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

, a puritan writer of considerable eminence, the third son of Ellis Crisp, esq. an alderman, and probably related to the family of the subject of the preceding article, was born in Bread-street, London, in 1600, and educated at Eton-school. He afterwards went to Cambridge, where he studied until he took his degree of B. A, and was, on his removal to Oxford, “for the accomplishment,” says Wood, “. of certain parts of learning,” incorporated in the same degree as a member of Baliol-college, in the end of Feb. 1626, and the degree was completed by him in the act following, July 1627. In this year he was presented to the rectory of Newington Butts, near Southwark, but enjoyed the living only a few months, being removed on account of a simoniacal contract. In the same year, however, he became rector of Brinkwortb, in Wiltshire, and a few years after proceeded D. D. At Brinkworth he was much followed for his edifying manner of preaching, and for his great hospitality. But on the breaking out of the rebellion, being noted among those who were inclined to favour the republicans, he met witk. such harsh treatment from the king’s soldiers, as obliged him to repair to London, where his preaching, although at first acceptable, was soon accused of leaning to Antinomianism, and involved him with many of his brethren in a controversy. He was baited, says Wood, by fifty-two opponents, in a grand dispute concerning the freeness of the grace of God in Jesus Christ; and by this encounter, which was eagerly managed on his part, he contracted a disease that brought him to his grave. This disease, communicated by infection, and probably nowise connected with the eagerness of his dispute, was the small-pox, of which he died Feb. 27, 1642, and was buried in the family vault in St. Mildred’s, Bread-street. In his last sickness, he avowed his firm adherence in the doctrines he had preached. The dispute mentioned by Wood, was probably carried on in person, or in the pulpit, for we do not find that he published any thing in his life-time; but, after his death, three 4to volumes of his sermons were printed by his son, under the title of “Christ alone exalted,” containing in all forty-two sermons. When they appeared, we are told, that the Westminster assembly proposed to have them burnt; and although we do not find that this was done, Flavel, and other non-conformists, endeavoured to expose the danger of some of his sentiments. Here, probably, the controversy might have rested, had not his works been again published about the revolution, by one of his sons, with additions. This excited a new controversy, confined almost entirely to the dissenters, but in which some of the most eminent of that body took a part, and carried it on with an asperity which produced considerable disunion. In particular it disturbed the harmony of the weekly lecture established at Pinners’ -hall, and the congregation mostly inclining to Dr. Crisp’s sentiments, the minority seceded, and began a weekly lecture at Salters’-hall. The principal writers in this controversy were Williams, Edwards, Lorimer, &c. against Crisp; and Chauncey, Mather, Lobb, &c. for him; and after a contest of seven-years, they rather agreed to a suspension of hostilities than came to a decision. The truth appears to have been, that Crisp was extremely unguarded in many of his expressions, but was as far as the fiercest of his antagonists from intending to support any doctrine that tended to licentiousness. A very full account of the whole controversy may be seen in the last of our authorities.

, an Italian divine and poet, of the sixteenth century, was born at Gallipoli, in the kingdom of Naples. Having entered into the church, his merit procured him the friendship of many of the most learned men of his time, and particularly of the cardinal Jerome Seripando, to whom he was for some time secretary; and he was also in great request as a teacher of jurisprudence, philosophy, and theology. He died about 1595, at the time when pope Clement VIII. intended to have promoted him to a bishopric. His principal work is a piece of criticism, much admired in his time, “De ethnicis philosophis caute legendis,” Rome, 1594, folio. Crispus’s other works are two orations concerning the war against the Turks, printed at Rome in 1594, 4to. “De JMedici Laudibus, Oratio ad cives suos Gallipolitanos,” Home, 1591, 4to. The “Life of Sannazarius,” Rome, 1583, reprinted at Naples in 1633, 8vo. A draught or map of the city of Gallipoli, dedicated to Flaminio Caraccioli January the 1st, 1591. Some of his Italian poems are in a collection published by Scipio de Monti, under the title “Le Rime,” &c. 1585, 4to.

In the mean time, he was not so intent upon his private concerns in his diocese, but that he shewed himself ready to serve the public as often as he thought it in his power. Accordingly, in 1675, when the quarrel with the non-conformists was at its height, and the breach so artfully widened that the Roman catholics entertained hopes of entering through it, he published a piece, entitled, “The Naked Truth; or, the true state of the primitive church,” 4to, which was printed at a private press, and addressed to the lords and commons assembled in parliament. This, though no more than a small pamphlet of four or five sheets, excited an uncommon degree of attention, and was read and studied by all people of sense and learning in the kingdom. The author’s design was to recommend to the legislature measures for reconciling the differences among protestants, and for securing the church against the attempts of papists. He begins with articles of faith; and having shewn the danger of imposing more than are necessary, especially as terms of communion, he proceeds next through all the great points in dispute between the church of England and those that dissent from her: labouring to prove throughout, that protestants differ about nothing that can truly be styled essential to religion; and that, for the sake of union, compliances would be more becoming, as well as more effectual, than enforcing uniformity by penalties and persecution. 7'he whole is written with the best intentions, and with great force of argument: nevertheless it was attacked with great zeal by some of the clergy, particularly by Dr. Turner, master of St. John’s college in Cambridge, in his Animadversions on a pamphlet called “The Naked Truth;” 1676, 4to. This was answered by Andrew Marvell, in a piece, entitled, “Mr. Smirke, or the Divine in Mode;” in which after descending, as the title shows, to personal ridicule, he says, that bishop Croft’s work is a treatise, which, “if not for its opposer, needs no commendation, being writ with that evidence and demonstration of truth, that all sober men cannot but give their assent and consent to it unasked. It is a book of that kind, that no Christian can scarce peruse it, without wishing himself to have been the author, and almost imagining that he is so: the conceptions therein being of so eternal idea, that every man finds it to be but a copy of the original in his own mind.” Many other pamphlets were written against “The Naked Truth;” but the author did not vouchsafe them any reply, and it continued for a considerable time to be read and reprinted.

This was the first thing bishop Croft published, except two sermons: one on Isaiah xxvii. verse last, preached before the house of lords upon the fast-day, Feb. 4, 1673; the other before the king at Whitehall, April 12, 1674, on Philipp. i. 21. In 1678 he published a third sermon, preached Nov. 4, at the cathedral church in Hereford, and entitled, “A second call to a farther Humiliation.” The year after he published “A Letter written to a friend concerning popish idolatry:” and also a second impression, corrected, with additions, of his “Legacy to his diocese; or a short determination of all controversies we have with the papists by God’s holy word,” 4to. Besides the epistle to all the people within his diocese, especially those of the city of Hereford, and a preface, this work consists of three sermons upon John v. 39. “Search the scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life;” and a supplement, together with a tract concerning the holy sacrament of the Lord’s Supper, promised in the preface. This work was calculated by him to preserve the people of his diocese from the snares of popish missionaries, who were then very active all over the kingdom. In 1685 he published some animadversions on a book entitled “The Theory of the Earth;” and in 1688, “A Short Discourse concerning the reading his majesty’s late declaration in Churches.” This, which was the last employment of his pen, was shewn by a certain courtier to king James; who ordered so much of the discourse, as concerned the reading of the declaration, to be published to the world, and the rest to be suppressed, as being contrary to the views with which that declaration had been set forth. It is remarkable of this excellent prelate, that he had taken a resolution some years before his death, of resigning his bishopric; to which, it seems, he was moved by some scruples of conscience. His motives he expressed in a long letter to Dr. Stillingfleet; who, however, in an answer, persuaded him to continue his episcopal charge with his usual earnestness and vigour. He died at his palace at Hereford, May 18, 1691, and was buried in the cathedral there, with this short inscription over his grave-stone “Depositum Herbert! Croft de Croft, episcopi Herefordensis, qui obiit 18 die Maii A. D. 1691, DDtatis suae 88; in vita conjuncti” that is, “Here are deposited the remains of Herbert Croft of Croft, bishop of Hereford, who died May 18, 1691, in the 88th year of his age in life united.” The last words, “in life united,” allude to his lying next dean Benson, at the bottom of whose grave-stone are these, “in morte non divisi,” that is, “in death not divided:” the two gravestones having hands engraven on them, reaching from one to the other, and joined together, to signify the lasting and uninterrupted friendship which subsisted between these two reverend dignitaries.

, a musician, was born at NetherEatington in Warwickshire, about 1657. He was educated in the royal chapel under Dr. Blow, and became organist at St. Anne’s, Westminster. In 1700 he was admitted a gentleman-extraordinary of the chapel royal, and in 1704organist of the same. In 1708 he succeeded Dr. Blow as master of the children, and composer to the chapel royal, and also as organist at Westminster-abbey. In 1712 he published, but without his name, “Divine Harmony, or a new collection of select anthems;” to which is prefixed, “A brief account of Church Music.” In 1715 he was created doctor in music at Oxford: his exercise for that degree was an English and also a Latin ode, written by Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Joseph Trapp, which, with the music, were published with the title of “Musicus apparatus Academicus.” In 1724 he published by subscription a noble work of his own, entitled “Musica Sacra, or Select Anthems in score,” in 2 vols, the first containing the burial service, which Purcell had begun, but lived not to complete. He died Aug. 1727, of an illness occasioned by attending upon his duty at the coronation of George II; and there is a monument erected for him in Westminsterabbey, by his friend Humphrey Wyrley Birch, esq. a gentleman of the bar, of a whimsical character, and extremely fond of funeral music. The character of Croft’s musical compositions is given in our authorities.

, a non-conformist divine, of the family of sir Edward Crofton, was born in Ireland, and for the most part had his education in Dublin. When the Irish troubles broke out, he came over to England; and having but one groat in his pocket, he spent it the first night at his quarters. His first living in the church was at Wrenbury in Cheshire, from whence he was expelled for refusing to take the engagement, 1648. He then came to London, and after being for some time minister at St. James’s Garlike-hithe, obtained the living of St. Botolph’s near Aldgate, where he continued until the restoration, when he was ejected for non-conformity. Not long after he entered into a controversy with bishop Gauden concerning the solemn league and covenant, for his defence of which he was imprisoned in the Tower, until he was obliged to petition for his liberty. He afterwards went into Cheshire, where he was again imprisoned; but obtaining his liberty, took a small farm, or as Calamy says, kept a grocer’s shop, for the support of his family. In 1667 he returned to London, and taught a school near Aldgate, where he died about 1672. He published a great number of controversial pamphlets, and some sermons, few of which have outlived their day. He was a man of learning, and acuteness in controversy; but, Calamy allows, of a warm and hasty temper.

, was born in the province of Maine in 1552. He was sieur or lord of the manor of Croix du Maine, and of Vieille Cour, four leagues from Mans. From his youth he. had a passionate inclination for learning and books, and collected so large a library at the university in Greek and Latin authors, and most European languages, that, as he says himself, the catalogue of them would make a volume. He began to make this collection in his seventeenth year; and in his thirty-second, viz. in 1584, he published his “French Library,” being a general account of all authdfs that wrote in that language, fol. Of this we shall take particular notice under the article Verdier. In 1519 he addressed a discourse to viscount de Pauliny, and speaks of a great many works which he had written, none of which, however, are known, except a small 4to, *' Dessems ou projets, &c. pour dresser une bibliotheque parfaite," Paris, 1583, and a long Latin epitaph on the poet Monin, who was assassinated at Paris in 1586, a fate which befell himself at Tours in 1592.

, the third son of sir John Croke of Buckinghamshire, was born at Chilton in that county in 1559, and educated at the free school of Thame, from whence, about the year 1576, he went to Oxford, and became a commoner, or gentleman commoner, of University college; but before he took any degree, he was removed to the Inner Temple, where he studied law. Here he was autumn reader in 1599, treasurer in 1609, and double reader in Lent 1617. In June 1623 he was knighted and made king’s serjeant; and Feb. 22, 1624, was created one of the justices of the common-pleas, which office he held till 1628, when, upon the death of sir John Doderidge, he succeeded him as justice of the king’s bench. In 1636 he gained great credit by taking the part of Hampden in the case of ship-money, without losing the king’s favour. Sir George had purchased an estate at Waterstoke, in Oxfordshire, and not long before his death he petitioned king Charles to be discharged from his office of judge on account of his age, being then upwards of eighty years old, when his majesty was pleased, in consideration of his long and faithful services, to excuse him from any farther attendance, either on the bench or circuit, but ordered that he should remain in office, and his salary be continued. After this he retired to Waterstoke, where he died Feb. 16, 1641. Sir George had another estate at Studley, near Waterstoke, where, in 1639, he endowed some almshouses. His epitaph at Watarstoke gives him a character which has never been contradicted; that he was distinguished for acute judgment and presence of mind inherited au integrity of heart which neither threats nor honours could seduce and that he poised in equal balance the prerogative of the crown and liberties of the people.

The “Reports” of sir George Croke have obtained the character of great authenticity. There have been several editions, as in 1657, 1658, 1661, all of which are called the first edition, and are frequently without tables of the principal matters; there is also a very incorrect edition, varying in the numbers from the other editions, and the dates are printed in numerical letters MDCL. &c. An edition of 1669, which is called the second, is well printed in 3 vols, but has no references. The third, also in 3 vols, fol. was translated and published by his son-in-law, sir Harbottle Grimstone, in 1683 or 1685, with tables and references. This first led the way in divesting this branch of legal literature of the foreign idiom, and substituting the author’s native language. The fourth and last edition, in 4 vols. 8vo, 1790 1792, with additions and marginal notes, and many references to later authorities, including several from the ms notes of lord chief baron Parker, was published by Thomas Leach, esq. There is an accurate abridgment of Croke’s Reports, three parts, 8vo, by Will. Hughes, esq, published in 1685. Sir George Croke’s arguments on ship-money were published with those of sic Richard Hutton. Lloyd, no friend to the patriots of Charles I.'s time, remarks that the share in this tax for which Hampden went to law was eighteen shillings, and that it cost the nation eighteen millions.

, in Latin Crocus, one of the revivers of classical learning, was a native of London, educated at Eton, and admitted scholar of King’s college, Cambridge, April 4, 1506. During the time of his scholarship he went to Oxford, and was instructed in the Greek language by Grocyn. He then went to Paris and some other parts of Europe for further improvement, and continued abroad about twelve years, supported chiefly by the liberality of Warham, archbishop of Canterbury. During his residence there he received a very high honour, that of being chosen Greek professor at Leipsic, being the fiirt that ever taught Greek in that university. Camerarius was one of his pupils here. He resided at Leipsic from 1514 to 1517, and afterwards for some time at Louvain in the same capacity. But as now the study of the Greek language began to be encouraged in our own universities, and as they could ill spare a scholar of Croke’s accomplishments, he was invited home, and in 1519, by the interest of Fisher, bishop of Rochester, was chosen public orator, and lecturer or teacher of Greek in that university. Here, likewise, as well as at Leipsic, he was the first who publicly and by authority taught Greek, Erasmus, who preceded him, having only made some private attempts; yet, in some respect he may be said to have succeeded that eminent scholar, as in his oration in praise of Greek learning, he makes honourable mention of Erasmus, and speaks modestly of himself as unworthy to succeed him. Erasmus had so good an opinion of him, that knowing he was poor, he desired dean Colet to assist him. In 1524, having proceeded in divinity, he became doctor in that faculty, and Henry VIII. being informed of his abilities, employed him as tutor to his natural son, the duke of Richmond. This promotion led to higher; for, being introduced at court when the question respecting the king’s divorce was agitated, Dr. Croke was thought a proper person to be sent abroad, in order to influence the university of Padua to the king’s side; which he successfully accomplished, although the enemies of that divorce say, not in the most honourable manner. From Collier we learn that Croke owns, in a letter to his royal master, that he had paid various sums to at least five of the members of the universities of Padua and Bologna, in order to keep them steady to the cause. But Burnet appears to explain this matter more to Croke’s honour.

, earl of Essex, an eminent statesman in the sixteenth century, was the son of Walter Cromwell, a blacksmith, at Putney, near London, and in his latter days a brewer; after whose decease, his mother was married to a sheerman in London. What education he had, was In a private school: and all the learning he attained to, was (according to the standard of those times), only reading and writing, and a little Latin. When he grew up, having a very great inclination for travelling, he went into foreign countries, though at whose expence is not known; and by that means he had an opportunity of seeing the world, of gaining experience, and of learning several languages, which proved of great service to him afterwards. Coming to Antwerp, where was then a very considerable English factory, he was by them retained to be their clerk, or secretary. But that office being too great a confinement, he embraced an opportunity that offered in 1510, of taking a journey to Rome. Whilst he remained in Italy he served for some time as a soldier under the duke of Bourbon, and was at the sacking of Rome: and at Bologna he assisted John Russel, esq. afterwards earl of Bedford, in making his escape, when he had like to be betrayed into the hands of the French, being secretly in those parts about our king’s affairs. It is also much to his credit, as an early convert to the reformation, that, in his journey to and from Rome, he learned by heart Erasmus’s translation of the New Testament. After his return from his travels he was taken into the family and service of cardinal Wolsey, who is said to have first discovered him in France, and who made him his solicitor, and often employed him in business of great importance. Among other things, he had the chief hand in the foundation of the two colleges begun at Oxford and Ipswich by that magnificent prelate; and upon the cardinal’s disgrace in 1529, he used his utmost endeavours and interest to have him restored to the king’s favour: even when articles of high-treason against him were sent down to the house of commons, of which Cromwell was then a member, he defended his master with so much wit and eloquence, that no treason cauld be laid to his charge: which honest beginning procured Cromwell great reputation, and made his parts and abilities to be much taken notice of. After the cardinal’s household was dissolved, Cromwell was taken into the king’s service (upon the recommendation of sir Christopher Hales, afterwards master of the rolls, and sir John Russel, knt. above-mentioned) as the fittest person to manage the disputes the king then had with the pope; though some endeavoured to hinder his promotion, and to prejudice his majesty against him, on account of his defacing the small monasteries that were dissolved for endowing Wolsey’s colleges. But he discovering to the king some particulars that were very acceptable to him respecting the submission of the clergy to the pope, in derogation of his majesty’s authority, he took him into the highest degree of favour, and soon after he was sent to the convocation, then sitting, to acquaint the clergy, that they were all fallen into a praemunire on the above account, and the provinces of Canterbury and York were glad to compromise by a present to the king of above 100,000l. In 1531 he was knighted; made master of the king’s jewel-house, with a salary of 50l. per annum; and constituted a privy-counsellor. The next year he was made clerk of the Hanaper, an office of profit and repute in chancery; and, before the end of the same year, chancellor of the exchequer, and in 1534, principal secretary of state, and master of the rolls. About the same time he was chosen chancellor of the university of Cambridge; soon after which followed a general visitation of that university, when the several colleges delivered up their charters, and other instruments, to sir Thomas Cromwell. The year before, he assessed the fines laid upon those who having 40l. per annum estate, refused to take the order of knighthood. In 1535 he was appointed visitor-general of the monasteries throughout England, in order for their suppression; and in that office is accused of having acted with much violence, although in other cases promises and pensions were employed to obtain the compliance of the monks and nuns. But the mode, whatever it might be, gave satisfaction to the king and his courtiers, and Cromwell was, on July 2, 1536, constituted lord keeper of the privy seal, when he resigned his mastership of the rolls . On the 9th of the same month he was advanced to the dignity of a baron of this realm, by the title of lord Cromwell of Okeham in Rutlandshire; and, six days after, took his place in the house of lords. The pope’s supremacy being now abolished in England, lord Cromwell was made, on the 18th of July, vicar-general, and vicegerent, over all the spirituality, under the king, who was declared supreme head of the church. In that quality his lordship satin the convocation holden this year, above the archbishops, as the king’s representative. Being-invested with such extensive power, he employed it in discouraging popery, and promoting the reformation. For that purpose he caused certain articles to be enjoined by the king’s authority, differing in many essential points from the established system of the Roman-catholic religion; and in September, this same year, he published some injunctions to the clergy, in which they were ordered to preach up the king’s supremacy; not to lay out their rhetoric in extolling images, relics, miracle*, or pilgrimages, but rather to exhort their people to serve God, and make provision for their families: to put parents and other directors of youth in mind to teach their children the Lord’s-prayer, the Creed, and the Ten Commandments in their mother-tongue, and to provide a Bible in Latin and English, to be laid in the churches for every one to read at their pleasure. He likewise encouraged the translation of the Bible into English; and, when finished, enjoined that one of the largest volume should be provided for every parish church, at the joint charge of the parson and parishioners. These alterations, with the dissolution of the monasteries, and (notwithstanding the immense riches gotten from thence) his demanding at the same time for the king subsidies both from the clergy and laity, occasioned very great murmurs against him, and indeed with some reason. All this, however, rather served to establish him in the king’s esteem, who was as prodigal of money as he was rapacious and in 1537 his majesty constituted him chief justice itinerant of all the forests beyond Trent and on the 26th of August, the same year, he was elected knight of the garter, and dean of the cathedral church of Weils. The year following he obtained a grant of the castle and lordship of Okeham in the county of Rutland; and was also made constable of Carisbrook-castle in the Isle of Wight. In September he published new injunctions, directed to all bishops and curates, in which he ordered that a Bible, in English, should be set up in some convenient place in every church, where the parishioners might most commodiously resort to read the same: that the clergy should, every Sunday and holiday, openly and plainly recite to their parishioners, twice or thrice together, one article of the Lord’s Prayer, or Creed, in English, that they might learn the same by heart: that they should make, or cause to be made, in their churches, one sermon every quarter of a year at least, in which they should purely and sincerely declare the very gospel of Christ, and exhort their hearers to the works of charity, mercy, and faith not to pilgrimages, images, &c. that they should forthwith take clown all images to which pilgrimages or offerings were wont to be made: that in all such benefices upon which they were not themselves resident, they should appoint able curates: that they, and every parson, vicar, or curate, should for every church keep one book of register, wherein they should write the day and year of every wedding, christening, and burying, within their parish; and therein set every person’s name that shall be so wedded, christened, or buried, &c. Having been thus highly instrumental in promoting the reformation, and in dissolving the monasteries, he was amply rewarded by the king in 1539, with many noble manors and large estates that had belonged to those dissolved houses. On the 17th of April, the same year, he was advanced to the dignity of earl of Essex; and soon after constituted lord high chamberlain of England. The same day he was created earl of Essex he procured Gregory his son to be made baron Cromwell of Okeham. On the 12th of March 1540, he was put in commission, with others, to sell the abbey-lands, at twenty years’ purchase: which was a thing he had advised the king to do, in order to stop the clamours of the people, to attach them to his interest, and to reconcile them to the dissolution of the monasteries. But as, like his old master Wolsey, he had risen rapidly, he was now doomed, like him, to exhibit as striking an example of the instability of human grandeur; and au unhappy precaution to secure (as he imagined) his greatness, proved his ruin. Observing that some of his most inveterate enemies, particularly Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, began to be more in favour at court than himself, he used his utmost endeavours to procure a marriage between king Henry and Anne of Cleves, expecting great support from a queen of his own making; and as her friends were Lutherans, he imagined it would bring down the popish party at court, and again recover the ground he and Cranmer had now lost. But this led immodiaieiy to his destruction; for the king, not liking the queen, began to hate Cromwell, the great promoter of the marriage, and soon found an opportunity to sacrifice him; nor was this difficult. Cromwell was odious to all the nobility by reason of his low binh: hated particularly by Gardiner, and the Roman catholics, for having been so busy in the dissolution of the abbies: the reformers themselves found he could not protect them from persecution; and the nation in general was highly incensed against him for his having lately obtained a subsidy of four shillings in the pound from the clergy, and one tenth and one fifteenth from the laity; notwithstanding the immense sums that had flowed into the treasury out of the monasteries. Henry, with his usual caprice, and without ever considering that Cromwell’s faults were his own, and committed, if we may use the expression, for his own gratification, caused him to be arrested at the council table, by the duke of Norfolk, on the 10th of June, when he least suspected it. Being committed to the Tower, he wrote a letter to the king, to vindicate himself from the guilt of treason; and another concerning his majesty’s marriage with Anne of Cleves; but we do not find that any notice was taken of these: yet, as his enemies knew if he were brought to the bar he would justify himself by producing the king’s orders and warrants for what he had done, they resolved to prosecute him by attainder; and the bill being brought into the house of lords the 17th of June, and read the first time, on the 19th was read the second and third times, and sent down to the commons. Here, however, it stuck ten days, and at last a new bill of attainder was sent up to the lords, framed in the house of commons: and they sent back at the same time the bill the lords had sent to them. The grounds of his condemnation were chieHy treason and heresy; the former very confusedly expressed. Like other falling favourites, he was deserted by most of his friends, except archbishop Cranmer, who wrote to the king in his behalf with great boldness and spirit. But the duke of Norfolk, and the rest of the popish party, prevailed; and, accordingly, in pursuance of his attainder, the lord Cromwell was brought to a scaffold erected on Tower-hill, where, after having made a speech, and prayed, he was beheaded, July 28, 1540. His death is solely to be attributed to the ingratitude and caprice of Henry, whom he had served with great faithfulness, courage, and resolution, in the most hazardous, difficult, and important undertakings. As for the lord Cromwell’s character, he is represented by popish historians as a crafty, cruel, ambitious, and covetous man, and a heretic; but their opponents, on better grounds, assert that he was a person of great wit, and excellent parts, joined to extraordinary diligence and industry; that his apprehension was quick and clear; his judgment methodical and solid; his memory strong and rational; his tongue fluent and pertinent; his presence stately and obliging; his heart large and noble; his temper patient and cautious; his correspondence well laid and constant; his conversation insinuating and close: none more dextrous in finding out the designs of men and courts; and none more reserved in keeping a secret. Though he was raised from the meanest condition to a high pitch of honour, he carried his greatness with wonderful temper; being noted in the exercise of his places of judicature, to have used much moderation, and in his greatest pomp to have taken notice of, and been thankful to mean persons of his old acquaintance. In his whole behaviour he was courteous and affable to all; a favourer in particular of the poor in their suits; and ready to relieve such as were in danger of being oppressed by powerful adversaries; and so very hospitable and bountiful, that about two hundred persons were served at the gate of his house in Throgmorton-strcet, London, twice every day, with bread, meat, and drink sufficient. He must be regarded as one of the chief instruments in the reformation; and though he could not prevent the promulgation, he stopped the execution, as far as he could, of the bloody act of the six articles. But when the king’s command pressed him close, he was not firm enough to refuse his concurrence to the condemnation and burning of John Lambert. In his domestic concerns he was very regular; calling upon his servants yearly, to give him an account of what they had got under him, and what they desired of him; warning them to improve their opportunities, because, he said, he was too great to stand long; providing for them as carefully, as for his own son, by his purse and credit, that they might live as handsomely when he was dead, as they did when he was alive. In a word, we are assured, that for piety towards God, fidelity to his king, prudence in the management of affairs, gratitude to his benefactors, dutifulness, charity, and benevolence, there was not any one then superior to him in England.

, protector of the commonwealth of England, and one of the most remarkable characters in English history, was descended, both by his father and mother, from families of great antiquity. He was the son of Mr. Robert Cromwell, who was the second son of sir Henry Cromwell of Hinchinbrooke, in the county of Huntingdon, knt. whose great grandfather is conjectured to have been Walter Cromwell, the blacksmith at Putney, spoken of in the preceding article; and his grandmother sister to Thomas Cromwell, earl of Essex. Yet we are told that when Goodman, bishop of Gloucester, who turned papist, and was very desirous of making his court to the protector, dedicated a book to him, and presented a printed paper to him, by which he pretended to claim kindred with him, as being himself someway allied to Thomas earl of Essex, the protector with some warmth told him, “that lord was not related to his family in any degree.” For this story, however, told by Fuller, there seems little foundation . Robert Cromwell, father of the protector, was settled at Huntingdon, and had four sons (including the protector) and seven daughters. Though by the interest of his brother sir Oliver, he was put into the commission of the peace for Huntingdonshire, he had but a slender fortune; most of his support arising from a brewhouse in Huntingdon, chiefly managed by his wife. She was Elizabeth, daughter of a Stewart, of Rothseyth in Fifeshire, and sister of sir Robert Stewart, of the isle of Ely, knt. who has been reported, and not without some foundation of truth, to have been descended from the royal house of Stuart; as appears from a pedigree of her family still in being. Out of the profits of this trade, and her own jointure of 60l. per annum, Mrs. Cromwell provided fortunes for her daughters, sufficient to marry them into good families. The eldest, or second surviving, was the wife of Mr. John Desborough, afterwards one of the protector’s major-generals; another married, first, Roger Whetstone, esq. and afterwards colonel John Jones, who was executed for being one of the king’s judges; the third espoused colonel Valentine Walton, who died in exile; the fourth, Robina, married first Dr. Peter French, and then Dr. John Wilkins, a man eminent in the republic of letters, and after the restoration bishop of Chester. It may be also added, that an aunt of the protector’s married Francis Barrington, esq. from whom descended the Barringtons of Essex; another aunt, John Hampden, esq. of Buckinghamshire, by whom she was mother of the famous John Hampden, who lost his life in Chalgrave field; a third was the wife of Mr. Whaley, and the mother of colonel Whaley, in whose custody the king was while he remained at Hampton-court; the fourth aunt married Mr. Dunch.

Cromwell was born in the parish of St. John, Huntingdon, where his father mostly lived, April 25, 1599, and baptized 29th of the same month; and educated in grammar-learning at the free-school in that town, under Dr. Beard, a severe disciplinarian. We have very different accounts of his behaviour while he remained at school: some say that he shewed very little propensity to learning; others, that he made a great proficiency in it. It is very probable that berth are wrong; and that he was not either incorrigibly dull, or wonderfully bright; but that he was an unlucky boy, and of an uneasy and turbulent temper, is reported by authors of unsuspected veracity. Many stories are told of his enthusiasm in this early part of his life; one of which we shall mention: lying melancholy upon his bed, in the day-time, he fancied he saw a spectre, which told him, that he should be the greatest man in the kingdom. His father, being informed of this, was very angry, and desired his master to correct him severely, which, however, had no great effect; for Oliver was still persuaded of the thing, and would sometimes mention it, notwithstanding his uncle Stewart told him, “it was too traitorous to repeat it.” Sir Philip Warwick tells us, that he was very well acquainted with one Dr. Simcot, Cromwell’s physician in the earlier part of his life, who assured him, that he was a very fanciful man, and subject to great disorders of imagination: and it is. certain, that he was not altogether free from these fits during his whole life, not even in the height of his prosperity.

When he came into parliament, he was very constant in his attendance, and a frequent speaker; though he did not at that time discover any of the great qualities which afterwards appeared, and which seem to have been called out as occasion required. He affected not only plainness but carelessness in dress, was very uniform in his conduct, and spoke warmly and roundly, but without either art or elocution. He was very forward in censuring what were called grievances, both in church and state, though he had not framed to himself any plan of reformation. This he frankly acknowledged, with respect to ecclesiastical affairs, when pressed by sir Thomas Chicheley and Mr. Warwick to declare his sentiments on that subject. “I can tell,” said Cromwell, “what I would not have, though I cannot tell what I would have.” He was very zealous in promoting the remonstrance, which was carried Nov. 14, 1641, and which in reality laid the basis of the civil war; and declared to lord Falkland afterwards, that if the remonstrance had not been carried, he was resolved to have converted the small remains of his estate into ready money the next day, and to have quitted the kingdom upon the first opportunity. His firmness upon this occasion recommended him so effectually to Hampden, Pym, and the rest of the leaders on that side, that they took him into all their councils; where he acquired that clear insight into things, and knowledge of men, of which afterwards he made such astonishing use. As soon as the parliament formed any scheme of raising forces, which was in the beginning of

The wisest men and the best patriots saw very clearly whither these excessive praises tended. That the nation might be made as fully convinced of it, the earl of Manchester exhibited a charge against him in the house of lords; and Cromwell, in return, brought another against the noble peer in the house of commons. It is true, that neither of these charges was prosecuted; but it is equally true, that Cromwell and his friends absolutely carried their point, by bringing in what was called the self-denying ordinance, which excluded the members of either house from having any commands in the army; from which, however, on account of his extraordinary merit, which set him above all ordinances, Cromwell was at first occasionally, and at length altogether exempted. From being lieutenant-general of the horse, he became lieutenant-general of the army; and he procured an address from his regiment, declaring their satisfaction with the change. He continued to distinguish himself by his military successes, and to receive the thanks of both houses for the services he did. He shone particularly at the battle of Naseby, June 14, 1646, and had also his share in reducing the west; till, upon the surrender of Exeter, April 13, 1645, he found leisure to return to London. Upon taking his seat in the house, thanks were returned him, in terms as strong as words could express; and the prevailing party there received from him such encouragement, as induced them to believe he was wholly at their devotion. But in this they were mistaken; for while they thought the lieutenant-general employed in their business, he was in reality only attentive to his own. Thus, when the parliament inclined to disband a part of their forces, after the king had delivered himself to the Scots and the Scots had agreed to deliver him to the parliament, Cromwell opposed it vigorously, if not openly. For, in the first place, he insinuated by his emissaries to the soldiers, that this was not only the highest piece of ingratitude towards those who had fought the parliament into a power of disbanding them, but also a crying act of injustice, as it was done with no other view than to cheat them of their arrears. Secondly, he procured an exemption for sir Thomas Fairfax’s army, or, in other words, for his own, the general only having that title and appointments, while Cromwell had the power; and the weight of the reduction fell upon Massey’s brigade in the west, together with the troops which colonel Poyntz commanded in Yorkshire; men of whom he had good reason to doubt, but upon whom the parliament might have depended. Thus he dextrously turned to his own advantage the means which, in truth, were contrived for his destruction. Nov. 12, 1646, the army marched triumphantly through London; and in February following, the Scots having received the money agreed on, delivered up the king, who was carried prisoner to Holmby. At this time Cromwell had a most difficult part to play. What wore the legal appearance of power was evidently in the hands of the parliament, in which the presbyterian party was still prevalent; and as the general sir Thomas Fairfax was likewise in that interest, the real power seemed also to be on their side. At bottom, however, the army, now taught to know their own strength, were in reality the masters; and they were entirely directed by Cromwell, though they knew it not themselves. He saw the necessity of having a strong place, and getting the king’s person into their power and he contrived to do both, without seeming to have a hand in either. Oxford was at that time in a good condition, and well supplied with artillery, upon which the army seized it, with the magazines, and every thing else; and Cromwell, then at London, prevailed upon cornet Joyce to seize the king’s person with a strong detachment of horse, not only without the general’s orders, but without any orders at all, except those verbal instructions from Cromwell. This was executed June 4, 1G47, notwithstanding the parliament’s commissioners were then with the king; who was conducted from Holmby to Childersly, in Cambridgeshire, then the army’s head quarters. Here, through the management chiefly of Cromwell and his son-in-law commissary Ireton, the king was treated, not only with reverence, but with kindness; and when sir Thomas Fairfax, who knew nothing of the taking of the king away, and disliked it, would have sent him back asrain with the commissioners, under the guard of two regiments of horse, the king absolutely refused to move. Nay, to such a degree was that monarch convinced of the sincerity of his new friends, that he had the indiscretion to tell sir Thomas Fairfax, when he made him a tender of his duty and respect, with promises of fair treatment, that “he thought he had as good an interest in the army as himself.”

The government being now entirely changed, for in five days after the king’s death the house of lords was voted useless, it became necessary to think of some expedient for managing the executive power; and therefore it was resolved to set up a council of state, of which John Bradshaw was president, and lieutenant-general Cromwell a principal member. But before he had well taken possession of this new dignity, he was again called to action; and that too as hazardous as any in which he had hitherto been concerned. The persons he had to engage were part of the army he commanded; who, being dissatisfied on some account or other, set forth their sentiments by way of remonstrance presented to the general. For this high offence they were seized, and tried by a court martial, and sentenced to ride with their faces to their horses’ tails, at the head of their respective corps, with a paper expressing their crime fixed on their breasts, after which their swords were to be broke over their heads, and themselves cashiered; every circumstance of which was strictly executed, March 6, in Great Palace-yard. This served only to increase the flame; for several regiments of horse, and among the rest Cromwell’s own, mutinied, put white cockades in their hats, and appointed a rendezvous at Ware; where Cromwell appeared, when he was least suspected, and brought with him some regiments quartered at a distance, that he couicl depend on. Here, without any previous expostulations, he with two regiments of horse surrounded one regiment of the mutineers, and calling four men by name out of their ranks, obliged them to cast dice for their lives; and the two that escaped were ordered to shoot the others, which they did; upon which the rest thought fit to slip their white cockades into their pockets, and to secure themselves by a submission. The same spirit of mutiny broke out in another regiment of horse; but it was entirely subdued by Cromwell, and the fomenters of it punished. After this, he and Fairfax went first to Oxford, where they were made doctors in civil law; and thence to London, where they were splendidly entertained by the city, and had presents of great value when they took leave. At this time England, if not quiet, was totally subdued; the Scots were discontented, but not in arms; so that Ireland became the principal object of the parliament’s care, since in that island, of three parties which had for many years been shedding each other’s blood, their own was the weakest. In August, therefore, 1649, Cromwell embarked with an army for Ireland, where his successes, as in England, were attended with so few disappointments, that, by June 1650, he had in a manner subdued the whole island. By that time his presence was required in England, not only by those who wished him well, but even by his most inveterate enemies; and therefore constituting his son-inlaw Ireton, his deputy, he took ship for Bristol, where, after a dangerous passage, he safely arrived, leaving such a terror upon the minds of the Irish as made every thing easy to those who succeeded him, and completed the conquest of that country.

