the tonsure. The elector of Saxony gave him, 1761, unsolicited, the place of counsellor Richter, the direction of the royal cabinet of medals, and antiquities at Dresden. Upon the death of the abbe Venuti, 1762, he was appointed president of the antiquities of the apostolic chamber, with power over all discoveries and exportations of antiquities and pictures. This is a post of honour, with an income of 160 scudi per annum. He had a prospect of the place of president of antiquities in the Vatican, going to be created at 16 scudi per month, and was named corresponding member of the academy of inscriptions. He had thoughts of publishing an” Essay on the Depravation of Taste in the Arts and Sciences.“The king of Prussia offered him by Col. Quintus Icilius the place of librarian and director of his cabinet of medals and antiquities, void by the death of M. Gautier de la Croze, with a handsome appointment. He made no scruple of accepting the offer; but, when it came to the pope’s ears, he added an appointment out of his own purse, and kept him at Rome. In April 1768 he left Rome to go with M. Cavaceppi over Germany and Switzerland. When he came to Vienna he was so pleased with the reception he met with that he made a longer stay there than he had intended. But, being suddenly seized with a secret uneasiness, and extraordinary desire to return to Rome, he set out for Italy, putting off his visits to his friends in Germany to a future opportunity. It was the will of Providence, however, that this opportunity should never come, he being assassinated in June of that year, by one Arcangeli, of whom, and of his crime, the following narrative was published: ” Francis Arcangeli was born of mean parents, near the city of Pistoia, and bred a cook, in which capacity he served in a respectable family at Vienna, where, having been guilty of a considerable robbery, he was condemned to work in fetters for four years, and then to be banished from all the Austrian dominions, after being sworn never to return. When three years of his slavery were expired, he found friends to intercede in his favour, and he was released from serving the fourth, but strictly enjoined to observe the order of banishment; in consequence of which he left Vienna, and retired to Venice with his pretended wife, Eva Rachel. In August 1767, notwithstanding his oath, he came to Trieste with a view to settle; but afterwards changed his mind, and returned to Venice, where, being disappointed of the encouragement he probably expected, he came again to Trieste in May 1768. Being almost destitute of money, and but shabbily dressed, he took up his lodging at a noted inn (probably with a view of robbing some traveller). In a few days the abbe Winkelman arrived at the same inn in his way from Vienna to Home, and was lodged in the next apartment to that of Arcangeli. This circumstance, and their dining together at the ordinary, first brought them acquainted. The abbe expressed a desire of prosecuting his journey with all possible expedition, and Arcangeli was seemingly very assiduous in procuring him a passage, which the abbé took very kindly, and very liberally rewarded him for his services. His departure, however, being delayed by the master of the vessel which was to carry turn, Arcangeli was more than ordinarily diligent in improving every opportunity of making himself acceptable to the abbe, and their frequent walks, long and fainiliar conversations, and the excessive civility and attention of Arcangeli upon all occasions that offered, so improved the regard which the abbe had begun to conceive for him, that he not only acquainted him in the general run of their discourse with the motives and the event of his journey to Vienna, the graces he had there received, and the offers of that ministry; but informed him also of the letters of credit he had with him, the medals of gold and silver which he had received from their imperial majesties, and, in short, with all the things of value of which he was possessed.

Some of Winkelman’s Mss. got to Vienna, where the new edition of his “History of Art” was presently advertised. He intended to have got this work translated into French at Berlin, by M. Toussaint, that it might be printed under his own inspection at Rome. It was translated by M. Hubert, so well known in the republic of letters, who has since published it in 3 vols. 4to, witlj head and tailpieces from designs of M. Oeser. An Italian translation of it by a literary society has been published at Milan.

, originally a barber, author of the “Lives of the Poets;” of “Select Lives of England’s Worthies;” “Historical Rarities;” “The Loyal Martyrology;” and some single lives; all in 8vo. Granger says he is a fantastical writer, and of the lowest class of biographers:. but we are obliged to him for many notices of persons and things, which are mentioned by no other writer, which must account for his “England’s Worthies” being a book still in request; and, as some of the vampers think, even worthy of being illustrated by prints. It is not, however, generally known, that it is necessary to have both editions of this work; those of 1660 and 1684, in order to possess the whole of his biographical labours: Winstanley, who could trim in politics as well as trade, omitted from the latter all the republican lives, and substituted others in their room. He flourished in the reigns of Charles I. II. andJames II. and was probably alive at the publication of his second edition, in which he changed his dedication, adopting new patrons. * In the “Gensura Literaria,” vol. V. is an account of “The Muses Cabinet,” 1655, 12mo, containing his original poetry, which is called in the title-page “both pleasant and profitable;” but now we are afraid will not be thought either. He was a great plagiary, and took his character of the English poets from Phillips’s “Theatrum,” and much from Fuller and others, without any acknowledgment.

, a name well known among the readers of old English poetry, and revived, of late, by the taste and judgment of some eminent poetical antiquaries, was born at Bentworth, near Alton in Hampshire, June 11, 1588. He was the only son of George Wither of Bentworth (by Anne Serle), who was the second son of John Wither of Manydowne near W r otton St. Lawrence in that county, at which' seat Mr. Bigg Wither, the heir (not the heir male, hut the heir female, who has taken the name), still resides. The poet was educated under John Greaves of Colemore, a celebrated schoolmaster, whom he afterwards commemorated with gratitude in a poem published in 1613. About 1604- he was sent to Magdalen college, Oxford, under the tuition of John Warner, afterwards bishop of Rochester. Here he informs us, in the proemium to his “Abuses stript and whipt,” that he found the v art of logic, to which his studies were directed, first dull and unintelligible; but at the moment it began all at once to unfold its mysteries to him, he was called home “to Jiold the plough.” He laments that he was thus obliged to forsake “the Paradise of England” to go “in quest of care, despair, and discontent.”

That Wither was a poet, and a poet deserving to be better known, has been sufficiently proved by the selection from his “Juvenilia,” printed by the late Alexander Dalfymple, esq. in 1785, and particularly by the more recent republications of his “Shepherd’s Hunting,” 1814, his “Fidelia,” 1815, and his “Hymns and Songs of the Church,” 1815, by sir Egerton Brydges, whose prefaces and remarks add no small value to these beautiful volumes, and whose judgment and taste in the revival of works of neglected merit cannot be too highly appreciated. It is to this learned baronet also that the reader is indebted for all that is valuable in the present sketch of Wither, taken frorii a more copious life of the poet in the “Bibliographer.” In the same work, the reader may be referred to a very accurate list, and history, by Mr. Park, of all Wither’s writings, amounting to 112 articles in prose and verse, from which very pleasing selections may yet be made, They are almost all of rare occurrence, and expensive in proportion, since the attention of the public has been drawn to them by the various critics mentioned in our references.

, a very learned and eminent divine of North Holland, was born at Enckhuisen, Feb. 12, 1636. He was trained to the study of divinity, and so distinguished himself by his uncommon abilities and learning, that he was chosen theological professor, first at Franeker, afterwards at Utrecht, and lastly at Leyden. He applied himself successfully to the study of the Oriental tongues, and was not ignorant in any branch of learning which is necessary to form a good divine. He died Oct. 82, 1708, in the seventy-third year of his age, after having published several important works, which shew great judg^ ment, learning, and piety. One of the principal of these is “Egyptiaca;” the best edition of which, at Amsterdam, 1696, in 4to, has this title “Ægyptiaca, et Decaphylon sive, de Jigyptiacorum Sacrorum cum Hebraicis collatione Libri tres. Et de decem tribubus Israelis Liber singularis. Accessit Diatribe de Legione Fulminatrice Christianorum, &ub Icnperatore Marco Aurelio Antonino,” Amst. 1683, and 1696, 4to. Witsius, in this work, not only compares the religious rites and ceremonies of the Jews and Egyptians, but he maintains particularly, against our sir John Marsham and Dr. Spencer, that the former did not borrow theirs, or any part of them, from the latter, as these learned and eminent writers had asserted in their respective works, “Canon Chronicus,” and “De Legibus Hebrseorum.” “The Oetionomy of the Covenants between God and Man” is another work of Witsius, and the best known in this country, having been often printed in English, 3 vols. 8vo. Of this and its author, Hervey, in his “Theron and Aspasia,” has taken occasion to speak in the following terms: “The Oeconomy of the Covenants,” says he, “is a body of divinity, in its method so well digested, in its doctrine so truly evangelical, and, what is not very usual with our systematic writers, in its language so refined and elegant, in its manner so affectionate and animating, that I would recommend it to every student in divinity. I would not scruple to risk all my reputation upon the merits of this performance; and I cannot but lament it, as one of my greatest losses, that I was no sooner acquainted with this most excellent author, all whose works have such a delicacy of composition, and such a sweet savour of holiness, that I know not any comparison more proper to represent their true character than the golden pot which had manna, and was outwardly bright with burnished gold, inwardly rich with heavenly food.”

Of his politics, Mr. Wodhtill says they were c< those of a British whig, not run away with by national prejudices;" but he never entered into public life; his chief occupation and amusement being the study of books, of which he was celebrated as a collector. He disposed during his life of many which he had purchased, but left behind him above 4000 volumes, consisting principally of first editions and rare specimens of early printing. The duties 6f private and social life no man discharged with more fidelity or exactness. As a son, a husband, a friend, a master, a landlord, few could excel him, and his charities, which were numerous, were known generally to those only whom he benefited.

As to his religious sentiments, although he was an advocate for toleration, he invariably asserted the principle of conformity to the sound and apostolic establishments of the land. His practice, even when very infirm, was to attend divine service in his parish church, to read or pro-? cure some friend to read a sermon and prayers to his family and domestics every Sunday evening. He never spoke an unkind word to his servants, and there was hardly an instance known of any one quitting his service for that of another master. He never complained, nor uttered a peevish expression under the greatest privations and the most severe pain. His funeral was, by his own desire,' as his life had been, without parade or ostentation, and the monumental stone declares no more than the name and age of him whose mortal reliques lie near it.

, a Scotch ecclesiastical historian, son to the rev. James Wodrow, professor of divinity in the university of Glasgow, was born there in 1679, and after passing through his academic course, was chosen in 1698 librarian to the university. He held this office for four years, during which he had many valuable opportunities for indulging his taste in the history and antiquities of the church of Scotland. In 1703 he was ordained minister of the parish of Eastwood, in which humble station he continued all his life, although he had encouraging offers of greater preferment in Glasgow and Stirling. He died in 1734, at the age of fifty-five. He published in 1721, in 2 vols. folio., a “History of the singular sufferings of the Church of Scotland, during the twenty-eight years immediately preceding the Revolution,” written with a fidelity which has seldom been disputed, and confirmed, at the end of each volume, by a large mass of public and private records. In England this work has been little known, except perhaps by an abridgment in 2 vols. 8vo. by the Rev. Mr. Cruickshanks, but since the publication of the historical work of the Hop. Charles James Fox, as well as by the writings of Messrs. Sommerville and Laing, it has greatly risen in reputation as well as price. “No historical facts,” Mr. Fox says, “are better ascertained than the accounts which are to be found in Wodrow. In every instance where there has been an opportunity of comparing these accounts with the records and authentic monuments, they appear to be quite correct.” Mr. Wodrow also left a greafc many biographical memoirs of the Scotch reformers and presbyterian divines, which are preserved in the university library of Glasgow.

, a learned scholar, hitherto strangely overlooked by most foreign biographers, was a native of Germany, born in 1683, but removed in his youth to Hamburgh, where he was educated under Fabricius, and assisted him in his “Bibliotheca Graeca,” as appears by vol. XIII. of that laborious work. He was a Lutheran divine, and preached at Hamburgh, where he was also professor of the Oriental languages, and where he died in 1739. Many of his works are known in this country, and have been often quoted with approbation by biblical scholars and critics. Among them are, 1. “Historia Lexicorum Hebraicorum,” Wittem. 1705, 8vo. 2. “Dissertatio de Zabiis,” ibid. 1706, 4to. 3. “Origenis Philosophumena recognita et nods illustrata,” Hamb. 1706, Sto. 4. An edition of Pbsedrus, 1709. 5. “Dissertatio de Atheism! falso suspectis,” Wittem. 1710, 4to. 6. “Casauboniana, sive Isaaci Casauboni varia de Scriptoribus, librisque judicia,” Hamb. 1710, 8vo. 7. “Libanii epist. adhuc non editarum centuria selecta Gr. cum versione et nods,” Leipsic, 1711, 8vo. 8. “Anecdota Gneca sacra et profana,” Hamb. 1722, &c. 3 vols. 8vo. 9. “Curse philologicae et criticae in omnes libros N. T.” Hamb. 1725 1735, but the best edition is that of Basil, 1741, 3 vols. 4to. This work, says bishop Watson, has some resemblance, in the manner of its composition, to Pool’s “Synopsis,” but is written with more judgment, and contains the opinions of many expositors who have lived since the publication of Pool’s work. Wolfe, moreover, has not followed Pool in simply relating the sentiments of others, but has frequently animadverted on them with great critical discernment. Wolfe published other works, and new editions, all which display great learning and critical acumen. His brother John Christian, who died in 1770, was the author of the “Monumenta typographies,” Hamburgh, 1740, 8vo, an edition of the fragments of Sappho, and other works.

, a learned and ingenious" writer, was born March 26, 1659, at Colon Clanford, in Staffordshire, where his father then resided, a private gentleman of small fortune, being descended from an ancient and considerable family in that county, where the elder branch always continued; but the second, in process of time, was transplanted into other counties. The head of it flourished formerly at Oncot, in the county of Stafford, though afterwards at Shenton, in Leicestershire; and was possessed of a large estate lying in those and other counties. Our author was a second son of a third son of a second son of a second son, yet notwithstanding this remarkable series of younger brothers, his grandfather, who stands in the midst of it, had a considerable estate both real and personal, together with an office of 700l. per annum. And from a younger brother of the same branch sprang sir John Wollaston,lord- mayor of London, well known in that city at the time of the grand rebellion.

He had now books and leisure, and he was resolved to make use of them, He was perfectly acquainted with the elementary parts of learning, and with the learned languages, Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, &c. He thought it necessary to add to these such a degree of philology and criticism as seemed likely to be useful to him: and also mathematical sciences, or at least the fundamentals of them; the general philosophy of nature the history and antiquities of the more known and noted states and kingdoms; and in order to attain the knowledge of true religion, and the discovery of truth, the points which he always had particularly in view, and to which he chiefly directed all his studies, he diligently inquired into the idolatries of the heathens; and made himself master of the sentiments, rites, and learning of the Jews; the history of tjie first settlement of Christianity, and the opinions and practice introduced into it since. In the mean time he exercised and improved his mind by using himself to clear images, observing the influence and extent of axioms, the nature and force of consequences, and the method of investigating truth. In general, he accustomed himself to much thinking as well as much reading. He likewise delighted in method and regularity: and chose to have his labours and refreshments periodical, and that his family and friends should observe the proper seasons of their revolution. He was most remarkably cheerful and lively in conversation, which rendered his company agreeable, and himself worthy to be courted by the learned and virtuous. But a general acquaintance was what he never cultivated, and it grew (as is mostly the case) more and more his aversion, so that he passed his days principally at home, with a few friends, with whom he could enjoy an agreeable relaxation of mind, and receive all the advantages of a sincere and open friendship. Having thus fixed his resolution to deserve honours, but not to wear them, it was not long before he published a piece entitled, “The Design of Part of the Book of Ecclesiastes, or the Unreasonableness of Man’s restless Contentions for the present Enjoyments, represented in an English poem,” in 8vo. But as he had never made poetry his study, he was very sensible of the defects of this attempt, and was afterward very desirous to suppress it. Ttiis poem was printed in 1690. Notwithstanding he declined to accept of any public employment, yet his studies were designed to be of public use, and his solitude was far from being employed in vain and trifling amusements, terminating in himself alone. But neither in this last view, could his retirement be without some inconveniences. His intimates were dropping off, and their places remained unsupplied; his own infirmities were increasing; the frequent remission of study, growing more and more necessary; and his solitude at the same time becoming less and less agreeable, for want of that conversation which had hitherto supported it.

Nor can we blame Wolsey for his credulity, since Henry, although he had stripped the cardinal of all his property, and the income arising from all his preferments, actually granted him, Feb. 12, 1530, a free pardon for all crimes and misdemeanors, and a few days after restored to him the revenues, &c. of the archbishopric of York, except York place, before-mentioned, and one thousand marks yearly from the bishopric of Winchester. He also sent him a present of 3000l. in money, and a quantity of plate and furniture exceeding that sum, and allowed him to remove from Esher to Richmond, where he resided for some time in the lodge in the old park, and afterwards in the priory. His enemies at court, however, who appear to have influenced the king beyond his usual arbitrary disposition, dreaded Wolsey’s being so near his majesty, and prevailed on him to order him to reside in his archbishopric. In obedience to this mandate, which was softened by another gracious message from Henry, he first went to the archbishop’s seat at Southwell, and about the end of September fixed his residence at Cawood castle, which he began to repair, and was acquiring popularity by his hospitable manners and bounty, when his capricious master was persuaded to arrest him for high treason, and order him to be conducted to London. Accordingly, on the first of November he set out, but on the road he was seized with a disorder of the dysenteric kind, brought on by fatigue and anxiety, which put a period to his life at Leicester abbey on the 28th of that mouth, in the fifty-ninth year of his age . Some of his last words implied the awful and just reflection, that if he had served his God as diligently as he had served his king, he would not have given him over to his enemies. Two days after he was interred in the abbey church of Leicester, but the spot is not now known. As to the report of his having poisoned himself, founded on an expression in the printed work of Cavendish, it has been amply refuted by a late eminent antiquary, who examined the whole of the evidence with much acuteness. Modern historians have formed a more favourable estimate of Wolsey’s character than their predecessors, yet it had that mixture of good and evil which admits of great variety of opinion, and gives to ingenious party-colouring all the appearance of truth. Perhaps Shakspeare, borrowing from Holinshed and Hall, has drawn a more just and comprehensive sketch of his perfections and failings than is to be found in any other writer.