His return to London was a kind of triumph; and all ranks of people contended, either from love or fear, who should shew him the most respect. At his taking his seat in the house, he had thanks returned him for his services in the highest terms. When these ceremonies were over, they proceeded to matters of greater consequence; for, by this time the parliament had another war upon their hands, the Scots having invited home Charles II. and prepared an army to invade England. There is no doubt that the parliament would readily have trusted this war to the conduct of lord Fairfax, a brave man and good officer; but Fairfax had taken the covenant, and such were his scruples, he could not bring himself to think of breaking it, by attacking the Scots in their own country. Cromwell thought, and rightly, that they should not wait for an invasion, but prevent one invasion by another; and therefore pressed Fairfax to continue in his command, and the more earnestly, because he knew he would not do it; declaring that he thought it a greater honour to serve as his lieutenant-general, than to command in chief the finest army in the world. Fairfax, however, remained inflexible in his resolution; so that, June 26, an ordinance passed for repealing his commission, and at the same time another for appointing Cromwell general and commander in chief of all the forces of the commonwealth. He had now such power as might have satisfied the most ambitious mind; for though he offered to resign his lieutenancy of Ireland, the parliament would not accept it. He marched with an army to Scotland, and Sept. 3, gained the victory of Dunbar, than which none ever did him greater credit as a commander. He continued the war all the winter; in the spring was severely attacked by an ague; of which recovering, he, after several successes, forced the king into England, and blocked him up in Worcester. Sept. 3, 165J, he attacked and carried that city, totally defeated the king’s forces, and gained what he himself called, in his letter to the parliament, the crowning victory. It is said, that this signal stroke of success took Cromwell a little off his trnard. He would have knighted two of his principal commanders upon the field of battle, and was with difficulty dissuaded from it: his letter to the parliament on this occasion was conceived in higher and loftier terms than usual: and Ludlow says, that his behaviour was altered from that day, and that all who were about him observed it. It is certain, nevertheless, that he afterwards behaved with great humility and submission to the parliament; though in the mean time he took all care imaginable to make the army sensible of their own importance, and to let them see that nothing could divide their interests from his own. This was the true foundation of his growing greatness, and of the gradual declension of the parliament’s power; which, though they clearly discerned, they knew not how to prevent.

He did not remain long with the troops, but directed his inarch to London; where, besides many considerable marks of honour that were paid him, a general thanksgiving was appointed for his victory, and September 3d made an anniversary state holiday. When these ceremonies and acknowledgments were over, he had leisure to look about him, and to consider his own condition as well as that of the nation. He saw himself at present general and commander in chief of a great army in England, and at the same time was lord lieutenant of Ireland. But then he knew that all this was derived to him from the parliament; and he clearly discerned, that, whether independents or presbyterians sat there, they would endeavour to perpetuate supreme power in their own hands, which for many reasons he disliked. He therefore sifted the most eminent persons, in order to find out their sentiments about the establishment of the kingdom; which was a new phrase invented to cover the design of subverting the parliament. In a meeting among them, held some time after the battle of Worcester, he proposed the question fairly; when some declared for a monarchy, as others did for a commonwealth: but this conference came to nothing. Nov. 7, 1652, meeting the lord commissioner Whitlocke in the Park, he entered into a long discourse with him upon this important subject: in which he undertook to shew Whitlocke, that the parliament was now become a faction; that they were resolved to ruin all, and to rule for ever, merely for their own sakes; that they gave all employments to themselves, their relations, aud friends that they drew every thing within their own cognizance, by which the subject lost the benefit of the law, and held his property by a precarious tenure; that, all this considered, they had fought themselves into a worse condition; and that, instead of a monarch with a prerogative royal, they had now many masters, who made laws and broke them at their pleasure; that, on the other hand, the army was very sensible of this; that they bore it with great reluctance; that they too had great disputes among themselves: and that it could not be long before those mischiefs broke out into a new flame. Whitlocke very readily agreed, that he had described both parties truly; but at the same time acknowledged, that, notwithstanding he was acquainted with the diseases of the commonwealth, he was entirely ignorant of any right method of cure. “What,” said Cromwell, “if a man should take upon himself to be king?” Whitlocke replied by shewing him, that he would get nothing by it; that he had more power already than former kings ever had; and that by assuming the name, he might run great hazard of losing the thing, Cromwell then pressed to know, what he would hare done? Upon which Whitlocke proposed compromising matters with Charles Stuart: the debating of which Cromwell declined, as an affair of much difficulty. Cromwell had many conversations of this sort with the most intelligent of all parties, none of which diverted him from his secret purpose, to possess himself of the regal power, under some name or other.

The true reason why Cromwell thus dismissed this council of state, was, because he intended to have another of his own framing; these being men entirely devoted to the parliament, from whom they derived their authority. He now projected such measures as appeared to him the most proper for the support of that great authority which he had attained. He continued for a few days to direct all things by the advice of the council of officers; but afterwards a new council of state was called, by virtue of letters or warrants under the lord-general’s hand. But this consisting chiefly of fifth-monarchy and other madmen, soon dissolved of itself; and then the power returned into the hands of Cromwell, from whom it came. Harrison, and about twenty more, remained in the house, and seeing the reign of the saints at an end, placed one Moyer in the speaker’s chair, and began to draw up protests; but they were soon interrupted by colonel White with a party of soldiers. White asking them what they did there, they told him, “they were seeking the Lord;” to which he replied, “that they might go somewhere else, for to his knowledge, the Lord had not been there many years;” and so turned them out of doors. The scene thus changed, the supreme power was said to be in the council of officers again; and they very speedily resolved, that the lordgeneral, with a select council, should have the administration of public affairs, upon the terms contained in a paper, entitled “The Instrument of Government;” and that his excellency should be protector of the commonwealth of England, Scotland, and Ireland, and have the title of Highness. Accordingly he was invested therewith Dec. 16, 1653, in the court of chancery in Westminster-hall, with great solemnity; and thus, in his 54th year, assumed the sovereign power, which he well knew how to exercise with firmness. When he had thus reduced the government into some order at least, he proceeded very wisely and warily; appointed a privy-council, in which there were great and worthy men, who he knew would either not act at all, or not very long with him; but their names giving a sanction for the present, he proceeded, with the advice of as many of them as attended, to make several ordinances that were necessary, as also to dispose matters for the holding a new parliament. He applied himself also to the settlement of the public affairs, both foreign and domestic; he concluded a peace with the states of Holland and Sweden; he obliged the king of Portugal, notwithstanding all that had passed between the parliament and bim, to accept of a peace upon his terms; and adjusted matters with France, though not without some difficulty. As to affairs at home, he filled the courts in Westminsterhall with able judges; and directed the lawyers themselves to make such corrections in the practice of their profession, as might free them from public odium. The same moderation he practised in church matters; professing an unalterable resolution to maintain liberty of conscience. He gave the command of all the forces in Scotland to general Monk, and sent his son Henry to govern Ireland. By an ordinance dated April 12, 1654, he united England and Scotland, fixing the number of representatives for the latter at 30; and soon after he did the same by Ireland. He affected to shew great zeal for justice, in causing the brother of the ambassador from Portugal to be executed for murder; which he did July 10, in spite of the greatest application to prevent it.

But, notwithstanding the pains which he took to gain the affections of the people, he found a spirit rising against him in all the three kingdoms; and his government so cramped for want of money, that he was under an absolute necessity of calling a parliament, according to the form which he had prescribed in the Instrument of Government. He fixed Sept. 3 for the day on which they were to assemble, esteeming it particularly fortunate to him; and to this he peremptorily adhered, though it happened to full upon a Sunday. The parliament svas accordingly opened on that day, alter hearing a sermon at Westminster-abbey, to which the protector went in very great state. He received this house of commons in the painted chamber, where he gave them a full account of the nature of that government which he had thought fit to establish, the ends he proposed, and the means he had used to promote those ends, &c. When they came to the house, they fell to debating, whether the supreme legislative power of the kingdom should be in a single person, or a parliament; which alarming the protector, who found himself in danger of being deposed by a vote of this new parliament, he caused a guard to be set at the door, on the 12th of the same month, to prevent their going into the house of commons; then sent for them into the painted chamber, where he gave them a very sharp rebuke; nor did he permit any to go into the house afterwards, hefore they had taken an oath to be faithful to the protector and his government. While this parliament was sitting, an odd accident happened to the protector. He had received a set of Friesland horses from the duke of Holstein as a present; and would needs drive his secretary Thurloe in his coach, drawn by these horses, round Hyde Park. But the horses, proving as ungovernable as the parliament, threw his highness out of the box, and in his fall one of his pocket pistols went off; notwithstanding which he escaped, without either wound or broken bones. By the Instrument of Government, the parliament was to sit five months; but finding they were about to take away his power, and would give him no money, he, Jan. 23, sent for them once more into the painted chamber, where after a long and bitter speech he dissolved them.

The loss he sustained in the discovery of Manning, whom king Charles caused to be shot for corresponding with Thurloe, was most effectually repaired by a person of superior character, who was chancellor Hyde’s great correspondent, and supposed to be one of the most active and determined royalists in England. Though the war with Spain under Blake’s management had brought two millions of money into the protector’s coffer, he still felt some wants, which he judged nothing but a parliament could supply; and having concerted more effectual methods, as he conceived, for bending them to his will, than had been practised before the last, he fixed the meeting of that assembly Sept. 19, 1656. It met accordingly; but with a guard posted at the door of the house, who suffered none to enter till they had taken the oaths prepared for them, by which many were excluded. The parliament, however, chose a speaker; passed an act for disannulling the king’s title, another for the security of his highness’s person, and several money bills: for all which the protector gave them his most gracious thanks. About the close of this year a new plot was either discovered or invented, for which one Miles Sindercombe was condemned; but he disappointed the protector, by poisoning himself the night before he was to be executed. In the spring of 1657 it plainly appeared what the protector aimed at, by the pains he had taken with the parliament; for now a kind of legislative settlement of the government was upon the carpet, under the title of “The humble Petition and Advice ;” in which there was a blank for the supreme governor’s title, and a clause prepared to countenance the establishing something like peers, under the name of the other house. At length the whole came to light; for one alderman Pack, a forward, time-serving, money-getting fellow, deep in all the jobs of the government, moved that the first blank might l)e filled with the word King. This was violently opposed by the army-members; but at length, after various debates, carried, as well as the clause empowering him. to make something like lords; and in this form the petition was presented to his highness, who desired some time to consider before he gave his answer. The protector would have been glad to have had the kingship forced upon him, but that he found some of his best friends and nearest relations averse to it; who carried their opposition so far, as to promote a petition from the army to the parliament against it. This determined Cromwell to refuse that honour which he had been so long seeking; and, therefore, May 8, 1657, he told them in the banqueting-house, that he could not with a good conscience accept the government under the title of king. The parliament then thought proper to fill up the blank with his former title of protector; and his highness himself, that all the pains he had taken might not absolutely be thrown away, resolved upon a new inauguration, which was accordingly performed June 26, 1657, in Westminster-hall, with all the pomp and solemnity of a coronation. After this, the house of commons adjourned to Jan. 20th following, in order to give the protector time to regulate all things according to the new system; with a view to which he summoned his two sons, and others, to take their seats in the other house. This year he was extremely disconcerted with a small treatise, which captain Titus, under the name of William Allen, published with this title, “Killing no Murder:” in which w r as shewn so plainly, that one who had violated all laws, could derive protection from no law, that Oliver thenceforward believed himself in continual danger. But his attempt to apprehend the true author failed of success.

In the beginning of 1658 he pleased himself with the hopes of being once at the head of an assembly somewhat resembling the ancient parliaments of England; and, pursuant to their own adjournment, the commons met Jan. 20, as the other house also did, agreeably to the writs of summons issued by the lord protector. He sent for them by the black rod, and began his speech with the pompous words, “My lords, and you the knights, citizens, and burgesses of the house of commons, &.c.” All this only served to shew that his administration was founded in military force, and nothing else: for the ancient nobility would not resume their seats in such company as he had assigned them; and the house of commons would have nothing to do with the new nobles in the other house; and the new nobles could do nothing by themselves. Thus in less than a fortnight the new system was in a fair way of being pulled to pieces, which obliged the protector to come, Feb. 4th, and to dissolve them with great bitterness of speech and sorrow of heart: for now he plainly saw that a regular establishment was a thing impracticable. Some farther designs against him were soon after discovered, not of the cavaliers only, but of the fifth-monarchy men also. With the latter he was obliged to observe some measures; the former he delivered over to a high court of justice. By the sentence of that court, Dr. Hewett, a divine of the church of England, suffered death for contumacy, June 8, 1658; having refused to plead, or to own the jurisdiction of the court. Aug. 6, the protector’s favourite daughter Elizabeth, wife of John Claypole, esq. of Narborough in Northamptonshire, died, which affected him greatly on more accounts than one. For her illness being very painful, distempered her mind not a little; and in her deliriums she exclaimed vehemently against him for his cruelties, and especially for the death of Dr. Hewett, on whose behalf she had made the most importunate intercessions. He is said to have been from that time wholly altered, and daily more reserved and suspicious: and indeed not without reason; for he found a general discontent prevailed through the nation, a signal disaffection in the army, and a great increase of the influence of the republicans, to whom some of his relations, and even his wife, inclined: so that he knew not which way to turn, or what to expect. These cares having long tormented his mind, at last affected his body; so that while at Hampton-court, he fell into a kind of slow fever, which soon degenerated into a tertian ague. For a week this disorder continued without any dangerous symptoms, insomuch that every other day he walked abroad; but one day after dinner his five physicians coming to wait upon him, one of them having felt his pulse, said that it intermitted. At this being somewhat surprised, he turned pale, fell into a cold sweat, and when he was almost fainting, ordered himself to be carried to bed; where, by the assistance of cordials, being brought a little to himself, he made his will with respect to his private affairs.

It is impossible to have a better account of his last sickness, than that given by Dr. Bates, who was his physician. After mentioning the circumstance of making his will, he tells us, that the next morning early, when one of his physicians came to visit him, he asked him, “why he looked so sad?” and, when answer was made, that so it became any one, who had the weighty care of his life and health upon him; “Ye physicians,” said he, “think I shall die: I tell you, I shall not die this time; I am sure of it. Do not think,” said he to the physician, looking more attentively at him on these words; “do not think that I am mad; I speak the words of truth upon surer grounds than Galen or your Hippocrates furnish you with. God Almighty himself hath given that answer, not to my prayers alone, but also to the prayers of those who entertain a stricter commerce and greater interest with him. Go on cheerfully, banishing all sadness from your looks; and deal with me as you would do with a serving-man. Ye may have a skill in the nature of things, yet nature can do more than all physicians put together; and God is far more above nature.” He was then desired to take his rest, because he had not slept the greatest part of the night; and this physician left him. But as he was coming out of the chamber, he accidentally met another; to whom said he, I am afraid our patient will be light-headed. “Then (replied the other) you are certainly a stranger in this house. Do not you know what was done last night? The chaplains, and all who are dear to God, being dispersed into several parts of the palace, have prayed to God for his health: and have brought this answer, he shall recover.” Nay, to such a degree of madness they came, that a public fast heing for his sake kept at Hampton-court, they did not so much pray to God for his health, as thank him for the undoubted pledges of his recovery; and they repeated the same at Whitehall. These oracles of his deluded chaplains were the cause that the physicians spake not a word of his danger. Being removed to London, he became much worse, grew first lethargic, then delirious; and after recovering a little, but not enough to give any distinct directions about public affairs, he died Sept. 2, 1658, aged somewhat more than 59 years. A little before his death, the physicians awakened the privy-council, by representing the danger he was in; and at an appointed time he was urged to name his successor. But when in a drowsy fit he answered out of purpose, they again asked him, if he did not name Richard his eldest son for his successor To which he answered, Yes. Then being asked where his will was, which heretofore he had made concerning the heirs of the kingdom, he sent to look for it in his closet and other places; but in vain for he had either burnt it, or somebody had stolen it. It has been imagined that Cromwell was poisoned, but without any reason. Dr. Bates gives us the following account of his disorder: “His body being opened, in the animal parts the brain seemed to be overcharged in the vitals the lungs a little inflamed but in die natural, the source of the distemper appeared the spleen, though sound to the eye, being within filled with alter like to the lees of oil. Nor was that inconsistent the disease he had for a long time been subject to; since, for t least thirty years, he had at times complained of hypochondriaeal indispositions. Though his bowels were taken out, and his body filled with spices, wrapped in a fourfold cere-cloth, put first into a coffin of lead, and then into one of wood, yet it purged and wrought through all, so that there was a necessity of interring it before the solemnity of the funeral.” A very pompous funeral was ordered at the public ex pence, and performed from Somerset-house, with a splendour superior to any that has been bestowed on crowned heads. Some have related, that his body was, by his own particular order, secretly buried in Naseby field; others that it was wrapped in lead, and sunk in the deepest part of the Thames, to prevent any insult that might be offered to it; others that it was taken from the gallows after the restoration, and deposited in the family-vault of the Claypoles, at Narborough near Peterborough. From the account of what passed upon, the order to disinter him after the restoration, it seems that his body was interred at Westminster. “In the middle aile of Henry VII's chapel,at the east end, in a vault, was found his corpse. In the inside of the coffin, and upon the breast of the corpse, was laid a copper-plate finely gilt, inclosed in a thin case of lead; on the side whereof were engraven the arms of England, impaled with the arms of Oliver; and on the reverse the following legend: Oli verius protector reipublicæ Angliæ, Scotiæ, & Hiberniæ, uatus 25 April 1599, inauguratus 16 Decembris 1653, mortuus 3 Septembris ann. 1658. Hic situs est.” But this in some writers is considered as a delusion; and that some other, if not the body of Charles I. was inclosed in this coffin, which is still a greater delusion and absurdity, as a very recent discovery proves. It has also been said, that the body of his daughter Claypole was found at the same time and place, with a silver plate with an inscription; but the workmen quarrelling about this plate, it was thrown into the vault again. The inscription on it, however, was shewn to the Society of Antiquaries, 1738, by Dr. Cromwell Mortimer, whose father married to his first wife a daughter of Richard Cromwell. The plate on Oliver’s coffin was in 1773 in the possession of the hon. George Hobart, of Nocton, in Lincolnshire, and shewn to the same society by Mr. Wills, and is engraved in Mr. Noble’s Memoirs .

Odious as Cromwell’s reign had been, many marks of public approbation were bestowed upon his memory. The poems of Waller, Sprat, and Dryden, though the authors lived to change their sentiments, give a very high idea of him, but allowance must be made for poetical evidence. In his life-time his actions had been celebrated by the learned abroad, as well as by his own secretary Milton at home; and with these panegyrics he seems not to have been displeased. We have indeed various characters of him from persons of various sentiments; yet in most of these there seems to be a mixture of flattery or prejudice. His panegyrists knew not where to stop their praises; and his enemies were as extravagant in their censures. Lord Hollis, in his “Memoirs,” will hardly allow him any great or good qualities; and one principal design of Ludiow’s Memoirs is to represent him as the vilest oi men. Cowley seems to have excelled all others, as well in respect to the matter as the manner of representing him in the different lights of praise and censure; so that his performance may justly be esteemed the most perfect of any, as it is beyond comparison the most beautiful. It is said, that cardinal Mazarine styled him a fortunate madman: but father Orleans, who relates this, dislikes that character, and would substitute in its place that of a judicious villain. Clarendon calls him a brave, wicked man: and Burnet is of opinion, that “his life and his arts were exhausted together; and that, if he had lived longer, he would scarce have been able to preserve his power.” But this only proves, that the bishop did not discern what resources he had. “how blameworthy soever the protector might have been in the acquisition of his high office, or how wickedly soever he acquired it, certain it is, he rivalled the greatest of the English monarchs in glory, and made himself courted and dreaded by the nations around him. The peace he gave the Dutch was honourable to himself and the nation; and whether he acted prudently or not in breaking with Spain, and allying himself with France, the inequality between the two crowns was far from being as visible then as it has since appeared, and Cromwell always had it in his power to throw himself into the opposite scale if necessary; and he distinguished himself by his interposition in behalf of the persecuted subjects of the French crown. His own government was, however, far from being free from blame. His edict against the episcopal clergy was very cruel, as it deprived them in a good measure of their maintenance, and liberty of worshiping God in a way that appeared best to their own understandings. The cavaliers had hard measure from him, as they were almost without exception subjected to heavy taxes and other inconveniences, on account of the rashness and imprudence of some of their party. Nor must we forget his institution of major-generals, who, in a variety of instances, lorded over an oppressed country; nor his sometimes making use of packed juries, and displacing judges for refusing to follow his directions, establishing high-commission courts, and so frequently violating the privileges of parliament.” Concessions like these make part of the character of Oliver Cromwell, as drawn by Mr. Harris, a professed advocate: but when he attempts to vindicate his illegal and tyrannical actions, on the ground of his being disappointed of regal power, and that had he accepted the kingship, which was offered by his parliament, a firmer settlement and a milder administration might have taken place, there seems little reason to doubt but the support even of that rank, considering the dangerous and uncertain terms on which he must have held it, would have urged him to the same violent and unwarrantable measures. Such biographers as Harris are generally employed in striking a balance between good and bad deeds; but it is not a few of the former that can redeem the character of Cromwell, who has been more justly said to be the strangest compound of villainy and virtue, baseness and magnanimity, absurdity and good sense, that we find upon record in the annals of mankind.

In his public way of living, there was a strange kind of splendour at Whitehall; for sometimes his court wore an air of stately severity; at other times he would unbend himself, and drink freely never indeed to excess, but only so far as to have an opportunity of sounding men’s thoughts in their unguarded moments. Sometimes, in the midst of serious consultations, he started into buffoonery; sometimes the feasts that were prepared for persons of the first distinction, were, by a signal of drums and trumpets, made the prey of his guards. There was a kind of madness in his mirth, as well as of humour in his gravity, and much of design in all. Some have commended him for keeping up a great face of religion in his court and through the nation: but it is not easy to know what they mean: certain it is, that religion never wore so many faces as in his time; nor was he pleased to discover which face he liked best. The presbyterians he hated; the church of England he persecuted; against the papists he made laws; but the sectaries he indulged. Yet some of the presbyterian divines he courted affected kindness to a few of the ministers of the church of England and entered into some very deep intrigues with the papists. This made sir Kenelm Digby’s favourite father White write in defence of his government, and even of his conduct; and the popish primate of Ireland sent precepts through all his province under his seal, to pray for the health, establishment, and prosperity of the protector Cromwell and his government. With regard to personal religion, it would be difficult to find, or even to conceive, an instance of more consummate, impudent hypocrisy than Cromwell exhibited, or a more unfeeling contempt for every thing that deserves the name of religion, when it interfered with the purposes of his ambition. As for the judges in Westminster-hall, he differed with St. John, and was sometimes out of humour with Hale. He set up high courts of justice unknown to the law, and put Dr. Hewett to death for not pleading before one of them, though he ottered to plead, if any one that sat there, and was a lawyer, would give it under his hand, that it was a legal jurisdiction; and Whitlocke himself owns, that, though he was named in the commission, he would never sit, because he knew it was not lawful. His majors-general, while they acted, superseded all law; and thv protector himself derided Magna Charta, so much respected by our kings. He was indeed kind to some learned men. Milton and Marvel were his secretaries. He would have hired Meric Casaubon to have written his history; and have taken the famous Hobbes into his service for writing the Leviathan, probably because in that celebrated work power is made the source of right and the basis of religion the foundation on which Cromwell’s system, as well as Hobbes’s, was entirely built. He gave archbishop Usher a public funeral in Westminster-abbey; yet he paid but half the expence, and the other half proved a heavy burden upon that prelate’s poor family. And when all this is allowed to so inflexible a tyrant, how much is deducted from the infamy that attaches to his character? The most execrable of mankind are never uniform in villainy.

Very little of Cromwell’s private life is known; he being near forty years of age when he first distinguished himself in opposing the project for draining of the fens. Yet there were some who knew and understood him thoroughly, before his extraordinary talents were made known to the world; and in particular his cousin Hampden, of which the following was a remarkable instance. When the debates ran high in the house of commons, and Hampden and lord Digby were going down the parliament stairs, with Cromwell just before them, who was known to the latter only by sight: “Pray,” said his lordship to Hampden, “who is that man, for I see that he is on our side, by his speaking so warmly to-day?” “That sloven,” replied Hampden, “whom you see before us, who has no ornament in his speech; that sloven, I say, if we should ever come to a breach with the king, which God forbid! in such a case, I say, that sloven will be the greatest man in England.” This prophecy, which was so fully accomplished, rose chiefly from the sense Hampden had of Cromwell’s indefatigable diligence in pursuing whatever he undertook. He had another quality, which was equally useful to him; that of discerning the temper of those with whom he had to deal, and dealing with them accordingly. Before he became commander in chief, he kept up a very high intimacy with the private men: taking great pains to learn their names, by which he was sure to call them; shaking them by the hand, clapping them on the shoulder; or, which was peculiar to him, giving them a slight box on the ear; which condescending familiarities, with the warm concern he expressed for their interests, gave him a power easier conceived than described. He tried to inveigle the earl of Manchester; but finding that impracticable, he fell upon him in the house of commons, and procured his removal. He carried himself with so much respect to Fairfax, that he knew not how to break with him, though he knew that he had betrayed him. He not only deceived Harrison, Bradshaw, and Ludlow, but outwitted Oliver St. John, who had more parts than them all; and he foiled sir Henry Vane with his own weapons. In short, he knew men perfectly, worked them to his purposes as if they had been cattle, and, which is still more wonderful, did that often while they conceived that they were making a tool of him. He had a reach of head, which enabled him to impose even upon the greatest bodies of men. He fed the resentment of the house of commons agai.ibi the army, till the latter were in a flame, and very angry with him; yet, when he came tothe army, it was upon a flea-bitten nag, all in a foam, as if he had made his escape from that house; in which trim he signed the engagement of Triploe heath, throwing himself from his horse upon the grass, and writing his name as he lay upon his belly. He had yet another faculty beyond these; and that was, the art of concealing his arts. He dictated a paper once to Ireton, which was imposed upon the agitators as if founded upon their instructions; who sent it express by two of their number to Cromwell, then lieutenant-general, at his quarters at Colchester. He was in bed when they came; but they demanded and obtained admittance. When they told him their commission, he asked them, with the greatest rage and resentment in his look, how they durst bring him papers from the army? They said, that paper contained the sense of the army, and they were directed to do it. “Are you sure of that?” said he, with the same stern countenance, “Let me see it.” He spent a long time in reading it; and, as it seemed to them, in reflecting upon it: then, with a mild and devout look, he told them it was a most just thing, and he hoped that God would prosper it; adding, “I will stand by the army in these desires with and fortune.”

It may seem strange, that in drawing together his character, there should be nothing said of his principles as to government or religion; but the real truth is, that neither run be discovered with certainty. We know that he hated a commonwealth, and the prtsbyterians; but what his sentiments were in other respects, it is not possible to say. When he recollected himself after the follies of his youth, there seems to be no doubt that he had serious impressions of religion; and there seem to be very strong proofs that he was afterwards tinctured with enthusiasm. It is impossible to suppose him a fanatic in the time of his elevavation; it were more reasonable to suppose him gradually to have lost all sense of religion, and only to have preserved the mask of it, for the better carrying on his designs, and managing the different parties, as we have before noticed. It is idle indeed to dispute on the religion of a man who rose to greatness by a succession of actions, both in conception and execution, radically criminal. Clarendon mentions his speaking kindly of bishops, as if there was something good in that order, it the dross was scoured off; and seems to think he was in earnest. But the whole of his life proves that he was not steady to any form of religion, supposing him to have retained any principles at the bottom; and there seems to be little doubt that the true meaning of these flattering words, was, his design to return to the old form of government; for whatever he intended, this was his great aim. He did not overturn the constitution to leave it in ruins, but to set it up again, and himself at the head of it; and though he compared his own government at first to that of a high constable, yet all he laboured at afterwards, was plainly to get the chaos new formed, and his own authority sanctified by the regal title, and the appearance of a legal parliament.

He had many children, of whom six, Richard, Henry, Bridget, Elizabeth, Mary, and Frances, survived to advanced age. Richard, his eldest son, was born Oct. 4, 1626. His father has been censured for keeping him at a distance from business, and giving him no employment but for this perhaps there was not any just ground. He married him to a daughter and coheir of Richard Major, of Hunley, in Hampshire, esq. who brought him a good fortune. He suffered him to pursue the bent of his inclinations, and to lead the life of a plain, honest, country gentleman; which for a time was highly suitable to his own interest, as it seemed to correspond with the terms of the Instrument of Government; and with the dislike which the protector, when first so called, had expressed of hereditary right. When he had afterwards brought about a change in affairs, he altered his conduct towards his son; named him the first lord in his other house; resigned to him the chancellorship of Oxford; and conferred upon him all the honours he could. His weak and harmless reign is well known. On his dismission from the protectorate, he resided some time at Pezenas, in Languedoc, and afterwards went to Geneva. Sometime in 1680, he returned to England, and for some time took the name of Richard Clark, and resided at Cheshunt, in Hertfordshire, where he died July 13, 1712. In 1705 he lost his only son, and became in right of him possessed of the manor of Horsley, which had belonged to his mother. Richard, then in an advanced age, sent or.c of his daughters to take possession of the estate for him. She kept it for herself and her sisters, allowing her father only a small annuity out of it, till she was dispossessed of it by a sentence of one of the courts of Westminster-hall. It was requisite for this purpose, that Richard should appear in person; and tradition says, that the judge who presided, lord Cowper, ordered a chair for him in court, and desired him to keep on his hat: this last circumstance appears wholly incredible. As Richard was returning from this trial, curiosity led him to see the house of peers, when, being asked by a person to whom he was a stranger, if he had ever seen any thing like it before, he replied, pointing to the throne, “Never since I sat in that chair.”

, a Swedish mineralogist, and one of the first who improved that science by applying chemistry in the decomposition of mineral substances, was born in Sudermania in 1722, and educated at the university of Upsal, where he joined to his other studies, an uncommon predilection for natural history, and especially mineralogy, which was the cause of his being much employed in the royal college of mines, and being frequently sent to inspect those of Sweden and Norway. In 1753 he was elected a member of the academy of Stockholm, and contributed several papers on mineralogical subjects, particularly on nickel, which, by some experiments made in 1751 and 1754, he showed to contain a new semi-metal, or at least that a regulus different from all others was obtainable from its ore. Cronstedt died Aug. 19, 1765. His principal work, which is well known in this country by translations, was “An Essay towards a System of Mineralogy,” originally published in 1758, translated from the Swedish by Engestrom, and from that into English by Emanuel da Costa, 1770, 8vo. Of this a second edition, greatly improved by the addition of the modern discoveries, and by a new arrangement of the articles, was published at London in 1788, by John Hyacinth de Magellan, 2 vols. 8vo.

, a Franciscan friar and popish missionary in England, was chaplain to king James II. and followed the abdicated monarch to St. Germain’s in 1688, where he died a few years after. H was esteemed to be a man of parts, and published: 1. “A Sermon before the king and queen at St. James’s palace,” 1686. 2. “Cynosura, or the Miserere psalm paraphrased,” thin folio. 3. “Divine Poems.” 4. “Philotheus’s Pilgrimage to perfection, in a practice of ten days solitude,” Bruges, 1668.

Two of M. de Crousaz’s publications yet remain, and require particular notice: his “Examen de l‘Essai sur l’homme, poeme de M. Pope,” Lausanne, 1737; and “Commentaire sur la traduction en vers de M. l‘abbé du Resnel, de l’essai de M. Pope,” Geneva, 1738, 12mo. In these M. Crousaz accuses Mr. Pope of Spinosism and naturalism, and the first of them was immediately translated into English by the celebrated Miss Carter, with some assistance from Dr. Johnson, and published under the title of “An Examination of Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man containing a succinct view of the system of the fatalists, and a confutation of their opinions with an illustration of the doctrine of free-will, and an inquiry what view Mr. Pope might have in touching upon the Leibnitzian philosophy and fatalism,” 1738, 8vo. The other was translated under the title of “A Commentary on Mr. Pope’s Principles of Morality, or Essay on Man. By M. Crousaz; with the abbe” dn Resnel’s translation of the Essay into French verse, and the English interlined: also observations on the French, Italian, and English Poetry,“1741, 8vo. Pope, who had got the principles of the Essay from Bolingbroke, and did not understand them, would have made but a sorry figure in this controversy had he not found in Warburton a vigorous defender, although it is said that he had once written a censure of the doctrines of the Essay on Man. He now stept forth, however, with a defence, which was first published in a monthly literary journal (The Republic of Letters), but was afterwards collected into a volume (1742, 12mo), written with more asperity than argument.” Crousaz,“says Dr. Johnson,” was no mean antagonist; his mind was one of those in which philosophy and piety are happily united. He was accustomed to argument and disquisition, and, perhaps, was grown too desirous of detecting faults; but his intentions were always right, his opinions were solid, and his religion pure. His incessant vigilance for the promotion of piety disposed him to look with distrust upon all metaphysical systems of theology, and all schemes of virtue and happiness purely rational; and therefore it was not long before he was persuaded that the positions of Pope, as they terminated for the most part in natural religion, were intended to draw mankind away from revelation, and to represent the wholecourse of things as a necessary concatenation of indissoluble fatality; and it is undeniable, that in many passages a religious eye may easily discover expressions not very favourable to morals or to liberty.“The consequence to Pope was, that his eyes were opened, and he was not a little pleased that by” any mode of interpretation he could be made to mean well." To Warburton the consequences were more important; Pope courted him, and ultimately got him a. ricli wife and a bishopric.

, a divine and poet, was born either in Gloucestershire, or, according to Bale, in Northamptonshire, and entered a student of Magdalen college, Oxford, about the year 1534; and after taking the degree of B. A. was elected probationer fellow in 1542. In the beginning of the reign of Edward VI. he settled in London, took a house in Ely-rents, Holborn, and there exercised the trade of printer and bookseller, and being, we suppose, in orders, occasionally preached but being at the same time a zealous friend to the reformation, on the accession of queen Mary he went with the other exiles to Francfort, where he remained until the queen’s death. After his return to England he had several benefices bestowed on him, among which were the archdeaconry, and a prebend in Hereford, both which he resigned in 1567; a prebend of St. Paul’s, the rectory of St. Peter le Poor, and the vicarage of St. Giles’s Cripplegate; but he was deprived of the latter, the only promotion which he appears to have held at that time (1566), for a riot in the church, because the choristers wore surplices. In 1576, however, it appears that he was collated to the living of St. Lawrence Jewry, and probably was now more reconciled to the ceremonies and habits of the church. In 1578 he was presented with the freedom of the Stationers’ company, and soon after is found with the wardens, licensing copies. He died June 18, 1588, and was buried in his former church of St. Giles’s. He was, according to Tanner, a person of a happy genius, an eminent preacher, and a zealous advocate for reformation. His works, both in prose and verse, enumerated by Wood and Tanner, are now merely objects of curiosity. In 1550 he printed the first edition of “Pierce Plowman’s Vision,” with the view of helping forward the reformation by the revival of a book which exposed the absurdities of popery. He translated into popular rhyme, not only the Psalter, but the Litany, with hymns, all which he printed together in 1549. In the same year, and in the same measure, he published “The Voice of the Last Trumpet blown by the seventh angel,” a piece containing twelve several lessons for the instruction of all classes. He also attacked the abuses of his age in thirty-one “Epigrams,” 1550, and twice reprinted. In the same year he published a kind of metrical sermon on “Pleasure and Pain, Heaven and Hell Remember these four, and all shall be well.” In his “Dialogue between Lent and Liberty,” written to prove that Lent is a superstitious institution, Mr. Warton thinks that the personification of Lent is a bold and a perfectly new prosopopeia. Crowley likewise wrote and printed in 1588, a rhyming manual, “The School of Virtue and Book of Good Nature,” a translation, into metre, of many of the less exceptionable Latin hymns anciently used by the catholics. Among his prose works are “An Apology of those English preachers and writers which Cerberus, the three-headed dog of hell, chargeth with false doctrine under the name of Predestination,” 1566, 4to, and “Brief Discourse concerning those four usual notes whereby Christ’s Catholic Church is known,” 1581, 4 to, &c. In controversy he was usually warm, and not nice in his language; and in his poetry he consulted usefulness rather than taste.

, was the son of Samuel Croxall, rector of Hanworth in Middlesex, and Walton upon Thames in Surrey, in the last of which places his son was born. He received his early education at Eton school, and thence was sent to St. John’s college, in Cambridge. It is said, that while he was at the university he became enamoured of Mrs. Anna Maria Mordaunt, who first inspired his breast with love; and to whom he dedicates “The Fair Circassian,” in a bombastic style, bordering on prophaneness. Croxall was designed for orders, and had probably entered them when he published this poem, which made him cautious of being known to be the author of a piece so ludicrously written, and yet taken from a book which makes a part of the canon of scripture. The first specimen of this poem, under the title of “Solomon’s Song, chap, iv.” appeared in Steele’s Miscellany, 1713. The first edition of the whole poem appeared in 1720, when it might have been expected he had acquired more reverence for the scriptures, or respect for his profession.