, a polite scholar, and under-secretary of state in 1764, has a right to a place here, for his very curious “Essay on the original Genius of Homer.” Of the particulars of his life, the proper subject for our pages, we reluctantly confess ourselves ignorant; but shall observe, that in 1751, he made the tour of Greece, Egypt, and Palestine, in company with Mr. Dawkins and Mr. Bouverie; and at his return published a splendid work, in folio, entitled “The Ruins of Palmyra, otherwise Tedmor in the Desert,” being an account of the ancient and modern state of that place; with a great number of elegant engravings of its ruins by Fourdrinier, from drawings made on the spot. This was followed by a similar work respecting Balbec. Speaking of the abovementioned friends, he says, “Had I been so fortunate as to have enjoyed their assistance in arranging and preparing for the public the substance of our many friendly conversations on this subject (Homer) I should be less anxious about the fate of the following work: but, whatever my success may be in an attempt to contribute to the amusement of a vacant hour, I am happy to think, that, though I should fail to answer the expectations of public curiosity, I am sure to satisfy the demands of private friendship; and that, acting as the only sur^ vivor and trustee for the literary concerns of my late fellow-r travellers, I am, to the best of my judgment, carrying into execution the purpose of men for whose memory I shall ever retain the greatest veneration; and though I may do injustice to those honest feelings which urge me to this pious task, by mixing -an air of compliment in an act of duty, yet I must not disown a private, perhaps an idle consolation, which, if it be vanity to indulge, it would be ingratitude to suppress, viz. that, as long as my imperfect descriptions shall preserve from oblivion the present state of the Troade, and the remains of Balbec and Palmyra, so long will it be known that Dawkins and Bouverie were my friends.”

Sir Henry was the only son of the second marriage of his father Thomas Wotton, esq. with Eleanora, daughter of sir William Finch, of Eastwell in Kent (ancestor to lord Winchelsea), and widow of Robert Morton, of the same county, esq. He was educated first under private tutors, and then sent to Winchester-school whence, in 1584, he was removed to New- college in Oxford. Here he was entered as a gentleman-commoner, and had his chamber in Hart-hall adjoining; and, for his chamber-fellow, Richard Baker, his countryman, afterwards a knight, and author of the well known “Chronicle” which goes by his name. Wotton did not continue long there, but went to Queen’s-college, where he became well versed in logic Uid philosophy-, and, being distinguished for his wit, was solicited to write a tragedy for private acting in that society, The name of it was “Tancredo” and Walton relates, “that it was so interwoven with sentences, and for the method and exact personating those humours, passions, and dispositions, which he proposed to represent, so performed, that the gravest of the society declared^ he had in a slight employment given an early and solid testimony of his future abilities.” In 1588 he supplicated the congregation of regents, that he might be admitted to the reading of any of the books of Aristotle’s logic, that is, be admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; but “whether he was admitted to that or any other degree doth not appear,” says Wood, ^from the university registers;“although Walton tells us, that about his 20th year he proceeded master of arts, and at that time read in Latin three lectures de oculo, on the blessing of sight, which he illustrated by some beautiful passages aud apt reflexions. In 1589 he lost his father, and was left with no other provision than a rent-charge of 100 marks a-year. Soon after, he left Oxford, betook himself to travel, and went into France, Germany, and Italy. He stayed but one year in France, and part of that at Geneva; where he became acquainted with Beza and Isaac Casaubon. Three years he spent in Germany, and five in Italy, where both in Rome, Venice, and Florence, he cultivated acquaintance with the most eminent men for learning and all manner of fine arts; for painting, sculpture, chemistry, and architecture; of all which he was an amateur and an excellent judge. After having spent nine years abroad, he returned to England highly accomplished, and with a great accumulation of knowledge of the countries through which he had passed. His wit and politeness so effectually recommended him to the earl of Essex that he first admitted him into his friendship, and afterwards made him one of his secretaries, the celebrated Mr. Henry Cuff being the other. (See Cuff.) He personally attended all the councils and employments of the earl, and continued with him till he was apprehended for high treason. Fearing now lest he might, from his intimate connexion, be involved in his patron’s ruin, he thought proper to retire, and was scarcely landed in France, when he heard that his master Essex was beheaded, and his friend Cuff hanged. He proceeded to Florence, and was received into great confidence by the grand duke of Tuscany. This place became the more agreeable to him, from his meeting with signor Vietta, a gentleman of Venice, with whom he had been formerly intimately acquainted, and who was now the grand duke’s secretary. It was during this retreat that Mr. Wotton drew up his” State of Christendom, or a most exact and curious discovery of many secret passages, and hidden myteries of the times." This was first printed, a thin fol. in 1657, and afterwards in 1677, with a small alteration in the title. It was here also that the grand duke having intercepted letters which discovered a design to take away the life of James VI. of Scotland, dispatched Wouon thither to give him notice of it. Wotton was on this account, as well as according to his instructions, to manage this affair with all possible secrecy: and therefore, having parted from the duke, he took the name and language of an Italian; and to avoid the line of English intelligence and danger, he posted into Norway, and from that country to Scotland, He found the king at Stirling, and was admitted to him under the name of Octavio Baldi. He delivered his message and his letters to the king in Italian: then, stepping up and whis^ pering to his majesty, he told him he was an Englishman, requested a more private conference with him, and that he might be concealed during his stay in Scotland. He spent about three months with the king, who was highly entertained with him, and then returned to Florence, where, after a few months, the news of queen Elizabeth’s death, and of king James’s accession to the crown of England, arriyep!.

Sir Henry Wotton then returned to England, and, as it seems, not sooner than welcome, for king James, finding, among other officers of the late queen, sir Edward, who was afterwards lord Wotton, asked him, “if _he knew one Henry Wotton, who had spent much time in foreign travel?” Sir Edward replied, that “he knew him well, and that he was his brother.” Then the king asking, “Where he then was” was answered, “at Venice, or Florence; but would soon be at Paris.” The king ordered him to be sent for, and to be brought privately to him; which being done, the king took him into his arms, and saluted him by the nanie of Octavio Baldi. Then he knighted him, and nominated him ambassador to the republic of Venice; whither he went, accompanied by sir Albertus Morton, his nephew, who was his secretary, and Mr. William Bedel, a man of great learning and wisdom, and afterwards bishop of Kilrnore in Ireland, who was his chaplain. He continued many years in king James’s favour, and indeed never entirely forfeited it, although he had once the misfortune to displease his majesty, by an apparently trifling circumstance. In proceeding as ambassador to Venice, he passed through Germany, and stayed some days at Augsburg; where, happening to spend a social evening with some ingenious and learned men, whom he had before known in his travels, one Christopher Flecamore requested him to write some sentence in his Album, a paper book which the German gentry used to carry about with them for that purpose. Sir Henry Wotton, consenting to the motion, took occasion from some incidental discourse of the company, to write a definition of an ambassador in these words: “Legatus est vir bonus peregre missus ad memiendum Reipublicae causa:” which Walton says he would have interpreted thus; “An ambassador is an honest man sent to lie abroad for the good of his country.” The word lie was the hinge on which this conceit turned, yet it was no conceit at all in Latin, and therefore could not bear the construction sir Henry, according to Walton, wished to have put upon it: so that when the Album fell afterwards into the hands of Caspar Scioppius (See Sciop­pjus), he printed it in his famous hook against king James, as a principle of the religion professed by that king, and his ambassador sir Henry Wotton; and in Venice it was presently after written in several glass windows, and spitefully declared to be sir Henry’s. This coming to the knowledge of king James, he apprehended it to be such an oversight, such weakness, or worse, that he expressed much anger against him; which caused sir Henry to write two apologies in Latin; one to Velserus at Augsburg, which was dispersed into the cities of Germany, and another to the king “de Gaspare Scioppio.” These gave such satisfaction that the king entirely forgave sir Henry, declaring publicly, that “he had commuted sufficiently for a greater offence.”

In 1679 he took the degree of B. A. when he was but twelve years and five months old; and, the winter following, was invited to London by Dr. Gilbert Burner, then preacher at the Rolls, who introduced him to almost all the learned; and among the rest to Dr. William Llovd, bishopi of St. Asaph, who was so highly pleased with him, that he took him a an assistant in making the catalogue of his library, and carried him the summer following to St. Asaph. Upon his return, Dr. Turner, afterwards bishop of Ely^ procured him by his interest a fellowship in St. John’s colege, where he took his degree of ML A. in 1683, and iri 1691 he commenced bachelor of divinity. The same year bishop Lloyd gave him the sinecure of LlandriUo, in Denbighshire. He was afterwards made chaplain to the earl of Nottingham, then secretary of state, who in 1693 presented him to the rectory of Middleton Keynes, in Buckinghamshire. In 1694- he published “Reflections upon Ancient and modern Learning” and dedicated his book to his patron the earl of Nottingham^ To settle the bounds of all branches of literature, and all arts and sciences, as they have been extended by both ancients and moderns, and thus to make a comparison between each, was a work too vast, one should think, for any one man, even for a whole life spent in study; yet it was executed with very considerable ability by Mr. Wotton at twenty-eight years of age; and if it did involve him somewhat in the controversy between Boyle and Bentley, that was rather owing to his connections with Bentley, whose “Dissertations upon Phalaris,” &c. were printed at the end of the 2d edition of his book in 1697, than to any intermeddling of his own. Boyle himself acknowledged that “Mr. Wotton is modest and decent, speaks generally with respect of those he differs from, and with a due distrust of his own opinion. His book has a vein of learning running through it, where there is no ostentation of it.” This and much more is true of Wotton’s performance yet it must not be dissembled, that this,as it stands in Boyle’s hook, appears to have been said rather for the sake of reflecting on Bentley than to commend Wotton. Wotton suffered, as is well known, under the satirical pen of Swift; and this induced him to write “A Defence of the Reflections upon Ancient and Modern Learning, in answer to the objections of sir William Temple and others;” with “Observations upon the Tale of a Tub;” reprinted with a third corrected edition of the “Reflections,” &c. in 1705, 8vo. He says that this “Tale is of a very irreligious nature, and a crude banter upon all that is esteemed as sacred among all sects and religions among men;” and his judgment of that famous piece is confirmed by that of Mr. Moyle, in the following passage: “I have read over the * Tale of a Tub.' There is a good deal of wild wit in it, which pleases by its extravagance and uncommonness; but I think it, upon the whole, the profanest piece of ribaldry which has appeared since the days of Rabelais, the great original of banter and ridicule.”

Among the many public buildings erected by him in the city of London, the church of St. Stephen in Waibroke, that of St. Mary-le-Bow, the Monument, and the cathedral of St. Paul, have more especially drawn the attention of foreign connoisseurs. “The church of Waibroke,” says the author of the ‘ Critical Review of the public buildings, &c. of London,’ “so little known among us, is famous all over Europe, and is justly reputed the master-piece of the celebrated sir Christopher Wren. Perhaps Italy itself can produce no modern building that can vie with this in taste or proportion. There is not a beauty which the plan would admit of, that is not to be found here In its greatest perfectjon; and foreigners very justly call our judgment in question, for understanding its graces no better, and allowing it. ho higher a degree of fame.” The steeple of St. Mary-le-Bow, which is particularly grand and beautiful, stands upon an old Roman causey, that lies eighteen feet below the level of the present street; and the body of the church on the walls of a Roman temple. The Monument is a pillar of the Doric order, the pedestal of which is forty feet high and twentyone square, the diameter of the column fifteen feet, and the altitude of the whole 202; which is a fourth part higher than that of the emperor Trajan at Rome. It was begun in 167 1, and finished in 1677. But St. Paul’s will probably be considered as the greatest monument of sir Christopher’s genius. He died, says Waipole, at the age of ninety-one, having lived to see the completion of St. Paul’s; a fabric and an event, which one

He left a son, James Wright, known to dramatic antiquaries, as one of the earliest historians of the stage, and perhaps one of the first collectors of old plays after Cartwright, whbse collection was at Dulwich-college. His work on this subject, which is extremely scarce, is entitled “Historia Histrionica; an historical account of the English stage, shewing the ancient use, improvement, and perfection, of dramatic representations in this nation. In a dialogue of plays and players,” Lond. 1699, 8vo. It was-first brought forward by Oldys, who quoted it in his life of Alleyn the player in the Biographia Britannica, By Warburton’s recommendation it was prefixed to Dodsley’s “Old Plays,” but the preface has been omitted which Warton says is a sensible one, and certainly points out the only use of most old plays, 'as exhibiting the manners of the times. Wright wrote likewise “Country conversations, being an account of some discourses that happened on a visit to the country last summer, on divers subjects; chiefly, of the modern comedies, of drinking, of translated verse, of painting and painters, of poets and poetry,” Lond. 1694, 12mo. He appears also to have been a skilful antiquary, and had formed a very curious collection, which was unfortunately consumed in a fire in the Middle Temple in 1698. Among his Mss. was an excellent transcript of Leland’s “Itinerary,” of the age of queen Elizabeth, and consequently made before the present mutilations and corruptions. On this he had much correspondence with Hearne. His other works were, 1. “A poem, being an Essay on the present ruins of St. Paul’s cathedral,” Lond. 1663, 4to. 2. “History and Antiquities of the county of Rutland,” ibid. 1634, fol. soon followed by “Additions” in 1687, and “Farther Additions,” 1714. This is a work of much labour and research, although not perfect. '6. “A new der scription of the city of Paris, in two parts, out of the French,” ibid. 1687, 8vo. 4. “Verses anniversary to the venerable memory of his ever honoured father, &c.” 1690, 8vo. 5. “Monasticon Anglicanum, &c.” an accurate epitome in English of Dugdale’s “Monasticon,” ibid. 1693, fol. 6. “Three poems of St. Paul’s cathedral, viz. The Ruins (mentioned above), The re-building, The Choir,” 1697, fol. 7. “Phcenix Paulina, a poem on St. Paul’s cathedral,” 1709, 4to. 8. “Burley on the hill, a poem,” 4to, no date, but reprinted in his last additions to his Rutlandshire. Hearne, who knew and respected Wright, informs us, that he wrote strictures on Wood’s “Athenæ,” but that they remained in manuscript. Wright, a few years before his death, gave Hearne a complete catalogue of his works, which on application he had refused to Wood, “as an injudicious biographer.”

At length, in 1599, Mr. Wright himself printed his celebrated treatise entitled “The Correction of certain Errors in Navigation,” which had been written many years before; where he shews the reason of this division of the meridian, the manner of constructing his table, and its uses in navigation, with other improvements. In 1610 a second edition of Mr. Wright’s book was published, and dedicated to his royal pupil* prince Henry; in which the author inserted farther improvements; particularly he proposed an excellent way of determining the magnitude of the earth; at the same time recommending, very judiciously, the making our common measures in some certain proportion to that of a degree on its surface, that they might not depend on the uncertain length of a barley corn. Some of his other improvements were the table of latitudes for dividing the meridian, computed as far as to minutes: an instrument, he calls the sea-rings, by which the variation of the compass, the altitude of the sun, and the time of the day, may be readily determined at once in any place, provided the latitude be known; the correcting of the errors arising from the eccentricity of the eye in observing by the cross-staff; a total amendment in the tables of the declinations and places of the sun and stars, from his own observations, made with a six-foot quadrant, in 1594, 95, 96, 97; a sea-quadrant, to take altitudes by a forward or backward observation; having also a contrivance for the ready finding the latitude by the height of the polar-star, when not upon the meridian. And that this book might be the better understood by beginners, to this edition is subjoined a translation of Zamorano’s Compendium; and added a large table of the variation of the compass as observed in very different parts of the world, to shew it is not occasioned by any magrietical pole. The work has gone through several other editions since. And, beside the books above mentioned, he wrote another on navigation, entitled “^he Haven-finding Art.” Some accounts of him say also, that it was in 1589 that he first began to attend the earl of Cumberland in his voyages. It is also said that he made for his pupil, prince Henry, a large sphere with curious movements, which, by the help of springwork, not only represented the motions of the whole celestial sphere, but shewed likewise the particular systems of the sun and moon, and their circular motions, together with their places and possibilities of eclipsing each other: there is in it a work for a motion of 17,100 years, if it should not be stopped, or the materials fail. This sphere, though thus made at a great expence of money and ingenious industry, was afterwards in the time of the civil wars cast aside, among dust and rubbish, where it was found in 1646, by sir Jonas Moore, wh.o at his own expence restored it to its first state of perfection, and deposited it at his own house in the Tower, among his other mathematical instruments and curiosities.

In the historical line, the Dead Soldier, which is now known by Heath’s admirable print, would alone establish his -fame, if his Edwin (in the possession of J. Milnes, esq. of Wakefield, who has also his Destruction of the Floating Batteries off Gibraltar, and some of his best landscapes), the two pictures of Hero and Leander, Lady in Comus, Indian Widow, and other historical subjects, had not already ascertained his excellence. His attachment to his native town, added to his natural modesty, and his severe application both to the theory and practice of painting, prevented his mixing with promiscuous society, or establishing his reputation by arts which he would never descend to practise. His friends long urged him to reside in London; but his family attachments, and love of retirement and study were invincible, and he fell a victim to his unwearied attention to his profession. He died of a decline, Aug. 29, 1797;

, of Barwell, Leicestershire, barrister at law, was elected recorder of Leicester in 1680; called by Writ, April 11, 1692, to take the degree of serjeant at law; knighted Dec. 30, 1696, and made king’s serjeant. On the refusal of the lords chief justices Holt and Treby, and Trevor the attorney-general, to accept the great seal, which was taken from lord Somers, it was delivered to sir Nathan, with the title of lord-keeper, May 21, 1700. As he was raised to this situation by the tories, so he seems to have acted in conformity to the views of that party. Burnet says, that many gentlemen of good estates and ancient families were put out of the commission of the peace by him, for no other visible reason but because they had gone in heartily to the revolution, and had continued zealous for king William; and, at the same time, men of no worth nor estate, and known to be ill-affected to queen Anne’s title, and to the protestant succession, were put in. He adds, that the lord-keeper was a “zealot to the party, and was become very exceptionable in all respects. Money, as was said, did every thing with him; only in his court, I never heard him charged for any thing but great slowness, by which the chancery was become one of the heaviest grievances of the nation.” The same author likewise says, that the lord-keeper “was sordidly covetous; and did not at all live suitable to that high post: he became extremely rich, yet I never heard him charged with bribery in his court.” One of the most remarkable events that happened while he was in office, was his sentence for dissolving the Savoy, July 13, 1702; and in the same year, Nov. 30, he reversed a decree of his great predecessor, lord Somers. Sir Nathan’s removal, however, which happened in May 1705, is said to have “been a great loss to the church.” He passed the remainder of his days in retirement, beloved and respected, at Chaldecot-Hall, in Warwicksbire,"wbere he died Aug. 4, 1721.