, a learned French writer, was born at Nantes, Dec. 4, 1661. His father, who was a merchant, was also a man of letters, and bestowed much pains on the education of his son, who answered his expectations by the proficiency he made in classical studies. He had, however, provided him with a private tutor, who happened to disgust him by the severity of his manners, and upon this account partly, at the age of fourteen, he desired to take a voyage to some of the West India islands, to which his father traded; but his principal inducement was what he had read in books of voyages, and the conversation of persons who had been in America, all which raised his curiosity to visit the new world. He embarked on board a French ship, with no other books than Erasmus’s Colloquies, and the Gradus ad Parnassum. His passage was not unpleasant, and during his residence at Guadeloupe he borrowed all the Latin books he could discover, and read them with avidity; but the chief advantage he seems to have derived here was an opportunity to learn the English, Spanish, Italian, and Portuguese San^uasres. To these he afterwards added an acquaintance with the German, Sclavonic, and AngloSaxon; and studied with much attention the ancient and modern Greek, the Hebrew, Syriac, Coptic, Armenian, Hebrew, Arabic, and even the Chinese. On his return to Nantes in 1677, he found his father’s affairs somewhat deranged, and was obliged to take a part in the business. Medicine appears to have been first suggested to him as a profession, but he found little inclination for that study; and some conferences he happened to have with the Benedictines of the congregation of St. Maur determined him to enter their society. He accordingly made his noviciate in 1673, and applied himself to the study of theology. In 1682 he formally became a member of the congregation. His residence at Paris, in the abbey of St. Germain des Pres, the vast number of books within his reach, and particularly of manuscripts, increased his knowledge and his thirst for knowledge, and some of his earliest labours were bestowed in preparing materials, collecting Mss. &c. for new editions of the works of St. Clement of Alexandria, and St. Gregory Nazianzen. But these were interrupted by certain differences which occurred in the abbey to which he belonged, and of which we have various accounts. The prior of St. Germain, father Loo, had a great aversion to the study of classical and polite literature, and was for confining the members to the strict religious duties of the house. This could not fail to be disgusting to a man of La Croze’s taste: but, according to other accounts, which seem more prohable, he began to entertain religious scruples about this time (lr.96), which induced him to withdraw himself. It is said that his superiors found among his papers a treatise against transubstantiation in his hand-writing, and which they believed to be his composition; but they discovered afterwards that it uas a translation from the English of Stillingfleet. Some other manuscripts, however, sufficiently proved that he had changed his opinion on religious matters; and the dread of persecution obliged him to make his escape to Basil, which he successfully accomplished in May 1696. Here he renounced the Roman catholic religion, and as his intention was to take up his residence, he was matriculated as a student of the college of Basil. He remained in this place, however, only till September, when he departed, provided with the most honourable testimonies of his learning and character from Buxtorf, the Hebrew professor, and Werenfels, dean of the faculty of theology. He then went to Berlin, where his object was to secure a iixed residence, devote himself to study, and endeavour to forget France. In order to introduce himself, he began with offering to educate young men, the sons of protestant parents, which appears to have answered his purpose, as in 1697 we find him appointed librarian to the king of Prussia; but his biographers are not agreed upon the terms. To this place a pension was attached, but not sufficient to enable him to live without continuing his school; and some assert that he was very poor at this time. The probability is, that his circumstances were improved as he became better known, and his reputation among the learned was already extensive. In June of 1697 he went to Francfort to visit the literati of that place, and their fine library, and visited also Brandenburgh for the same purpose. In November 1697 (or, as Chaufepie says, in 1702), he married Elizabeth Rose, a lady originally of Dauphiny, and thus, adds one of his Roman catholic biographers, completed the abjuration of the true religion. In 1698 he first commenced author, and from time to time published those works on which his fame rests. Soon after he became acquainted with the celebrated Leibnitz, with whom he carried on an intimate correspondence. In 17 13 he went to Hamburgh, where he paid many visits to the learned Fabricius, and in his letters speaks with great warmth of the pleasure this journey afforded; but this year, 17 J 3, was not in other respects a vei'y fortunate one to La Croze, and he formed the design of quitting Germany. He had been appointed tutor to the margrave of Schwel, and this employment terminating in 1714, he lost the pension annexed to it, and was reduced to considerable difficulties, of which he wrote to Leibnitz, as to a friend in whom he could confide. Leibnitz, by way of answer, sent him a copy of a letter which he had written to M. BernsdorfT, prime minister to the elector of Hanover, in his behalf. The object likely to be attained by this interest was a professorship at Helmstadt; but as it required subscription to the articles of the Lutheran church, M. la Croze, notwithstanding the persuasions Leibnitz employed, declined accepting it. His affairs, however, soon after wore a more promising aspect, partly in consequence of a prize he gained in the Dutch lottery. In 1717 he had the honour to be engaged as private tutor to the princess royal of Prussia, afterwards margravine of Bareoth. In 1724, for several months his studies were interrupted by a violent fit of the gravel; and on his recovery, the queen of Prussia, who always patronized La Croze, obtained for him the professorship of philosophy in the French college at Berlin, vacant by the death of M. Chauvin. This imposed on him the necessity of drawing up a course of philosophy, but as he never intended to print it, it is said not to have been executed with the care he bestowed on his other works. In 1713 father Bernard Pez, the Benedictine, made him liberal offers if he would return to the church he had forsaken, but this he declined with politeness, offering the arguments which influenced his mind to remain in the protestant church. In 1739 an inflammation appeared on his leg, which inApril put on appearances of mortification, hut did not prove fatal until May 21. About a quarter of an bour before his death he desired his servant to read the 51st and 77th psalms, during which he expired, in the seventy -first year of his age. He was reckoned one of the most learned men of his time, and was frequently called a living library. So extensive was his reading, and so vast iiis memory, that no one ever consulted him without obtaining prompt information. In dates, facts, and references he was correct and ready. We have already noticed how many languages he had learned, but it appears that he made the least progress in the Chinese, to which Leihnitz, in his letters, is perpetuiiy iirging him. The greater part of his life was employed in study, and he had no other pleasures. There was scarcely a book in his library whicli he had not perused, and he wrote ms notes on most of them. His conversation could not fail to be acceptable to men of literary research, as his memory was stored with anecdotes, which he told in a very agreeable manner. He was conscientiously attached to the principles of the reformed religion. He had always on his table the Hebrew Psalter, the Greek Testament, and Thomas a Kempis in Latin: the latter he almost had by heart, as well as Buchanan’s Psalms. His consistent piety and charity are noticed by all his biographers.

, one of the contributors to the reformation in Germany, was born at Leipsic, Jan. 1, 1504. In his youth he was of a retired melancholy cast, but made great progress in classical learning, and afterwards in divinity, which he studied at Wittemberg under Mosellanus and Richard Croke (See Croke), and had for his fellow student the learned Camerarius, who says, that although he appeared to his companions of a didl capacity, he laid in a greater stock of learning than any of them. In 1524 he went to Magdeburgb, and taught school for two years; and on his return to Wittemberg he was appointed to expound the scriptures, and to preach in the church near the castle, and was admitted to his doctor’s degree. Here he also applied his mind to the study of medicine, pharmacy, and botany, and laid out two gardens with a great variety of curious and useful plants. Having contracted an intimacy with Luther, he joined him in his efforts to promote the reformation, and assisted him in the translation of the Bible. In 1,540, in the dispute at Worms with Eckius, &c. he was chosen secretary; and Glanvil, who represented the emperor in this assembly, said of him that he had more learning than all the Pontificians, or Romanists. In disputing he aimed at great perspicuity, and disliked new and ambiguous expressions. To his other studies he joined a very intimate acquaintance with mathematics, was a master of Euclid, anil himself invented or improved various astronomical instruments. In 1546 he was chosen rector of the college of Wittemberg, and sustained almost alone the whole weight of managing its concerns, by which, added to his unremitting studies, his health became injured, and his strength so much impaired, that he died of a decline Nov. 16, 1548, in the forty-fourth year of his age. During his sickness, he employed himself in reading, and exhorting his family and friends, who came to see him, to adhere to the principles he had professed and taught. He published some commentaries on the gospel of St. John, the epistle to Timothy, and the Psalms in German “Ermrrationes in duns articltlos Symboll Niceni;” and “Oratio cle ordine discendi.” Some of these are to be found among Mclanchton’s works.

, of the same family with the preceding-, was also of the reformed religion, and a man of great learning. He was born at Mersburgh Sept. 24, 1575, and was educated at Nassau, Leipsic, Wittemberg, and Heidelberg; and in 1600 was appointed schoolmaster at Cassel. In 1605 he was promoted to the professorship of logic at Marpurg, and about three years after received his doctor’s degree, and became rector of the college, and afterwards dean of the faculty of theology. He died in 1636. His only, or principal publication, is a very learned and curious work, entitled “Harmonia Linguarum quatuor Cardinalium, Hebraicse, Latin ae, et Germanicse,” Francfort, 1616, fol. In this work the author endeavours to prove that the Hebrew is the parent of the Greek, Latin, and German languages, and although he indulges perhaps a little too much in etymological conjecture, he is frequently successful, and always ingenious. All bibliographers mark this a book of rare occurrence, but we have just seen a copy in the late Dr. Gosset’s valuable library, sold for a few shillings.

, or, as he signs in his French letters, La Croix, a learned Dutchman, was born at Delft, about the end of the sixteenth century, and was first educated under the elder Trelcatius at Leyden, and afterwards at Franeker, where he studied divinity, Hebrew, and Greek, under Drusius, &c. He also read history, philosophy, and poetry, and occasionally amused himself with writing Latin poetry. He became pastor at Delft, the only situation he appears to have held in the church. When he died is not mentioned by Foppen or Moreri; and the little we know of him is gleaned from his curious volume of miscellanies and epistolary correspondence, the best edition of which was published at Amsterdam, 1661, 12mo, under the title of “Jacobi Crucii Mercurius Batavus, sive epistolarum opus, monitis theologicis, ethicis, politicis, ceconomicis, refer turn, editio aucta et recognita.” This work is replete with judicious remarks, and literary anecdote, and contains many letters from Rivet, Colvius, Lanoy, Salmasius, Vossius, and other learned contemporaries. The freedom of some of Crucius’s observations procured it a place in the Index Expurgatorius, Jan. 25, 1684. He published also “Suada Delphica, sive orationes LXIX. varii argurnenti, ad usury studiosae juventutis,” Amst. 1675, 12mo, and often reprinted.

, author of an excellent “Concordance of the Bible,” was born in 1701 at Aberdeen, where he received his grammar learning: he afterwards studied at Marischal college, with a view of entering the church. Unfortunately, before the period arrived when he could be admitted to officiate as a public instructor, such decided symptoms of insanity appeared in his conduct, as rendered confinement necessary. This afterwards settled in a kind of belief that he was delegated by Heaven to reform a guilty world; and his conduct in a thousand instances demonstrated an ardour and zeal for the good of his fellow-creatures, that merited the highest applause. Thrice, however, he was shut up in a private madhouse, in which, if the nature of his disease did not lead him to exaggeration, he was cruelly treated. Once indeed he brought his action against a respectable physician, and other persons connected with him; the cause was tried, and Cruden was unable to make out a case. The verdict was given in favour of the defendants; and his appeal to the public was not of a kind to set aside that verdict, although he certainly suffered much more harsh treatment than was necessary. On his release from his first confinement, which was in his native place, he came to London, and engaged in some respectable families as private tutor. In the same employment he spent some years in the isle of Man; and in 1732 he opened a shop in London, under the Royal Exchange, as bookseller, and employed all his vacant time as a corrector of the press. In the following year he began to compile his great work, viz. “A complete Concordance of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament.” We can scarcely conceive any literary work that required more patient labour than this, and few have been executed with greater accuracy. He had nearly executed the whole before he looked for public remuneration. The first edition was published in 1737, and dedicated to queen Caroline, who had led the editor to expect her patronage but her majesty unfortunately died a few days before the work could be got ready. The author’s affairs were now embarrassed; he had none to look to for assistance, and in a fit of despondence he gave up his trade, and became a prey to melancholy. Shortly after this, he assumed the title of “Alexander the Corrector,” maintained that he was divinely commissioned to reform the manners of the age, and restore the due observance of the sabbath, appealing to prophecy, in which he fancied he saw his own character delineated. He sought, however, for earthly honours, and requested of his majesty the dignity of knighthood, and earnestly solicited his fellow-citizens to elect him member for the city of London. Both were deaf to his entreaties, and he turned from public offices to duties for which he was better qualified. He laboured almost incessantly, sometimes in works of pure benevolence, and at others as corrector of the press, and seldom allowed himself more than four or five hours for sleep. In 1770, after paying a visit to Aberdeen, he returned to London, and took lodgings at Islington, where he died November the first. In private life Mr. Cruden was courteous and affable, ready to assist all that came within his reach, as well with his money as with his advice, and most zealous in serving the distressed. One of his boldest efforts of this kind was in the case of Richard Potter, a poor ignorant sailor, who was condemned at the Old Bailey for uttering a forged seaman’s will, and who, in Mr. Cruden’s opinion, was so justly an object of the royal clemency, that he never ceased his applications to the secretary of state until he had obtained a pardon. The following year, 1763, he published a very interesting account of this affair, under the title of “The History of Richard Potter,” 8vo. His other publications were, “An Account of the History and Excellency of the Scriptures,” prefixed to a “Compendium of the Holy Bible,” 24-mo; and “A Scripture Dictionary, or Guide to the Holy Scriptures,” Aberdeen, 2 vols. 8vo; printed a short time after his death. He also compiled that very elaborate Index which belongs to bishop Newton’s edition of Milton, an undertaking inferior only to that of his “Concordance,” and which he undertook at the request of auditor Benson. Of his Concordance an edition was published in 1810, which may be justly pronounced the most correct that has appeared since the author’s time, every word with its references having been most carefully examined by Mr. Deodatus Bye, formerly a respectable printer in St. John’s gate, who voluntarily employed some years in this arduous task, for which he is richly entitled to the thanks of the public.

Mr. Cruikshank was not without some share of personal as well as intellectual vanity; but he had a generous and sympathetic heart, and literally “went about doing good.” He was one of those liberal medical gentlemen who attended Dr. Johnson in his last illness. Mr. Cruikshank’s death was occasioned by a disorder, the fatal consequences of which had been predicted by one of his pupils about sixteen years before that event. He used at certain times to complain of an acute pain in the apex of his head, and his pupil gave it as his opinion that the pain arose from extravasated blood, which was settled upon the sensorium; and that as no relief could be given without the greatest care in point of regimen, it would increase until it was too heavy for the tender nerves or organs of the medulla oblongata to bear; of course, it would occasion a rupture, and end in dissolution. When Mr. Cruikshank found himself in most excruciating pain, he sent for this gentleman, and every assistance was given; but the seat of the complaint, being directly under the pia mater, could not be touched. In this situation he breathed his last, July 27, 1800. The pericranium being afterwards opened, a quantity of extravasated blood was found upon the sensorium t some of the tender vessels of which were ruptured.

, of Alexandria, a famous mathematician about 120 years B. C. was, it is reported, the first inventor of the pump, which he discovered by accident. On lowering a mirror that was in his father’s shop, he observed that the weight which helped it in moving upwards and downwards, and which was inclosed in a cylinder, made a noise, produced by the friction of the air violently forced by the weight. He set about examining into the cause of this sound, and thought it might be possible to avail himself of it in making an hydraulic organ, in which the air and the water should form the sound; an undertaking which he executed with success. Encouraged by this production, Ctesibius thought of using his mechanical skill in measuring time. He constructed a clepsydra, or waterclock, formed with water, and regulated by cogged wheels; the water by falling turned these wheels, which communicated their motion to a column on which were marked the characters for distinguishing the months and the hours. At the same time that the cogged wheels were put in motion, they raised a little statue, which with a wand pointed to the months and hours marked upon the column. He was also the author of “Geodesia, or the art of dividing and measuring bodies,” which is said to be in the Vatican library; but he must be distinguished from Ctesibius of Chalcis, who was a cynic philosopher, of a sportive disposition and a cheerful temper, who had the art of being agreeable to the great, without submitting to the vile arts of flattery, and made them hearken to truth, and gave them a taste for virtue, under the name of amusement.

In 1644 he took the degree of B. D. upon which occasion he maintained the two following theses: that, The reasons of good and evil are eternal and indispensable; and that There are incorporeal substances by their own nature immortal. From these questions it has been thought that he was even at that time examining and revolving in his mind those important subjects, which he afterwards introduced in his “Intellectual System,” and other works still preserved in ms. The same year he was appointed master of Clare hall, in Cambridge, in the room of Dr. Paske, who had been ejected by the parliamentary visitors. The year after, Dr. Metcalf having resigned the regius professorship of Hebrew, Cudworth was unanimously nominated by the seven electors to succeed him. From this time he applied himself chiefly to his academical employments and studies, especially to that of the Jewish antiquities. March 31, 1647, he preached before the house of commons at Westminster, upon a day of public humiliation, a sermon upon 1 John ii. 3, 4, for which he had the thanks of that house returned him the same day. This sermon was printed the same year at Cambridge, in 4to, with a dedication to the house of commons; in which he told them, that the scope of it was not to contend for this or that opinion, but only to persuade men to the life of Christ, as the pith and kernel of all religion; without which all the several forms of religion in the world, though we please ourselves never so much with them, are but so many several dreams.

In 1651 he took the degree of D. D. and in 1654 was chosen master of Christ’s college, in Cambridge; in which year also he married. He spent the remainder of his life in this station, proving highly serviceable to the university, and the church of England. Jan. 1657, he was one of the persons nominated by a committee of the parliament, to be consulted about the English translation of the Bible. The lord commissioner Whitlocke, who had the care of this business, mentions him among others and says, that “this committee often met at his house, and had the most learned men in the oriental tongues, to consult with in this great business, and divers learned and excellent observations of some mistakes in the translation of the Bible in English, which yet was agreed to be the best of any translation in the world.” Our author had a great share in the friendship and esteem of John Thurloe, esq. secretary of state to the protectors Oliver and Richard Cromwell; who frequently corresponded with him, and consulted him about such persons in the university as were proper to be employed in political and civil affairs. Besides several letters of recommendation remaining in ms. there is a printed one in Thurloe’s “State Papers” in which he recommends to the secretary, for the place of chaplain to the English merchants at Lisbon, Mr. Zachary Cradock, afterwards provost of Eton college, and famous for his uncommon learning and abilities as a preacher. Upon the restoration of Charles II. he wrote a copy of verses, which were published in “Academic Cantabrigiensis Σωτηρια, sive ad Carolum II. reducem, &c. gratulatio;” and in 1662 he was presented by Sheldon, then bishop of London, to the vicarage of Ashwell, in Hertfordshire. In 1678 he was installed a prebendary of Gloucester; and in this year it was that he published at London, in folio, his celebrated work entitled “The true Intellectual System of the Universe; the first part, wherein all the reason and philosophy of atheism is confuted, and its impossibility demonstrated.” The imprimatur by Dr. Samuel Parker, chaplain to archbishop Sheldon, is dated May 29, 1671, seven years before the publication of this work, owing to the opposition of some people at court, who used all their endeavours to destroy its reputation on account of certain singularities in it, which brought some of his opinions under suspicion. He appeared indeed so much to affect impartiality, as to incur the imputation of betraying the cause he meant to defend, which certainly was far from his intention. Dryden tells us, that “he raised such strong objections against the being of a God and providence, that many thought he had not answered them:” and lord Shaftesbury says that “though the whole world were no less satisfied with his capacity and learning, than with his sincer ty in the cause of the Deity; yet was he accused of giving the upper hand to the atheists, for having only stated their reasons and those of their adversaries fairly together.” Bayle, in his “Continuation des pensees diverses sur les Cometes,” observed, that Cud worth by his plastic nature gave great advantage to the atheists; and laid the foundation of a warm dispute between himself and Le Clerc upon this subject. Le Clerc frequently expressed his wishes, that some man of learning would translate the “Intellectual System” into Latin; but this design, though formed or entertained and attempted by several persons in Germany, was never executed till 1733, when the learned Mosheim published his translation of it. A second edition of the English was published by Birch, 1743, in 2 vols. 4to, in which were first supplied, chiefly from Mosheim’s Latin edition, references to the several quotations in the “Intellectual System,” which before were very obscure and imperfect, but Mosheim had been at the pains to search them all out, and to note them very accurately. In Birch’s edition, there are, besides the “Intellectual System,” the following pieces of our author, viz. the “Discourse concerning the true notion of the Lord’s Supper,” and “Two Sermons,” on 1 John ii. 3, 4, and 1 Cor. xv. 57, to all which is prefixed an account of the life and writings of the author, by Dr. Birch.

Cudworth died at Cambridge, June 26, 1688, and was interred in the chapel of Christ’s college. He was a man of very extensive erudition, excellently skilled in the learned languages and antiquity, a good mathematician, a subtle philosopher, and a profound metaphysician. The main design of his celebrated work, “The Intellectual System,” is to refute the principles of atheism, and in this he has successfully employed a vast fund of learning and reading. But his partiality for the Platonic philosophy, in judging of which, after the example of his contemporaries, he paid too much respect to the writings of the modern Alexandrian Platonists, led him into frequent mistakes. In physics he adopted the atomic system; but, abandoning Democritus and Epicurus as the first patrons of impiety, he added to the doctrine of atoms that of a certain middle substance between matter and spirit, to which he gave the appellation of plastic nature, which he supposed to be the immediate instrument of the divine operation; and this hypothesis gave rise to the controversy above mentioned between Bayle and Le Clerc. Cudworth stands at the head of those divines who, considering the belief in a triune God as a fundamental article of Christian belief, maintain that both the Platonic, and all the other Pagan trinities are only corruptions and mutilations of certain primaeval revelations and patriarchal traditions relative to the asserted distinction in the divine nature; and he has very ably discussed this important subject in his Intellectual System. A great number of writers commend Cudworth’s piety and modesty; and Burnet having observed, that Dr. Henry More studied to consider religion as a seed of a deiform nature, and in order to this, set young students much on reading the ancient philosophers, chiefly Plato, Tully, and Plotinus, and on considering the Christian religion as a doctrine sent from God, both to elevate and sweeten human nature, tells us, that “Cudworth carried this on with a great strength of genius, and a vast compass of learning; and that he was a man of great conduct and prudence; upon which his enemies did very falsely accuse him of craft and dissimulation.” He left several manuscripts which seem to be a continuation of his “Intellectual System,” of which he had given the world only the first part. One of these was published by Chandler, bishop of Durham, 1731, in 8vo, under this title, “A Treatise concerning eternal and immutable Morality.” This piece was levelled against the writings of Hobbes and others, who revived the exploded opinions of Protagoras; taking away the essential and eternal differences of moral good and evil, of just and unjust, and making them all arbitrary productions of divine or human will. He left also several other Mss. with the following titles“: 1. A discourse of moral good and evil.” 2. Another book of morality, wherein Hobbes’s philosophy is explained. 3. A discourse of liberty and necessity, in which the grounds of the atheistical philosophy are confuted, and morality vindicated and explained. 4. Another book “De libero arbitrio.” 5. Upon Daniel’s prophecy of the 70 weeks, wherein all the interpretations of the Jews are considered and confuted, with several of some learned Christians. 6. Of the verity of the Christian religion, against the Jews. 7. A discourse of the creation of the world, and immortality of the soul. 8. Hebrew learning. 9. An explanation of Hobbes’s notion of God, and of the extension of spirits. The history of these Mss. is somewhat curious. Having been left to the care of his daughter, lady Masham , they for a long time quietly reposed in the library at Oates, in Essex. But, about the year 1762, when the late lord Masham married his second lady, his lordship thought proper to remove a number of volumes of ancient learning, which had been bequeathed to the family by Mr. Locke, and the manuscripts of Dr. Cudworih, to make room for books of polite amusement. For this purpose, he sold either the whole, or a considerable part of them, to Mr. Robert Davis, then a bookseller in Piccadilly. Mr. Davis being told, or having concluded, that the manuscripts were the productions of Mr. Locke, it became an object of consideration with him, how to convert them, as a tradesman, to the best advantage. They contained, among other things, sundry notes on scripture. About the same time, a number of manuscript scriptural notes by Dr. Waterland came into the possession of the booksellers. It was therefore projected, by the aid of such celebrated names as Mr. Locke and Dr. Waterland, to fabricate a new Bible with annotations. At a consultation, however, it was suggested, that, though these names were very important, it would be necessary, to the complete success of the design, to join with them some popular living character. The unfortunate Dr. Dodd was then in the height of his reputation as a preacher, and was fixed upon to carry on the undertaking. This was the origin of Dr. Dodd’s Bible, and part of the materials put into his hands the doctor made use of in the “Christian Magazine.” When the manuscripts were returned to Mr. Davis, he carried them down to Barnes in Surry, which was his country retirement, and threw them into a garret, where they lay exposed to the dangers of such a situation. About the beginning of the year 1777, a gentleman, who had a veneration for the name of Mr. Locke, and was concerned to hear that any of his writings were in danger of being lost, went to Barnes, to see these manuscript*; and being positively assured by Mr. Davis, that they were the real compositions of that eminent man, he immediately purchased them fur forty guineas. He was, however, soon, convinced, after an examination of them, that the authority of the bookseller was fallacious, and having remonstrated against the deception, the vender condescended to take them again, upon being paid ten guineas for his disappointment in the negociation. In the investigation of the manuscripts, the gentleman having discovered, by many incontestable proofs, that they were the writings of Dr. Cudworth, he recommended them to the curators of the British Museum, by whom they were purchased; and thus, at last, after many perils and mutilations, they are safely lodged in that noble repository.

, a very extraordinary person, was a native of Amsterdam, where he was born in 1.522. It appears that early in life he travelled into Spain and Portugal, but the motives of his journey are not ascertained. He was a man of science; and, according to report, a good poet. The sister arts he at first considered as an amusement only; but at length was obliged to have recourse to engraving for his support, and though the different studies in which he employed his time prevented his application to this art from being so close as it ought to have been, yet marks of genius are discoverable in his works. They are slight, and hastily executed with the graver alone, in an open careless style, so as greatly to resemble drawings made with a pen. He was settled at Haerlem; and there pursuing his favourite studies in literature, he learned Latin, and was made secretary to that town, from whence he was several times employed as ambassador to the prince of Orange, to whom he addressed a famous manifesto, which that prince published in 1566. Had he stopped here, it had been well; but, directing his thoughts to matters which he did not understand, he brought forward an argument as dangerous as it was absurd. He maintained, that all religious communications were corrupted; and that without a supernatural mission, accompanied with miracles, no person hat! any right to administer in any religious office: he therefore pronounced that man to be unworthy the name of a Christian who would enter any place of public worship. This he not only advanced in words, but strove to shew the sincerity of his belief in it by practice; and for that reason would not communicate with either protestant or papist. His works were published in three volumes folio, 1630; and though he was several times imprisoned, and at last sentenced to banishment, yet he does not appear to Lave altered his sentiments. He died at Tergout in 1590, aged 68. It is to his honour as an artist, that he was the instructor of the justly-celebrated Henry Goltzius. Cuerenhert worked conjointly with the Galles and other artists, from the designs of Martin Hemskerk. The subjects are from the Old and New Testament, and consist chiefly of middling-sized plates lengthwise. He also engraved several subjects from Frank Floris.

, a celebrated wit and scholar, but memorable chiefly for the peculiarity of his fate, was descended from a good family, though some have insinuated the contrary, and born at Hinton St. George in Somerset-' shire about 1560. He gave early marks of genius and application, and in 1576 was admitted of Trinity college in Oxford; where he soon distinguished himself by his knowledge of the Greek tongue, and an admirable faculty in disputing. He was elected scholar in May 1578, and was admitted fellow in May 1583, but had the misfortune to lose his fellowship for a witticism, which, either in jest or malice, he levelled at sir Thomas Pope, the founder of his college. Sir Thomas, we are told, had a singular whim, upon visiting some persons, of seizing whatever he could lay his hands on, and carrying it off under his gown or in his pocket; which, however, was not imputed to dishonesty, but to humour. This induced Cuff in one of his merry moments to say, “A pox! this is a poor beggarly college indeed: the plate that our founder stole, would build such another.” The president, hearing of this, ejected Cuff from his fellowship; not suffering prophane wit to be thus exercised within his walls, for fear perhaps that it should become contagious. Such is the story, as told by Wood, who says he had it from Dr. Bathurst; but Mr. Warton has proved that he has misrepresented it, nor was Cuff removed by the president, but by a mandate from lady Powlett, the foundress, who first placed him there. Cuff’s merit, however, was so great, and his reputation for foaming so extraordinary, that he was, in 1586, elected probationer of Merton college by sir Henry Savile, then warden; and two years after made fellow. He was considered as a man capable of making a shining figure in life; and that he was much esteemed by sir Henry Savile, appears not only from the instance of kindness just mentioned, but also from a letter of his to the learned Camden, in which he gives him the highest character, and styles him his own and Camden’s intimate friend. He wrote a Greek epigram in commendation of Camden’s Britannia, which is prefixed to all the Latin editions, and to some of the English translations of it; and which has been much admired. He was afterwards promoted to the Greek professorship, and chosen proctor of the university in 1594. While Greek professor, he assisted Columbanius in the first edition of Longus’s elegant pastoral romance, printed at Florence in 1598.

At what time he left Oxford, or upon what occasion, does not appear; but there is some reason to believe, it was for the sake of travelling in order to improve himself. For he was always inclined rather to a busy, than to a retired life; and held, that learning was of little service to any man, if it did not qualify him for active pursuits. This disposition recommended him much to the favour of the celebrated Robert earl of Essex, who was himself equally fond of knowledge and business. Cuff became his secretary in 1596, when the earl was made lord lieutenant of Ireland; but it had been happier for him, if he could have contented himself with the easy and honourable situation, which his own learning, and the assistance of his friends in the university, had procured him. Even his outset was unfortunate; he accompanied the earl in his expedition against Cadiz, and after its successful conclusion, was dispatched with his lordship’s letters to England, and, when he had landed, endeavoured with the utmost speed, to arrive with them at the court. Beinsr, however, unfortunately taken ill on the road, he was obliged to send up the letters, inclosed in one of his own, to Mr. Reynoldes, another of the earl’s secretaries. Mr. Cuff, agreeably to Jarge instructions which he had received from his lordship, had drawn up a discourse concerning the great action at Cadiz, which the earl purposed to be published as soon as possible, both to stop all vagrant rumours, and to inform those that were well affected, of the truth of the whole. It was at the same time to be so contrived, that neither his lordship’s name, nor Cuff’s, nor any other person’s, connected with the earl, should either be openly mentioned, used, or in such a manner insinuated, as that the most slender guess could be made, who was the penman. The publication was to have the appearance of a letter that came from Cadiz, and the title of it was to be, “A true relation of the action at Cadiz, the 21st of June, under the earl of Essex and the lord admiral, sent to a gentleman in court from one that served there in good place.” Sir Anthony Ashley, who was entrusted with the design, acted a treacherous part on this occasion. He betrayed the secret to the queen, and the lords of her council; the consequence of which was, that Mr. Fulke Grevill was charged by her majesty to command Mr. Cuff, upon pain of death, not to set forth any discourse concerning the expedition without her consent.

He was afterwards involved in all the misfortunes of that unhappy earl, and did not escape partaking of his fate. Upon the sudden reverse of the earl’s fortunes, Cuff was not only involved, but looked upon as the chief if not the sole cause and author of his misfortunes. Thus, when the earl was tried and condemned, February ly, 1601, and solicited by the divines who attended him while under sentence, he not only confessed matters prejudicial to Cuff, but likewise charged him to his face with being the author of all his misfortunes, and the person who principally persuaded him to pursue violent measures. Sir Henry Neville, also, being involved in this unhappy business, mentioned Cuff as the person who invited him to the meeting at JDrury-house; where the plot for forcing the earl’s way to the queen by violence was concerted. Cuff was brought to his trial March 5th following, and although he defended himself with great steadiness and spirit, was convicted, and executed at Tyburn, March 30, 1601; dying, it is said, with great constancy and courage. He declared, at the place of execution, that “he was not in the least concerned in that wild commotion which was raised by a particular great but unadvised earl, but shut up that whole day within the house, where he spent his time in very melancholy reflections: that he never persuaded any man to take up arms against the queen, but was most heartily concerned for being -an instrument of bringing that worthy gentleman sir Henry Neville into danger, and did most earnestly intreat his pardon, &c.” His character has been harshly treated by lord* Bacon, sir Henry Wotton, and other writers. Camden also, who knew him intimately, and had lived many years in great friendship with him, says that he was a man of most exquisite learning and penetrating wit, but of a seditious and perverse disposition. Others are milder in their censures 5 and all allow him to have been a very able and learned man. He wrote a book in English, a very little before his death, which was printed about six years after, under this title: “The differences of the ages of man’s life, together with the original causes, progress, and end thereof,” 1607, 8vo. It has been printed more than once since, and commended as a curious and philosophical piece. Wood says, that he left behind him other things ready for the press, which were never published. Bishop Tanner has given us the title of one; viz. “De rebus gestis in sancto concilio Nicaeno;” or, The transactions in the holy council of Nice, translated out of Greek into Latin, and believed to have been the work of Gelasius Cyricenus, which was transcribed from the original in the Vatican library by Cuff. And in the “Epistolae Francisci et Johannis Hotomanorum, Patris et Filii, et clarorum Virorum ad eos,” are several letters by Cuff, to John Hotman. These are said to exhibit distinguished marks of genius and learning; to be written in elegant Latin; and to contain some curious particulars. Mr. Warton informs us that, notwithstanding the severe check he received at Trinity college, he presented several volumes to the library. The manner of his death deprived him, as may easily be imagined, of a monument an old friend, however, ventured to embalm his memory in the following epitaph:

Dr. Cullen also was justly admired in his conduct to his scholars, which was so attentive, and the interest he took in the private concerns of all those students who applied to him for advice, was so cordial and so warm, that it was impossible for any one who had a heart susceptible of generous feelings, not to be enraptured with attentions so uncommon and kind. The general conduct of Cullen to his students was this. With all such as he observed to be attentive and diligent, he formed an early acquaintance, by inviting them by twos, by threes, or by fours at a time, to sup with him, conversing with them on these occasions with the most engaging ease, and freely entering with them on the subject of their studies, their amusements, their difficulties, their hopes, and future prospects. In this way, he usually invited the whole of his numerous class, till he made himself acquainted with their abilities, their private character, and their objects of pursuit. Those among them whom he found most assiduous, best disposed, or the most friendless, he invited the most frequently, till an intimacy was gradually formed, which proved highly beneficial to them. Their doubts, with regard to their objects of study, he listened to with attention, and solved with the most obliging condescension. His library, which consisted of an excellent assortment of the best books, especially on medical subjects, was at all times open for their accommodation; and his advice, in every case of difficulty to them, they always had it in their power most readily to obtain. They seemed to be his family; and few persons of distinguished merit have left the university of Edinburgh in his time, with whom he did not keep up a correspondence till they were fairly established in business. By these means, he came to have a roost accurate knowledge of the state of every country, with respect to practitioners in the medical line: the only use he made of which knowledge, was to direct students in their choice of places, where they might have an opportunity of engaging in business with a reasonable prospect of success. Many, very many able men has he thus placed in situations of business which they never could have thought of themselves; and some of them even now are reaping the fruits of this beneficent foresight on his part.

Nor was it in this way only that he befriended the students at the university of Edinburgh. Possessing a benevolence of mind that made him ever think first of the wants of others, and recollecting the difficulties that he himself struggled with in his younger days, he was at all times singularly attentive to their pecuniary concerns. From his general acquaintance among the students, and the friendly habits he was in with many of them, he found no difficulty in discovering those among them who were rather in low circumstances, without being obliged to hurt their delicacy in any degree. To such persons, when their habits of study admitted of it, he was peculiarly attentive. They were more frequently invited to his house than others; they were treated with more than usual kindness and familiarity; they were conducted to his library, and encouraged by the most delicate address to borrow from it freely whatever books he thought they had occasion for: and as persons in these circumstances were usually more shy in this respect than others, books were sometimes pressed upon them with a sort of constraint, by the doctor insisting to have their opinion of such or such passages they had not read, and desiring them to carry the book home for that purpose. He in short behaved to them rather as if he courted their company, and stood in need of their acquaintance, than they of his. He thus raised them in the opinion of their acquaintance to a much higher degree of estimation than they could otherwise have obtained, which, to people whose minds were depressed by penury, and whose sense of honour was sharpened by the consciousness of an inferiority of a certain kind, was singularly engaging. Thus were they inspired with a secret sense of dignity, which elevated their minds, and excited an uncommon ardour of pursuit, instead of that melancholy inactivity which is so natural in such circumstances, and which too often leads to despair. Nor was he less delicate in the manner of supplying their wants, than attentive to discover them. He often found out some polite excuse for refusing to take payment for a first course of lectures, and never was at a loss for one to an after-course, and by other delicate expedients he befriended those young men whose circumstances were not equal to their merit and industry. It was also a constant rule with him never to take fees as a physician from any student at the university; yet when called in, he attended them with the same assiduity as if they had been persons of the first rank, who paid him most liberally. This gradually induced others to adopt a similar practice; so that it became a general rule for medical professors to decline taking any fees when their assistance was necessary to a student. For this useful reform, with many others, the students of the university of Edinburgh are solely indebted to the liberality of Dr. Cullen.

The first lectures which Cullen delivered in Edinburgh were on chemistry; and for many years he also gave clinical lectures on the cases which occurred in the Royal Infirmary. In the month of February 1763, Dr. Alston died, after having begun his usual course of lectures on the materia, medica; and the magistrates of Edinburgh, us patrons oi thrit professorship in the university, appointed Dr. Cullen to that chair, requesting that he would finish the course of lectures that had been begun for that season. This he agreed to do; and though he was under a necessity of going on with the course in a few days after he was nominated, he did not once think of reading the lectures of his predecessor, but resolved to deliver a new course, entirely his own. The popularity of Cullen at this time may be guessed at by the increase of new students who came to attend his course in addition to the eight or ten who had entered to Dr. Alston. The new students exceeded one hundred. An imperfect copy of these lectures, thus fabricated in haste, having been published, the doctor thought it necessary to give a more correct edition of them in the latter part of his life; but his faculties being then much impaired, his friends looked in vain for those striking beauties that characterised his literary exertions in the prime of life.

Some years afterwards, on the death of Dr. White, the magistrates once more appointed Dr. Cullen to give lectures on the theory of physic in his stead. And it was on that occasion Dr. Cullen thought it expedient to resign the chemical chair in favour of Dr. Black, his former pupil, whose talents in that department of science were then well known, and who filled the chair till his death with great satisfaction to the public. Soon after, on the death of Dr. Rutherford, who for many years had given lectures with applause on the practice of physic, Dr. John Gregory having become a candidate for this place along with Dr. Cullen, a sort of compromise took place between them, by which they agreed each to give lectures, alternately, on the theory and on the practice of physic during their joint lives, the longest survivor being allowed to hold either of the classes he should incline. In consequence of this agreement, Dr. Cullen delivered the first course of lectures on the practice of physic, in winter 176G; and Dr. Gregorysucceeded him in that branch the following year. Never, perhaps, did a literary arrangement take place, tli*t could have proved more beneficial to the students than this. Both these men possessed great talents, though of a kind extremely dissimilar. Both of them had certain failings or defects, which the other was aware of, and counteracted. Each of them knew and respected the talents of the other. They co-operated, therefore, in the happiest manner, to enlarge the understanding, and to forward the pursuits of their pupils. Unfortunately this arrangement was soon destroyed, by the unexpected death of Dr. Gregory, who was cut off in the flower of life by a sudden and unforeseen event After this time, Culleu continued to give lectures on the practice of physic till a few months before his death, which happened on the 5th of February, 1790, in the seventy-seventh year of his age.