Sir Thomas was a man whose acquaintance was much Courted, for his splendid entertainments, his knowledge of the political relations of the kingdom, his discernment in discovering men of parts, and his readiness to encourage them; and for the interest he was known to possess at court. ID became a proverb, when any person received preferment, that “he had been in sir Thomas Wyat’s closet.” To this may be added, thai his conversation had that happy mixture of the grave and gay which excludes dullness as well as levity, and his manners were so highly polished that he differed in opinion with the utmost civility, and expressed his doubts as if he needed the information which he was able to impart.

Sir Thomas’s biographers are in general silent on the subject of his connection with lord Surrey. It is known, however, that they were closely allied by friendship, and similarity of taste and studies. Surrey’s character of Wyat is a noble tribute to his memory. The year following his death, Leland published a volume of elegiac verses, some of which are very elegant, and all highly encomiastic, entitled “Naenise in mortem ThomaB Viati, Equitis incomparabilis, Joanne Lelando Antiquario, Auctore,” 4to. This scarce pamphlet has a woodcut of Wyat, supposed to be by Holbein, but represents him as a much older man than he was, and with a huge bushy beard hiding more than half his features. The copy in the British Museum is dated 1552.

His poems were first published by Tottel, along wit^h Surrey’s and the collection by uncertain authors. The authenticity of Surrey’s and Wyat’s poems seems to be confirmed by this care of Tottel to distinguish what he knew from what he did not know, and what, from the ignorance of an editor of so riiuch taste, we apprehend were not generally known. Mr, Warton has favoured us with a very elaborate and elegant criticism on Wyat, but has found it impossible to revive his poetical fame. He contributed but little to the refinement of English poetry, and his versification and language are deficient in harmony and pei> spicuity. From a close study of the Italian poets, his imagination dwells too often on puerile conceits and contrarieties, which, however, to some are so pleasing that they are not to this day totally excluded from our poetry. As a lover, his addresses are stately, and pedantic, with very little mixture of feeling or passion, and although detached beauties may be pointed out in a few of his sonnets, his genius was ill adapted to that species of poetry. In all respects he is inferior to his friend Surrey, and claims a place in the English series chiefly as being the first moral satirist, and as having represented the vices and follies of his time in the true spirit of the didactic muse.

Lord Surrey, we have seen, praises his version of David’s Psalms, a work about the existence of which bibliographers are not agreed. No copy is known to be extant, nor is it noticed in any history of the English press, nor in any library printed or manuscript. In 1549, were published “Certayne Psalms,” a transcript of which appeared in the last edition of the “English poets,” without, perhaps, adding much to the author’s reputation. Mr. Warton observes that the pious Thomas Sternhold and John Hopkins are the only immortal translators of David’s Psalms. But indifferent as they are now thought, there is nothing to be found of a superior kind before their time. In the library of Bene't college, Cambridge, is a manuscript translation of the Psalms into Scotch metre of the fourteenth century.

But this match, so promising in appearance both to his fortunes and to his happiness, was the actual ruin of both. As soon as the news of it came to court, it was looked upon as an affront to the king, and a contempt of his majesty’s orders; and Wycherley’s conduct after marriage occasioned this to be resented more heinously; for he seldom or never went near the fiourt, which made him be thought ungrateful. But the true cause of his absence was not known: in short, the lady was jealous of him to distraction; jealous to that degree, that she could not endure him to be one moment out of her sight. Their lodgings were in Bowstreet, Covent-garden, over against a tavern, whither if he at any time went with friends, he was obliged to leave the windows open, that his lady might see there was no woman in company; or she would immediately put on the airs of a frantic woman. At last she died, and settled her fortune on him; but his title being disputed after her death, the expence of the law and other incumbrances so far reduced him, that, not being able to satisfy the importunity of his creditors, he was thrown into prison.

Within less than three years from this commencement of his plan, the society consisted of a warden and seventy fellows, who were called Pauperes Scholares Vtnerabilis Domini Domini Wilhelmi de Wykeham Wynton. Episcopi. The warden had a salary of 20l. a year, and the fellows were lodged in the places hired for them, and then known by the names of Blake-hall, Hert-hall, Shule-hall, Mayden-hall, and Hamer-hall. The annual expense of their lodging amounted to iOi 13.S. 4d.; and each was allowed Is. and 6d. a week for commons.

In 1774 Mr. Wynne published (but like the former, without his name.) “Eunornus, or Dialogues concerning the Law and Constitution of England. With an Essay on Dialogue,” 4 vols. 8vo. This scientific work, says Mr. Bridgman, would probably have been held in higher estimation had it been better known; but having been written before, and published after the commentaries of sir William Blackstone, its acknowledged merits have been obscured, though not totally eclipsed by the splendour of that great performance: it is, however, highly valued, as having very much illustrated the principles of our laws and constitution, and given an instructive and rational account of the several branches into which the practice of the law is divided, and as having recommended, with much learning, a liberal and enlarged method of study in that science, pointing out its necessary connexion with the other branches of literature. Mr. Hargrave has further observed, that this work treats incidentally of the character and authority of the several law xvriters, and more professedly on the origin and progress of the most important subjects and branches of the law, and their connexion with the history and constitution of England. A second edition of this work appeared after the author’s death, in 1785, but without any alteration.

, a man of some original genius, but whose works will not entitle him to any very Jjigh rank in literature, was descended from a very respectable family in South Wales, where he was born in 1743. At what time he arrived in London, is not known, but for some time he gained his bread in the printing business, with which he became disgusted, and had interest enough to obtain an appointment in a regiment about to go abroad. Such was the perverseness of his temper while on shipboard vyith liis brother officers, that they refused to associate with him, and actually left him behind when the ship arrived at its first place of destination. From thence he contrived to return to England, where he married a young woman of some property. This was probably soon spent, as about this time he commenced author by profession, but either his works or his employers were of the lowest order, for it was with difficulty he could procure the necessaries of life by his labours. In 1770, however, he began to aim at higher fame, and published “A General History of theJBritish Empire in America: including all the countries in North America and the West-Indies ceded by the peace of Paris, 2 vols. 8vo. This as a compilation did him no discredit.In 1771 he published the” Prostitute, a Poem,“4to; in 1772” Choice Emblems, natural, historical, fabulous, moral, and divine, for the improvement of youth; in verse and prose/* 12mo. The same year appeared his principal work, “A general History of Ireland, from the earliest accounts to the present time,” 2 vols. 8vo., This was more popular, from the nature of the subject, than his History of America, but far enough removed from the merit that would enrol him among historians. Next year he published “tables of Flowers for the Female Sex,” “Evelina, a poem;” and “The Four Seasons, a poem.” In poetry he was ill -qualified to excel, although there are passages in some of his pieces that indicate superior talents, had he cultivated them at leisure, and been possessed of a mind better regulated. In 1787 he published a novel called “The Child of Chance;” and at different periods of his life supplied the magazines and newspapers with essays, poems, &c. generally with his name. All these were written to supply immediate wants, which they did but imperfectly. He died Dec. 2, 1788. It is mentioned to his honour that through a long life of poverty, he abhorred and avoided every mean and dishonest expedient to improve his finances, and was even so extravagant in his notions of independence that to do him an act of kindness unsolicited, was to incur his bitterest reproaches.

, an illustrious philosopher, soldier, and historian, was an Athenian, the son of Gryllus, a person of high rank, and was born in the third year of the eightysecond Olympiad, or B. C. 450. Few particulars of his early life are known. Laertius tells us, that meeting Socrates in a narrow lane, after he was pretty well grown up, he stopped the philosopher with his staff; and asked him, “Where all kinds of meats were to be sold ?” To which Socrates made a serious answer: and then demanded of him, “Where it was that men were made good and virtuous?” At which Xenophon pausing, “Follow me, then,” said Socrates, “and learn:” from which time he became the disciple of that father of ancient wisdom.