Although much of the character of this learned and amiable man may be collected from the preceding narrative, yet the following circumstances are too remarkable to be omitted. In his lectures Dr. Cullen never attempted to read. They were delivered viva voce, without having been previously put into writing, or thrown into any particular arrangement. The vigour of his mind was such, that nothing more was necessary than a few short notes before him, merely to prevent him from varying from the general order he had been accustomed to observe. This gave to his discourses an ease, a vivacity, a variety, and a force, that are rarely to be met with in academical discourses. His lectures, by consequence, upon the same subject, were never exactly the same. Their general tenor indeed was not much varied; but the particular illustrations were always new, well suited to the circumstances that attracted the general attention of the day, and were delivered in the particular way that accorded with the cast of mind the prelector found himself in at the time. To these circumstances must be ascribed that energetic artless elocution, which rendered his lectures so generally captivating to his hearers. Even those who could not follow him in those extensive views his penetrating mind glanced at, or who were not able to understand those apt allusions to collateral objects, he could only rapidly point at as he went along, could not help being warmed in some measure by the vivacity of his manner. But to those who could follow him in his rapid career, the ideas he suggested were so nurnerous; the views he laid open were so extensive; and the objects to be attained were so important, that every active faculty of the mind was roused; and such an ardour of enthusiasm was excited in the prosecution of study, as appeared to he inexplicable to those who were merely unconcerned spectators. In consequence of this unshackled freedom in the composition and delivery of his lectures, every circumstance was in the nicest unison with the tone of voice, and expression of countenance, which the particular cast of mind he was in at the time inspired. Was he joyous, all the figures introduced for illustration were fitted to excite hilarity and good humour: was he grave, the objects brought under view were of a nature more solemn and grand; and was he peevish, there was a peculiarity of manner, in thought, in word, and in action, which produced a most striking and interesting effect. The languor of a nerveless uniformity was never experienced, nor did an abortive attempt to excite emotions that the speaker himself could not at the time feel, ever produce those discordant ideas which prove disgusting and unpleasing.

, student, as he calls himself, in physic and astrology, was born in London, Oct. 18, 1616. He was the son of a clergyman, by whom he was sent, after receiving a preparatory education, to the university of Cambridge, at the age of eighteen. There making but a short stay, he was put apprentice to an apothecary, under whom he appears to have acquired a competent knowledge of the materia medica, and of the method of preparing and compounding medicines. On completing the term of his apprenticeship, he came to London, and settled in Spital-fields about 1642. By the whole tenor of his writings we find he joined, or at least favoured the Puritans, and those who were engaged in those unhappy times in overturning the constitution of the country. But his warfare was with the college of physicians, whom he accused of craft and ignorance. Like the popish clergy, he says they endeavoured to keep the people in ignorance of what might be useful either in preserving or restoring health. To counteract their endeavours, he published, in 1649, a translation of the “Dispensary of the College of Physicians,” in small 4to, adding to the account of each drug and preparation a list of their supposed virtues, and of the complaints in which they were usually given. He also published an “Herbal,” which has passed through several editions, and is still in repute as a sort of family guide. He tells in this book under what planet the plants are to be gathered, which he thinks essential in preserving their virtues; but Dr. Pulteney says his descriptions of common plants are drawn up with a clearness and distinction that would not have disgraced a better pen. He intended to treat of the diseases incident to men at the different periods of their lives, and as a beginning, gave a directory to midwives, on the method of insuring a healthy progeny, and then of the management of new-born children. Though this book is of very small value, it passed through many editions. He died at his house in Spital-fields, Jan. 10, 1653-4.

, a very learned divine, and bishop of Peterborough, the son of an honest citizen of London, who by his industry acquired a competent, though not a great fortune, was born in the parish of St. Anne, near Aldersgate, July 15th, 1632. He was educated at St. Paul’s school, under the care of Mr. John Langley, and was moved from thence to Magdalen-college, in Cambridge, probably in 1649, where he was contemporary with some very worthy and learned persons; such as Dr. Hezekiah Burton, his intimate friend and acquaintance, a very learned and pious divine; Dr. Hollings, an eminent physician at Shrewsbury; sir Samuel Moreland, admired for his skill in the mathematics; the celebrated Mr. Pepys, secretary to the admiralty; and the lord keeper Bridgeman, to whom himself, and his friend Dr. Burton, were chaplains at the same time. He was very remarkable, while fellow of his college, for his diligent application to his studies, as well as for the unaffected piety and unblemished probity of his life. He took his degree of B. A. in 1653, and in 1656 he became M. A. at which time he had thoughts of applying himself to physic, which he actually studied for some time. He was incorporated M. A. in the university of Oxford, July 14th, 1657, and went out B. D. at a public commencement at his own university, A. D. 1663, with universal applause. His first preferment was the rectory of Brampton, in the deanery of Haddon, in the archdeaconry and county of Northampton, which was given him by sir John Norwich, a gentleman who descended of a most ancient and noble family, and was advanced to the dignity of a baronet by king Charles the First. Mr. Cumberland was admitted December 3d, 1658, upon the demise of the reverend Mr. John Ward; and after the restoration, having never had the least scruple to the authority of the church, he had a legal institution, and read the Thirty-nine Articles, as directed by law, November 24th, 1661, and was the same year appointed one of the twelve preachers in the university of Cambridge. This, however, was a temporary avocation only, owing to the high character he had raised by the masterly manner in which he had performed all academical exercises, and from which he quickly returned to the duties of his parochial charge. In this rural retirement he minded little else than the duties of his function, and his studies. His relaxations from these were very few, besides his journies to Cambridge, which he made frequently, to preserve a correspondence with his learned acquaintance in that place. Here he might probably have remained during the course of his whole life, if his intimate friend and kind benefactor, sir Orlando Bridgeman, upon his receiving the seals in 1667, had not sent for him up to London, made him his chaplain, and soon after bestowed upon him the living of Alhallows, in Stamford. He discharged the functions of his ministry in that great town with indefatigable diligence; for, besides the duties incumbent upon him by his parochial charge, he accepted of the weekly lecture, and then preached three times every week in the same church, and at the same time cultivated his philosophical, mathematical, and philological studies. He gave a noble proof of this, and one which equally demonstrated the soundness of his morals and the solidity of his parts, in publishing his work “De Legibus Naturae Disquisitio philosophica,” Lond. 1672, 4to, written while he was chaplain to sir Orlando Bridgeman, to whom it was dedicated, and there is prefixed to it a short preface to the reader, by the author’s friend and fellow chaplain to the lord-keeper, Dr. Hezekiah Burton. Dr. Cumberland being at a distance from the press when this book was published, it came into the world very incorrectly printed, and in subsequent editions these faults were multiplied in a very surprizing manner. We may hence form an idea of the excellency of a work that could, notwithstanding, support its author’s reputation both at home and abroad, and be constantly esteemed one of the best performances that ever appeared, and that too upon one of the nicest and most important subjects. Mr. Payne says very justly, that it was one of the first pieces written in a demonstrative way on a moral subject, and at the same time the most perfect. It is indeed on all hands admitted, that Hobbes was never so closely handled, or his notions so thoroughly sifted, as by Dr. Cumberland. He has, however, taken a new road, very different from Grotius, Puffendorff, and other writers, more difficult, and less entertaining indeed, but at the same time much more convincing. It was desired that a piece of such general utility should be made better known by being put into an easier method, and translated into the English language. This the author would not oppose, though he did not undertake it; being very sensible that the obscurity complained of by some, was really in the subject itself, and would be found so by those who meddled with it. The project, however, was pursued by James Tyrrel, esq. grandson to the famous archbishop Usher, who published his performance under the following title: “A brief Disquisition of the Law of Nature, according to the principles and method laid down in the reverend Dr. Cumberland’s (now lord bishop of Peterburgh’s) Latin treatise on that subject, &c.” London, 1692, 8vo. Mr. Payne had also an intention to have translated it, but was anticipated by the rev. John Maxwell, in a translation published at London, 1727, 4to; and in 1750 appeared a third translation by the rev. John Towers, D. D. prebendary of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, 4to, Dublin, with large explanatory notes, &c. In 1744, Barbeyrac published a French translation.

The high fame and repeated praises of this work did not divert the author from his studies or his duties; and in his station of a private clergyman, so great was his reputation, that he was importuned by the university, and by other acquaintance, to take upon him the weighty exercise of responding at the public commencement. Nothing but the earnest solicitation of his friends could have prevailed with a man void not only of ambition, but of even the desire of applause, to appear so publicly. This he did in 1680, in so masterly a manner, as to be remembered for many years after. The next specimen of his abilities was his “Essay on Jewish Measures and Weights,” 1686, 8vo, a work not only highly useful in its nature, but very much wanted, and was therefore received with the highest applause by the best judges, who were equally pleased with the method and matter, as well as the manner and conciseness, of the performance. It was afterwards reprinted, and will continue to support the reputation of its author, as long as this kind of literature is either en-, couraged or understood. His sincere attachment to the protestant religion made him very apprehensive of its danger; and the melancholy prospect of affairs in the reign of king James made so deep an impression on him as to affect his health. After the revolution he appears to have entertained no thoughts of soliciting for better preferment; and it was, therefore, a greater surprize to himself than to any body else, when walking after his usual manner, on a post-day, to the coffee-house, he read there in a newspaper, that one Dr. Cumberland, of Stamford, was named to the bishopric of Peterborough, This piece of intelligence, however, proved true, and he had the singular satisfaction of finding himself raised to a bishopric, not only without pains or anxiety, but without having so much as sought for it; but at that time it was necessary to the establishment of the new government, that men who were to be raised to these high stations in the church, should be such only as had been most eminent for their learning, most exemplary in their lives, and firmest to the protestant interest; and whilst these qualifications were only considered, the king, who in two years’ time had appointed no less than fifteen bishops of the above character, was told that Dr. Cumberland was the fittest man he could nominate to the bishopric of Peterborough. He was elected in the room of Dr. Thomas White, who refused the new oaths May 15th; was consecrated with other bishops, July 5th, and enthroned September 12th, 1691, in the cathedral of Peterborough. He now applied himself to the work of a bishop, making no omissions to consult his own ease, or to spare his pains; and the desires of his mind, that all under him should do their duty, were earnest and sincere. His composition had no alloy of vain-glory. He never did any thing to court applause, or gain the praise of men. He never acted a part, never put on a mask. His tongue and heart always went together. If he ran into any extreme, it was the excess of humility; he lived with the simplicity and plainness of a primitive bishop, conversed and looked like a private man, hardly maintaining what the world calls the dignity of his character. He used hospitality without grudging; no man’s house was more open to his friends, and the ease and freedom with which they always found themselves entertained, was peculiar to it. The poor had substantial relief at his door, and his neighbours and acquaintance a hearty welcome to his table, after the plentiful and plain manner in which he lived. Every thing in his house served for friendly entertainment, nothing for luxury or pomp. His desire was to make every body easy, and to do them good. He dispensed with a liberal hand, and in the most private and delicate manner, to the necessities of others. His speeches to the clergy at his visitations, and his exhortations to the catechumens before his confirmations, though they had not the embellishments of oratory, yet they were fervent expressions of the inward desires of his soul to do what good he was able, and to excite others to be influenced by it; the pious breathings of a plain and good mind. On all occasions he treated his clergy with singular ta and indulgence. An expression that often came from him, was, “I love always to make my clergy easy.” This was his rule in all applications made to him by them, and if he erred, it was always on this side. When the duties of his office required it, he never spared himself. To the last month of his life it was impossible to dissuade him from undertaking fatigues that every body about him feared were superior to his strength. He was inflexible to their intreaties, and his answer and resolution was, “I will do my duty as long as I can.” He had acted by a maxim like this in his vigour. When his friends represented to him, that by his studies and labours he would injure his health, his usual reply was, “A man had better wear out than rust out.” The last time he visited his diocese, he was in the eightieth year of his age; and at his next triennial, when he was in the eighty-third year of his age, it was with the utmost difficulty that he could be dissuaded from undertaking again the visitation of his diocese. To draw the clergy nearer than the usual decanal meetings, to make his visitations easier to himself, was a thing he would not hear of. Such were the public acts of this great prelate in the discharge of his duty as a father of the church. In respect to his temporal concerns, and his management of the revenue arising from his see, he was not less liberal and munificent. His natural parts were not quick, but strong and retentive. He was a perfect master of every subject he studied. Eyery thing he read staid with him. The impressions on his mind were some time in forming, but they were clear, distinct, and durable. The things he had chiefly studied, were researches into the most ancient times; mathematics in all its parts and the Scripture in its original languages but he was also thoroughly acquainted with all the branches of philosophy, medicine, and anatomy, and was a good classical scholar. He was so thoroughly conversant in Scripture, that no difficult passage ever occurred, either occasionally, or in reading, but he could readily give the meaning of it, and the several interpretations, without needing to consult his books. He sometimes had thoughts of writing an exposition of the Epistles to the Romans and Galatians, with a view to set the doctrine of justification in a light very different from that in which it has been hitherto considered by most divines, but what that light was we are not told. One of his chief objects was the examination of Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, about which the greatest men had been most mistaken, and in relation to which none had entered into so strict an examination as our learned prelate thought it deserved. He spent many years in these speculations; for he began to write several years before the revolution, and he continued improving his design down to 1702. Jt may be justly wondered, that, after taking so mnch pains, and carrying a work of such difficulty to so high a degree of perfection, he should never judge it expedient to publish it; for though his bookseller refused to print the first part at a critical season, yet afterwards both might have seen the light; and for this the most probable reason that can be assigned is, that thorough dislike he had to controversy. His son-in-law, however, the rev. Mr. Payne, has done justice to his memory, and published it under the title of“Sanchoniatho’s Phoenician History, translated from the first book of Eusebius de Preparatione Evangelica,” &c. Lond. 1720, 8vo. Mr. Payne observes, that our author had a quicker sense than many other men, of the advances popery was making upon us, and was affected with the apprehension of it to the last degree. This made him turn his thoughts to the inquiry, by what steps and methods idolatry got ground in the world. The oldest account of this he believed he found in Sanchoniathe'a fragment. This he saw was a professed apology for idolatry, and owned openly what other heathens would have made a secret of, that the gods of the Gentile world had been all mortal men. He studied this fragment with no other view than as it led to the discovery of the original of idolatry. He spent some time upon it, before ever he had a thought of extracting from it footsteps of the history of the world preceding the flood. While other divines of the church of England were engaged in the controversy with the papists, in which they gained over them so complete a victory, our author was endeavouring to strike at the root of their idolatrous religion. These fragments have exercised the talents of some of the ablest scholars that foreign nations have produced, and several of these, being able to make nothing clear or consistent out of them, incline to think they were forgeries, and consequently not worthy of notice. Our prelate was not only of a different sentiment, but with great knowledge and great labour, has made it very evident that these fragments are genuine, and that he thoroughly understood them. He has proved that they contain the most ancient system of atheism and idolatry; that very system which took place in Egypt, and was set up against the true religion contained in the writings of Moses.

After bishop Cumberland had once engaged his thoughts upon this subject, fresh matter was continually rising, for the distribution of which into a proper method, so as to render a very perplexed subject intelligible, he found himself under the necessity of undertaking a yet more extensive work than the former, in which he made some progress in the space of above twenty years, during which it employed his thoughts. To this piece, when finished, he proposed to have given the title of “Origines Antiquissimae,” which were transcribed in his life-time, and, by his direction, by Mr. Payne. This treatise, which is properly a supplement to the first, was published in 1724, 8vo, under the title of “Origines Gentium Antiquissimae,” or Attempts for discovering the times of the first planting of nations, in several tracts. — In bishop Cumberland’s old age, he retained the easiness and sweetness of his temper, which continued to the last day of his life. His senses and bodily strength were more perfect than could well be expected, in a man whose course of life had been studious and sedentary. He remained a master of all the parts of learning he had studied when he was young. He ever loved the classics, and to the last week of his life would quote them readily and appositely. When Dr. Wilkins had published his Coptic Testament, he made a present of one of them to his lordship, who sat down to study this when he was past eighty-three. At this age he mastered the language, and went through great part of this version, and would often give excellent hints and remarks as he proceeded in reading it. At length, in the autumn of 1718, he was struck in an afternoon with a dead palsy, and breathed his last in his palace at Peterborough on October 9, in the same year, in the eighty-seventh year of his age. His corpse was interred in his own cathedral, where a plain tomb has been erected, with a modest inscription to his memory. His reputation at the time of his death was very great at home, and much greater abroad. He is mentioned in the highest terms of respect by many foreign writers, particularly Niceron, Morhoff, Thomasius, Stollius, and Fourmont. His fame now rests chiefly on the works he published in his life-time. The Sanchoniatho and the Origines, although they afford ample demonstration of learned research, have not so well preserved their credit.

, a late dramatic and miscellaneous writer, was the great grandson of the preceding. His father, Denison, so named from his mother, was educated at Westminster school, and from that admitted fellow-commoner of Trinity college, Cambridge. He married, at the age of twenty-two, Joanna, the younger daughter of Dr. Richard Bentley (the Phoebe of Byron’s Pastoral); by whom he had a daughter, Joanna, and Richard, the subject of this article. Though in possession of an independent fortune, he was readily prevailed upon by his father-in-law to take the rectory of Stanwick, in. Northamptonshire, given to him by lord chancellor King, as soon as he was of age to hold it. From this period he fixed his constant residence in that retired spot, and sedulously devoted himself to the duties of his function, never holding any other preferment for thirty years, except a small prebend in the church of Lincoln, given him by his uncle bishop Reynolds, He was in the commission of the peace, and a very active magistrate in the reconcilement of parties rather than in the conviction of persons. When the rebels were on the march, and had advanced to Derby, he raised among the neighbouring parishes two companies of 100 men each for the regiment then enrolling under the command of the earl of Halifax, and marched them in person to Northampton. The earl, as a mark of his consideration, insisted upon bestowing one of the companies upon his son, who being too young to take the command, an officer was named to act in his place. Some time after, on the approach of the general election for the county of Northampton, a contest took place with the rival parties of Knightly and Hanbury, or, in other words, between the tories and the whigs. His politics accorded with the latter, and he gave a very active and effectual support to his party. His exertions, though unsuccessful, were not overlooked by the earl of Halifax, who was then high in office, and lord lieutenant of the county. Offers were pressed upon him; yet, though he was resolute in declining all personal favours, he was persuaded to lend an ear to flattering situations pointed out for his son, who was shortly afterwards employed by lord Halifax as his confidential secretary. In 1757 he exchanged the living of Stanwick for Fulham, in order to be nearer his son, whose attendance on the earl of Halifax required his residence in town. On the earl being appointed lord-lieutenant of Ireland, he was made one of his chaplains; and in 1763, at the close of his lordship’s administration, was promoted to the bishopric of Clonfert. In this situation he much ingratiated himself with all classes of people by his benevolence and generosity. He introduced many improvements and comforts among the Irish peasantry. He encouraged the English mode of agriculture by judicious rewards; and, as one of the members of the linen trade, introduced a number of spinning-wheels, and much good linen was made in consequence. This improving manufacture formed an interesting occupation also to his lady, and flourished under her care. The city of Dublin presented him with his freedom in a gold box, an honour never before (except in the remarkable instance of dean Swift) conferred on any person below the rank of a chief governor; and the deed which accompanied it assigned as the motive, the great respectability of his character, and his disinterested protection of the Irish clergy. In 1772 he was translated to the see of Kilmore. Some alarming symptoms soon after indicated the breaking up of his constitution, which was increased by the anxiety he experienced, through the debility and loss of health of his, amiable lady. When his son took leave of him at the end of his summer visit, the bishop expressed an intention of attempting a journey to England; but died in the winter of the same year; and this sad event was speedily succeeded by the death of his lady, whose weak and exhausted frame sunk under the blow, May 27, 1775.

Having thus, in 1750, at an age more than commonly early, obtained his bachelor’s degree, with the return of his health he resumed his studies, and, without neglecting those he had lately been engaged in, again took up those authors who had lain by untouched for a whole twelvemonth. Being in the habit of reading upon system, he began to form collectanea of his studies. With this view he got together all the tracts relative to the controversy between Boyle and Bentley, omitting none even of the authorities and passages they referred to; and having done this, compressed the reasonings on both sides into a kind of statement and report upon the question in dispute; and, having accomplished this, he meditated upon a plan little short of what might be projected for an universal history, or at least for that of the great empires in particular. But he was perhaps more agreeably employed in reading the Greek tragedians; and when Mason published his Eu'rida, was warm in his praise of that generally-admired production; and, in imitation, planned and composed an entire drama, of which Caractacus was the hero, with bards and druids attached to it as a chorus, for whom he wrote odes.

Bickerstatf having brought forward with success his operas of “Love in a Village,” and “The Maid of the Mill,” Mr. Cumberland attempted a drama of that sort, under the title of “The Summer’s Tale,” which was performed for nine or ten nights, but with no great applause; the music to it was the production of Bach, Arne, Arnold, and Simpson. This drama was published in 1765, and the author afterwards cut it down to an afterpiece of two acts, and exhibited it under the title of “Amelia” with very tolerable success; and published it in 1768. His next production was the comedy of “The Brothers,” which was brought out at Covent Garden, and well received, and published in 1769.

During a visit at his father’s at Clonfert, in a little closet at the back of the palace, with no other prospect than a single turf-stack, he began to plan and compose “The West Indian.” It was his object always in his hours of study, so to place himself, as to have little or nothing to distract his attention. During his stay in Ireland, he received from the university of Dublin the honorary degree of LL.D. On iiis return to London he entered into an engagement with Garrick to bring out the “West Indian” at his theatre; and availed himself of Garrick’s suggestions in adding a new scene and other improvements. This piece (which appeared in 1771) proved successful beyond the utmost expectation of its author, who was aware that the moral was not quite unexceptionable.

His next dramatic production was “Timon of Athens,” altered from Shakspeare, in which the entire part of Evanthe, and, with very few exceptions, the whole of Alcibiades, were new. The public approbation sanctioned the attempt at the first production of the play; but it has since been neglected. In compliance with the wishes of AJoodv, who had become the established performer of Irish characters, Cumberland sketched another Hibernian, on a smaller scale, in the entertainment of “The Note of Hand, or a Trip to Newmarket,” which was the last of his pieces that Garrick produced before he disposed of his property in Drury-lane. His tragedy of “The Battle of Hastings” was brought out there under the direction of Mr. Sheridan. In his own judgment it was better written than planned. It was published in 1773.

Mr. Cumberland afterwards resided at Tetworth in Bedfordshire, in the vicinity of the house of his honoured friend lady Frances Burgoyne, sister of lord Halifax. Here he passed his summer recesses; and in one of them wrote his opera of “Calypso,” which was brought out at Covent Garden; but did not meet with very great success. In the following season Cumberland wrote “The Widow of Delphi, or the descent of the Deities,” which has never been printed, but received frequent revisions and corrections in the ms. and its author considered it in this improved s-tate as one of his most classical productions. About this time appeared his tragi-comedy of “The Bondman,” and “The Duke of Milan,” altered neither of which has been printed.

In 1789 appeared his comedy of “The Impostor;” and “Arundel, a Novel,” 2 vols. 12mo, thelatterhastilyput together in a few weeks at Brighthclmstone, and sent to the press in parcels as he wrote it. This novel, rapidly composed as it was, met with success; on which he resolved to bestow his utmost care and diligence on a second, which appeared in 1795, in 4 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Henry.” In 1792 he published his “Calvary, or the Death of Christ, a Poem, in eight books,” 4to. To this work he had applied himself with uncommon ardour; he began it in the winter, and, rising every morning some hours before day-light, soon dispatched the whole poem of eight books at the average of full fifty lines a day, of which he kept a regular account, marking each day’s work upon the ms. This poem has since been republished in a more portable size in 2 vols.

The publications he was afterwards concerned in are, “The Exodiad,” an epic poem, written in conjunction with sir James Bland Burges. “John de Lancaster,” a novel, in 3 vols. and “Joanna of Montfaucon,” a dramatic romance. He was also the conductor of “The London Review,” a new attempt, in which the reviewers gave their names, but it did not succeed. From the time of his secession from public life, Mr. Cumberland resided at Tunbridge Wells, devoting his time solely to his literary occupations. Here he lost his wife, the happy partner of all his joys, his affectionate consoler in every sorrow. This stroke of affliction he bore with the resignation of a man of sense, convinced, as he says, that patience is no mark of insensibility, nor the parade of lamentation any evidence of the sincerity or permanency of grief.

During the alarm of invasion he headed two companies of volunteer infantry, and received the commission of major-commandant. So beloved was he by his corps, that they honoured him with a sword as a mark of their esteem; and at the conclusion of the peace, agreed to serve under him without receiving their customary pay. His last days were spent chiefly in London, where he died May 7, 1811, after a few days illness, at the house of his friend, Mr. Henry Fry, Bedford-place. The last act of his life was the publication of a poem called “Retrospection,” a kind of legacy of opinions concerning the “men and things” more fully handled in his Memoirs. In appreciating the personal character of Mr. Cumberland, the reader may be very safely directed to these “Memoirs,” where the disguise of self-esteem is too thin to hide what is attempted to be hidden. It was Mr. Cumberland’s misfortune to be bred a courtier, and never to have attained his degrees in that school. In a subordinate station, the duties of which were technical and formal, he performed them like others, but was peculiarly unfortunate in venturing to act the minister, Mr. Cumberland having associated with almost all the eminent literary characters of his day, has introduced many striking sketches and anecdotes of them in his “Memoirs.” In company his aim was to please by retailing these, and in the art of pleasing in conversation lew men have In-*, n more successful, and few would have been more praiseworthy, had he been more sincere in his compliments to those who were present, or less bitter in his sarcasms on them after they had taken their leave. By this, however, although it occasionally administered to mirth, he lost more than he gained; and his address, polite, studied, and courtier-like, soon became depreciated beyond all recovery.

As a writer, the number of his works is perhaps the most striking circumstance; but many of them, it may be remembered, were hastily written, and produced to better his income at a time when a succession of statesmen had agreed to forget that such a man ever held a public station. Whatever else he wrote, the drama was his favourite pursuit, from which he could seldom endure a long interruption; and this seems to have created in his mind a ready play of imagination which unfitted him for the serious concerns of real life and business. As a poet, he cannot rank very high; elegant versification and sentiment, however, throw a charm over some of his poetical works which has ensured them a considerable share of popularity. His “Observer,” now that he has acknowledged how much he took from Bentley’s Mss. no longer supports his character as a Greek critic. First or last, the drama was his peculiar province: it was in that he endeavoured to excel, and in that, we think, he has attained the excellence that will he most permanent.

, bart. a man of considerable talents, unhappily, in some respects, misapplied, was the son of Alexander Cuming of Coulter, who was created a baronet in 1695, and was born probably about the beginning of the last century. It appears by his Journal, which was in the possession of the late Isaac Reed, esq. that he was bred to the law of Scotland, but was induced to quit that profession in consequence of a pension of 300l. per annum being assigned him by government, either, as he intimates, for services done by his family, or expected from himself. This pension was withdrawn in 1721, at the instance, according to his account, of sir Robert Walpole, who had conceived a pique against his father, for opposing him in parliament. It is mors probable, however, that he was found too visionary a schemer to fulfil what was expected from him. In 1129 he was induced, by a dream of lady Cunaing’s, to undertake a voyage to America, for the purpose of visiting the Cherokee nations. He left England on Sept. 13, and arrived at Charlestown Dec. 5. On March 11 following, he set out for the Indians country; and on April 3, 1730, he was crowned commander, and chief ruler of the Cherokee nations in a general meeting of chiefs at Nequisee among the mountains; he returned to Charlestown April 13, with six Indian chiefs, and on June 5, arrived at Dover. On the 18th he presented the chiefs to George II. at Windsor, where he laid his crown at his majesty’s feet: the chiefs also did homage, laying four scalps at the king’s feet, to show that they were an overmatch for their enemies, and five eagles’ tails as emblems of victory. These circumstances are confirmed by the newspapers of that time, which are full of the proceedings of the Cherokees whilst, in England, and speak of them as brought over by sir Alexander Cuming. Their portraits were engraved on a single sheet. Sir Alexander says in his Journal, that whilst he was in America in 1729, he found such injudicious notions of liberty prevail, as were inconsistent with any kind of government, particularly with their dependence on the British nation. This suggested to him the idea of establishing banks in each of the provinces dependent on the British exchequer, and accountable to the British parliament, as the only means of securing the dependency of the colonies. But it was not till 1748 (as it appears) that he laid his plans before the minister (the right hon. Henry Pelham) who treated him as a visionary enthusiast, which his journal indeed most clearly indicates him to have been. He connected this scheme with the restoration of the Jews, for which he supposed the time appointed to be arrived, and that he himself was alluded to in various passages of Scripture as their deliverer. He was not, like a late enthusiast, to conduct them to the Holy Land, but proposed to take them to the Cherokee mountains: wild as his projects were, some of the most learned Jews (among whom was Isaac Netto, formerly grand rabbi of the Portuguese synagogue) seem to have given him several patient hearings upon the subject. When the minister refused tollsten to his schemes, he proposed to open a subscription himself for 500,000l. to establish provincial banks in America, and to settle 300,000 Jewish families among the Cherokee mountains. From one wild project he proceeded to another; and being already desperately involved in debt, he turned his thoughts to alchemy, and began to try experiments on the transmutation of metal. He was supported principally by the contributions of his friends: till at length, in 1766, archbishop Seeker appointed him one of the pensioners in the Charter-house, where he died at a very advanced age in August 1775, and was buried at East Bavnet, where lady Cuming had been buried in 1743. He appears to have been a man of learning., and to have possessed talents, which, if they had not been under a wrong bias, might have been beneficial to himself and useful to his country. His son, who succeeded him in his title, became deranged in his intellects, and died some years ago, in a state of indigence, in the neighbourhood of Red-lionstreet, Whitechapel. He had been a captain in the army: the title became extinct at his death.

, born Sept. 30, 1714, was the son of Mr. James Cuming, an eminent merchant in Edinburgh. Alter a suitable education in the high-school of that city, and under the particular tuition of Mr. Alexander Muir, formerly professor of philosophy at Aberdeen, he applied himself to the study of physic four years in the university of Edinburgh, and became connected with some of the most eminent students in that science. In 1735 he spent nine months at Paris, improving himself in anatomy and the French language: and he passed some time at Leyden the following year; but returned immediately before the death of his father. In 1738 he quitted Edinburgh for London: and while his friends were meditating a settlement for him at Lynne in the room of the late sir William Browne, his friend Dr, Fothergill found out a more promising situation at Dorchester; where he remained to the last, notwithstanding the most pressing invitations from Dr. Fothergill to succeed Dr. Russel in London. In the space of a few years after his establishment at Dorchester, he came to be employed in many, and in process of time, with an exception of three or four at most, in all the families of distinction within the county, and frequently in the adjacent ones. At length his chaste manners, his learning, and his probity, as they were more generally known, rendered him not only the physician, but the confidential friend of some of the best families into which he was introduced. His warm and friendly attention to the interests of the late Mr. Hutchins, author of the History of Dorset, in advancing the publication of that well written and well arranged work, cannot better be expressed than in the grateful language of its author: “One of the gentlemen to whom my acknowledgments are eminently due, permitted part of that time which is so beneficially employed to far better purposes, and is so precious to a gentleman of his extensive practice, to be diverted to the work in hand; the publication of which he patronised and promoted with great zeal and assiduity: nor did his success fall short of his zeal. Without his friendly assistance my papers might yet have remained undelivered to the press; or, if they had been committed to the public, would have wanted several advantages and embellishments with which they now appear.” The doctor bequeathed his interleaved copy of this work to Mr.Gough, his friend and coadjutor in its publication. In 1752 he received a diploma from the university of Edinburgh; and was soon after elected a fellow of the royal college of physicians there, of which he died senior fellow. He was elected in 1769 fellow of the society of antiquaries of London; and in 1781 of that of Scotland. The tenderness of his eyes was, through life, the greatest misfortune he had to struggle with; and, considering the many obstacles which the complaints in those organs have occasioned in the pursuit of knowledge, it is wonderful how he attained the degree of erudition which he was well known to possess. In his retreat from the more busy pursuits of this world, the surviving companions of his youth continued the friends and correspondents of his advanced years; and he enjoyed to the last the singular satisfaction of being visited by the most respectable persons in the county for probity, rank, and fortune. We cannot but regret that the doctor, who lias been the means of so many valuable performances being laid before the public, and some of them improved by his pen, had not himself stood forth, to give that information for which he was so well qualified, both in point of classical learning and elegant composition. He died of a dropsy, in the 7 kh year of his age, March 25, 1788.

, a lady of great genius and learning, was born in Silesia about the beginning of the seventeenth century, and became celebrated for her extensive knowledge in many branches of learning, particularly in mathematics and astronomy, upon which she wrote several ingenious treatises; one of which, under the title of “Urania Propitia,” printed in 1650, in Latin and German, she dedicated to Ferdinand III. emperor of Germany. In this work are contained astronomical tables, of great ease and accuracy, founded upon Kepler’s hypothesis. She learned languages with amazing facility; and understood Polish, German, French, Italian, Latin, Greek, and Hebrew. With equal ease she acquired a knowledge of the sciences: history, physic, poetry, painting, music both vocal and instrumental, were familiar to her; and yet these were no more than her amusement. Her favourite study was the mathematics, and especially astronomy, to which she principally applied, and was not without reason ranked among the most able astronomers of her time. She married Elias de Levvin, M. D. also an astronomer; and they carried on their favourite studies for some time with equal reputation and success, until the war penetrated into Silesia, and obliged them to quit their residence at Schweinitz, for Poland, which was then at peace. Upon their journey, although furnished with the best passports, they were robbed by the soldiers; but, on their arrival in Poland, were welcomed with every kind attention. Here she composed her astronomical tables above noticed, first printed at Oels, and four years after at Franeker or Francfort. Moreri fixes her death at 1664, but others think she was living in 1669, and then a widow.

, an historian, was born in Scotland, in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation, in 1654; his father was minister at Ettrick, in the shire and presbytery of Selkirk. He was educated, according to the custom of the Scotch gentlemen of those times who. were of the presbyterian sect, in Holland, where we may suppose he imbibed his principles of government, and was much with the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague before the revolution, particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland. He came over to England with the prince of Orange; and was honoured with the confidence and intimacy of many leading men among the friends of king William and the revolution. We find him employed, at different times, in the character of a travelling companion or tutor; first to the earl of Hyndford and his brother Mr. William Carmichael, solicitor-general in the reign of queen Anne for Scotland; secondly, with the lord Lome, afterwards so well known under the name of John duke of Argyle; and thirdly, with the lord viscount Lonsdale. In 1703 we find him at Hanover with the celebrated Atldison, and graciously received by the elector and princess Sophia.

Mr. Cunningham’s political friends, Argyle, Sunderland, sir Robert Walpole, &c. on the accession of George I. sent him as British envoy to the republic of Venice, where he resided from 1715 to 1720. His correspondence, or at least part of it (for secretary Craggs carried away his official correspondence from the public officte, and probably, among others, some of Mr. Cunningham’s letters), with the secretaries of state is preserved, in the paper-office. His dispatches have been collected and arranged by Mr. Astle, who very obligingly communicated this information to the author of the critical and biographical memoirs prefixed to the translation of the Latin manuscript.

A question has, no doubt, been anticipated by the reader of these memorials of Mr. Cunningham, whether he was not the celebrated critic on Horace, and the author of the posthumous criticisms in an edition of Virgil published by Hamilton and Balfour of Edinburgh in 1742. On this question, which is, no doubt, not a little interesting to philologists, but not perhaps so interesting as it would have been 50 or 60 years ago, his editor Dr. Thomson has exhausted not a little reading, inquiry, and probable conjecture, and bestows perhaps more consideration on it than the importance of the question deserves. It must be owned, at the same time, that the circumstances tending to prove the identity of the critic and the historian, and those tending to prove their diversity, are so many, and the evidence for and against each so nicely balanced, that it becomes a question of infinite curiosity on this account, and of importance too as illustrating the uncertainty of both direct and circumstantial evidence. The historian Alexander Cunningham was born in Scotland in the time of Cromwell’s usurpation; was educated in Holland, where he was intimately acquainted with many of the Scotch and English refugees at the Hague, and particularly with the earls of Argyle and Sunderland: he enjoyed, in an eminent degree, the favour and familiarity of the great: he travelled with the duke of Argyle: he was distinguished by his skill in the game of chess: he was in politics a whig; and he lived to extreme old age. Now there is very strong evidence that all these circumstances belong to the life, and point to Alexander Cunningham, the editor and commentator of Horace. It would seem strange indeed, if two Alexander Cunninghams, countrymen, contemporaries, so distinguished for erudition and the familiarity and favour of men of rank and power, and the same men too, should have flourished at the same sera, in modes of life, in places of residence, in peculiarities of character, and other circumstances so nearly parallel. And yet, notwithstanding these accumulated coincidences, there are circumstances too of diversity and opposition that seem incompatible with their identity; and therefore Dr. Thomson, after all his inquiries cdncerning the identity or the diversity of the historian and the critic, on that subject remains sceptical; and from those curious points of coincidence and opposition draws the following pertinent inference: “If the writings of our author have increased the stores of history, the incidents of his life, by shewing the uncertainty of oral tradition, have illustrated its importance.”

, a poet of considerable reputation, was born in 1729 in Dublin, where his father and mother, both descendants of Scotch parents, then resided. His father was a wine cooper, and becoming enriched by a prize in the lottery, commenced wine-merchant, and failed. The little education our author received was from a Mr. Clark, who was master of the grammar-school of the city of Drogheda; and when his father’s affairs became embarrassed, he was recalled to Dublin, where he produced many of his lesser poems at a very early age. At seventeen he wrote a farce, entitled “Love in a Mist,” which was acted for several nights at Dublin in 1747. Garrick is said to have been indebted to this farce for the fable or plot of his “Lying Valet.” The success of his little drama procured him the freedom of the theatre, to which he became immoderately attached, and mistaking inclination for ability, commenced actor without one essential qualification either natural or acquired, if we except a knack at personating the mock French character, in which he is said to have been tolerable. His passion for the stage, however, predominated so strongly, that without any intimation of his intentions, he left his family and embarked for England, where he obtained a precarious and unprofitable employment in various companies of strolling comedians. Frequent want made him at length sensible of his imprudence, but pride prevented his return to his friends; and the death of his father in circumstances of distress, probably reconciled him to a way of life which he could not now exchange for a better. About the year 1761 we find him a performer at Edinburgh, where he published his “Elegy on a Pile of Ruins,” which, although obviously an imitation of Gray’s Elegy, contains many passages conceived in the true spirit of poetry, and obtained considerable reputation. During his theatrical engagement at Edinburgh, although insignificant as an actor, he was of some value to the manager, by furnishing prologues and other occasional addresses, which were much applauded.

Although Cunningham cannot be admitted to a very high rank among poets, he may be allowed to possess a considerable share of genius. His poems have a peculiar sweetness and elegance; his sentiments are generally natural, and his language simple, and appropriate to his subject, except in some of his longer pieces, where he accumulates epithets that appear to be laboured, and are sometimes uncouth compounds, either obsolete or unauthorized. As he contemplated nature with a fond and minute attention, and had familiarized his mind to rural scenes and images, his pastorals will probably continue to be his most favoured efforts. He has informed us that Shenstone, with whose correspondence he was honoured, encouraged him to cultivate this species of poetry. His “Landscape” is a cluster of beauties which every reader must feel, but such as only a very accurate observer of nature could have grouped with equal effect. His fables are ingenious, and his lyric pieces were at one time in very high estimation, and certainly cannot suffer by a comparison with their successors on the stage and public gardens; and, upon the whole, his works have lost little of the popularity with which they were originally favoured.

, was a physician in London, who resided in Coleman-street some years of his life. About 1556 1559 he lived at Norwich, and in 1563 he was a public lecturer in surgeons’-hall, London. Bishop Bull applauded him much for his knowledge in astronomy and physic. He was certainly a man of considerable learning, and much admired for his ingenuity in the art of engraving on copper. In 1559 he published his “Cosmographical Glass, conteyning the pleasant principles of Cosmographie, Geographic, Hydrographie, or Navigation,” fol. He executed several of the cuts in this book himself. The map of Norwich, Mr. Granger thinks, is curious and fine. He wrote also a Commentary on Hippocrates, “De Acre, Aquis et Regionibus,” and a “Treatise on the French Disease.”

, a learned philologist, was born Sept. 14, 1644, at Hemmem, in the duchy of Guelderland, and educated first at home, and then at Nimeguen, where after attending a course of rhetoric, philosophy, mathematics, history, law, and theology, he found his inclination drawing him more closely to matters of taste and polite literature. With a view to further improvement in these branches, he went to Leyden, and put himself for some time under the direction of the elder Gronovius. He came afterwards to Paris, and while he was about to leave that city for Italy, he was appointed professor of history at Deventer, when he was only in his twenty-fifth year. The reputation he acquired in this office, raised him to the magistracy, and he was employed by the states of Overyssel in various important transactions. Having carried on a correspondence with some distinguished members of the French academy of inscriptions, he was chosen an honorary member. He died at Deventer, Nov. 22, 1716, in the seventy-third year of his age. His works are: 1. “Observationum Libri III.” on different Greek and Latin authors,“Utrecht, 1670, 8vo. 2.” Harpocrates, et Monumenta antiqua inedita,“Utrecht, 1676, 1687, and 1&94, 4to. 3. An additional book or volume of observations on the Greek and Latin authors, Deventer, 1678, 8vo. 4.” Apotheosis, vel consecratio Homeri,“Amst. 1683, 4to. 5.” Historia trium Gordianum,“Deventer, 1697, 12mo; and ibid. 1697, 8vo. 6.” Lettres de critique, d'histoire, de litterature, &c.“Amst. 1742, 4to. He also wrote a preface and notes to the edition of Lactantius.” de mortibus persecutorum,“Abo, 1684, and Utrecht, 1692. His correspondence with the literary men of his age was very extensive, and many of his letters have been published in various collections particularly in” Celeberrimorum virorum epistolae,“Wittemberg, 1716, 8vo, in” Schelhornii Amcenitates,“Leipsic, 1738, 8vo in Burman’s Sylloge;” in the “Sylloge nova Epistolarum,” Nuremberg, 1759, 8vo and lastly, by Betou, in his work “De Aris et Lapidibus Votivis ad Neomagum et Sanctenum effosis,” Neomag. 1783, 8vo.

Though externally of a vigorous frame of body, Dr. Currie had a pre-disposition to those complaints which usually shorten life; and in 1784 he had experienced a pulmonary attack of an alarming nature, from which he was extraordinarily recovered by the use of horse-exercise, as related by himself in his case, inserted in the second volume of Dr. Darwin’s “Zoonomia.” He was, however, seldom long free from threatenings of a return, and his health began visibly to decline in the early part of 1804. In the summer of that year he took a journey to Scotland, where, among other sources of gratification, he had that of witnessing the happy effects of his kindness on the family of Burns. His letters on this occasion were delightful displays of benevolence rejoicing in its work. He returned with some temporary amendment; but alarming symptoms soon returned, and in November he found it necessary to quit the climate and business of Liverpool. He spent the winter alternately at Clifton and Bath; and in the month of March appeared to himself in a state of convalescence, which justified his taking a house in Bath, and commencing the practice of his profession. From the manner in which his career opened, there could be no doubt that it would have proved eminently successful; but the concluding scene was hastily approaching. As a last resource, he went in August to Sidmouth, where, after much suffering, which he bore with manly fortitude and pious resignation, he expired on August 31st, 1805, in the fiftieth year of his age. His disease was ascertained to be a great enlargement and flaccidity of the heart, accompanied with remarkable wasting of the left lung, but without ulceration, tubercle, or abscess.

Few men have left the world with a more amiable and estimable character, proved in every relation of life, public and domestic. In his professional conduct he was upright, liberal, and honourable; with much sensibility for his patients, without the affectation of it; fair and candid towards his brethren of the faculty; and though usually decided in his opinion, yet entirely free from arrogance or dogmatism. His behaviour was singularly calculated to convert rivals into friends; and some of those who regarded him with the greatest esteem and affection, have been the persons who divided practice with him. His powers of mind were of the highest rank, equally fitted for action and speculation; his morals were pure, his principles exalted. His life, though much too short to satisfy the wishes of his friends and family, was long enough for signal usefulness and for lasting fame.

Mr. Curtis was very early led to combine the study of insects and thtir metamorphoses with that of plants, and his various gardens were furnished with accommodations for this pursuit. Hence he became an author; his first publication being a pamphlet, entitled “Instructions for collecting and preserving Insects; particularly Moths and Butterflies, illustrated with a copper plate,” printed in 1771. In the following year he published a translation of the “Fundamenta Entomologist” of Linnæus, entitled “An Introduction to the Knowledge of Insects,” many valuable additions being subjoined to the original treatise. These two pamphlets have contributed more than any similar works, to diffuse a knowledge of scientific entomology in England, and to engraft on the illiterate illiberal stock of mere collectors, a race of enlightened and communicative observers of nature; who no longer hoard up unique specimens, and selfish acquisitions, but contribute their discoveries and their experience for the benefit of the agriculturist, the manufacturer, or the physician.

The celebrity which these publications procured for their author, was soon altogether eclipsed by what arose from his botanical labours, which have placed him in the very first rank of English writers in that department of science. In 1777 appeared the first number of his “Flora Londinensis,” containing six folio plates, with a page or more of letter-press, consisting of a description in Latin and English, with synonyms of each plant, and copious remarks on its history, uses, qualities, and the insects it nourishes. Each number was sold at half a crown plain, five shillings coloured; and some copie?, finished with extraordinary care, were sold at seven shillings and six-pence. The first artist employed in making the drawings for this work, was Mr. Kilburn, who used a camera obscura for the purpose; his sketches were shaded with Indian ink, before the colours were laid on. The performances of this artist have not been excelled in any similar work. When from other engagements, Mr. Kilburn was obliged to relinquish his task, Mr. Sowerby was employed, and maintained uridiminished the perfection of the figures. After him, Mr. Sydenham Edwards was engaged by Mr. Curtis, with no less credit, both in this publication and the “Botanical Magazine” hereafter mentioned. Of the plates of the “Flora Londineosis” too much cannot be said; their beauty and botanical accuracy are alike eminent, and it is only to be regretted that the manufactory of paper, as well as the typographical art, were in so degraded a state when this book first appeared. For this its author cannot be responsible, nor are these defects of any moment in the eyes of learned or scientific readers, to whom the work in question, independent of its excellent figures, ranks next to Ray’s Synopsis, in original merit and authority upon English plants. It may be added, that the works of Curtis have tended, more than any other publications of their day, to give that tone of urbanity and liberality to the science, which every subsequent writer of good character has observed. Wherever their author swerved in any degree from this candour, which was very seldom, and not perhaps without provocation, it was always to his own loss; and he was thus led into some of the very few mistakes that he has committed.

The “Flora Londinensis” was extended to six fasciculi, of seventy-two plates each, and ten years after the beginning of it, Mr. Curtis undertook a new publication, the “Botanical Magazine,” a work whose sale has been extensive beyond all former example, and which is in every respect worthy of its author. No book has more diffused a taste for unsophisticated nature and science. It rewarded its contriver with pecuniary emolument as well as with merited celebrity, and is still continued with unabated utility. It is designed to be a general repository of garden plants, whether previously figured or not in other works, but it has often had the advantage of giving entire novelties to the public.

Besides the above works, Mr. Curtis published “Practical Observations on the British Grasses,” in 8vo; his truly praise-worthy aim being to direct the farmer to a knowledge and discrimination of the species and their qualities. He also from time to time printed catalogues of his garden. He was induced, by the unfortunate alarm which he conceived at the publication of“English Botany,” an apparently rival work, to put forth diminished figures in 8vo, of his great Flora; but these met with no approbation nor success, and were soon discontinued. His “Lectures on Botany,”' rendered needlessly expensive by superfluous coloured plates, have appeared since his death; but for this publication he is not responsible. Two admirable entomological papers of Mr. Curtis are found in the “Transactions of the Linnean Society” of which society he was one of the original fellows. The first of these is an account of the Silpha Grisea, and Curculio Lapathi, two coleopterous insects very destructive to willows. The other paper is intended to shew that the Aphides, or lice of plants, are “the sole cause of the honey-dew,” a new theory on the subject, and perfectly just, as far as concerns the most common kind of honey-dew. This paper was digested by the president from the unfinished materials of its author, and communicated to the society after his death, which happened on the 7th of July, 1799, after he had for near a twelvemonth laboured under a disease in the chest, supposed to be of a dropsical nature; but which was rather, perhaps, an organic affection of the heart, or of the great vessels immediately connected with it. His remains were interred at Battersea church. He left behind him the character of an honest friendly man, a lively and entertaining companion, and a good master. He was ever ready to encourage and assist beginners in his favourite science, and always endeavoured to render that science as attractive as possible. It must not be forgotten that he was one of the first, who, in spite of authority, contributed to remove some reproaches to which it was justly liable, on the score of indelicacy. This last praise is justly paid to Mr. Curtis by an excellent and very eminent friend, who has given the world a history of his life and merits in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1799, whence we have derived many of the ubove particulars.

, a native of Brussels, where he was born in 1586, became a monk of the Augustine order, and rose to honours and high official situations among his order; being prefect of the schools of Brussels and Louvaine, a provincial of various convents, and counsellor and historiographer to the emperor of Germany. He had the character of a man of extensive learning and piety, the latter carried sometimes to the minuUsc of superstition, as appears by his work “De Clavis Dominicis,” of which there are three editions, 1622, 1632, and 1670: in this he gravely discusses whether our Saviour. was fixed to the cross with three nails or four? and decides in favour of the latter number. His more valuable works are: 1. “Vita; S. S. Rupert! et Virgilii,” Ingolstadt, 1622. 2. “Epistolas familiares,” ibid. 1621. 3. “Poematum libri tres,” Ant. 1629, 12mo. 4. “Amphitheatrum amorum, Christ. Fonseca auctore, Curtio interprete,” Ingolstadt, 1623, 8vo. 5. “Quadragesimale” by Fonseca, translated from the Spanish into Latin, Cologn. 6. “Vitae quinque Virginum Augustiniarum,” ibid. 1636. 7. “Elogia virorum illustrium Ord. Eremit. S. Augustini,” with engraven portraits, Antwerp, 1636, 4to. 8. “Vita S. Nicolai Tolentinatis,” with the lives of other Augustines, ibid, 1637, 16mo. He left also some unfinished manuscripts. He died in Oct. 1633.

In 1758 he was invested with the dignity of privy-counsellor; and in 1795 became principal of the faculty of philosophy. He twice held the office of pro-rector of the university, in which he gave universal satisfaction. During a period of thirty-four years, he taught, with indefatigable diligence, all the branches of history, statistics, and geography; explained the Roman antiquities, the imitative arts, natural and experimental philosophy, rural economy, &c. and gave introductory lessons on the formation of a good Latin style. At the same time, he fulfilled all his other college-duties with the most scrupulous fidelity, till the few last weeks of his active life. His health was tolerably good, excepting that he was sometimes attacked with a paralytic affection, and symptoms of the stone. In the spring of 1802, his constitution began to break; and, notwithstanding all the attention of his friend and physician, Michaelis, his health declined rapidly. In the last twelve or fourteen days of his life, his memory was considerably impaired. He had been particularly distinguished by the strength of that faculty; and has frequently been known to write down in his lectures, whole tables, containing dates of years, and other figures, merely from recollection, and without a single error. This alteration, and the anxiety he felt hecause he was prevented from attending his official duties, preyed on his mind, and weakened him more than his disorder. On the 22d of August, 1802, this venerable man expired, aged seventy-eight years and four days.

, is the name, or assumed name, of a Latin historian, who has written the actions of Alexander the Great, in ten books; the two first of which are indeed not extant, but yet are so well supplied by Freinshemius, as to be thought equal to the others. Where this author was born, and when he lived, are disputed points among the learned, and never likely to be settled. Some have fancied, from the elegant style of his history, that he must have lived in or near the Augustan age; but there are no explicit testimonies to confirm this opinion; 'and a judgment formed upon the single circumstance of style will always be found precarious. Others place him in the reign of Vespasian, and others have brought him down so low as to Trajan’s: Gibbon is inclined to place him in the time of Gordian, in the middle of the third century; and some have imagined that the name of Quintus Curtius was forged by an Italian, who composed that history, or romance as it has been called, about three hundred years ago; yet why so good a Latin writer, who might have gained the reputation of the first Latin scholar of his time, should have been willing to sacrifice his glory to that of an imaginary Quintus Curtius, is a question yet to be resolved. On the other hand it is certain that Quintus Curtius was an admired historian of the romantic ages. He is quoted in the “Policraticon” of John of Salisbury, who died in the year 1181; and Peter Blesensis, archdeacon of London, a student at Paris, about 1150, mentioning the books most common in the schools, declares that “he profited much by frequently looking into this author.” All this is decidedly against the opinion that Quintus Curtiuis a forgery of only three hundred years old.

Cardinal du Perron was so great an admirer of this historian, that he declared one page of him to be worth thirty of Tacitus. This extravagant admiration, however, may be somewhat abated by a view of what Le Clerc has written about this author, at the end of his book upon the art of of criticism; in which are manifestly shewn several great faults in him, ignorance of astronomy and geography, contradictions, erroneous descriptions, bad taste in the choice of matter, carelessness in dating the events, &c. though perhaps, as Bayle rightly observes, the greatest part of those faults might be found in most ancient historians, if one would take the pains, or had the opportunity, to criticise them severely. He has nevertheless many qualities as a writer, which will always make him admired and applauded; and notwithstanding the censures of some critics, this historian deserves to be commended for his sincerity, for he speaks the good and the bad of his hero, without the least prepossession of his merit. If any fault is to be found with his history, it is for being too highly polished.

He was colonel of the Coldstream, or second regiment of guards, in 1701; when Steele, who was indebted to his interest for a captain’s commission in the lord Lucas’s regiment of fusileers, inscribed to him his first work, “The Christian Hero.” On the accession of queen Anne, he was made a lieutenant-general of the forces in Holland. February 13, 1702-3, he was appointed commander in chief of the English forces on the continent, during the absence of the duke of Marlborough; commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, under the duke of Ormond, March 23, 1704-5; and afterwards one of the lords justices of that kingdom, to keep him out of the way of action, a circumstance which broke his heart. He died at Dublin, Jan. 26, 1706-7, and was buried there on the 29th, in the cathedral of Christ-church. He was a person of eminent natural parts, well cultivated by study and conversation; of a free, unreserved temper; and of undaunted bravery and resolution. As he was a servant to queen Mary when princess of Orange, and learned the trade of war under her consort, he was early devoted to them both, and a warm supporter of the revolution. He was an absolute stranger to fear; and on all occasions gave distinguishing proofs of his intrepidity, particularly at the siege of Limerick in 1691, at the memorable attack of the castle of Namur in 1695, and at the siege of Venlo in 1702. Macky says of him, in 1703: “He hath abundance of wit, but too much seized with vanity and self-conceit; he is affable, familiar, and very brave. Few considerable actions happened in this as well as the last war, in which he was not, and hath been wounded in all the actions where he served; is esteemed to be a mighty vigilant officer, and for putting the military orders in execution; he is pretty tall, lusty, wellshaped, and an agreeable companion; hath great revenues, yet so very expensive, as always to be in debt; towards fifty years old.” Swift, in a ms note on the above passage, with his usual laconic cruelty, calls lord Cutts, “The vainest old fool alive.” He wrote a poem on the death of queen Mary; and published in 1687, “Poetical Exercises, written upon several occasions, and dedicated to her Royal Highness Mary Princess of Orange; licensed March 23, 1686-7, Roger L'Estrange.” It contains, besides the dedication signed “J. Cutts,” verses to that princess; a poem on Wisdom; another to Mr. Waller on his commending it; seven more copies of verses (one of them called “La Muse Cavalier,” which had been ascribed to lord Peterborough, and as such mentioned by Mr. Walpole in the list of that nobleman’s writings), and eleven songs; the whole composing a very thin volume, which is by no means so scarce as Mr. Walpole supposes it to be. The author speaks of having more pieces by him.

In the year 246 Cyprian was prevailed on to embrace Christianity, at Carthage, by Cæcilius, a priest of that church, whose name Cyprian afterwards took; and between whom there ever after subsisted so close a friendship, that Csecilius at his death committed to Cyprian the care of his family. Cyprian was also a married man himself; but as soon as he became a Christian, he resolved upon a state of continence, which was thought a high degree of piety, as being yet not become general. This we learn from his deacon Pontius, who has left us memoirs of his life, which are prefixed to his works, but are not so ample in information as might have been expected from one who knew him so well. It was now incumbent upon him to give the usual proof of the sincerity of his conversion, by writing against paganism, and in defence of Christianity. With this view he composed his piece “De gratia Dei, or, concerning the grace of God,” which he addressed to Donatus. It is a work of the same nature with the Apologetic of Tertullian, and the Octavius of Minutius Felix; and it is remarkable, that Cyprian has not only insisted upon the same arguments with those writers, but frequently transcribed their words, those of Minutius Felix especially. In the year 247, the year after his conversion, he composed another piece upon the subject, entitled “De idolorum vanitate, or, upon the vanity of idols” in which he has taken the same liberties with Tertulliau and Minutius Felix. His Oxford editor, bishop Fell, endeavours to excuse him from the charge of plagiarism upon this occasion; because, says he, having the same points to treat as all the apologists had before, namely, the truth and excellency of Christianity, and the falsehood and vanity of heathenism, he could not well avoid making use of the. same topics.

Cyprian’s behaviour, both before and after his baptism, was so highly pleasing to the bishop of Carthage, that he ordained him priest a few months after, although it was rather irregular to ordain any person in his noviciate: But Cyprian was so extraordinary a person, and thought capable of doing such singular service to the church, that it might seem allowable in his case to dispense a little with the form and discipline of it. Besides his known talents as a man of learning, he had acquired a high reputation of sanctity since his conversion; having not only separated himself from his wife, which in those days was thought an extraordinary act of piety, but also consigned over all his goods to the poor, and given himself up entirely to the things of God; and on this account, when the bishop of Carthage died the year after, that is, in the year 248, none was judged so proper to succeed him as Cyprian. Cyprian himself, as Pontius tells us, was extremely against it, and kept out of the way on purpose to avoid being chosen; but the people insisted upon it, and he was forced to comply. The quiet and repose which the Christians had enjoyed for the last forty years, had, it seems, greatly corrupted their manners; and therefore Cyprian’s first care, after his advancement to the bishopric, was to correct disorders and reform abuses. Luxury was prevalent among them; and many of their women were remarkable indecorous in the article of dress. This occasioned him to draw up his piece, “De habitu virginum, or, concerning the dress of young women;” in which, besides what he says on that particular head, he inculcates many lessons of modesty and sobriety.

As soon as Cyprian had withdrawn himself, he was proscribed by name, and his goods confiscated. He lay concealed, but not inactive; for he continued to write from time to time to the clergy and to the laity such letters as their unhappy situation and occasions required. He exhorted the clergy to take care of the discipline of the church, of the poor, and especially of those who suffered for the gospel; and he gave them particular directions upon each of these heads. He exhorted the people to be of good courage, to stand fast in the faith, and to persevere against all the terrors of persecution even unto death; assuring them, in the words of the apostle, that the present “afflictions, which were but for a moment, would work for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” When the persecution ceased, either in 251 or 252, Cyprian returned to Carthage, and appeared again at the head of his clergy. He had now much business upon his hands, which was occasioned in his absence, partly by the persecution, and the disorders attending it, and partly by divisions which had arisen among the Christians. The first thing that presented itself was the case of the lapsed, or those unhappy members of the church who had not been able to stand the fiery trial of persecution, but had been drawn by the terrors of it to renounce Christ, and sacrifice to idols; and for the settling of this, he immediately called a council at Carthage. The year after, he called another council, to sit upon the baptism of infants; and, in 255, a third, to debate concerning baptism received from heretics, which was there determined to be void and of no effect. All these points had produced great disputes and disturbances; and as to the last, namely, heretical baptism, it was so far from being fixed at Carthage to the satisfaction of the church, that Stephen, the bishop of Rome, and a great part of the Christian world, afterwards opposed it with the utmost violence.

, a French critic and philologer, was born of protestant parents at Castres in Upper Languedoc April 6, 1651, and began to be educated in the college there; but, when by a decree of the council the direction of it was given, in 1664, to the Jesuits alone, his father sent him to the university of Puylaurens, and afterwards to that of Saumur, that he might finish his classical studies under Tannegui le Fevre, or Tanaquil Faber. This eminent scholar was so pleased with Dacier’s inclination for learning, that he kept him alone in his house, after he had dismissed the rest of the pupils; and here he conceived that affection for le Fevre’s celebrated daughter, which ended at length in marriage. On le Fevre’s death in 1672, Dacier returned to his father; and after some time went to Paris, in order to gain a settlement, and cultivate the acquaintance and friendship of the learned: in the former of these objects he did not at first succeed; but on a second visit to Paris, he procured an introduction to the duke of Montausier, governor to the dauphin, who put him on the list of the commentators for the use of the dauphin, and engaged him in the edition of Pompeius Festus, and Marcus Verrius Flaccus. This he published at Paris, 1681, in 4to; and it was again published at Amsterdam, 1699, in 4to, which edition is preferable to that of Paris, because there are added to it the entire notes of Joseph Scaliger, Fulvius Ursinus, and Anthony Augustinus, and the new fragments of Festus. His Horace, with a French translation, and notes critical and historical, came out at Paris, 1681, in 10 vols. 12mo, and has often been printed since. The best edition of this work is that of Amsterdam, 1726, consisting of the same number of volumes in the same size. Another edition was printed at Amsterdam in 8 vols. 12mo, to which were added the translation and notes of father Sanadon, published at Paris, 1728, in 2 vols. 4to, Mr. John Masson, a refugee minister in England, made several animadversions upon Dacier’s notes on Horace, in his life of that poet, printed at Leyden in 1708; which occasioned Dacier to publish new explications upon the works of Horace, with an answer to the criticisms of Mr. Masson, in which he treats Masson’s book with great contempt; and, speaking of verbal criticism, styles it “the last effort of reflection and judgment.” These were afterwards added to Sanadon’s edition of Dacier’s Horace.

In the midst of all these various publications, so close to eacli other, she married Dacier, with whom she had been brought up in her father’s house from her earliest years. This happened, as we have already observed in our account of that gentleman, in 1683; though some have controverted not only the date, but even the marriage itself; and have surmised that she was previously married to one John Lesnier, a bookseller of her father’s, and that she ran away from him for the sake of Dacier, with whom she was never married in any regular way. But it is hardly possible to conceive, that so extraordinary a circumstance in the history of this celebrated lady must not, if it were true, have been notorious and incontested. We are therefore apt to admit father Niceron’s solution of this difficulty; vyho observes, upon this occasion, that “nothing is more common than for a person, who abandons any party, to be exposed to the calumies of those whom they have quitted,” and to suffer by them. Madame Dacier, soon after her marriage, declared to the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux, who had been her friends, a design of reconciling herself to the church of Rome; but as M. Dacier was not yet convinced of the reasonableness of such a change, they thought proper to retire to Castres in 1684, in order to examine the controversy between the protestants and papists. They at last determined in favour of the latter; and, as already noticed, made their public abjuration in Sept. 1685. This, in the opinion of her catholic admirers, might probably occasion the above-mentioned rumour, so much to the disadvantage of madame Dacier, and for which there was probably very little foundation. After they had become catholics, however, the duke of Montausier and the bishop of Meaux recommended them at court; and the king settled a pension of 1500 livres upon M. Dacier, and another of 500 upon his lady. The patent was expedited in November; and, upon the advice which they received of it, they returned to Paris, where they resumed their studies; but before proceeding in our account of madame Dacier' s publications, it is necessary to do justice to the liberality of her patron the duke de Montausier. We are informed, that in 1682 this lady having dedicated a book to the king of France, she could not find any person at court, who would venture to introduce her to his majesty, in order to present it, because she was at that time a protestant. The duke of Montausier, being informed of this, offered his service to introduce her to the king, and taking her in his coach, presented her and her book to his majesty; who told him with an air of resentment, that he acted wrong in supporting persons of that lady’s religion; and that for his part he would forbid his name to be prefixed to any book written by Huguenots; for which purpose he would give orders to seize all the copies of mademoiselle le Fevre’s book. The duke answered with that freedom with which he always spoke to the king, and in which no person else would presume to follow him: “Is it thus, sir, that you favour polite literature? I declare to you frankly, a king ought not to be a bigot.” He added then, that he would thank the lady in his majesty’s name, and make her a present of an hundred pistoles; and that he would leave it to the king to pay him, or not pay him; and he did as he had said. In 1688 she published a French translation of Terence’s comedies, with notes, in 8 vols. 12mo. She is said to have risen at five o'clock in the morning, during a very sharp winter, and to have dispatched four of the comedies; but, upon looking them over some months after, to have flung them into the fire, being much dissatisfied with them, and to have begun the translation again. She brought the work then to the highest perfection; and, in the opinion of the French critics, even reached the graces and noble simplicity of the original. It was a circumstance greatly to her honour, that, having taken the liberty to change the scenes and acts, her disposition of them was afterwards confirmed by an excellent ms. in the king of France’s library. The best and most finished edition of this universally-admired performance, is that of 1717; which, however, was greatly improved afterwards, by adopting the emendations in Bentley’s edition. She had a hand in the translation of Marcus Antoninus, which her husband published in 1691, and likewise in the specimen of a translation of Plutarch’s Lives, which he published three years after; but being now intent on her translation of Homer, she left her husband to finish that of Plutarch. In 1711 appeared her Homer, translated into French, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo and the translation is reckoned elegant and faithful. In 1714 she published the Causes of the Corruption of Taste. This treatise was written against M. de la Motte, who, in the preface to his Iliad, had declared very little esteem for that poem. Madame Dacier, shocked with the liberty he had taken with her favourite author, immediately began this defence of him, in which she did not treat La Motte with the greatest civility. In 1716 she published a defence of Homer, against the apology of father Hardouin, or, a sequel of the causes of the corruption of Taste: in which she attempts to shew, that father Hardouin, in endeavouring to apologize for Homer, has done him a greater injury than ever he received from his most declared enemies. Besides these two pieces, she had prepared a third against La Motte; but suppressed it, after M. de Valiincourt had procured a reconciliation between them. The same year also she published the Odyssey of Homer, translated from the Greek, with notes, in 3 vols. 12mo, and this, as far as we can find, was her last appearance as an author. She was in a very infirm state of health the last two years of her life; and died, after a very painful sickness, Aug. 17, 1720, being 69 years of age. She bad two daughters and a son, of whose education she took the strictest care; but the son died young: one of her daughters became a nun; and the other, who is said to have had united in her all the virtues and accomplishments of her sex, died at 18 years of age. Her mother has said high things of her, in the preface to her translation of the Iliad.

Madame Dacier was a lady of great virtue as well as learning. She was remarkable for firmness, generosity, good nature, and piety. The causes of her change of religion are not well explained, but she appears to have been at least sincere. Her modesty was so great, that she never spoke of subjects of literature; and it was with some difficulty that she could at any time be led to do it. There is an anecdote related of her, which her countrymen say sets this modesty in a very strong light, although others may think the pi oof equivocal. It is customary with the scholars in the northern parts of Europe, who visit, when they travel, the learned in other countries, to carry with them a book, in which they desire such persons to write their names, with some sentence or other. A learned German paid a visit to madame Dacier, and requested her to write her name and sentence in his book. She seeing in it the names of the greatest scholars in Europe, told him, that she should he ashamed to put her name among those of so many illustrious persons; and that such presumption would by no means become her. The gentleman insisting upon it, she was at last prevailed upon and taking her pen, wrote her name with this verse of Sophocles, Γυναιξὶν ὴ πιγὴ φέρει χόσμον, that is, “Silence is the ornament of the female sex.” When likewise she was solicited to publish a translation of some books of scripture, with remarks upon them, she always answered, that “a woman ought to read, and meditate upon the scriptures, and regulate her conduct by them, and to keep silence, agreeably to the command of St. Haul.” Among her other literary honours, the academy of Iticovrati at Padua chose her one of their body in 1684.

Daillé, having lived seven years with so excellent a master, set out on his travels with his pupils in the autumn of 1619, and went to Geneva; and from thence through Piedmont and Lombardy to Venice, where they spent the winter. During their abode in Italy, a melancholy affair happened, which perplexed him not a little. One of his pupils fell sick at Mantua; and he removed him with all speed to Padua, where those of the protestant religion have more liberty, but here he died; and the difficulty was, to avoid the observation of the inquisitors, and remove the corpse to France, to the burial-place of his ancestors. After much consideration, no more eligible plan presented itself than to send him under the disguise of a bale of merchandize goods, or a cargo of books; and in this manner the corpse was conveyed to France, under the care of two of his servants; not, however, without the necessary safe-conduct and passports, which were procured for him from the republic by the celebrated father Paul. He then continued his travels with his other pupil, visiting Switzerland, Germany, Flanders, Holland, England; and returned to France towards the end of 1621. The son relates, that he had often heard his father regret those two years of travelling, which he reckoned as lost, because he could have spent them to better purpose in his closet; and, it seems, he would have regretted them still more, if he had not enjoyed the privilege at Venice of a familiar acquaintance with father Paul, the only fruit which he said he had reaped from that journey. M. du Plessis, with whom that father corresponded by letters, had recommended to him in a very particular manner both his grandsons and their crovernor; so that M. Daille was immediately admitted into his confidence, and there passed not a day without his enjoying some hours discourse with him. The good father even conceived such an affection for M. Daille, that he used his utmost endeavours with a French physician of the protestant religion, and one of his intimate friends, to prevail with him to stay at Venice. This circumstance of Daille’s life, among many others, has been thought no inconsiderable proof, that father Paul concealed, under the habit of a monk, a temper wholly devoted to protestantism and its professors.

Daille was received minister in 1623, and first exercised his office in the family of du Plessis Mornay: but this did not last long; for that lord fell sick a little after, and died the same year, in the arms of the new pastor. Daille spent the following year in digesting some papers of his, which were afterwards published in two volumes, under the title of “Memoirs.” In 1625 he was appointed minister of the church of Sauinur; and the year after removed to that of Paris. Here he spent the rest of his life, and diffused great light over the whole hody, as well by his sermons, as by his books of controversy. In 1628 he wrote his celebrated book, “De l'usage des Peres,” or, “Of the Use of the Fathers;” but, on account of some troubles which seemed to be coming upon the protestants in France, it was not published till 1631. Bayle has pronounced this work a master-piece; but it has been attacked with great seventy by some, as tending to lessen the just respect due to the fathers, and to the views of religious opinions which they exhibit, and which are at least important in point of historical evidence. On the other hand, some eminent scholars, and orthodox churchmen in England have acknowledged its high worth and merit; and so early as 1651 an English translation of it was published by the learned Thomas Smith, B. D. fellow of Christ’s college in Cambridge. An advertisement is prefixed to it, from which we transcribe a passage or two, as illustrating the translator’s opinion and views of the work: “The translation of this tract,” says Mr. Smith, “hath been often attempted, and oftener desired by many noble personages of this and other nations: among others by sir Lucius Gary late lord viscount Falkland, who, with his dear friend Mr. Chillingworth, made very much use of it in all their writings against the Romanists. But the papers of that learned nobleman, wherein this translation was half finished, were long since involved in the common loss. Those few, which have escaped it, and the press, make a very honourable mentipn of this monsieur, whose acquaintance the said lord was wont to say, was worth a voyage to Paris. In page 202 of his Reply, he hath these words: ‘This observation of mine hath been confirmed by consideration of what hath been so temperately, learnedly, and judiciously written by M. Daille, our protestant Perron.’ I shall add but one lord’s testimony more, namely, the lord George Digby*S in his late Letters concerning Religion, in these words, p. 27, 28: 'The reasons prevalent with me, whereon and enquiring and judicious person should be obliged to rely and acquiesce, are so amply and so learnedly set down by M. Daille in his `Emploi des Peres,‘ that I think little, which is material and weighty, can he said on this subject, that his rare and piercing observation hath not anticipated.’ And for myself, I must ingenuously profess, that it was the reading of this rational book, which first convinced me that my study in the French language was not ill employed; which hath also enabled me to commend this to the world, as faithfully translated by a judicious hand.” Mr. Mettayer, who was minister of St. Quintin, published a Latin translation of this work; which translation was revised and augmented with new observations, by Daille himself, and was printed at Geneva in 1656.

In 1633 he published another work of general concern, entitled “L'Apologie de nos Eglises,” or, “An Apology for the reformed Churches;” in which he vindicates, with much learning and argument, their separation from the church of Rome, from the imputation of schism, which was usually brought against them. This work was also translated into English by Mr. Smith, in 1658; as it was into Latin the same year by Daille himself, and printed at Amsterdam in 8vo. It was much censured by the clergy of France, as soon as it was published, and some were employed to write against it. Daille“wrote two or three little pieces in defence of it, which were afterwards printed with it in the Latin edition. That Daille was a very voluminous writer, will not seem strange, when it is considered that he lived long, was very laborious, and enjoyed a good state of health. He was endued with the qualifications of a writer in a most eminent degree; and had this singular advantage, that his understanding was not impaired with age: for it is observable, that there is no less strength and fire in his two volumes” De objecto cultds religiosi," the first of which was published when he was 70 years old, than in any of his earlier works.

He assisted at the national synod, which was held at Alengon in 1637: and his authority and advice contributed much to quiet the disputes, which were then warmly agitated among the protestants concerning universal grace. He declared strenuously for universal grace; and afterwards published at Amsterdam, in 1655, a Latin work against Frederic Spanheim, the divinity professor at Leyden, entitled “An apology for the synods of Alengon and Cbarenton.” This work rekindled the war among the protestant divines; yet Daille endeavoured to clear himself. by saying, that his book had been published without his knowledge. Nevertheless, he answered the celebrated Samuel des Marets, professor of Groning-en, which produced a short, but very warm contest between them, in which Daille’s spirit of controversy has not been approved even by his friends. He died at Paris, April 15, 1670, having never experienced throughout his life any illness, except that in 1650 he was suddenly seized with a lethargic or apopletic disorder, in which he lay 10 or 11 days, apparently without a possibility of recovering. He left a high reputation behind him; and the protestants used to say in France, that “they had no better writer since Calvin than M. Daille.” In 1720, M. Engelschall, a Roman catholic clergyman at Dresden, published proposals for a complete edition of Daille’s works, for which it is probable he had no encouragement, as we have not been able to find such a publication in any catalogue; but his proposals, which are drawn up with great candour, will at least enable us to give a more correct list of Daille’s works, with the best editions. 1. “De Usu Patrum,” Geneva, 1656. 2. “Apologia ecclesiarum veformatarum,” Amst. 3. “Fides ex S. Scripturis demonstrate,” Gen. 1660. 4. “Examen Sententiae Theoph. Bracheti Milleterii super conciliatione Controversiarum religionis,” Paris, 1637. 5. “De Patrum, fide circa imagines,” Leyden, 1642. 6. “De pcenis et satisfactionibus humanis,” Amst. 1649. 7. “Pseudepigrapha Apostolica de octo libris constitutionum Apostolicarum,” Harderw. 1653. 8. “De jejuniis et quadragesima,” Daventer, 1G54. 9. “Pro duabus Synodis, Alenson et Carenton. Apologia,” Amst. 1655. 10. “De coniirmatione et extrema unctione,” Genev. 1659. II. “De confessione auriculari,” Genev. 1661. 12. “Adversus Latinorurn traditionem de cultus religiosi objecto, disputatio,” Gen. 1664. 13. “De Scriptis, quae sub Dionysii Areopagii et Ignatii nominibus circumferuntur,” Gen. 1666. 14. “De cultibus Latinorum religiosis Libri Novem,” Gen. 1671. In all those he has been thought to be very perspicuous, both with regard to the expression, and to the disposition of his subject. He was reproached by one of his adversaries with stealing several things from Dr. Davenant, in his “Exposition of the Epistle to the Colossians;” but he answered the charge.