He was one of Socrates’s most eminent scholars; but he did not excel in philosophy only; he was also famous for arms and military achievements. In the Peloponnesian war, he was personally engaged in the fight before Delium, the first year of the 89th Olympiad; in which the Bœotians overcame the Athenians. Here Xenophon, in the precipitation of flight, was unhorsed and thrown down; when Socrates, who having lost his horse was fighting on foot, took him upon his shoulders, and carried him many furlongs, till the enemy gave over the pursuit. This was the first essay of his military profession: afterwards he became known to the younger Cyrus, by means of Proxenus the Boeotian, who was favoured by that prince, and resided with him at Sardis. Proxenus, then Xenophon’s friend, wrote to Athens, to invite him to come to Cyrus. Xenophon shewed his letters to Socrates, desiring -his advice. Socrates referred him to the oracle of Delphi, which Xenophon accordingly consulted: but, instead of asking whether he should go to Cyrus, he inquired how he should goto him; for which Socrates reprimanded him, yet advised him to go. Being arrived at the court of Cyrus, he acquired at least as great a share of his favour as Proxenus himself; and accompanied that prince in his expedition to Persia, when he took up arms against his brother Artaxerxes, who had succeeded his father Darius in the kingdom. Cyrus was killed: and Artaxerxes sent -the day after to the Grecians, that they should give up their arms. Xenophon answered Phalinus, who brought the order, “that they had nothing left but their arms and valour; that as long as they kept their arms they might use their valour; but, if they surrendered them, they should cease to be masters of themselves.” Phalinus replied, smiling, “Young man, you look and speak like a philosopher; but assure yourself, that your valour will not be a match for the king’s power.” Nevertheless, ten thousand of them determined to attempt a retreat, and actually effected it with Xenophon at their head, who brought them' from Persia to their own homes, remaining victorious over all who attempted to oppose his passage. The history of this expedition, which happened in the 4th year of the 94th Olympiad, was written by himself; and is still extant.

, an eminent statesman and patron of literature, was born in 1437, at Torrelaguna, in Old Castille, and was the son of Alphonso de Cimeros de Ximenes, procurator of that city. He was educated for the church, at Alcala and Salamanca, and then went to Rome, but having been robbed on his journey home, brought nothing back with him, except a bull for the first prebend which should be vacant. This the archbishop of Toledo refused to grant, and confined him in the tower of Uceda, where it is said a priest, who had long been prisoner there, foretold to him that he should, one day, be archbishop of Toledo. Having recovered his liberty, he obtained a benefice in the diocese of Siguenza, and cardinal Gonsalez de Mendoza, who was bishop there, made him his grand vicar. Ximenes entered soon after among the Franciscans of Toledo, and took the vows; but finding himself embarrassed by visits, he retired to a solitude called Castauel, where he studied the Oriental languages and divinity. On his return to Toledo, queen Isabella of Castille appointed him her confessor, and nominated him to the archbishopric of Toledo, 14.95, without his knowledge. When Ximenes received the bulls from the hand of this princess, he only kissed them, returned them to her, unopened, saying, “Madam, these letters are not addressed to me,” and went immediately back to his convent at Castanel, being determined not to accept the archbishopric. The queen was much pleased with this refusal; but when Ximenes still persisted in his refusal, an express command from the pope became necessary to overcome his resolution. Nor would he even then yield but upon the following conditions: “That he should never quit his church of Toledo; that no pension should be charged on his archbishopric (one of the richest in the world); and that no infringement of the privileges and immunities of his church should ever be attempted.” He took possession of it in 1498, being received with unusual magnificence at Toledo. This prelate’s first care was to provide for the poor, visit the churches and hospitals, and clear his diocese from usurers and licentious houses. Those judges who neglected their duty, he degraded, supplying their places with persons whose probity and disinterestedness were known to him. He held a synod afterwards at Alcala, and another at Talavera, where he made very prudent regulations for the clergy of his diocese, and laboured at the same time to reform the Franciscans throughout Castille and Arragon, in which he happily succeeded, notwithstanding the obstacles he had to encounter. Ximenes established a celebrated university at Alcala, and founded there in 1499, the famous college of St. Ildephonsus, built by Peter Gumiel, one of the best architects of that time. Three years after he undertook the great plan of a Polyglot Bible, for the execution of which he invited many learned men from Alcala to Toledo, who were skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages necessary for the perfect understanding the holy scriptures. This Bible, though began in 1502, was not printed till 1517, 6 vols. folio, at Alcala. It contains the Hebrew text of the Bible, the version of the LXX. with a literal translation, that of St. Jerome, and the Chaldee paraphrases of Onkelos on the Pentateuch only. In the original preface, addressed to pope Leo X. the learned archbishop says, “It is doing great service to the church to publish the scriptures in their original language, both because no translation cati give a perfect idea of the original, and because, according to the opinion of the holy fathers, we should refer to the Hebrew text for the Old Testament, and to the Greek for the New Testament.” The work was above fifteen years in finishing. Ximenes himself assisted in it with great assiduity, and paid the whole expence, which amounted to an immense sum. He purchased seven Hebrew copies, that cost four thousand crowns, and gave vast prices for ancient Mss. To the above-mentioned Bible, which is called the Polyglot of Ximenes, he added a dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee words in the Bible. In 1507 pope Julius II. gave him a cardinal’s hat; and Ferdinand the catholic entrusted him with the administration of state affairs, from which moment cardinal Ximenes became the soul of all that was done in Spain. He began his ministry by delivering the people from an oppressive tax, which had been continued on account of the war of Grenada; and he laboured so zealously and successfully in the conversion of the Mahometans, that he made near three thousand proselytes, among whom was the prince of the blood royal of Grenada. This great multitude he baptized in a spacious square, awd ordering all the copies of the Koran to be brought thither, set them on fire; which memorable day was afterwarda kept as a festival in Spain. Cardinal Ximenes extended Ferdinand’s dominion over the Moors, 1509, by the conquest of Oran, a city in the kingdom of Algiers. He undertook this conquest at his own expence, and marched himself at the head of the Spanish army in his pontifical habit, accompanied by a great number of ecclesiastics and monks, and at his return was met within four leagues of Seville by Ferdinand, who alighted to embrace him. Foreseeing afterwards an uncommon dearth, he ordered public granaries to be built at Toledo, Alcala, and Torrelaguna, and stored them with corn at his own cost; which made him so generally beloved, that his eulogy was engraved in the senate-house at Toledo, and in the public square, to perpetuate the memory of this noble action. King Ferdinand dying in 1516, appointed him regent of his dominions, and the archduke Charles (afterwards the emperor Charles V.) confirmed this appointment. No sooner was cardinal Ximenes established in the regency, than he became intent on exerting his authority. He introduced a reformation among the officers of the supreme council, and those of the court, ordered the judges to repress all extortions of the rich and of the nobility, and dismissed prince Ferdinand’s two favourites. These changes excited murmurs among the grandees, and some officer’s asked the cardinal, by what authority he thus acted? Ximenes immediately showed them the soldiers who composed his common guard, and replied, that his power consisted in their strength; then shaking his cord of St. Francis, said, “This suffices me to quell my rebellious subjects.” At the same time he ordered the cannon, which he kept behind his palace, to be fired, and concluded with these words: “Haec est ratio ultima regis;” i. e. This is the decisive argument of kings. He opposed the reformation of the inquisition; devoted himself, with indefatigable ardour, to the affairs of the church and state; and omitted nothing that he thought could contribute to the glory of religion, and the advantage of his sovereigns. At length, after having governed Spain twenty -two years, in the reigns of Ferdinand, Isabella, Jane, Philip, and Charles of Austria, he died November 8, 1517, as some think, by poison, in the eighty-first year of his age. His remains were interred in the college of Ildephonsus, at Alcala, where his tomb may be seen. This cardinal had settled several excellent foundations; among others, two magnificent female convents; one for the religious education of a great many young ladies of high rank, but destitute of fortune the other to be an asylum; for such poor maidens as should be found to have a real call to the monastic life. He also founded a chapel in his cathedral for the performance of divine service according to the Mozarabic rites. If we add the fountain of springwater, which he conveyed to the town of Torrelaguna, for public use, to the other sums he expended there, it will appear that he laid out nearly a million in that one place.

After he had executed the high office of lord high chancellor about seventeen years, in times and circumstances of accumulated difficulty and danger, he was, in April 1754, advanced to the rank of an earl of Great Britain, with the titles of viscount Royston, and earl of Hardwicke. This favour was conferred unasked, by his sovereign, who treated him through the whole of his reign with particular esteem and confidence, and always spoke of him in a manner which shewed that he set as high a value on the man as on the minister. His resignation of the great seal, in November 1756, gave ah universal concern to the nation, however divided at that time in other respects. But he still continued to serve the public in a more private station; at council, at the House of Lords, and upon every occasion where the course of public business required it, with the same assiduity as when he rilled one of the highest offices in the kingdom. He always felt and expressed the truest affection and reverence for the laws and constitution of his country: this rendered him as tender of the just prerogatives invested in the crown, for the benefit of the whole, as watchful to prevent the least incroachment upon the liberty of the subject. The part which he acted in planning, introducing, and supporting, the “Bill for abolishing the heritable Jurisdictions in Scotland,” and the share which he took, beyond what his department required of him, in framing and promoting the other bills relating to that country, arose from his zeal to the Protestant succession, his concern for the general happiness and improvement of the kingdom, and for the preservation of this equal and limited monarchy which were the governing principles of his public conduct through life. And these, and other bills which might be mentioned, were strong proofs of his talents as a legislator. In judicature, his firmness and dignity were evidently derived from his consummate knowledge and talents; and the mildness and humanity with which he tempered it, from the most amiable disposition. He was wonderfully happy in his manner of debating causes upon the bench. His extraordinary dispatch of the business of the court of chancery, increased as it was in his time beyond what had been known in any former, was an advantage to the suitor, inferior only to that arising from the acknowledged equity, perspicuity, and precision, of his decrees. The manner in which he presided in the House of Lords added order and dignity to that assembly, and expedition to the business transacted there. His talents as a speaker in the senate as well as on the bench, were universally admired: he spoke with a natural and manly eloquence, without false ornaments or personal invectives; and, when he argued, his reasons were supported and strengthened by the most apposite cases and examples which the subject would allow. His manner was graceful and affecting; modest, yet commanding his voice peculiarly clear and harmonious, and even loud and strong, for the greater part of his time. With these talents for public speaking r the integrity of his character gave a lustre to his eloquence, which those who opposed him felt in the debate, and which operated most powerfully on the minds of those who heard him with a view to information and convictions, is<