According to the records of the Charter-house, he was appointed master July 9, 1624, when he was only in deacon’s orders, which was through the recommendation “of the most excellent prince of Wales.” He is described as a man “of good merit and deserte.” The governors resolved at the same time that no future master should be elected under forty years of age; or who was not in holy orders of priesthood two years before his election; and having not more than one living, and that within thirty miles of London. Sir Robert had grown so very infirm in 1636, that the governors ordered three persons as his assistants.

, a very learned Lutheran divine of the sixteenth century, of whose personal history little is known, deserves notice as thetranslator of Luther’s German Bible into the Sclavonian, which language being . spoken in Styria, Carinthia, and Carniola, the states of those countries came to a determination that this Bible should be printed for their use. They first employed John Manlius, a printer of Laybach, who was the first that printed the Sclavonic in Roman letters: but while Manlius was making his calculations of expence, &c. the archduke Charles of Austria forbad him to print it. This appears to have happened in 1580. The states, however, only changed their determination so far as to have it printed elsewhere, and sent Dalmatin for that purpose to Gratz, where he was to correct the press, after the copy had been carefully revised at Laybach by him, in conjunction with other eminent divines and Oriental scholars. But, finding that no impression of this Bible would be permitted in the Austrian dominions, the states sent, in April 1583, Dalmatin, and another divine, Adam Bohoritsch, to Wittemberg, with a recommendation to the elector of Saxony, and the work being begun in May 1583, was finished Jan. 1, 1584. They had agreed with Samuel Seelfisch, bookseller at Wittemberg, that he should print fifteen hundred copies, each to contain two hundred and eighty sheets of the largest paper, on a fine character, with wooden cuts; for which the states of Carniola were to pay after the rate of twenty florins for every bale of five hundred sheets. The expences of the impression of this Bible amounted to about eight thousand florins: towards which the states of Styria gave a thousand florins, those of Carirrthia nine hundred, and the evangelic states of Carniola six thousand one hundred. These particulars may not be unacceptable to typographical students, as it is but seldom we have access to the history of early printing. Of Dalmatin we are only told that he afterwards was put in possession of the cure of St. Khazaim, or St. Catiani, near Aurspergh, by Christopher, baron of Aurspergh, in 1585, who, when the popish party banished Dalmatin in 1598, kept him concealed in his house; and a vault under the stable before the castle used long to be shewn as the hole of the preacher."

As the Cuddalore went under the secret orders of the governor, it was not thought proper to apply to the council for the provision of such a cargo as was necessary in countries where there was no regular communication or commerce; and where even provisions could, probably, only be purchased by barter; a small cargo was put on board at the expence of the governor, who permitted captain Baker, the captain, to have a fourth concern. The evening before Mr. Dalrymple embarked, governor Pigot presented him with an instrument, making him a present of whatever profits might accrue from the three-fourths concern. Having never insinuated such an intention, he left no ground for mercenary imputation against Mr. Dalrymple, in undertaking the voyage, or against the governor himself for ordering it. In consequence of an offer made by the hon. Thomas Howe, commander of that ship, he first embarked in the Winchelsea, April 22, 1759, and having joined the Cuddalore, captain George Baker, in the strait of Malacca, whither that vessel had been dispatched a few days before the Winchelsea, Mr. Dalrymple quitted the Winchelsea, and embarked on the Cuddalore June 3, in the Strait of Sincapore.

The person then filling the hereditary office of Bandahara, was as conspicuous for the probity and exalted justice ok his character, as by his distinguished rank, of which, whilst Mr. Dalrymple was at Sooloo, in 1761, an occasion occurred for Bandahara to exert. There were at this time two Chinese junks in Sooloo road; in the cargo of one of them the sultan had an interest; the other belonged entirely to Chinese merchants of Amoy. The sultan, who was very avaricious, in hopes of getting money from the Chinese, or thinking, perhaps, that it would be more advantageous for the sale of the cargo in which he was concerned, laid an embargo on the other junk: Bandahara and Oranky Mailick remonstrated with the sultan on the impropriety of this behaviour to merchants, but without effect; upon which Bandahara, and Oranky Mailick, with Pangleema Milabain, a person of a military order, consonant to ancient knighthood, went on board the China junk, in which the sultan had an interest, and brought her rudder on shore, informing the sultan that they would detain the one if he obstructed the departure of the other: this well-timed interference had its due effect, and both junks proceeded without further molestation on their voyage home.

He returned to Madras from this eastern voyage, Jan. 23, 1762. The company’s administration approved of his proceedings, and in March 1762, having resolved to send on the company’s account the cargo stipulated, employed him in expediting the provision of that cargo. His expences in the voyage of almost three years, amounted to 612l. which was repaid by the governor and council of Madras, but he neither asked or received any pecuniary advantage to himself. On the 10th of May, the London packet was destined for the Sooloo voyage, and Mr. Dalrymple was appointed captain. In the passage from Madras to Sooloo, he first visited Balambangan; and on his arrival at Sooloo, found the small-pox had swept off many of the principal inhabitants, and dispersed the rest; so that very ineffectual measures had been taken towards providing the intended cargo. But although this unexpected calamity, which in the Eastern Islands is similar in its effects to the plague, was a sufficient reason for the disappointment of the cargo, yet a still more efficient cause, was the death of Bandahara, soon after Mr. Dalrymple’s departure from Sooloo, the preceding year. A few days before the death of this good man, he sent for the linguist whom Mr. Dalrymple had employed, and who had remained behind at Sooloo, asking if he thought the English would certainly come again. The linguist declaring that it was not to be doubted; Bandahara thereupon expressed his concern, saying that it would have made him very happy to have lived to have seen this contract faithfully performed on their part, and the friendship with the English established on a firm footing. The linguist observed, that they were all equally bound. Banclahara replied, that although this was true, all had not the same disposition; and perhaps none else the power of enforcing the due execution of their engagements; but that he was resigned to the divine will.

Mr. Dalrymple had taken every occasion to keep up his claim on the Madras establishment; but after lord Pigot was, in 1775, appointed governor of Fort St. George, he was advised by the then chairman and deputy chairman, to make a specific application before the arrangement of the Madras council was made, his former letters being considered as too general. Accordingly, on the 3d of March, 1775, he applied to be restored to his standing on the Madras establishment; which application the company were pleased to comply with, and he was appointed in his rank, as a member of council, and was nominated to be one of the committee of circuit. In the proceedings of the council at Madras, no man, however violent in his animosity or opposition, ever imputed to Mr. Dalrymple any want of integrity or zeal, for what he thought was for the company’s interest, and he had the satisfaction to find that the court of directors gave him distinguished marks of their approbation. On the 1st of April, 1779, when the company were pleased to accept of his services in the employment he held until his death, namely, that of hydrographer, by advice of sir George Wombwell, the then chairman, he accepted on the 8th that employment by letter, read in court on the 9th of April, on condition it should not invalidate his pretensions at Madras.

1. “Account of Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean before 1764,” 1767, 8vo. 2. † “Memorial to the Proprietors of East India Stock,” 1768, 8vo. 3. † “Account of what has passed between the East India Directors and Alexander Dalrymple,” as first printed, 1768, 8vo. 4. “Account of what has passed Do. Do. as published,” 8vo. 5. “Plan for extending the Commerce of this Kingdom, and of the East India Company, by an Establishment at Balambangan,” 1771. 6. * “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 20th June 1769, 8vo. 7. “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 30th June 1769, 4to. 8. Second Letter Do. 10th July 1769, 4to. 9. “Vox populi Vox Dei, lord Weymouth’s Appeal to the General Court of India Proprietors, considered, 14th August,” 1769, 4to. 10. “Historical collection of South Sea Voyages,” 1770, 2 vols. 4to; 1771, 4to. 11. † “Proposition of a benevolent Voyage to introduce Corn, &c. into New Zealand,” &c. 1771, 4to. 12. Considerations on a Pamphlet (by governor Johnstone) entitled “Thoughts onour acquisitions in the East Indies, particularly respecting Bengal,” 1772, 8vo. 13. “General View of the East India Company’s Affairs (written in January 1769), to which are added some Observations on the present State of the Company’s Affairs,” 1772, 8vo. 14. † “A paper concerning the General Government for India,” 8vo. 15. † “Rights of the East India Company.” N. B. This was printed at the company’s expence, 1773, 8vo. 16. “Letter to Dr. Hawkesworth,” 1773, 4to. 17. *“Observations on Dr. Hawkesworth’s Preface to 2d edition,” 1773, 4to. An opinion of sir David Dalrymple, that there was too much asperity in this Reply, retarded, and the death of Dr. Hawkesworth prevented, the publication. 18. † “Memorial of Doctor Juan Louis Arias (in Spanish),” 1773, 4to. 19. † “Proposition for printing, by subscription, the ms voyages and travels in the British Museum,” 1773, 4to. 20. “A full and clear proof that the Spaniards have no right to Balambangan,” 1774, 8vo. 21. “An historical relation of the several Expeditions, from Fort Marlbro' to the Islands off the West Coast of Sumatra,” 1775, 4to. 22. “Collection of Voyages, chiefly in the South Atlantic Ocean, from the original Mss. by Dr. H alley, M. Bouvet, &c. with a Preface concerning a Voyage on Discovery, proposed to be undertaken by Alexander Dalrymple at his own expence; Letters to Lord North on the subject, and Plan of a Republican Colony,” 1775, 4to. 23. † “Copies of papers relative to the Restoration of the King of Tanjour, the Imprisonment of Lord Pigot, &c. Printed by the East India Company, for the use of the Proprietors.” 1777, 4to. N. B. In this collection are many Minutes of Council, and some Letters by Alexander Dalrymple. 24. † Several other pieces on the same subject, written by Alexander Dalrymple, were printed by admiral Pigot and Alexander Dalrymple, but not sold; those particularly by Alexander Dalrymple are 4to, 1777. 25. “Notes on Lord Pigot’s Narrative.” 26. “Letter to Proprietors of East India Stock,” 8th May 1777. 27. “Account of the transactions concerning the Revolt at Madras, 30th April 1777. Appendix.” 28. “Letter to the Court of Directors, 19th June 1777. Memorial 19th June 1777.” 29. † “Account of the subversion of the Legal Government of Fort St. George, in answer to Mr. Andrew Stuart’s Letter to the Court of Directors,” 1778, 4to. 30. “Journal of the Grenville,” published in the Philosophical Transactions, 1778, 4to. 31. “Considerations on the present State of Affairs between England and America, 1778,” 8vo. 32. “Considerations on the East India Bill, 1769,” 8vo, 1778. 33. “State of the East India Company, and Sketch of an equitable Agreement,” 1780, 8vo. 34. “Account of the Loss of the Grosvenor,” 1783, 8vo. 35. “Reflections on the present State of the East India Company,” 1783, 8vo. 36. “A short account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel,” 1783, 8vo. 37. “A Retrospective View of the Ancient System of the Blast India Company, with a Plan of Regulation,” 178-4, 8vo. 38. “Postscript to Mr. Dairy mple’s account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel, being, Observations made on a perusal of it by Moodoo Kistna,” 1785, 8vo. 39. “Extracts from Juvenilia, or Poems by George Wither,” 1785, 24mo. 40. “Eair State of the Case between the East India Company and the Owners of Ships now in their service; to which are added, Considerations on Mr. Brough’s Pamphlet, concerning East India Shipping,” 1786, 8vo. 41. “A serious Admonition to the Public on the intended Thief Colony at Botany Bay.” 42. “Review of the Contest concerning Four New Regiments, graciously offered by his Majesty to be sent to India,” &c. 178S, 8vo. 43. * “Plan for promoting the Fur-trade, and securing it to this Country, by uniting the Operations of the East India and Hudson’s Bay Companies,” 1789, 4to. 44. “Memoir of a Map of the Lands around the North Pole,” 1789, 4to, 45. “An Historical Journal of the Expeditions by Sea and Land, to the North of California in 1768, 1769, and 1770, when Spanish establishments were first made at San Diego and Monterey, translated from the Spanish ms. by William Revely, esq. to which is added, Translation of Cabrera Bueno’s Description of the Coast of California, and an Extract from the ms Journal of M. Sauvague le Muet, 1714,” 1790, 4to. 46. “A Letter to a Friend on the Test Act,” 1790, 8vo. 47. “The Spanish Pretensions fairly discussed,” 1790, 8vo, 48. “The Spanish Memorial of 4th June considered,” 1790, 8vo. 49. † “Plan for the publication of a Repertory of Oriental Information,” 1790, 4to. 50. * “Memorial of Alexander Dalrymple,” 1791, 8vo. 51. “Parliamentary Reform, as it is called, improper, in the present State of this Country,” 1793, 8vo. 52. “Mr. Fox’s Letter to his worthy and independent Electors of Westminster, fully considered,” 1793, 8vo. 53. † “Observations on the Copper-coinage wanted for the Circars. Printed for the use of the East India Company,” 1794, 8vo. 54. “The Poor Man’s Friend,” 1795, 8vo. 55. “A collection of English Songs, with an Appendix of Original Pieces,” 1796, 8vo. 56. * “A Fragment on the India Trade, written in 1791,” 1797, 8vo. 57. “Thoughts of an old Man of independent mind, though dependent fortune,” 1800, 8vo. 58. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. I. 4to. April 1791 to January 1793. 59. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. II. 4to. (not completed).

, an eminent Scotch lawyer and antiquary, and brother to the preceding, was born in Edinburgh on the 28th of October 1726, and was educated at Eton school, where he was distinguished no less for his acquisitions in literature-than for the regularity of his manners. From Eton he was removed, to complete his studies at Utrecht, where he remained till 1746. In 1748 he was called to the Scotch bar, where, notwithstanding the elegant propriety of the cases which he drew, his success did not answer the expectations which had been formed of him. This was not owing either to wajjt of science or to want of industry, but to certain peculiarities, which, if not inherent in his nature, were the result of early and deep-rooted habits. He possessed on all occasions a sovereign contempt, not only for verbal antithesis, but for well-rounded periods, and every thing which had the semblance of declamation; and indeed he was wholly unfitted, by an ill-toned voice, and ungraceful elocution, for shining as an orator. It is not surprizing, therefore, that his pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ strokes of irony too fine to be perceived by the bulk of any audience, but expressed themselves in full, clear, and harmonious periods. Even his memorials, though classically written, and often replete with valuable matter, did not on every occasion please the court; for they were always brief, and sometimes, it was said, indicated more attention to the minutiye of forms than to the merits of the cause. Yet on points which touched his own feelings, or the interests of truth and virtue, his language was animated, his arguments forcible, and his scrupulous regard to form thrown aside. He was on all occasions incapable of misleading the judge by a false statement of facts, or his clients, by holding out to them fallacious grounds of hope. The character indeed which he had obtained for knowledge and integrity in the Scotch law, soon raised him to an eminence in his profession. Accordingly, in March 1766, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of session with the wannest approbation of his countrymen; and in May 1776 he succeeded to the place of a lord commissioner of the justiciary on the resignation of lord Coalston, his wife’s father. Upon taking his seat on the bench he assumed the title of lord Hailes, in compliance with the usage established in the court of session: this is the name by which he is generally known among the learned of Europe.

In 1771 he composed a very learned and ingenious paper, or law-case, on the disputed peerage of Sutherland. He was one of the trustees of the lady Elizabeth, the daughter of the last earl, and being then a judge, the names of two eminent lawyers were annexed to it. In that case, he displayed the greatest accuracy of research, and the most profound knowledge of the antiquities and rules of descent, in that country; which he managed with such dexterity of argument, as clearly established the right of his pupil, and formed a precedent, at the same time, for the decision of all such questions in future. In 1773 he published a small volume, entitled “Remarks on the History of Scotland.” Tnese appeared to be the gleanings of the historical research which he was making at that time, and discovered his lordship’s turn for minute and accurate inquiry into doubtful points of history, and at the same time displayed the candour and liberality of his judgment. This publication prepared the public for the favourable reception of the Annals of Scotland, in 2 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in 1776, and the second in 1779, and fully answered the expectations which he had raised. The difficulties attending the subject, the want of candour, and the spirit of party, had hitherto prevented the Scotch from having a genuine history of their country, in times previous to those of queen Mary. Lord Hailes carried his attention to this history, as far back as to the accession of Malcolm Canmore, in 1057, and his work contains the annals of 14 princes, from Malcolm III. to the death of David II. Aiul happy it was that the affairs of Scotland attracted the talents of so able a writer, who to the learning and skill of a lawyer, joined the industry and curiosity of an antiquary; to whom no object appears frivolous or unimportant that serves to elucidate his subject.

Lord Hailes has so well authenticated his work by references to historians of good credit, or deeds and writings of undoubted authority, and has so happily cleared it from fable, uncertainty, and conjecture, that every Scotchman, since its appearance, has been able to trace back with confidence, in genuine memoirs, the history of his country for 736 years, and may revere the memory of the respectable judge, who with indefatigable industry, and painful labour, has removed the rubbish under which the precious remains were concealed. Lord Hailes at first intended, as appears by an advertisement prefixed to his work, to carry down his annals to the accession of James I. but, to the great disappointment of the public, he stopped short at the death of David II. and a very important period of the history still remains to be filled up by an able writer. Lord Hailes’s Annals of Scotland, it is believed, stand unrivalled in the English language, for a p irity and simplicity of style, an elegance, perspicuity, and conciseness of narration, that peculiarly suited the form of his work; and is entirely void of that false ornament, and stately gait, which makes the works of some other writers appear in gigantic but fictitious majesty.

The erudition of lord Hailes, says his friend the late lord Woodhousiee, was not of a dry and scholastic nature; he felt the beauties of the composition of the ancients; he entered with taste and discernment into the merits of the Latin poets, and that peculiar vein of delicate and ingenious thought which characterises the Greek epigrammatists; and a few specimens which he has left of his own composition in that style, evince the hand of a master. It would not, adds his lordship, be easy to produce from the works of any modern Latin poet, a more delicate, tender, and pathetic effusion, or an idylliou of greater classical purity, than the iambics he wrote “On the death of his first wife, in child-bed of twins.” Lord Hailes was a man of wit, and possessed a strong feeling of the absurd and ridiculous in human conduct and character, which gave a keen edge of irony both to his conversation and writings. To his praise, however, it must be added, that that irony, if not always untinctured with prejudice, was never prompted by malignity, and was generally exerted in the cause of virtue and good morals. How much he excelled in painting the lighter weaknesses and absurdities of mankind, may be seen from the papers of his composition in the “World” and the “Mirror.” His private character was every thing that is praise-worthy and respectable. In a word, he was an honour to the station which he filled, and to the age in which he lived. That such a man should not yet have found a biographer worthy of his merits, cannot be ascribed either to the obscurity of his character and station, or to the incapacity of his contemporaries. But lord Hailes was a man of piety of the old stamp, and a strenuous advocate for revealed religion, and therefore did not share, as he uould not have been ambitious to share, the celebrity that has been conferred on some of his countrymen of a very opposite character.

The works of lord Hailes, arranged in the order of their publication, are as follow: 1. “Sacred poems, by various authors,” Edinb. 1751, 12mo. 2. “The wisdom of Solomon, wisdom of Jesus the son of Sirach, or Ecclesiasticus.” Edinb. 1755, 12mo. 3. “Select discourses, nine in number, by John Smith, late fellow of Queen’s college, Cambridge,” Ediub. 17 06, 12mo. 4. “World,” No. 140, Sept. 4, 1755; a meditation among books. 5. World, No. 147, Thursday, Oct. 23, 1755. 6. World, No. 204, Thursday, Nov. 25, 1756. 7. “A discourse of the unnatural and vile Conspiracy attempted by John earl of Go wry, and his brother, against his majesty’s person, at St. Johnstoun, upon the 5th of Aug. 1600,” 1757, 12mo. 8. “A sermon which might have been preached in East Lothian, upon the 25th day of Oct. 1761, from Acts xxvii. 1, 2.” The barbarous people sbewed us no little kindness,“Edinb. 1761, 12mo; occasioned by the country people pillaging the wreck of two vessels, viz. the Betsy, Cunningham, and the Leith packet, Pitcairn, from London to Leith, cast away on the shore between D unbar and North Berwick. All the passengers on board the former, in number seventeen, perished; five on-board the latter, Oct. 16, 1761. An affecting discourse, which is said to have produced the restitution of some part of the pillage. 9.” Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of James I. published from the originals,“Glasgow, 1762. 10.” The works of the ever-memorable Mr. John Hailes of Eton, now first collected together,“Glasgow, 1765, 3 vols. The fine-paper copies of this work are truly elegant. 11. A specimen of a book entitled: Ane compendious booke of godlie and spiritual sangs, collectit out of sundrie parts of the Scripture, with sundrie other ballates, changed out of prophaine sangs, for avoyding of sin and harlotrie, with augmentation of sundrie gucle and godlie ballates, not contained in the first edition. Printed by Andro Hart,” Edinb. 1765, 12mo. 12. “Memorials and Letters relating to the history of Britain in the reign of Charles’ I. published from the originals,” Glasgow, 1766. 13. “An Account of the Preservation of Charles II. after the battle of Worcester, drawn up by himself; to which are added, his letters to several persons,” Glasgow, 1766. 14. “The secret correspondence between sir Robert Cecil and James VI.” 1766, 12mo. 15. “A catalogue of the lords of session, from the institution of the college of justice, in 1532, with historical notes,” Edinb. 1767, 4to. 16. “The private correspondence of doctor Francis Atterbury, bishop of Rochester, and his friends, in 1725, never before published,” 1768, 4to. 17. “An examination of some of the arguments for the high antiquity of regiam majestatem; and an inquiry into the authenticity of the leges Malcolrni,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 18. “Historical Memoirs concerning the Provincial Councils of the Scottish Clergy, from the earliest accounts of the,; aera of the reformation,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 19. “Canons of the church of Scotland, drawn up in the provincial councils held at Perth, anno 1242 and 1269,” Edinb. 1769, 4to. 20. “Ancient Scottish poems, published from the manuscript of George Bannatyne, 1568,” Edinb. 1770, 12mo. 21 .“The additional case of Elizabeth, claiming the title and dignity of countess of Sutherland,” 4to. 22. “Remarks on the History of Scotland,” Edinb. 1773, 12mo. 23. “Hubert! Langueti Epistolae ad Philippum Syclm-ium eqtritem Anglum, ace ura rite D. Dalrymple de Hailes eq.” Edinb. 1776, 8vo. 24. “Annals of Scotland, from the accession of Malcolm III. suriiamed Canmore, to the accession of Robert!.” Edinb. 1776. 25. “Tables of the succession of the kings of Scotland, from Malcolm 111. to Robert 1.” 26. Chronological abridgment of the volume.“The appendix contains eight dissertations. 27.” Annah of Scotland, from the accession of Robert I. surnamed Bruce, to the accession of the house of Stewart,“177:, 4to, with an appendix containing nine dissertations. 28.” Account of the Martyrs of Smyrna and Lyons, in the 2d century, with explanatory notes,“Edinb. 1776. 29,” Remains of Christian Antiquity,“Edinb. 1778, 3 vols. 30.” Octavius, a dialogue by Marcus Minucius Felix,“Edinb. 1781. 31.” Of the manner in which the persecutors died, by Lactantius,“Edinb. 17S2. 32.” Luciani Coelii Firmiani Lactantii divinarum institutionum liber quintus, sen de justitia,“1777. 33.” Disquisitions concerning the Antiquities of the Christian Church,“Glasgow, 1783. 34.” Sketch of the life of John Barclay,“1786, 4to. 35.” Sketch of the life of John Hamilton, a secular priest, who lived about 1600,“4to. 36.” Sketch of the life of sir James Ramsay, a general officer in the armies of Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden.“37.” Life of George Leslie,“4 to. 38.” Sketch of the life of Mark Alex. Boyd,“4to. 39.” The opinions of Sarah duchess dowager of Marlborough, published from her originalMSS.“1788, 12mo. 40.” The address of Q. Septini. Tertullian to Scapula Tertullus, proconsul of Africa," Edinb. 1790, 12mo. This address contains many particulars relating to the church after the 3d century. The translator has rejected all words and phrases of French origin, and writes entirely in the Anglo-Saxon dialect. In the course of the notes, many obscurities of the original, not adverted to by other commentators, are explained. Some strange inaccuracies of Mr. Gibbon are also detected, not included in the misrepresentations of his two famous chapters. He was long engaged in pursuits to examine the authenticity of the books of the New Testament. The result is said to have been, that he discovered every verse contained in it, with the exception of two or three, in the writings of the three first centuries. Indeed this seems to have been an object in all his works; for, at the end of each of his translations and editions of the primitive Christian writers, a table is given of passages quoted or mentioned by them.

was born in 1709, at Deane, in Cumberland, where his father was then rector. He had his school education at Lowther, in Westmoreland, and thence was removed, at the age of sixteen, to Queen’seollege, in Oxford. When he had taken his first degrees, he was employed as tutor or governor to lord Beauchamp, only son of Algernon Seymour, earl of Hertford, late duke of Somerset. During his attendance on that noble youth, he employed some of his leisure hours in adapting Milton’s “Masque at Ludlow Castle” to the stage, by a judicious insertion of several songs and passages selected from other of Milton’s works, as well as of several songs and other elegant additions of his own, suited to the characters and to the manner of the original author. This was received as a very acceptable present to the public; and it still continues one of the most favourite dramatic entertainments, under the title of “Comus, a masque,” being set to music by Dr. Arne. We cannot omit mentioning to Dalton’s honour, that, during the run of this piece, he industriously sought out a grand-daughter of Milton’s, oppressed both by age and penury; and procured her a benefit from this play, the profits of which to her amounted, it is said, to upwards of 120l. Dr. Johnson wrote the Prologue spoken on this occasion. A bad state of health prevented Dr. Dalton from attending his pupil abroad, and saved him the mortification of being an eye-witness of his death, which was occasioned by the small-pox, at Bologna, in Italy. Soon after, succeeding to a fellowship in his college, he entered into orders, according to the rules of that society.

, an English lawyer, was born somewhere in the county of Cambridge, in 1554, and bred to his profession in Lincoln’s-inn, or Gray’s-inn, and was formerly as well known for his book on the office of justice of the peace, as Burn is at present: his “Duty of Sheriffs” was also a book in good esteem. In Neal’s “History of the Puritans,” mention is made of Mr. Dalton the queen’s counsel, who, in 1590, pleaded against Mr. Udal, who was condemned for writing a libel called “A demonstration of Discipline:” this was probably our Dalton, who also in 1592 supported the episcopal power in parliament, of which he was a member, when attacked by the puritan party. There is a ms. of his in the British Museum, entitled “A Breviary or Chronology of the state of the lioinan or Western church or Empire; the decay of true religion, and the rising of papacy, from the time of our Saviour till Martin Luther.” In this he is styled Michael Dalton of Gray’s-inn, esq. It is supposed that he died before the commencement of the civil war.

, M. A. F. R. S. Edin. Greek professor in the university of Edinburgh, keeper of the university library, &c. was born in 1750, in the parish of Rathos near Edinburgh, and was educated partly at the parish school, but principally at Edinburgh, where his learning and moral conduct induced the late earl of Lautierdale to appoint him tutor to his eldest son, lord Maitland, the present earl. With this young nobleman, he attended a course of the lectures of the celebrated professor Millar at Glasgow, and afterwards accompanied his lordship to Paris. On his return from the continent, Mr. Dalzcll, at the recommendation of the late earl of Landerdale, was appointed to the professorship of Greek at Edinburgh, an office which he rilled for many years with the highest reputation and advantage to the university. He has thfe credit indeed of reviving a taste for that language, which from various causes, had been disused at Edinburgh, or studied very superficially. To enable his pupils to prosecute this accomplishment with the more effect, and imbibe a taste for what was elegant in the language, he compiled and printed, at a great expence, a series of collections out of the Greek authors, including all those passages which he wished to explain in the course of his teaching. These were printed in several 8vo volumes, under the titles of “Collectanea Minora,” and “Collectanea Majora.” He added to each volume short notes in Latin, explanatory of the difficult places, and the text was printed with great accuracy. The notes, which are in elegant Latin, are admirable for brevity, perspicuity, and judgment. He at the same time composed and read to the students a series of lectures on the language and antiquities, the philosophy and history, the literature, eloquence, poetry, and fine arts of the Greeks. By these means he became eminently successful in disseminating a taste for classical literature in the university, nor was he less happy in the art of engaging the affections and fixing the attention of his pupils on the objects which he considered as the fundamentals of all genuine scholarship.

On the death of the learned professor of Oriental languages, Dr. James Robertson, he was chosen to succeed him as keeper of the university library; and likewise succeeded Dr. John Drysdale in the honourable appointment of principal clerk to the general assembly of the church of Scotland, being the first layman who had ever been elected to that office. Besides an intimacy with his learned contemporaries at home, he corresponded with Heyne and other eminent scholars abroad, and enriched the Edinburgh Royal Society Transactions with a variety of interesting communications in biography, or on subjects of erudition. He also translated and illustrated Chevalier’s description of the plain of Troy; and was editor of the sermons of Dr. Drysdale, whose daughter he married. This learned professor, whose private character was in, every respect amiable, and threw a lustre on his public services, died at Edinburgh, Dec. 3, 1806.

, or John of Damascus, a learned priest and monk of the 'eighth century, surnamed Mansur, was born at Damascus about G76. His father, who was rich, and held several considerable offices, had him instructed in the sciences by an Italian monk, named Cosmo, and he was afterwards raised to the highest posts, and became chief counsellor to the prince of the Saracens All these dignities, however, St. John Damascenus resigned, and entered himself a monk in the monastery of St. Sabas near Jerusalem, where he led a pious and exemplary life, and became famous in the church by his piety and writings. It is said, that the caliph Hiocham, having ordered his right hand to be cut off on account of a forged letter by the emperor Leo, the hand was restored to him the night following by a miracle, as he slept; which miracle was universally known, or as much so as many other miracles propagated in the credulous ages. He died about the year 760, aged eighty-four. He left an excellent treatise on the orthodox faith, and several other works published in Greek and Latin, by le Quien, 1712, 2 vols. fol. A book entitled “Liber Barlaam et Josaphat Indite regis,” is ascribed to St. John Damascenus, but without any foundation; it has no date of time or place, but was printed about 1470, and is scarce. There are several French translations of it, old, and little valued. Damascenus may be reckoned the most learned man of the eighth century, if we except our countryman Bede; and, what is less to his credit, ono of the first who mingled the Aristotelian philosophy with the Christian religion. He became among the Greeks what Thomas Aquinas was afterwards among the Latins. Except with regard to the doctrine of the Trinity, most of his notions were erroneous, and his learning and fame gave considerable support to the worshipping of images, and other superstitions of that time.

One merit of Damascenus has not been generally noticed. He is celebrated by the writers of his life, and by ecclesiastical historians, as the compiler and reformer of chants in the Greek church, in the same manner as St. Gregory in the Roman. Leo Allatius tells us they were composed by J. Damascenus, and Zarlino goes still farther, and informs us, that in the first ages of Christianity the ancient Greek notation by letters having been thrown aside, Damascenus invented new characters, which he accommodated to the Greek ecclesiastical tones; and that these characters did not, like ours, merely express single sounds, but all the intervals used in melody; as a semitone, tone, third minor, third major, &c. ascending and descending, with their different duration. This resembles, in many particulars, the notation of the ecclesiastical books of the Romkh church, before the time-table and characters in present use-were invented, or, at least, generally received.

, a celebrated heathen philosopher and writer, of the stoic school as some say, of the peripatetic according to others, was born at Damascus, and flourished about 540, when the Goths reigned in Italy. If great masters can make a great scholar or philosopher, Damascius had every advantage of this kind. Theon, we are told, was his preceptor in rhetoric; Isidorus in logic; Mavinus, the successor of Proclus in the school of Athens, in geometry and arithmetic; Zenodotus, the successor of Marinus, in philosophy ', and Ammonias in astronomy, and the doctrines of Plato. He wrote the life of his master Isidorus, and dedicated it to Theodora, a very learned and philosophic lady, who had been a pupil of Isidorus. In this Life, which was copiously written, Damascius frequently attacked the Christian religion; yet obliquely, it is said, and with some reserve and timidity: for Christianity was then too firmly established, and protected by its numbers, to endure any open attacks with impunity, especially in a work so remarkable for obscurity, fanaticism, and imposture. Of this Life, however, we have nothing remaining, but some extracts which Photius has preserved; who also acquaints us with another work of Damascius, of the philosophic or the theologic kind. This was divided into four books; 1. De admirandis operibus; 2. Admirandae narrationes de daemonibus; 3. De animarum apparitionibus post obitum admirandae narrationes. The title of the fourth has not been preserved. Damascius succeeded Theon in the rhetorical school, over which he presided nine years: and afterwards Isidorus in that of philosophy at Athens, in which situation it is supposed that he spent the latter part of his life.

, a celebrated pope, was born at Guimaraens in Spain, and succeeded Liberius in the year 366. Ursinus, or Ursicinus, opposed his election, and caused himself to be ordained bishop of Rome, which raised a sedition, in which many of the people were murdered. Ursinus was sent into exile by order of the emperor, but, returning to Italy in the year 381, excited fresh troubles there. The Italian bishops, however, condemned him the same year, in the council of Aquileia, and he was banished for ever by the emperor Gratian, at their request: thus Daniasus remained in peaceful possession of his seat at Rome. He held several councils, condemned Ursaces, Valens, and Auxentius; took the part of Paul in us against Meletius, excommunicated ApolUnanus, Vitalus, and Timotheus; and declared himself against the Luciferians. Datnasus had an illustrious secretary in St. Jerome. He governed the church of Rome with what the catholic writers term great glory, for eighteen years, and died in the year 384. Some of his letters remain,. Rome, 175-i, fol. with his life, in the library of the fathers, and in the Epist. Rom. Pont, of Coustant, fol. He also left some Latin verses, which may be found in Maittaire’s Corpus Poetarum. Fabricius gives a very particular account of his works. This pope is said to have introduced the custom of singing hallelujah in the church. He is more noted, however, for having extended the power and authority of the bishops of Rome, and laid the foundation of the custom of conferring upon certain bishops the title of vicars to the pope, by which they were enabled to perform several authoritative acts, which they could not by the mere virtue of episcopal power: hence the rights of bishops and synods became gradually and entirely dependent on the authority of the pope.

, an eminent cardinal, was born at Ravenna in the beginning of the eleventh century, became a Benedictine, and, it is thought, would always have preferred solitude to the dignities of the church, if he had not been in some measure forced to accept them. In 1057 he was created cardinal by pope Stephen IX. and under pope Nicolas II. was sent as papal legate to Milan, to reform certain clerical abuses, which he successfully accomplished, and even turned his arguments against his superiors, whom he found licentious, without any respect for their rank or power. Among other proofs of his zeal, he publicly condemned the liberty which the popes took of opposing the emperors in cases of war; affirming, that the offices of emperor and pope are distinct, and that the emperors ought not to meddle with what belongs to the popes, nor the popes with what belongs to the emperors. “As the son of God,” says he, “surmounted all the obstacles of worldly power, not by the severity of vengeance, but by the lively majesty of an invincible patience, so has he taught us rather to bear the fury of the world with constancy, than to take up arms against those who offend us; especially since between the royalty and the priesthood there is such a distinction of offices, that it belongs to the king to use secular arms, and to the priest to gird on the sword of the spirit, which is the word of God,” &c. Damian described also in a very lively manner the enormous vices of his age, in several of his works;, in his Gomorrhaetis particularly, which, though pope Alexander II. thought fit to suppress it, has nevertheless been preserved. Disappointed, however, in his hopes of producing any favourable change, he resigned all his preferments in the church in 1061, although he appears afterwards to have been employed on missions as legate. He died in 1073, and his writings, while in ms. must have been frequently read and admired, as we find that between five and six centuries after his deaih they were ordered to be printed by Clement VIII. who employed Constantino Cajetan as editor. This first edition was published at Home in 3 vols. fol. 160b, 1608, 1615, and reprinted at Leyden, 1623, fol. In 1640 Cajeta 1 added a fourth volume. The whole were afterwards reprinted at Paris in 1642 and 1663, in a thick folio. These works consist of

They entered now the bay of Panama: for their design was to look into some river unfrequented by the Spaniards, in search of canoes; and therefore they endeavoured to make the river St. Jago, on account of its nearness to the island of Gallo, in which there is much gold, and safe ancborage for ships. Dampier with some others, in four canoes, ventured to row six leagues up the river; but the Indians, at their approach, got into their canoes, and paddled away against the stream much faster than they could follow. They therefore returned the next morning in order to sail for the island of Gallo; and in their way took a Spanish pacquet-boat, sent with dispatches from Panama to Lima, by which they learned that the armada, being arrived from Spain at Porto Bello, waited for the plate fleet from Lima, which made them resolve to rendezvous among the King’s or Pearl Islands, by which all the ships bound to Panama from Lima must necessarily pass. On May 28th they discovered the Spanish fleet; but night approaching, they exchanged only a few shot. The Spanish admiral, by the artifice of a false light, got the weather-gage of them the next day, and came up to them with full sail, which obliged them to make a running fight of it all round the bay of Panama, and thus their long-projected design ended unsuccessfully. They sailed now for the island of Quibo, where they found captain Harris; and as their late attempt at sea had been fruitless, they resolved to try their fortune by land, by attacking the city of Leon, on the coast of Mexico. This place they took and burnt, and proceeded to Rio Leja, which they also took. Here Dampier left captain Davis, and went on board captain Swan, in order to satisfy his curiosity by obtaining a more perfect knowledge of the northern parts of Mexico. They continued sailing to the westward till they came to Guatulco, one of the best ports in the kingdom of Mexico; and from thence to Cape Cerientes, where they waited some time in hopes of meeting with a galleon, of which they had received information. They continued cruizing off this cape till Jan. 1, when their provisions being exhausted, they steered to the valley of Valderas to procure a supply of beef. And while they were engaged in this necessary business, the Manilla ship passed by them to the eastward. After this they steered towards California, and anchored in one of the Tres Maria islands. Dampier, having been long sick of a dropsy, was here buried for about half an hour up to the neck in sand, which threw him into a profuse sweat; and being afterwards wrapped up warm, and put to bed in a tent, found great benefit from this extraordinary remedy.

Their success in this part of the world having been very indifferent, and there appearing no probability of its mending, Swan and Dampier agreed to steer their course for the East Indies. They sailed to St. John’s island, and to the Piscadores, to Bouton island, to New Holland, to Triest; and arriving at Nicobar, Dampier with others was left on shore, and treated with great civility by the inhabitants. He, however, left them, and arrived at the English factory at Achen, where he became acquainted with captain Bowry, who would have persuaded him to sail with him to Persia in quality of boatswain but he declined accepting of this proposal, on account of the ill state of his health. He afterwards engaged with captain Weldon, under whom he made several trading voyages, for upwards of fifteen months, and afterwards entered as a gunner to an English factory at Bencoolen. Upon this coast he staid till 1691, and then embarked for England, when he was obliged to make his escape by creeping through one of the port-holes, for the governor had revoked his promise of allowing him to depart; but he brought off his journal and most valuable papers. He arrived in the Downs Sept. 16; and being in want of money, sold his property in a painted Indian prince, who was carried about for a sight, and shewn for money. He appears afterwards to have been concerned in an expedition concerted by the merchants of Bristol to Uie South Sea, commanded by caplain Woodes “Rogers, which sailed in Aug. 1708, and returned Sept. 1711; a voyage attended with many singular circumstances, and a great number of curious and entertaining events. We have no further particulars of Dampier’s life or death. His” Voyage round the World" has gone through many editions, and the substance of it has been transferred to many collections of voyages. It was first published in 3 vols. 8vo, Lond. 1697.

, or Danckerts, is the name of a family of engravers of considerable reputation in Holland. Cornelius Danckkkts, who was born at Amsterdam in 1561, established himself at Antwerp as a print-seller; but he did not suffer this employment to engross his whole time, as he engraved many portraits, landscapes, and historical pieces, as well from his own compositions as from the designs of Berghem, Rembrandt, and others. His son, Danckert Danckerts, who was born at Antwerp about 1600, also engraved different subjects, as well from his own designs as from those of other artists; and though his pieces are not so numerous as his father’s, they surpass them in merit. Danckert combined the point and the graver with very great success, and the pieces from Berghem and Wouvermanns, which he has wrought in this manner, are much esteemed.

, an eminent painter, nephew to the preceding, was born at Florence in 1646, and received his first instruction in the art of painting from Valerio Spada, who excelled in small drawings with a pen. Whilst he was under the tuition of thrt artist he gave such evident proofs of genius, that he was then placed as a disciple with his uncle Vincent. He afterwards travelled through most of the cities of Italy, studying the works of those who were most distinguished; and resided for a long time at Venice, where he copied the paintings of Titian, Tintoretto, and Paolo Veronese. He next visited Parma and Modena, to study the works of Correggio; omitting no opportunity that might contribute to improve his hand or his judgment. When he returned to Florence, the grand duke Cosmo III. the grand duchess Victoria, and the prince Ferdinand, kept him perpetually employed, in fresco painting as well as in oil; his subjects being taken not only from sacred or fabulous history, but from his own invention and fancy, which frequently furnished him with such as were odd and singular, and especially with whimsical caricatures. He died in 1712. — This master had an extraordinary talent for imitating the style of even the most celebrated ancient painters of every school, particularly Titian, Veronese, and Tintoretto; and with a force and elegance, equal to his subjects of history, he painted portraits, landscapes, architecture, flowers, fruit, battles, animals of all kinds, and likewise sea-pieces; proving himself an universal artist, and excellent in even thing he undertook. Mr. Fuseli, however, says that the avidity of gain led him to dispatch and a general mediocrity, compensated by little more than the admirable freedom of his pencil. He exerted his powers according to the price he received for his work: they are seen to advantage in the cupolas of S. Maria Maddalena, in various frescos of the ducal palace and villas, and in the public hall of Pisa, where he represented the taking of Jerusalem. There are likewise altar-pieces which shew his merit: that of St. Francis in S. Maria Maggiore, and another of S. Piccolomini saying mass in the church a'Servi, a pleasing animated performance. He had a son, Octavio, who proved not inferior to him in any branch of his profession, and was an honour to his family and his country.

, brother of the preceding, was born in 1638. The endowments of his mind and person advanced him at the court of Louis XIV. and his decided taste for literature obtained him a place in the French academy, and in that of sciences. He died at Paris in 1720, at the age of eighty-two, privy ­councillor, knight of several orders, grand-master of the royal and military order of Notre Dame dn Mont Carmel, and of St. Lazare de Jerusalem. On being invested with this last dignity, he paid greater attention than had been before shewn to the choice of the chevaliers, iincl revived the ancient pomp at their reception, which the wits endeavoured to turn into ridicule. But what was superior to all ridicule was, that by his care he procured the foundation of upwards of twenty-five commanderies, and employed the revenues of the office of grand-master, to the education of twelve young gentlemen of the best nobility of the kingdom, as has been mentioned in onr account of his brother. At the court (says Fontenelle), where there is but little faith in probity and virtue, he always preserved his reputation clear and entire. His conversation, his manners, all savoured of a politeness which was far less that of a man of fashion, than of a friendly and obliging person. His wish at all times to play the part of a grandee, might have been passed over, on account of the worthiness of his character. Madame de Montespun, who thought him not qualified exactly for that, said rather tartly, that it was impossible not to love him, and not to laugh at hi ID. His first wife was Frances Morin, sister to the marechal dEstrées, and his second the countess de Louvestein, of the palatine house. There are extant by the marquis de Dangeau, memoirs in manuscript, from whence Voltaire, Renault, and la Beaumelle, have taken many curious anecdotes; but it was not always Dangeau, says Voltaire, who made these memoirs: “It was (according to this satirist) an old stupid valet-de-chambre, who thought proper to make manuscript gazettes of all the nonsense, right or wrong, that he could pick up in the anti-chambers,” by which Voltaire would insinuate that the memoirs which bear the name of the marquis de Dangeau are to be read with caution. There is Another little work of his, also in manuscript, in which he gives the picture of Louis XIV. in a very interesting manner, such as he was among his courtiers.

, a very ingenious and learned Frenchman, was born at Roan, Feb. 8, 1649; and in Sept. 1667, entered as a novitiate into the society of the Jesuits, He read lectures upon polite literature, upon philosophy, and theology, at several places in the early part of his life by the desire of his superiors, after which he appears to have devoted his time to his historical and controversial works. One of his earliest productions was his “Voyage to the world of Descartes,” a satirical confutation of the Cartesian philosophy, under the appearance of a romance, which was so well received, that it was soon translated into several languages into English, into Italian, &c. It has undergone several editions, which have been revised and enlarged by the author; and to that printed in 1703 there were added, by way of supplement, two or three pieces, which have a connection with the subject. They are entitled, “New difficulties proposed to the author of the Voyage,” &c. concerning the consciousness or perception of brutes: with a refutation of two defences of Descartes’s general system of the world.

His works consist of: 1. “The Complaint of Rosamond,” Lond. 1594, 1598, 1611, and 1623, 4to. 2. Various “Sonnets” to Delia. 3. “Tragedy of Cleopatra,” Lond. 1594, 1598, 4to. 4. “Of the” Civil Wars between the houses of Lancaster and York,“Lond. 1604, 1609, 8vo, and 1623, 4to. 5.” The Vision of the Twelve Goddesses, presented in a Mask,“&c. London, 1604, 8vo, and 1623, 4to. 6.” Panegyric congratulatory,“delivered to king James at Burleigh Harrington, in Rutlandshire, Lond. 1604 and 1623, 4to. 7.” Epistles“to various great personages, in verse, Lond. 1601 and 1623, 4to. 8.” Musophilus, containing a general Defence of Learning,“printed with the former. 9.” Tragedy of “Philotas,” Lond. 1611, &c. 8vo. 10. “Hymen’s Triumph; a pastoral tragi-comedy,” at the nuptials of lord Roxborough, Lond. 1623, 4to, 2d edit. 11.“Musa,” or a Defence of Rhyme, Lond. 1611, 8vo. 12. The “Epistle of Octavia to M. Antoiiius,” Lond. 1611, 8vo. 13. The first part of the “History of England,” in three books, Lond. 1613, 4to, reaching to the end of king Stephen, in prose; to which he afterwards added a second part, reaching to the end of king Edward III. Lond. 1618, 1621, 1623, and 1634, folio, continued to the end of king Richard III. by John Trussel, some time a Winchester scholar, afterwards a trader and alderman of that city. 14. “The Queen’s Arcadia,” a pastoral tragicomedy, 1605, 1623, Lond. 4to. 15. “Funeral poem on the Death of the earl of Devon,” Lond. 1623, 4to. In the same year his poetical works were published in 4to, by his brother John Daniel.

The editor of Phillips’s Theatrum (1800) to whom we are indebted for the above list, adds, that “the character of Daniel’s genius seems to be propriety, rather than elevation. His language is generally pure and harmonious; and his reflections are just. But his thoughts are too abstract, and appeal rather to the understanding than to the imagination or the heart; and he wanted the fire necessary for the loftier flights of poetry.”

Mr. Headly, who appears to have studied his works with much attention, thus appreciates his merit: “Though very rarely sublime, he has skill in the pathetic; and his pages are disgraced with neither pedantry nor conceit. We find, both in his poetry and prose, such a legitimate and rational flow of language as approaches nearer the style of the 18th than the 16th century, and of which we may safely assert, that it never will become obsolete. He certainly was the Atticus of his day. It seems to have been his error to have entertained too great a diffidence of his own abilities. Constantly contented with the sedate propriety of good sense, which he no sooner attains than he seems to rest satisfied, though his resources, had he but made the effort, would have carried him much farther. In thus escaping censure, he is not always entitled to praise. From not endeavouring to be great, he sometimes misses of being respectable. The constitution of his mind seems often to have failed him in the sultry and exhausting regions of the muses; for though generally neat, easy, and perspicuous, he too frequently grows slack, languid, and enervated. In perusing his long historical poem, we grow sleepy at the dead ebb of his narrative, notwithstanding being occasionally relieved with some touches of the pathetic. Unfortunate in the choice of his subject, he seems fearful of supplying its defects by digressional embellishment; instead of fixing upon one of a more fanciful cast, which the natural coolness of his judgment would necessarily have corrected, he has cooped himself up within the limited and narrow pale of dry events; instead of casting his eye on the general history of human nature, and giving his genius a range over her immeasurable fields, he has confined himself to an abstract diary of fortune; instead of presenting us with pictures of truth from the effects of the passions, he has versified the truth of action only; he has sufficiently, therefore, shown the historian, but by no means the poet. For, to use a sentiment of sir William Davenant’s, ‘ Truth narrative and past is the idol of historians, (who worship a dead thing); and truth operative, and by its effects continually alive, is the mistress of poets, who hath not her existence in mutter, but in reason.’ Daniel Las often the softness of Rowe without his effeminacy. In his Complaint of Cleopatra, he has caught Ovid’s manner very happily, as he has no obscurities either of style or language, neither pedantry nor affectation, all of which have concurred in banishing from use the works of his contemporaries. The oblivion he has met with is peculiarly undeserved; he has shared their fate, though innocent of their faults.”

The justice of these remarks cannot be disproved, although some of them are rather too figurative for sober criticism. Daniel’s fatal error was in causing history instead of fiction; yet in his lesser pieces, and particularly in his sonnets, are many striking poetical beauties; and his language is every where so much more harmonious than that of his contemporaries, that he deserves a place in every collection of English poetry, as one who had the taste or genius to anticipate the improvements of a more refined age. As a dramatic writer, he has been praised for his adherence to the models of antiquity, but whoever attempts this, attempts what has ever been found repugnant to the constitution of the English Theatre.

, an illustrious Italian poet, descended from one of the first families of Florence, of the name of Caccia Guida. Alighieri was the surname of the maternal line, natives of Ferrara, so called from a golden wing which the family bore on their arms. He was born in 1265, a little after the return of the Guelfs or pope’s faction, who had been exiled from their native country in consequence of the defeat at Monte Aperte. The superiority of his genius appeared early, and if we may credit his biographer Boccaccio, his amorous disposition appeared almost as soon. His passion for the lady whom he has celebrated in his poem by the name of Beatrice, is said to have commenced at nine years of age. She was the daughter of Eoleo Portinari, a noble citizen of Florence. His passion seems to have been of the platonic kind, according to the account he gives of it in his “Vita Nuova,” one of his earliest productions. The lady died at the age of twenty-six and Dante, affected by the afflicting event, fell into a profound melancholy, to cure which his friends recommended matrimony. Dante took their advice, but was unfortunate in choosing a lady of a termagant temper, from whom he found it necessary to separate, but not until they had lived miserably for a considerable time, during which she bore him several children. Either at this period, or after the death of his first mistress, he seems by his own account to have fallen into a profligate course of life, from which he was rescued by the prayers of his mistress, now a saint, who prevailed on the spirit of Virgil to attend him through the infernal regions. It is not easy to reduce this account to matter of fact, nor is it very clear indeed whether his reigning vice was profligacy, or ambition of worldly honours. It is certain, however, that he possessed this ambition, and had reason to repent of it.

He had already conceived notions of military glory, and had distinguished himself by his bravery in an action where the Florentines obtained a signal victory at Arezzo. This, joined with his acknowledged learning, prepared the way for his advancement to the first honours of the state. Italy, at that time, was distracted between the factions of the Guelfs, or partizans of the pope, and the Ghibellines, who adhered to the emperor. After many revolutions, the Gnelfs had got the superiority in Florence; and in 130O Dante, with several colleagues, was elected prior, the first executive office in the republic of Florence, and from this he is said to have dated all his misfortunes. Although the faction of the Ghibellines seemed totally extinct, an uninterrupted flow of ten years prosperity was attended with consequences more fatal to the Guelfs than all their past misfortunes. The two noble families of the Cherchi and Donati had been engaged in a quarrel of old standing, and now had recourse to arms, in consequence of a dispute between two branches of the family of Cancelieri, of Pistoia. The rival factions had distinguished themselves by the names of the blacks and the whites, i. e. the Neri and the Bianchi. Donati, from an old attachment to the part of the Cancelieri, called the blacks, joined their faction, which immediately determined the Cherchi to join the whites; and in order to put an end to the quarrel, Dante and his colleagues, ordered the heads of the opposite factions t remove from Pistoia to Florence, the consequence of which was, that all the noble families of Florence ranged themselves with the one or the other, and even the lower order of the citizens became partizans. At last, at a secret meeting of the blacks, Carso Donati proposed to apply to pope Boniface VIII. to terminate these intestine broils, by sending Charles of Valois of the blood royal of France. The whites, having learned this, assembled in arms, and clamoured loudly against the project, and Dante was so dissatisfied with it, that from that moment it is probable he took a decided part against the black faction.

To preserve, however, the appearance of impartiality, he and his colleagues, gaining the multitude on their side, ordered the leaders of both parties, Donati and Cherchi, into confinement; but Dante’s real sentiments soon appeared: the whites were set at liberty, and the blacks remained in bonds or in exile, and although Dante’s priorate had expired before the whites were released, the measure was attributed to his influence. This appearance of partiality gave the wished for pretext to Boniface to send Charles of Valois to Florence, who, after producing a letter pretended to be written by some of the leaders of the whites, offering to corrupt his integrity in their favour, recalled the exiles of the black faction, and banished their opponents. Dante was at this time at Rome soliciting the pope to conciliate the two parties, and finding his solicitations in vain, returned, and found the sentence of exile passed upon him, his possessions confiscated, and his house razed to the foundation. This news met him at Siena, where he was soon joined by a numerous body of exiles, who formed themselves into an army, and after makingsome unsuccessful efforts to enter their native city byforce, which they repeated for four years, were obliged tu disperse.

Dante first found a patron in the great Cane de la Scala, prince of Verona, whom he has celebrated in the first canto of the Inferno; but his high spirit was ill-suited to courtly dependance; and it is very probable he lost the favour of the prince by the frankness of his behaviour. Of this an instance is given in several authors. The disposition of the poet, in the latter part of his life, had acquired a strong tincture of melancholy, which made him less acceptable in the gay court of Verona, where probably a poet was only thought a character fit to find frivolous amusements for his patron. A common jester, or buffoon (a noted personage in those days), eclipsed the character of the hard, and neither the variety of his learning, nor the sublimity of his genius, stood him in any stead. Cane, the prince, perceived that he was hurt by it; and, instead of altering his mode of treatment, very ungenerously exasperated his resentment, by observing one day in public company, that it was very extraordinary, that the jester, whom every one knew to be a worthless fellow, should be so much admired by him, and all his court; while Dante, a man unparalleled in learning, genius, and integrity, was universally neglected. “You will cease to wonder (says Dante), when you consider that similarity of manners is the strongest bond of attachment.” It does not appear whether the prince resented this answer, which he surely must have felt; but it is certain that the prince endeavoured to make the poet an occasional object of merriment in some very low instances, and Dante condescended to meet him even in that humble species of wit. Dante, however, soon found it necessary to seek his fortune elsewhere, and from Verona he retired to France, according to Manetti; and Boccaccio affirms that he disputed in the theological schools of Paris with great reputation, which Boccaccio had a much better opportunity of knowing than Bavle, who takes upon him to question the fact.

His fame rests on his “Divina Commedia,” unquestionably a great and singular, but very unequal work. At what time, or in what place, he wrote it, his numerous commentators seem unable to determine. The life of Dante, in which we have principally followed Mr. Boyd, in the preliminary matter to his excellent translation, is after all not the life of a poet, nqr does it furnish the information we naturally look for in order to enable us to trace the progress of genius. Boccaccio asserts, that he began the “Commedia” in his thirty-eighth year, and had finished seven cantos of his “Inferno” before his exile, and that in the plunder of his house, on that event, the beginning of his poem was fortunately preserved, but remained for some time neglected, till, its merit being accidentally discovered by an intelligent poet, Dino, it was sent to the marquis Marcello Marespina, an Italian nobleman, by whom Dante was then protected. The marquis restored these lost papers to the poet, and intreated him to proceed in the work, which opened in so promising a manner. To this accident we are probably indebted for the poem of Dante, which he must have continued under all the disadvantages of an unfortunate and agitated life. It does not appear at what time he completed it: perhaps before he quitted Verona, as he dedicated the “Paradeso” to his Veronese patron. The critics are not agreed why he called this poem “Commedia.”

The “Commedia” of Dante is a species of satiric epic, in which the reader is conducted through the three stages, “the Inferno,” the “Purgatorio,” and “Paradiso,” the whole consisting of a monstrous assemblage of characters, pagan heroes and philosophers, Christian fathers, kings, popes, monks, ladies, apostles, saints, and hierarchies; yet frequently embellished with passages of great sublimity and pathos (of the latter, what is comparable to the tale of Ugolino?) and imagery and sentiments truly Homeric. The highest praise, however, must be given to his “Inferno,” a subject which seems to have suited the gloomy vvildness of his imagination, which appears tamed and softened even in the most interesting pictures in the “Purgatorio” and “Paradiso.” Whether, says an excellent living critic, Dante was stimulated to his singular work by the success of his immediate predecessors, the Provenal poets, or by the example of the ancient Roman authors, has been doubted. The latter opinion, Mr. Roscoe thinks the more probable. In his “Inferno” he had apparently the descent of ^neas in view, but in the rest of his poem there is little resemblance to any antecedent production. Compared with the ^neid, adds Mr. Roscoe, “it is a piece of grand Gothic architecture at the side of a beautiful Roman temple,” on which an anonymous writer remarks that this Gothic grandeur miserably degenerates in the adjoining edifices, the “Purgatorio” and “Paradiso.”

, a learned German divine of the Lutheran church, and whose talents contributed greatly to raise the reputation of the university of Jena, was born Feb. 1, 1654, at Sandhusen, a village near Gotha. He appears to have obtained the patronage of the duke Frederick, who defrayed the expence of his education, both at school, and at the university of Wittemberg, where he took his master’s degree in 1676. Having devoted much of his attention to the Hebrew language and antiquities, he went to Hamburgh, where he profited by the assistance of Esdras Edzardi and other learned Jews, and was enabled to read the rabbinical writings with facility. From Hamburgh he went to Leipsic, and thence to Jena, from which in 1683 he visited Holland and England, acquiring in both countries the acquaintance of men of learning. On his return, having determined to settle at Jena, he was appointed professor extraordinary of the oriental languages, and on the death of the learned Frischmuth, was advanced to be professorordinary. In these offices he acquired great reputation, and attracted a number of foreign students. Some time after, he was appointed professor of divinity, in which he was no less popular. He died of a stroke of apoplexy, Dec. 20, 1727. He wrote, among many other works, “Sinceritas sacrae Scripturae veteris testamenti triumphans, cujus prodromus Sinceritas Scriptuvae Vet. Test, prevalente Keri vacillans,” Jena, 1713, 4to; and various dissertations in Latin, in controversy with the Jews, or on topics of Jewish antiquities, particularly “Divina Elohim inter coaequales de primo homine condendo deliberatio,” 1712 “Inauguratio Christi haud obscurior Mosaica, decem dissert, asserta,” Jena, 1717, 4to and a very ingenious tract entitled “Davidis in Ammonitas devictos mitigata crudelitas,” 1713.

. See Darcy. D‘Arcon (John Claudius Eleonore Limiceaud), an eminent French engineer, and memorable in history as the contriver of a mode of besieging Gibraltar which proved so fatal to his countrymen, was born at Pontarlier in 1733. His father, an advocate, intended to bring him up for the church, and had provided him with a benefice, but Dar5011 from his infancy had a turn for the military life; and when at school, instead of learning Latin, was copying drawings and sketches of fortifications. On one occasion he took a singular mode of acquainting his parents with the error they had committed, in seeking a profession for him. Having by their desire sat for his portrait, he substituted, with his own hand, the uniform of an engineer, instead of the dress of an abbe, in which the artist had clothed him. His father, struck with this silent hint, no longer opposed his inclinations. In 1754 he was admitted into the school of Mezieres, and the following year was received as an ordinary engineer. He served afterwards with distinguished honour in the seven years’ war, and particularly in 1761, at the defence of Cassel. He atterwar is devoted himself to improvements in the military art, and even in the making of drawings and charts; and having great ambition, with a warmth of imagination that presented every thing as practicable, he at length in 1780 conceived the memorable plan of the siege of Gibraltar. This, say his countrymen, which has made so much noise in Europe, has not been fairly estimated, because everyone has judged from the event. Without entering, however, in this place, on its merits, all our historians have attributed to Darcon’s ideas a grandeur and even sublimity of conception vviiich did him much honour, and it is yet remembered that almost all Europe was so perfectly convinced of the success of the plan as to admit of no doubt or objection. Nothing of the kind, however, was ever attended with a discomfiture more complete, and D’Arcou wrote and printed a species of justification, which at least shows the bitterness of his disappointment. On the commencement of the revolutionary war, he engaged on the popular side; but, except some concern he had in the invasion of Holland, does not appear to have greatly distinguished himself. He was twice denounced by Hnctuating governments; and being treated in the same manner after his Dutch campaign, he retired from the service, and wrote his last work on fortifications. In 179y the first consul introduced him into the senate, but he did not enjoy this honour long, as he died July 1, 1800. He was at that time a member of the Institute. His works, still in high estimation in France, are: 1. “Reflexions d'un ingenieur, en reponse a un tacticien,” Amst. 1773, 12mo. 2. “Correspondanee sur Part de la Guerre entre un colonel de dragons et un capitaine d'infanterie,” Bouillon, 1774, 8vo. 3. “Defense d‘une systeme de Guerre Nationale, ou analyse raisonne d’un ouvrage, intitule * Refutation complete du systeme, 1 &c.” This is a defence of M. Menil Durand’s system, which had been attacked by Guibert and the preceding pamphlet has a respect to the same dispute concerning what the French call the ordre projond and the ordre mince. 4. “Conseil de Guerre prive, sur revenement de Gibraltar en 1782,” 1785, 8vo. 5. “Memoires pour serrir a l‘histoire du siege de Gibraltar, par l’auteur des batteries flottantes,” 1783, 8vo. 6. “Considerations sur l'influence du genie de Vauban dans la balance des forces de Petat,” 1786, 8vo. 7. “Examen detaillté de l'importante question de Putilite des places fortes et retranchments,” Strasburgh, 1789, 8vo. 8. “De la force militaire considered dans ses rapports conservateurs,” Strasburgh, 1789, 8vo, with a continuation, 1790. 9. “Reponse aux Memoires de M. de Montalembert, sur la fortification dite perpendiculaire,” 1790, 8vo. 10. “Considerations militaires et politiques sur les Fortifications,” Paris, 1795, 8vo. This, which is the most important of all his works, and was printed at the expence of the government, contains the essence of all his other productions, and the result of his experience on an art which he had studied during the whole of his life.

Having published an “Essay on Artillery” in 1760, containing various curious experiments on the charges of powder, &c. and several improvements on Robins (who was not so great a mathematician as he), Darcy continued the experiments to the last moment of his life, but has left nothing behind him. In 1765 he published his “Memoir on the duration of the sensation of 8i^ht,” the most ingenious of his works, and that which shews him in the best light as an accurate and ingenious maker of experiments: the result of these researches was, that a body may souietimes pass by our eyes without being seen, or marking its presence, otherwise than by weakening the brightness of the object it covers; thus, in turning pieces of card painted blue and yellow, you only perceive a continued circle of green; thus the seven prismatic colours, rapidly turned, produce an obscure white, which is the obscurer as the motion is more rapid. As this duration of the sensation increases with the brightness of the object, it would have been interesting to know the laws, according to which the augmentation of the duration follows the intensity of the light, and, contrarywise, what are the gradations of the intensity of the light of an object which motion makes continually visible; but Darcy, now obliged to trust to other eyes than his own, was forced to relinquish this pursuit. Darcy, always employed in comparing mathematical theory and observation, made a particular use of this principle in his “Memoir on Hydraulic Machines,” printed in 1754. In this he shews how easy it is to make mistakes in looking by experiment for the laws of such effects as are susceptible of a maximum or minimum; and indicates at the same time, how a system of experiments may be formed, which shall lead to the discovery of these laws. All Darcy’s works bear the character which results from the union of genius and philosophy; but as he measured every thing upon the largest scale, and required infinite accuracy in experiment, neither his time, fortune, nor avocations allowed him to execute more than a very small part of what he projected. He was amiable, spirited, lively, and a lover of independence; a passion to which he sacrificed even in the midst of literary society, where perhaps a little aristocracy may not be quite so dangerous.

As Dr. Darwin was a votary to poetry, as well as medicine, he occasionally sent his effusions in that way, to one or other of the monthly publications, but without his name, conceiving, from the example of Akenside and Armstrong, that the reputation he might acquire by his poetry, would operate as a bar to his advancement in the practice of medicine. His “Botanic Garden,” in which he celebrates what he calls the “Loves of the Plants,” the first of his poems to which he put his name, was not published until 1781, when his medical fame was so well established as to make it safe for him to indulge his taste in any way he should chuse. Besides, the poem was so amply furnished with notes, containing the natural history, and accounts of the properties of plants, that it did not seem very alien from his profession. The Botanic Garden is comprised in two parts. In the first the author treats of the economy of vegetables, in the second of the loves of the plants. The novelty of the design, the brilliancy of the diction, full of figurative expressions, in which every thing was personified, rendered the poem for some years extremely popular. But the fame which it acquired has in a great degree subsided, and it is now little noticed. It is probable, that an ingenious little poem, “The Loves of the Triangles,” published in a monthly journal, which is a happy imitation of the Darwinian manner, contributed to its decline.

In 1753, the author published the first volume of“Zoonomia, or the Laws of Organic Life,” 4to. The second volume, which completed the author’s plan, was printed in 1796. As the eccentric genius of the author was known, great expectations were formed of this work, the labour, we were told, of more than twenty years. It was to reform, or entirely new model, the whole system of medicine, professing no less than to account for the manner in which man, animals, and vegetables are formed. They all, it seems, take their origin from living filaments, susceptible of irritation, which is the agent that sets them in motion. Archimedes was wont to say, “give me a place to stand on, and I will move the earth:” such was his confidence in his know edge of the power of the lever. Our author said, “give me a fibre susceptible of irritation, and I will make a tree, a dog, a horse, a man.” “I conceive,” he says, Zoonomia, vol. I. p. 492, “the primordium, or rudiment of the embryon, as secreted from the blood of the parent, to consist in a single living filament, as a muscular fibre, which I suppose to be the extremity of a nerve of loco-motion, as a fibre of the retina is the extremity of a nerve of sensation; as, for instance, one of the fibrils which compose the mouth of an absorbent vessel; I suppose this living filament, of whatever form it may be, whether sphere, cube, or cylinder, to be endued with the capacity of being exciied into action by certain kinds of stimulus. By the stimulus of the surrounding fluid in which it is received from the mah-, it may bend into a ring, and thus form the lieg'nninj of a tube. This living ring may now embrace, or absorb a nutritive particle of the fluid in which it swims, and by drawing it into its pores, or joining it by compression to its extremities, may increase its own length or crassitude, and, by degrees, the living-ring may become a living tube. With this new organization, or accretion of parts, new kinds of irritability may commence,” &c.; whence, sensibility, which may be only an extension of irritability, and sensibility further extended, beget perception, memory, reason, and, in short, all those faculties which have been, it seems, erroneously attributed to mind, for which, it appears, there is not the smallest necessity; ajid as the Deity does nothing in vain, of course such a being does not exist. It would be useless to enter into a further examination of theZoonomia, which has long ceased to be popular; those who wish to see a complete refutation of the sophisms contained in it will read with satisfaction, “Observations on the Zoonomia of Dr. Darwin, by Thomas Brown, esq.” published at Edinburgh in 8vo, in 1798. In ISOi, the author published “Phytologia, or the Philosophy of Agriculture and Gardening;” but the public, tired with the reveries of the writer, let this large book of 600 pages in 4to pass almost unnoticed. As little attention was paid to a small tract on Female Education, which had little indeed to attract notice. “It is,” Miss Seward observes, “a meagre work, of little general interest, those rules excepted, which are laid down for the preservation of health.” It is, however, harmless, a character that can by no means be accorded to the Zoonomia, as may he gathered from the strictures which the author of his life in the Cyclopædia has justly passed on that work, and to which nothing could have given even a temporary popularity but the activity of a small sect to whom the author’s political and religious, or rather irreligious principles, were endeared. His son, Charles Darwin, who died at Edinburgh the 15th of May, 1778, while prosecuting his studies in medicine, deserves to be noticed for having discovered a. test distinguishing pus from mucus, for which a gold medal was adjudged him by the university. “As the result of numerous experiments,” he says, “when any one wishes to examine the matter expectorated by his patient, let him dissolve a portion of it in vitriolic acid, and another portion of it in caustic alkaline lixivium, and then add pure water to both solutions; if there is a precipitation in each solution, it is clear the expectorated matter is pus; if there is no precipitation, the matter is simply mucus.” Mr. Darwin left an unfinished essay on the retrograde motion of the absorbent vessels of animal bodies in some diseases. This was, some time after the death of the young man, published by his father, together with the dissertation for which he had obtained the prize medal.

, medallist to the republic of Geneva, where he was born in 1678, aspiring to be employed in the English mint, struck a series of kings of England in a good style, though not all of them taken from originals. He published them by subscription in 1731, at six guineas the set in copper, and fifteen in silver. He published also a series of events in the Roman History; some of the great characters in the reign of Louis XVI.; and a series of the reformers. He died in 1763. His brother James was in London three or four years to solicit a place for John in the mint, but did not succeed. James Antony Dassier, nephew of John, came over on Croker’s death in 1740, was next year appointed second engraver to the mint, returned to Geneva in 1745, and died at Copenhagen in 1759. The uncle had begun large medals of some of our great men then living; the nephew did several more, which were sold in copper at 7s. 6d. each. There is also a numerous suite of Roman history in small medals of bronze, by the younger Dassier, that are good performances.

, bishop of Salisbury in the seventeenth century, was born in Watling-street, London, where his father was an eminent merchant, but originally descended from the ancient family of the Davenants of Sible-Heningham, in Essex. What school he was educated in, we cannot find. But, on the 4th of July, 1587, he was admitted pensioner of Queen’s college, in Cambridge. He regularly took his degrees in arts; that of master in 1594. A fellowship was offered him about the same time; but his father would not permit him to accept of it, on account of his plentiful fortune: however, after his father’s decease he accepted of one, into which he was admitted September 2, 1597. Being thus settled in the college, he distinguished himself, as before, by his learning and other excellent qualifications. Tn 1601-he took his degree of B. D. and that of D. D. in 1609. This same year last-mentioned he was elected lady Margaret’s professor, which place he enjoyed till 1621. He was also one of her preachers in 1609 and 1612. On the 20th of October 1614, he was admitted master of his college, and continued in that station till April 20, 1622. And so considerable did he become, that he was one of those eminent English divines sent by king James I. to the synod of Dovt, in 1618. He returned to England in May 1619, after having visited the principal cities in the Low Countries. Upon the death of his brother-in-law, Dr. Robert Townson, he was nominated bishop of Salisbury; and was elected June 11, 1621, confirmed November 17 following, and consecrated the 18th of the same month. He continued in favour during the remainder of king James the First’s reign; but in Lent 1630-1, he incurred the displeasure of the court Cor meddling (in a sermon preached before the king at Whitehall) with the predestinarian controversy “all curious search” into which his majesty had strictly enjoined “to be laid aside.” In a letter to Dr. Ward, bishop Davenant gives the following account of this unpleasant affair. As soon as his sermon was ended, it was signified to him that his majesty was much displeased that he had stirred this question, which his majesty had forbidden to be meddled withal, one way or other: the bishop’s answer was, that he had delivered nothing but the received doctrine of our church, established in the 17th article, and that he was ready to justify the truth of what he had then taught. He was told, the doctrine was not gainsaid, but his majesty had given command these questions should not be debated, and therefore he took it more offensively that any should be so bold as in his own hearing to break his royal commands. To this he replied, that he never understood his majesty had forbidden the handling of any doctrine comprised in the articles of our church, but only raising of new questions, or adding of new sense thereunto, which he had not done, nor ever should do. Two days after, when he appeared before the privy-council, Dr. Sam. Harsnet, archbishop of York, made a speech nearly half an hour long, aggravating the boldness of bishop Davenant’s offence, and shewing many inconveniencies that it was likely to draw after it. When the archbishop had finished his speech, the bishop desired, that since he was called thither as an offender, he might not be put to answer a long speech upon the sudden; but that his grace would be pleased to charge him point by point, and so to receive his answer; for he did not yet understand wherein he had broken any commandment of his majesty’s, which was taken for granted. After some pause, the archbishop told him he knew well enough the point which was urged against him, namely, the breach of the king’s declaration. Then he stood upon this defence, that the doctrine of predestination, which he taught, was not forbidden by the declaration; 1st, Because in the declaration all the articles are established, amongst which, the article of predestination is one. 2. Because all ministers are urged to subscribe unto the truth of the article, and all subjects to continue in the profession of that as well as of the rest. Upon these and such like grounds, he gathered that it could not be esteemed amongst forbidden, curious, or needless doctrines; and here he desired that out of any clause in the declaration it might be shewed him, that keeping himself within the bounds of the article, he had transgressed his majesty’s command; but the declaration was not produced, nor any particular words in it; only this was urged, that the king’s will was, that for the peace of the church these high questions should be forborne. He added, that he was sorry he understood not his majesty’s intention; which if he had done before, he should have made choice of some other matter to treat of, which might have given no offence; and that for the time to come, he should conform himself as readily as any other to his majesty’s command; whereupon he was dismissed. At his departure he entreated the lords of the council to let his majesty understand that he had not boldly, or wilfully and wittingly, against his declaration, meddled with the fore-named point; and that now, understanding fully his majesty’s mind and intention, he should humbly yield obedience thereunto. But although he was dismissed without farther censure, and was even admitted to kiss the king’s hand, yet he was never afterwards in favour at court. He died of a consumption April 20, 1641, to which a sense of the melancholy event approaching did not a little contribute. Among other benefactions, he gave to Queen’scollege, in Cambridge, the perpetual advowsons of the rectories of Cheverel Magna, and Newton Tony, in Wiltshire, and a rent-charge of 3 1l. 10s. per annum, for the founding of two Bible-clerks, and buying books for the library in the same college. His character was that of a man humble and hospitable; painful in preaching and writing; and behaving in every station with exemplary gravity and moderation. He was a man of great learning, and an eminent divine; but strictly attached to Calvinism in the article of unconditionate predestination, &c. Whilst he was at the synod of Dort, he inclined to the doctrine of universal redemption; and was for a middle way between the two extremes, maintaining the certainty of the salvation of a certain number of the elect; and that offers of pardon were sent not only to all that should believe and repent, but to all that heard the Gospel; that grace sufficient to convince and persuade the impenitent (so as to lay the blame of their condemnation upon themselves) went along with these offers; that the redemption of Christ and his merits were applicable to these; and consequently there was a possibility of their salvation. He was buried in Salisbury cathedral.