Convinced of the great principles* of religion, and steady in his practice of the duties of it, he maintained a reputation of virtue, which added dignity to the stations which he filled, and authority to the laws which he administered. His attachment to the national church was accompanied with a full conviction, that a tender regard to the rights of conscience, and a temper of lenity and moderation, are not only right in themselves, but most conducive in their consequences to the honour and interest of the church. The strongest recommendation to him of the clergy, to the ecclesiastical preferments in his disposal, was their fitness for the discharge of the duties of their profession. And that respectable body owes a particular obligation to his lordship, and his predecessor lord Talbot, for the opposition which they gave in the House of Lords to the “Act for the more easy recovery of Tithes, Church-rates, and other ecclesiastical Dues, from People called Quakers,” which might have proved of dangerous consequences to the rights and property of the clergy; though if. had passed the other house, and was known to be powerfully supported. Many facts and anecdotes which do him honour may be recollected and set down, when resentments, partialities, and contests, are forgot.

, a relation of the Hardwicke family, and known also in the literary world, was the son of Simon Yorke, esq. of Erthig in Denbighshire, who died in 1767, leaving the subject of the present memoir, who was born in 1743, and admitted fellow-commoner of Bene‘t college, Cambridge. 1765; created M. A. by mandamus 1765; elected F. A. S. 1768; married Elizabeth youngest daughter of the speaker of the House of Commons, sir John Cust, by whom he had a son in 1771, afterwards M. P. for Grantham, and a daughter in 1772. She died 1779; and he took to his second wife, 1782, the relict of Owen Meyrick, esq. of Dyffrynaled, co. Denbigh. Mr. Yorke died Feb. 19, 1804. He was a gentleman of superior endowments and the most benevolent disposition. His hospitality, friendship, and charity, made the ample fortune he inherited a common benefit; whilst the peculiar mildness and suavity of his manners endeared him to lire’ relatives, and to every one who had the honour of his acquaintance. He loved his country, and the constitution of its government, from conviction of their excellence; and what he loved he was always ready to support, both in his public and private capacity, although constitutional diffidence would not allow him to speak ift the House of Commons, where he sat as burgess for Helstone and Grantham. But Mr. Yorke had a cultivated as well as benevolent mind, being well versed in most branches of polite literature; which an accurate and retentive memory enabled him to apply with great advantage. Of late years he turned his attention a good deal to Welsh history and genealogy, in which, from the specimens given in his “Royal Tribes of Wales, 1799,” 4to, he appears to have made great progress. This study, rather dry in itself, was, in his hands, enlivened by a variety of authentic and entertaining anecdotes, many of which had escaped preceding historians, as well as genealogical discussions; and his book was adorned with portraits of eminent persons of Wales, well engraved by the late Mr. Bond. He had collected materials for a longer work of the same kind, which has not yet appeared. His taste for natural beauties was very correct, of which the pleasure-grounds of Erthig are a decided proof. Of a character so respectable and amiable throughout, one of the most distinguishing traits was his talent for conversation. Whatever he advanced arose naturally from the occasion; and was expressed in such a happy manner and choice of words, as made him the very life and delight of society.

From a paper in “The Englishman” it would appear that Young began his theatrical career so early as 1713, but his tirst play, “Busiris,” was not brought upon the stage till 1719, and was dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, “.because,” he says, “the late instances he had received ­of his grace’s undeserved and uncommon favour, in an affair of some consequence, foreign to the theatre, had taken from him the privilege of chusing a patron.” This dedication also he afterwards suppressed. In 1721 his most popular tragedy, “The Revenge,” made its appearance, and being left at liberty now to chuse his patron, he dedicated it to the duke of Wharton. That he ever had such a patron, Young took all the pains in his power to conceal from the world, by excluding this dedication from his works. He probably indeed was very soon ashamed of it, for while he was representing that wretched nobleman as an amiable character, Pope was perhaps beginning to describe him as “the scorn and wonder of his days,” and it is certain that even at this time Wharton’s real character was well known. His obligations to the duke of Wharton appear to have consisted both of promises and money. Young, about 1719, had been taken into the Exeter family as tutor to the young lord Burleigh. This circumstance transpired on a singular occasion. After Wharton’s death, whose affairs were much involved, among other legal questions, the court of chancery had to determine whether two annuities granted by Wharton to Young, were far legal considerations. One was dated March 24, 1719, and the preamble stated that it was granted in consideration of advancing the public good by the encouragement of learning, and of the love he bore to Dr. Young, &c. This, as his biographer remarks, was commendable, if not legal. The other was dated July 10, 1722; and Young, on his examination, swore that he quitted the Kxeter family, and refused an annuity of 100l. which had be^n offered him for his lite if he would continue tutor to lord BnrJeigh, upon the pressing solicitations of the duke of Wharton, and his grace’s assurances of providing for him in a much more ample manner It also appeared that the duke had given him a bond for 600l. dated March 15, 1721, in consideration of his taking several journeys, and being at great essences in order to be chosen member of parliament at the duke’s desire, and in consideration of his not taking two livings of 200l. and 400l. in the gift of All Souls’ college, on his grace’s promises of serving and advancing him in the world It was for Cirencester that Young stood the unsuccessful contest. Such were the obligations he owed to Wharton; how becoming Young’s character, may be left to the reader.

In 1730 he resumed his poetical publications, but one of them, his “Impfcrium Pelasgi, a naval lyric,” he afterwards disclaimed. This was followed by two epistles to Pope “concerning the authors of the age.” In July of the same year he was presented by his college to the rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire, and in May 1731 married lady Elizabeth Lee, daughter of the earl of Lichfield, and widow of colonel Lee. This lady died in 1741, and her death is said to have contributed to the mournful tenour of his much celebrated f Night Thoughts,“which formed his next great publication, and that which will in all probability preserve his name the longest. The” Nights“were begun immediately after his wife’s death, and were published from 174? to 1744, It has long been a popular notion that his own son was the Lorenzo of this poem, but this is totally inconsistent with the unquestionable fact that in 1741 this son was only eight years old. Other persons have been conjectured with as little probability. Why might he not have Wharton in his eye? Of this work, we know of no more eloquent eulogium than that by Dr. Johnson.” In his Night Thoughts,“says the critic,” he has exhibited a very wide display of original poetry, variegated with deep reflections and striking allusions, a wilderness of thought, in which the fertility of fancy scatters flowers of every hue and of every odour. This is one of the few poems in which blank verse could not be changed for rhime but with disadvantage. The wild diffusion of the sentiments, and the digressive sallies of the imagination, would have been compressed and restrained by confinement to rhyme. The excellence of this work is not exactness, but copiousness: particular lines are not to be regarded; the power is in the whole, and in the whole there is a magnificence like that ascribed to Chinese plantation, the magnificence of vast extent and endless diversity.“By this extraordinary poem, written after he was sixty, it was the desire of Young to be principally known. He entitled the four volumes which he published himself,” The works of the Author of the Night Thoughts."

In 1786, when the professorship of philosophy in Trinity college became vacant, he had attained so high reputation in that branch of science, that he was elected to the office without opposition. His “Essay on Sounds” had been published two years, and it was known that he was engaged in the arduous task of illustrating the “Principia” of Newton. He now devoted himself to the duties of his professorship: and the college having been enriched with the excellent apparatus of Mr. Atwood, Dr. Young improved the occasion of carrying his lectures to a degree of perfection unknown in the university of Dublin, and never perhaps exceeded in any other. He proceeded in the mean time in his great work, “The method of Prime and Ultimate Ratios, illustrated by a commentary on the first two books of the Principia,” and had nearly completed it in English, when he was advised by his friends to publish it in Latin. He readily acquiesced, and thus had an opportunity, while translating it, of revising the whole, and rendering it fuller and more perfect. It was finished a year or two before his promotion to the see of Clonfert, at which time he was engaged in preparing it for the press. The^circumstances of this promotion reflect equal honour on himself and on the lord lieutenant (earl Cornwallis) who conferred it. It was a favour as unsolicited as unexpected, unless the report made to his excellency by his principal secretary, on being consulted as to the properest person to fill the vacant see, may be called solicitation. His report was, that “he believed Dr. Young to be the most distinguished literary character in the kingdom.”

, a celebrated traveller, was a native of Gluckstad in Holstem, a man of ingenuity, activity, and enterprize, whose curiosity after voyages and discoveries led him to Moscow about the beginning of the reign of the czars John and Peter Alexiewitz. The latter, better known by the name of Peter the Great, discovered the talents of Ysbraad, took him into his service, and employed him on some regulations which he was about to form, and which laid the foundation for the commercial prosperity of Russia. Peter having afterwards a dispute with the emperor of China, respecting certain boundaries, considered Ysbrand as a very proper person to conduct a negociation, and therefore sent him to China, invested with the character of ambassador. He set off in March 1692, and returned in Jan. 1695, and afterwards published an account of his voyage, at Amsterdam in 169y, reprinted in 1704 and 1710. An English translation was published at London in 1704, 4to, with maps and plates, and is deemed a work of great curiosity and considerable value. It has also been translated into other languages. We have no farther notice of the author than that he was living in 1700.

In 1752, he was recommended by the celebrated cardinal. Quirini as a director of the public library of Brescia, a re-< commendation which, however, had no effect. But two years after, his name being already known to the reigning duke of Modena, under whose auspices he had undertaken and continued his literary history of Italy, he was appointed director of the Ducal library, a place formerly held by Muratori, and on his death tendered to the learned father Corsini, of the university of Pisa, who had declined it, from his invincible attachment to his native place. He associated to himself, in the direction of the Ducal library, those two excellent friends and brothers, who were also co-operators in the compilation of the Literary History, father Dominic Troilo of Macerata, and father Joachim Gabardi of Carpi; who afterwards retained the same place under the celebrated father Granelli, and his successor, the illustrious Tiraboschi. Without any interruption to his higher literary pursuits, the improvements which he made in this situation are recorded highly to the honour of Zaccaria:. he enlarged the apartment devoted to the library; introduced a better classification of books, enriched it with new articles, and compiled a catalogue raisonne" of every branch, which, to the regret of many intelligent persons, was never published.

In 1768, he repaired to Rome, and was soon appointed librarian to the college of Jesus, and historiographer of the society for the literary department. Here a new field was open to his exertions. He became the champion of the holy see against the prevailing philosophy of the age, and against the encroachment of the secular powers on the church, for which he was rewarded with a pension by the then reigning and unfortunate pontiff Clement Alii. He did not long enjoy either this gift of fortune or his own tranquillity, as in 1773, by the dissolution of his order, after repeated risks of being confined in the castle of St. Angelo, he received a perpetual injunction not to go out of the gates of Rome without a licence from the magistrates. Pope Ganganelli esteemed and lamented him, though he could not restrain these violent measures. He had better days under the new pontificate, when Pius VI. not only restored liberty to Mr. Zaccaria, but increased the pension which had been formerly granted to him. He also appointed him governor to the newly established academy of noble clergymen, with a liberal salary; and as he had been, before that period, professor of ecclesiastical history in the Roman university, better known by the name of Sapienza, the pope gave him for the remainder of his life the dignity of ex-professor in that school, with the enjoyment of the same salaries as if he had retained the official post. In this situation he remained till his death, which took place October 10, 1795, in the eighty-second year of his age.

The mere list of the various works either written or edited by Zaccaria is sufficient to give him the character. of an extraordinary man. Comprehensiveness of mincf^ depth of erudition, JaboriousnesS of research, and celerity of execution, were happily combined in all his performances. In the earlier part of his life, he had entered the lists with the immortal Muratori and the illustrious Lamb Afterwards he had a great polemic dispute, on the pope’s supremacy, with the celebrated German bishop, John Nicholas Hontheim, better known under the name of Justin us Febronius. In the latter part of his life, he corresponded with many sovereigns and princes, with many Italian academies, and many literary characters, on this side the Alps, among whom were the celebrated Stilting, a Bollandist; Mr. de Courcelles, editor of the Foreign Journal in Paris; the proprietors of the Literary Journal of Italy, published in Amsterdam; and that of the Eneyelopedian Journal of Liege.

, one of the most learned men of the sixteenth century, was a native of Bergamo. His real name was Peter, which he exchanged for Basil, when he became a canon regular. He was born in 1501. He appears to have studied at Rome and various other places, but resided for the greater part of his life at Rome, where he was highly honoured for his literary talents, and, as some say (but this is disputed), was made keeper of the Vatican library. He died there, however, in 1560. Paul Manutius, in a letter to Gambara, the intimate friend of Zanchius, says that he was oppressed and persecuted in a very cruel manner, and ended his days miserably, in consequence of a decree of the pope against those who did not reside in their convents, but some have conjectured that he might have probably become a convert to the reformed religion, like his cousin Jerome, of whom we are nxt to speak. It seems certain, however, that he died in prison, and that he was worthy of a better fate, being one of the most learned men, and best Latin poets of his age. His beautiful verses on the death of Sannazarius were translated into Italian by the great Torquato Tasso. His Latin poems were first printed at Rome in 1540, 4to, and were often reprinted. Serassi gave a new edition of them at Bergamo m 1747, with a life of the author. He wrote also observations on all the books of scripture, printed at Rome 1553, and twice reprinted. He is ranked among lexicographers, from having contributed to Nizolius’s observations on Cicero, and from having added a great collection of words to Calepin, from the best and purest authors. He published also “Epithetorum commentarii,” Rome, 1542, 4to, a work better known by the title of the second edition, “Dictionarium poedcum et epitheta veterum poetarum,” &c. 1612, 8vo.

Eight volumes of Zollikofer’s “Sermons,” which are in the highest estimation in Germany, have lately been known in this country by a translation, of great purity and elegance, by the rev. William Took e, F. R. S. who has prefixed some memoirs of the author to the “Sermons on the Dignity of Man,” published in 1802. In these sermons there is no display of the theological learning of their author, and little that is explanatory in regard to peculiar texts of scripture; they discuss not human creeds and systems of divinity: their aim is to explain the nature and grounds of Christian morality, and reconcile it with the best dictates of philosophy to reveal man to himself; and they discover a talent seldom possessed a knowledge of the human heart.

was an eminent philosopher, whose history is involved in much obscurity, nor is it certain whether the name belongs to one or many. Some have maintained that there was but one Zoroaster, and that he was a Persian. Others have said that there were six eminent founders of philosophy of th'is name. Ham, the son of Noah, Moses, Osiris, Mithras, and others, both gods and men, have by different writers been asserted to have been the same with Zoroaster. Many different opinions have also been advanced, concerning the time in which he flourished. Aristotle and Pliny fix his date at so remote a period as 6000 years before the death of Plato; Hermippus says that he lived 5000 years before the Trojan war: idle tales, which are, doubtless, to be classed with the report of the Chaldeans concerning the antiquity of their astronomical observations. According to Laertius, he flourished 600 years before the Trojan war; according to Suidas, 500. In the midst of so much uncertainty, the probability may be, that there was a Zoroaster, a Perso- Median, who flourished about the time of Darius Hystaspes, and that besides him there was another Zoroaster, who lived in a much more remote period among the Babylonians, and taught them astronomy. The Greek and Arabian writers are agreed concerning the existence of the Persian Zoroaster; and the ancients unanimously ascribe to a philosopher, whom they call Zoroaster, the origin of the Chaldean astronomy, which is certainly of much earlier date than the time of Hystaspes: it seems, therefore, necessary to suppose a Chaldean Zoroaster distinct from the Persian. Concerning this Zoroaster, however, nothing more is known than that he flourished towards the beginning of the Babylonish empire, and was the father of the Chaldean astrology and magic, which was probably nothing more than the performance of certain religious ceremonies, by means of which good daemons were supposed to be prevailed upon to communicate supernatural properties and powers to herbs, stones, and other natural bodies, or to afford assistance, in other miraculous ways, to those who invoked them. In this art the kings of Chaldea and Persia were instructed, as one of the most useful instruments of government, among a people, whose ignorance and credulity rendered them proper subjects of imposture. The Chaldean magic was then a very different thing from a knowledge of the real properties of bodies; and it cannot be inferred, either from their magical or astrological arts, that the Chaldeans were eminent masters in any branch of natural science. All the writings which have been ascribed to the Chaldean Zoroaster, are unquestionably spurious.

In England he met with much encourageme/it, and several of his pictures were engraved by Vivares, By the advice of some of his friends, he executed a collection of drawings, which he disposed of by auction. They were well received, and produced a handsome sum. About 1773 he returned to Florence, and for some time relinquished his pencil, and lived upon his fortune but part of that having been lost upon bad security, he again resumed his pencil, and was much employed by the English gentlemen who visited Italy. He died at Florence, at what time is not exactly known, but the event was confirmed to the Royal Academy in 1788. He was one of the original members, and consequently considered as one of the founders of the academy. The pictures of this artist have, in Mr. Edwards’s opinion, infinite merit, particularly those which he painted in the early part of his life, when resident at Venice. They have an evident superiority over those he painted in England. He made several etchings, particularly of figures, from the originals of Andrea del Sarto, which are marked with his name, " Zuccarelli delin. et fecit.