, a poet and dramatic writer of considerable note, was the son of John Davenant, who kept the Crown tavern or inn at Oxford, but owing to an obscure ins nuation in Wood’s accountof his birth, ithas been supposed that he was the natural son of Shakspeare; and to render this story probable, Mrs. Davenant is represented as a woman of beauty and gaiety, and a particular favourite of Shakspeare, who was accustomed to lodge at the Crown, on his journies between Warwickshire and London. Modern inquirers, particularly Mr. Steevens, are inclined to discredit this story, which indeed seems to rest upon no very sound foundation. Young Davenant, who was born Feb. 1605, very early betrayed a poetical bias, and one of Iris first attempts, when he was only ten years old, was an ode in remembrance of master William Shakspeare: this is a remarkable production for one so young, and one who lived, not only to see Shakspeare forgotten, but to contribute, with some degree of activity, to that instance of depraved taste. Davenant was educated at the grammarschool of All Saints, in his native city, under Mr. Edward Sylvester, a teacher of high reputation. In 1621, the year in which his father served the office of mayor, he entered of Lincoln-college, but being encouraged to try his success at court, he appeared there as page to Frances duchess of Richmond, a lady of great influence and fashion. He afterwards resided in the family of the celebrated sir Ftilke Greville, lord Brooke, who was himself a poet and a patron of poets. The murder of this nobleman in! 628 depriving him of what assistance he might expect from his friendship, Davenant had recourse to the stage, on which he produced his first dramatic piece, the tragedy of Albovine, king of the Lombards.

This play had success enough to procure him the recommendation, if nothing more substantial, of many persons of distinction, and of the wits of the times; and with such encouragement he renewed his attendance at court, adding to its pleasures by his dramatic efforts, and not sparingly to the mirth of his brethren the satirists, by the unfortunate issue of some of his licentious gallantries. For several years his plays and masks were acted with the greatest applause, and his character as a poet was raised very high by all who pretended to be judges. On the death of Ben Jonson, in 1638, the queen procured for him. the vacant laurel, which is said to have given such offence to Thomas May, his rival, as to induce him to join the disaffected party, and to become the advocate and historian of the republican parliament. In 1639, Davenaut was appointed “Governor of the king and queen’s company acting at the Cockpit in Drurv-lane, during the lease which Mrs. Elizabeth Beeston, alias Hutcheson, hath or doth hold in the said house.” When the civil commotions had for some time subsisted, the peculiar nature of them required that public; amusements should be the decided objects of popular resentment, and Davenant, who had administered so copiously to the pleasures of the court, was very soon brought under suspicions of a more serious kind. In May 16M, he was accused before the parliament, of being a partner with many of the king’s friends, in the design of bringing the army to London for his majesty’s protection. His accomplices effected their escape, but Davenant was apprehended at Feversham, and sent up to London. In July following he was bailed, but on a second attempt to withdraw to France, was taken in Kent. At last, however, he contrived to make his escape without farther impediment, and remained abroad for some time. The motive of his flight appears not to have been cowardice, but an unwillingness to sacrifice his life to popular fury, while there was any prospect of his being able to devote it to the service of his royal master. Accordingly, when the queen sent over a considerable quantity of military stores for the use of the earl of Newcastle’s army, Davenant resolutely ventured to return to England, and volunteered his services under that nobleman, who had been one of his patrons. The earl ma.le him lieutenant-general of his ordnance, a post for which, if he was not previously prepared, he qualified himself with so much skill and success, that in September 1643, he was rewarded with the honour of knighthood for the service he rendered to the royal cause at the siege of Gloucester. Of his military prowess, however, we have no farther account, nor at what time he found it necessary, on the decline of the king’s affairs, to retire again into France. Here he was received into the confidence of the queen, who in 1646 employed him in one of her importunate and ill-advised negociations with the king, who was then at Newcastle. About the same time Davenant had embraced the popish religion, a step which probably recommended him to the queen, but which, when known, could only tend to increase the animosity of the republicans against the court, which was already too closely suspected of an attachment to that persuasion. The object of his negociation was to persuade the king to save his crown by sacrificing the church; a proposition which his majesty rejected with becoming dignity; and this, as lord Clarendon observes, “evinced an honest and conscientious principle in his majesty’s mind, which elevated him above all his advisers.” The queen’s advisers in the measure were, his majesty knew, men of no religious principle, and he seems to have resented their sending an ambassador of no more consequence than the manager of a play-house.

By degrees he obtained complete enlargement, and had nothing to regret but the wreck of his fortune. In this dilemma, he adopted a measure which, like a great part of his conduct throughout life, shews him to have been a man of an undaunted and unaccommodating spirit, fertile in expedients, and possessed of no common resources of mind. Indeed, of all schemes, this seemed the most unlikely to succeed, and even the most dangerous to propose. Yet, in the very teeth of national prejudices or principles, and at a time when all dramatic entertainments were suspended, discouraged by the protectoral court, and anathematized by the people, he conceived, that if he could contrive to open a theatre of some kind, it would be sure to be well filled. Viewing his difficulties with great precaution, he proceeded by slow steps, and an apparent reluctance to revive what was so generally obnoxious. Having, however, obtained the countenance of lord Whitlocke, sir John Maynard, and other persons of rank, he opened a theatre in Rutland-house, Charterhouse-yard, on the 21st of May, 1656, and performed a kind of non-descript entertainments, as they were called, which were dramatic in every thing but the names and form, and some of them were called operas. When he found these relished and tolerated, he proceeded to more regular pieces, and with such advantages in style and manner, as, in the judgment of the historians of the stage, entitle him to the honour of being not only the reviver, but the improver of the legitimate drama. These pieces he afterwards revised, and published in a more perfect state, and they now form the principal part of his printed works, although modern taste has long excluded them from the stage.

, the eldest son of sir William Davenant, was born in 1656, and was initiated in grammar-learning at Cheame in Surrey. Though he had the misfortune to lose his father when scarce twelve years of age, yet care was taken to send him to Oxford to finish his education, where he became a commoner of Baliol college in 1671. He took no degree, but went to London, where, at the age of nineteen, he distinguished himself by a dramatic performance, the only one he published, entitled, “Circe, a tragedy, acted at his royal highness the duke of York’s theatre with great applause.” This play was not printed till two years after it was acted; upon which occasion Dryden wrote a prologue, and the earl of Rochester an epilogue. In the former, there was an apology for the author’s youth and inexperience. He had a considerable share in the theatre in right of his father, which probably induced him to turn his thoughts so early to the stage; however, he was not long detained there either by that, or the success of his play, but applied himself to the civil law, in which, it is said, he had the degree of doctor conferred upon him by the university of Cambridge. He was elected to represent the borough of St. Ives in Cornwall, in the first parliament of James II. which was summoned to meet in May 1685; and, about the same time, jointly empowered, with the master of the revels, to inspect all plays, and to preserve the decorum of the stage. He was also appointed a commissioner of the excise, and continued in that employment for near six years, that is, from 1683 to 1689: however, he does not seem to have been advanced to this rank before he had gone through some lesser employments. In 1698 he was elected for the borough of Great Bedwin, as he was again in 1700. He was afterwards appointed inspector-general of the exports and imports; and this employment he held to the time of his death, which happened Nov. 6, 1714. Dr. Davenant’s thorough acquaintance with the laws and constitution of the kingdom, joined to his great skill in figures, and his happiness in applying that skill according to the principles advanced by sir William Petty in his Political Arithmetic, enabled him to enter deeply into the management of affairs, and procured him great success as a writer in politics; and it is remarkable, that though he was advanced and preferred under the reigns of Charles II. and James II. yet in all his pieces he reasons entirely upon revolution principles, and compliments in the highest manner the virtues and abilities of the prince then upon the throne.

His first political work was, “An Essay upon Ways and Means of supplying the War,” 1695. In this treatise he wrote with so much strength and perspicuity upon the nature of funds, that whatever pieces came abroad from the author of the Essay on Ways and Means, were sufficiently recommended to the public; and this was the method he usually took to distinguish the writings he afterwards published. 2. “An Essay on the East-India Trade,” 1697. This was nothing more than a pamphlet, written in form of a letter to the marquis of Normandy, afterwards duke of Buckinghamshire. 3. “Discourses on the public revenues, and of the trade of England. Part I. To which is added, a discourse upon improving the revenue of the state of Athens, written originally in Greek by Xenophon, and now made English from the original, with some historical notes by another hand,” 1698. This other hand was Walter Moyle, esq. who addressed his discourse to Dr. Pavenant. There is a passage in it which shews, that there were some thoughts of sending over our author in quality of director-general to the East-Indies; and is also a clear testimony what that great man’s notions were, in regard' to the importance of his writings. It is this: “The great trade to the East-Indies, with some few regulations, might be established upon a bottom more consistent with the manufactures of England; but in all appearance this is not to be compased, unless some public-spirited man, with a masterly genius,” meaning Dr. Davenant himsrlf, “be placed at the head of our affairs in India. And though we, who are his friends, are loth to lose him, it were to be wished for the good of the kingdom, that the gentleman, whom common fame and the voice of the world have pointed out as the ablest man for such a station, would employ his excellent judgment and talents that way, in the execution of so noble and useful a design.” 4. “Discourses on the Public Revenues, and on the Trade of England, which more immediately treat of the foreign traffic of this kingdom. Part II.” 1698. 5. “An Essay on the probable Method of making the people gainers in the Balance of Trade,” 1699. 6. “A Discourse upon Grants and Resumptions: shewing, how our ancestors have proceeded with such ministers as have procured to themselves grants of the crown revenue; and that the forfeited estates ought to be applied to the payment of public debts,” 1700. 7. “EsMiys upon the Balance of Power; the right of making War, Peace, Alliances; Universal Monarchy. To which is added, an Appendix, containing the records referred to in the second essay,” 1701. It was in this book that our author was carried away by his zeal to treat the church, or at least some churchmen, in so disrespectful a manner, as to draw upon himself a censure from one of the houses of convocation. 8. “A picture of a Modern Whig, in two parts,” 1701. There is, however, nothing but general report, founded upon the likeness of style and other circumstantial evidence, to prove that this bitter pamphlet fell from the pen of our author; and, if it did, he must be allowed to have been the greatest master of invective that ever wrote in our language; others have attributed it to Defoe. 9. “Essays upon Peace at Home and War Abroad, in two parts,” 1704. This is the first piece our author published after the time that he is supposed to have reconciled himself to the ministry; it was suspected to be written at the desire of lord Halifax, and was dedicated to the queen. It drew upon him the resentment of that party, by whom he had been formerly esteemed, but who now bestowed upon him as ill language, or rather worse, than he had received from his former opponents. 10. “Reflections upon the Constitution and Management of the Trade to Africa, through the whole course and progress thereof, from the beginning of the last century to this time,” &c. 1709, fol. in 3 parts. 11. “A Report to the honourable the Commissioners for putting in execution the Act, entitled, an Act for the taking, examining, and stating the Public Accounts of the Kingdom, from Charles Davenant, LL. D. inspector-general of the exports and imports,” 1712, part I. 12. “A Second Report to the Honourable the Commissioners,” &c. 1712. It may be necessary to observe, that several of the above-recited pieces were attacked in the warmest manner, at the time they were published; but the author seems to have satisfied himself in delivering his sentiments and opinions, without shewing any further concern to defend and support them against the cavils of party zeal and contention. Most of his political works were collected and revised by sir Charles Whitworth, 1771, in 5 vols. 8vo.

“Davenant,” says sir John Sinclair, “is certainly a most valuable political author; and considering that the modern system of politics, founded on a spirit of commerce, on public credit, on paper circulation, and on skill in finance, was then in a manner in its infancy, he undoubtedly was a writer whose progress was more advanced than could hare been expected at that time. It appears from his works, that he had access to official information, from which he derived many advantages. He seems, however, to have depended too much upon political arithmetic, or the strength of figures, which ought only to be resorted to when the fact itself cannot be ascertained, being only a succedaneum when better evidence cannot be procured. He was unfortunately, also, a party writer, and saw every thing in the manner the best calculated to promote the views and purposes of his political friends at the time. Every thing they did was right, whilst every action of their enemies was ill-intended and ruinous. He possessed a very considerable command of language, and is sometimes too prolix; but on the whole there are certainly very few that can rival him as a political author.”

, a learned Englishman, was born at Coventry, in Warwickshire, about 1598, and educated in grammar-learning at a school in that city. He was sent to Merton-college in Oxford at fifteen years of age; where, spending two years, he, upon an invitation from some Romish priest, afterwards went to Doway. He remained there for some time; and then going to Ypres, he entered into the order of Franciscans among the Dutch there, in 1617. After several removals from place to place, he became a missionary into England, where he went by the name of Franciscus a Sancta Clara; and at length was made one of the chaplains to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I. Here he exerted himself to promote the cause of popery, by gaining disciples, raising money among the English catholics to carry on public matters abroad, and by writing books for the advancement of his religion and order. He was very eminent for his uncommon learning, being excellently versed in school-divinity, in fathers and councils, in philosophers, and in ecclesiastical and profane histories. He was, Wood tells us, a person of very free discourse, while his fellowlabourer in the same vineyard, Hugh Cressey, was reserved; of a lively and quick aspect, while Cressey was clouded and melancholy: all which accomplishments made him agreeable to protestants as well as papists. Archbishop Laud, it seems, had some knowledge of this person; for, in the seventh article of his impeachment, it is said, that “the said archbishop, for the advancement of popery and superstition within this realm, hath wittingly and willingly received, harboured, and relieved divers popish priests and Jesuits, namely, one called Sancta Clara, alias Davenport, a dangerous person and Franciscan friar, who hath written a popish and seditious book, entitled, ‘ Dens, Natura, Gratia,’ &c. wherein the thirtynine articles of the church of England, established by act of parliament, are much traduced and scandalized: that the said archbishop had divers conferences with him, while he was writing the said book,” &c. To which article, the archbishop made this answer: “I never saw that Franciscan friar, Sancta Clara, in my life, to the utmost of my memory, above four times or five at most. He was first brought to me by Dr. Lindsell: but 1 did fear, that he would never expound the articles so, that the church of England might have cause to thank him for it. He never came to me after, till he was almost ready to print another book, to prove that episcopacy was authorised in the church by divine right; and this was after these unhappy stirs began. His desire was, to have this book printed here; but at his several addresses to me for this, I still gave him this answer: That I did not like the way which the church of Rome went concerning episcopacy; that I would never consent, that any such book from the pen of a Romanist should be printed here; that the bishops of England are very well able to defend their own cause and calling, without any help from Rome, and would do so when they saw cause: and this is all the conference I ever had with him.” Davenport at this time absconded, and spent most of those years of trouble in obscurity, sometimes beyond the seas, sometimes at London, sometimes in the country, and sometimes at Oxford. After the restoration of Charles II. when the marriage was celebrated between him and Catherine of Portugal, Sancta Clara became one of her chaplains; and was for the third time chosen provincial of his order for England, where he died May 31, 1680, and was buried in the church-yard belonging to the Savoy. It was his desire, many years before his death, to retire to Oxford to die, purposely that his bones might be laid in St. Ebb’s churcb, to which the mansion of the Franciscans or grey-friars sometime joined, and in which several of the brethren were anciently interred, particularly those of his old friend John Day, a learned friar of his order, who was there buried in 165;s. He was the author of several works: 1. “Paraphrastiea expositio articulorum confessionis Anglicae:” this book was, w r e know not why, much censured by the Jesuits, who would fain have had it burnt; but beino-soon after licensed at Rome, all farther rumour about it stopped. 2. “Deus, Natura, Gratia sive, tractatus de praedestinatione, de mentis,” &c. this book was dedicated to Charles I. and Prynne contends, that the whole scope of it, as well as the paraphrastical exposition of the articles, reprinted at the end of it in 1635, was to reconcile the king, the church, and the articles of our religion, to the church of Rome. He published also a great number of other works, which are not now of consequence enough to be mentioned.

, elder brother of Christopher just mentioned, was born at Coventry in 1597, and sent from thence with his brother to Merton-college in 1613; but while Christopher went to Doway, and became a catholic, John went to London, and became a puritan. He was minister of St. Stephen’s in Coleman-street, and esteemed by his brethren a person of excellent gifts in preaching, and in other qualities belonging to a divine. About 1630 he was appointed one of the feoffees for the buying in impropriations, which involved him in a dispute with archbishop Laud; but that project miscarrying, he left his pastoral charge about 1633, under pretence of opposition from the bishops, and went to Amsterdam. Here, endeavouring to be a minister in the English congregation, and to join with them in all duties, he was opposed by John Paget, an elder, on account of some difference between them about baptism; upon which he wrote, in his own defence, “A Letter to the Dutch Classis, containing a just complaint against an unjust doer; wherein is declared the miserable slavery and bondage that the English church at Amsterdam is now in, by reason of the tyrannical government and corrupt doctrine of Mr. John Paget, their minister,” Amst. 1634. Two or three more pieces relating to this controversy were published by him afterwards; and such were his parts and learning, that he drew away from them many of their congregation, to whom he preached and prayed in private houses.

In the beginning of the rebellion, he returned into England, according to Wood, as other nonconformists did, and had a cure bestowed on him; but Neal says he came back in disguise, which is most probable, as this happened about 1637, when the power of the church was yet in force. In this year he went into New-England, and became a pastor of New-Haven there. He afterwards removed from thence to Boston in 1668, where he died March 15, 1670. He was the author of, a “Catechism containing the chief heads of the Christian religion,” which was printed at London in 1659; several sermons; the power of congregational churches asserted and vindicated; and of an exposition of the Canticles, which has never been published. Neal agrees that his notions of churchdiscipline were very rigid, and that he was a millenarian, being fully persuaded in his own mind of the thousand years’ personal reign of Christ upon earth; but adds, that notwithstanding this or any other singular notions he might entertain, he was one of the greatest men that New England ever enjoyed.

, the patron of Wales, was the son of Xantus or Santus, prince of Ceretica, now Cardiganshire, and born about the close of the fifth century. Being brought up to the church, he was ordained priest; he then retired to the Isle of Wight, and for some time lived in the accustomed solitude of those times. From this he at length emerged, and went into Wales, where he preached to the Britons. He built a chapel at Glastonbury, and founded twelve monasteries, the principal of which was in the vale of Ross, near Menevia. Of this monastery frequent mention is made in the acts of the Irish saints. The rules he established for his monasteries were, as usual; rigid, but not so injudicious or absurd as some of the early monastic statutes. One of his penances was manual labour in agriculture, and, for some time at least, there was no accumulation of worldly goods, for whoever was admitted as a member, was enjoined to leave every thing of that kind behind him. When the synod of Brevy in Cardiganshire was held in the year 519, St. David was invited to it, and was one of its chief champions against Pelagianism. At the close of this synod, St. Dubricius, archbishop of Caerleon upon Usk, resigned his see to St. David, who translated it to Menevia, now called St. David’s. Here he died about the year 544 in a very advanced age. He is praised by his biographers for his eloquence and powers in conversion, and has, according to them, been in all succeeding ages the glory of the British church. He wrote the “Decrees of the Synod of Victoria,” which he called soon after he became bishop; the “Rules of his Monasteries;” some “Homilies,” and “Letters to king Arthur,” all of which have perished.

, a most extraordinary fanatic, was the son of a waterman of Ghent, and educated a glazier, or, as some say, a glass-painter. He began about 1525 to preach that he was the true Messiah, the third David, nephew of God, not after the flesh, but after the spirit. “The heavens,” he said, “being empty, he was sent to adopt children worthy of that kingdom and to restore Israel, not by death, as Christ, but by grace.” With the Sadducees, he denied eternal life, the resurrection, and the last judgment: with the Adamites, he was against marriage, and for a community of women: and with the followers of Manes, he thought that the body only, and not the soul, could be defiled with sin. According to him, the souk of unbelievers ought to be saved, and those of the apostles damned. Lastly, he affirmed it folly to believe that there was any sin in denying Jesus Christ; and ridiculed the martyrs for preferring death to apostacy. A prosecution being commenced against him and his followers, he fled first to Friesland, and from thence to Basil, where he lurked under the name of John Bruck. He died in that city in 1556, promising to his disciples, that he should rise again in three days; which, as it happened, was not altogether false; for the magistrates of Basil, understanding at length who he was, about that time, dug tip his corpse, which, together with his writings, they caused to be burned by the common executioner. This George David had many followers in his life-time, and it is even said that there are still some remains of them in Holstein, Friesland, and other countries, whose temper and conduct seem to discredit the exaggerated account which some writers have given of their founder.

, D. D. an eminent writer and antiquary, was born in the latter part of the sixteenth century in Denbighshire, and educated by William Morgan, afterwards bishop of St. Asaph. He was admitted a student of Jesus-college, Oxford, in 1589, where he took one degree in arts, and afterwards became a member of Lincoln-college in the same university. He was rector ol Malloyd, or Maynlloyd in Merionethshire, and afterwards a canon of St. Asaph, to which dignity he was promoted by Dr. Parry, then bishop, whose chaplain he was. He commenced doctor in 1616, and was highly esteemed by the university, says Wood, as well versed in the history and antiquities of his own nation, and in the Greek and Hebrew languages; a most exact critic, and indefatigable searcher into ancient writings, and well acquainted with curious and rare authors. The time of his death is not known. His works are, 1. “Antiques Linguae Britannicse nunc communiter dictae Cambro-Britannicoe, a suis Cymrascae vel Cambricee, ab aliis Wallicoe rudimenta,” &c. 1621, 8vo. 2. “Dietionarium Latino-Britannicum,” 1631, folio. With this is printed, “Dictionarium Latino-Britannicum,” which was begun and greatly advanced by Thomas Williams, physician, before 1600. It was afterwards completed and published by Dr. Davies. 3. “Aclagia Britannica, authorum Britannicorum nomina, & quando floruerunt,” 1632, printed at the end of the dictionary before mentioned. 4. “Adagiorum Britannicorum specimen,” ms. Bibl. Bodl. He also assisted W. Morgan, bishop of Landaff, and Richard Parry, bishop of St. Asaph, in translating the Bible into Welsh, in that correct edition which came out in 1620. He also translated into the same language (which he had studied at vacant hours for 30 years) the book of “Resolution,” written by Robert Parsons, a Jesuit.

, an eminent and learned critic, was the son of a merchant in London, and born there April 22, 1679. After being educated in classical learning at the Charterhouse-school, he was, June 8, 1695, admitted of Queen’s-college in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1698. On July 7, 1701, he was chosen fellow of his college and the year following took the degree of M. A. and was proctor in 1709. In 1711, having distinguished himself by several learned publications hereafter mentioned, he was collated by Moore, bishop of Ely, to the rectory of Fen-Ditton near Cambridge, and to a prebend in the church of Ely; taking the same year the degree of LL. D. Upon the death of Dr. James, or, as Bentham says, Dr. Humphrey Gower, he was, on March 23, 1716-17, chosen master of Queen’s-college; and created D. D. the same year, when George I. was at Cambridge. He died March 7, 1731-2, aged 53, and was buried in the chapel of his college, where a flat marble stone was laid over his grave, with a plain inscription at his own desire. His mother, who was daughter of sir John Turton, knt. is said to have been living in 1743.

After this affair Davies returned to Oxford, where he is supposed to have written his poem on the “Immortality of the Soul.” There is some mistake among his biographers as to the time of its publication, or even of its being written. If, as they all say, he wrote it at Oxford in 1598, and published it in 1599, how is either of these facts to be reconciled with the dedication to queen Elizabeth, which is dated July 11, 1592? Mr. Park, whose accuracy and zeal for literary history induced him to put this question to the readersof the Biographia Britannica, has not attempted a solution, and it must remain in this state, unless an edition of the “Nosce Teipsum” can be found of a prior date, or any ground for supposing that the date of the dedication was a typographical error. This poem, however, procured to him, as he deserved, a very high distinction among the writers of his time, whom, in harmony of versification, he has far surpassed. Whether Elizabeth bestowed any marks of her favour does not appear. He knew, however, her love of flattery, and wrote twenty-six acrostic hymns on the words “Elizabetha regina,” which are certainly the best of their kind.

In 1603 he was sent as solicitor-general to Ireland, and immediately rose to be attorney-general. Being afterwards appointed one of the judges of assize, he conducted himself with so much prudence and humanity on the circuits as greatly to contribute to allay the ferments which existed in that country, and received the praises of his superiors, “as a painful and well-deserving servant of his majesty.” In Trinity term 1606 he was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law, and received the honour of knighthood on the llth of February 1607. His biographer attributes these promotions to the patronage of lord Ellesmere and the earl of Salisbury, with whom he corresponded, and to whom he sent a very interesting account of a circuit he performed with the lord-deputy in July 1607. Such was Ireland then, that a guard of “six or seven score foot and fifty or three score horse” was thought a necessary protection against a peasantry recovering from their wildness.

He married, while in Ireland, Eleanor, the third daughter of lord Audley, by whom he had one son, who was an idiot and died young, and a daughter, Lucy, who was married to Ferdinando lord Hastings, afterwards earl of Huntingdon. Sir John’s lady appears to have been an enthusiast; a volume of her prophecies was published in 1649, 4to. Anthony Wood informs us that she foretold the death of her husband, who turned the matter off with a jest. She was harshly treated during the republic for her officious prophecies, and is said to have been confined several years in Bethlem hospital, and in the Tower of London, where she suffered all the rigour that could be inflicted by those who would tolerate no impostures but their own. She died in 1652, and was interred near her husband in St. Martin’s church. The late earl of Huntingdon informed lord Mountmorres the historian of the Irish parliament, that sir John Davies did not appear to have acquired any landed property in Ireland from his great employments. The character of sir John Davies as a lawyer, is that of great ability and learning. As a politician he stands unimpeached of corruption or servility, and his “Tracts” are valued as the result of profound knowledge and investigation. They were republished with some originals in 1786 by Mr. George Chalmers, who prefixed a Life of the Author, to which the present sketch is greatly indebted.

, a Welsh clergyman, was born in Tre'r-Abbot, in Whiteford parish, Flintshire. Of his personal history little is known, except that he was a good scholar, very conversant in the literary history of his country, and very unfortunate in attempting to turn his knowlege to advantage. He was a vehement foe to Popery, Arianism, and Socinianism, and of the most fervent loyalty. to George I. and the Hanoverian succession. Owing to some disgust, he quitted his native place, and probably his profession when he came to London, as he subscribes himself “counsellor-at-law;” and in one of his volumes has a long digression on law and law-writers. Here he commenced author in the humblest form, not content with dedicating to the great, but hawking his books in person from door to door, where he was often repulsed with rudeness, and seldom appears to have been treated with kindness or liberality. How long he carried on this unprosperous business, or when he died, we have not been able to discover. Mr. D'Israeli, who has taken much pains to rescue his name from oblivion, suspects that his mind became disordered from poverty and disappointment. He appears to have courted the Muses, who certainly were not very favourable to his addresses. The most curious of his works consist of some volumes under the general title of “Athenæ Britannicæ,” 8vo, 1715, &c. a kind of bibliographical, biographical, and critical work, “the greatest part (says Baker, the antiquary) borrowed from modern historians, but containing some things more uncommon, and not easily to be met with.” The first of these volumes, printed in 1715, is entitled Ειχων Μιχρο-βιβλιχε, sive Icon Libellorum, or a Critical History of Pamphlets.“In this he styles himself” a gentleman of the inns of, court.“The others are entitled” Athenæ Britannicæ, or a Critical History of the Oxford and Cambridge Writers and Writings, &c. by M. D.“London, 1716, 8vo. They are all of so great rarity, that Dr. Farmer never saw but one volume, the first, nor Baker but three, which were sent to him as a great curiosity by the earl of Oxford, and are now deposited in St. John’s college, Cambridge. In the British Museum there are seven. From the” Icon Libellorum," the only volume we have had an opportunity of perusing attentively, the author appears to have been well acquainted with English authors, their works and editions, and to have occasionally looked into the works of foreign bibliographers.

, the son of a physician who practised in Wales, was born at Shrewsbury, and educated at Eton, whence he removed to King’s college, Cambridge, and regularly took the degrees of A. B. 1732, A. M. 1737, and D. D. 175y. He was early noticed by his school-fellow, Cornwallis, archbishop of Canterbury, when bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, who appointed him his chaplain, and collated him to a canonry of Lithfield, and in 1751 presented him to the mastership of St. John’s hospital, Lichfield. He was also archdeacon of Derby, and rector of Kingsland, in Herefordshire, in the gift of his family. He died Feb. 6, 1769, much esteemed for his learning and amiable disposition; and his numerous poems, both printed and manuscript, bear ample testimony to his talents. He wrote several of the anonymous imitations of Horace in Buncombe’s edition, 1767, and at the end of vol. IV. is given the character of the ancient Romans from a poem by him, styled “The Progress of Science.” He has many poems in Dodsley’s and Nichols’s collections, and one, in Latin, preserved in the “Alumni Etonenses.” Mr. Pennant also, in his “Tour in Wales,” vol. II. p. 422, has preserved some animated lines by Dr. Davies on Caractacus, which he says were delivered almost extempore at one of the annual meetings held on Caer Caradoc some years ago by gentlemen from different parts, to celebrate the name of that renowned British chieftain, in prose or verse.

, a man of considerable talents, and who prided himself on being through life “a companion of his superiors,” was born about 1712. In 1728 and 1729 he was at the university of Edinburgh, completing his education, and became, as Dr. Johnson used to say of him, “learned enough for a clergyman.” That, however, was not his destination, for in 1736 we find him among the dramatis personae of Lillo’s celebrated tragedy of “Fatal Curiosity,” at the theatre in the Hay market, where he was the original representative of young Wilmot, under the management of Henry Fielding. He afterwards commenced bookseller in Duke’s court, opposite the church of St. Martin-in-the-fields, and afterwards in Round court in the Strand, but met with misfortunes which induced him to return to the theatre. For several years he belonged to various companies at York, Dublin, and other places, particularly at Edinburgh, where he appears to have been at one time the manager of the theatre. At York he married miss Yarrow, daughter of a performer there, whose beauty was not more remarkable than the blamelessness of her conduct and the amiableness of her manners. In 1753 he returned to London, and with Mrs. Davies was engaged at Drury-lane, where they remained for several years in good estimation with the town, and played many characters, if not with great excellence, at least with propriety and decency. Churchill, in his indiscriminate satire, has attempted to fix some degree of ridicule on Mr. Davies’s performance, which, just or not, had the effect of driving him from the stage, which about 1762 he exchanged for a shop in Russel-street, Covent Garden; but his efforts in trade were not crowned with the success which his abilities in his profession merited. In 1778 he became a bankrupt; when, such was the regard enterr tained for him by his friends, that they readily consented to his re-establishment; and none of them, as he says himself, were more active to serve him than those who had suffered most by his misfortunes. Yet, all their efforts might possibly have been fruitless if his powerful and firm friend Dr. Johnson had not exerted himself to the utmost in his behalf. He called upon all over whom he had any influence to assist Tom Davies; and prevailed on. Mr. Sheridan, patentee of Drury-lane theatre, to give him a benefit, which he granted on the most liberal terms. In. 1780, by a well-timed publication, the “Life of David Garrick,” which has passed through several editions, Mr. Davies acquired much fame, and some money. He afterwards published “Dramatic Miscellanies,” if) 3 yols. of which a second edition appeared a few days only before the author’s death. His other works are, 1. “Some Memoirs of Mr. Henderson.” 2. “A Review of lord Chesterfield’s Characters.” 3. A “Life of Massinger.” 4. Lives of Dr. John Eacharo, sir John Davies, and Mr. Lillo, prefixed to editions of their works, published by Mr. Davies; and fugitive pieces without number in prose and verse in the St. James’s Chronicle, and almost all the public newspapers. The compiler of this article in the last edition of this Dictionary, informs us that he “knew him well, and has passed many convivial hours in his company at a social meeting, where his lively sallies of pleasantry used to set the table in a roar of harmless merriment. The last time he visited them he wore the appearance of a spectre; and, sensible of his approaching end, took a solemn valediction of all the company.” Mr. Davies died the 5th of May, 1785, and was buried, by his own desire, in the vault of St. Paul, Covent Garden, close by the side of his next door neighbour, the late Mr. Grignion, watchmaker. Mrs. Davies died Feb. 9, 1801. Tom Davies, as he was familiarly called, was a good-natured and conscientious man in business as in private life, but his theatrical bias created a levity not consistent with prudence. Had he been rich, he would have been liberal: Dr. Campbell used to say he was not a bookseller, but a gentleman who dealt in books"

, an eminent navigator, of the sixteenth century, was born at Sandridge, in the parish of StokeGabriel, near Dartmouth in Devonshire. His birth near that eminent sea-port, having given him a fair opportunity, to which probably was added a strong natural disposition, he put himself early to sea; where, by the help of a good master, and his subsequent industry, knowledge, and experience, he became the most expert pilot, and one of the ablest navigators of his time. The first public employment he had was in 1585, when he undertook to discover a new passage, by the north-west parts of America, to the East-Indies. For that purpose, he sailed from Dartmouth, on the seventh of June, with two barks, one of fifty and the other of thirty-five tons, which were fitted out at the charge of some noblemen and gentlemen; and met, July 19, many islands of ice floating, in 60 degrees northern latitude. They were soon encompassed with them; and going upon some, perceived, that the roaring noise they heard, at which they were greatly astonished, was caused only by the rolling of the ice together. The next day, they discovered the southern coast of Greenland, five hundred leagues distant from the Durseys, or Missenhead, in Ireland; and observed it to be extremely rocky and mountainous, and covered with snow, without any signs of wood, grass, or earth to be seen. The shore, likewise, was so full of ice, that no ship could come near it by two leagues: and so shocking was the appearance of it, and the cracking of the ice so hideous, that they imagined it to be a quite desolate country, without a living creature, or even any vegetable substance; for which reason captain Davis named it, “The Land of Desolation.” Perceiving that they were run into a very deep bay, wherein they were almost surrounded with ice, they kept coasting along the edge of it, south-south-west, till the 25th of July; when, after having gone fifty or sixty leagues, they found that the shore lay directly north. This made them alter their course to the north-west, in hopes of finding their desired passage: but on the 29th they discovered land to the north-east, in 64 degr. 15 min. latitude. Making towards it, they perceived that they were passed the ice, and were among many green, temperate, and pleasant islands, bordering upon the shore; though the hills of the continent were still covered with great quantities of snow. Among these islands were many fine bays, and good roads for shipping: they landed in some, and the people of the country came down and conversed with them by signs, making Mr. Davis understand, that there was a great sea towards the north west. He staid in this place till the first of August, and then proceeded in his discovery. The sixth of that month, they found land in 66 degr. 40 min. latitude, quite free from ice; and anchored in a safe road, under a great mountain, the cliffs whereof glistered like gold. This mountain he named, Mount Raleigh: the road where their ships lay at anchor, Totness Road: the bay which encompassed the mountain, Exeter Sound: the foreland towards the north, Dier’s Cape: and the foreland towards the south, Cape Walsingham. He departed from hence the eighth of August, coasting along the shore, which lay south-south-west, and east-north-east; and on the eleventh came to the most southerly cape of that land, which he named, “The Cape of God’s Mercy,” as being the place of their first entrance for the discovery. Going forward, they came into a very fine straight, or passage, in some places twenty leagues broad, in others thirty, quite free from ice, the weather in it very tolerable, and the water of the same colour and nature as the main ocean. This passage still retains the name of its first discoverer, being called to this day Fretum Davis, or Davis’s Straights. Having sailed, north-west, sixty leagues in this passage, they discovered several islands in the midst of it; on some of which they landed. The coast was very barren, without wood or grass; and the rocks were like fine marble, full of veins of divers colours. Some days after they continued searching for the north-west passage, but found only a great number of islands. And, on the 2oth, the wind coming contrary, they altered their course and design, and returning for England, arrived at Dartmouth the 29th of September. The next year Mr. Davis undertook a second voyage, for the farther discovery of the north-west passage, being supported and encouraged again by secretary Walsingham, and other adventurers. With' a view therefore of searching the bottom of the Straights he had been in the year before, he sailed from Dartmouth, May the 7th, 1586, with four ships, and the 15th of June discovered land in 60 degrees latitude, and 47 degrees longitude west from London. The ice along the coast reached in some places ten, in some twenty, and in others fifty leagues into the sea; so that, to avoid it, they were forced to bear into 57 degrees latitude. After many tempestuous storms, they made the land again, June the 29th, in 64 degrees of latitude, and 58 of longitude; and ran among the temperate islands they had been at the year before. But the water was so deep, they could not easily come to an anchor; yet they found means to go ashore, on some of the islands, where they were much caressed and welcomed by the natives, who knew them again. Having finished a pinnace, which was to serve them for a front in their discoveries, they landed, not only in that, but also in their boats, in several places: and, upon the strictest search, found the land not to be a continent, as they imagined, but a collection of huge, waste, and desert isles, with great sounds and inlets passing between sea and sea. They pursued their voyage the 11th of July, and on the 17th, in 63 degrees 8 minutes latitude, met with a prodigious mass of ice, which they coasted till the 30th. This was a great obstacle and discouragement to them, not having the like there the year before; and, besides, the men beginning to grow sickly, the crew of one of the ships, on which he chiefly depended, forsook him, and resolved to proceed no farther. However, not to disappoint Mr. W. Sanderson, who was the chief adventurer in this voyage, and for fear of losing the favour of secretary Walsingham, who had this discovery much at heart, Mr. Davis undertook to proceed alone in his small bark of thirty tons. Having therefore fitted, and well-victualled it, in a harbour lying in 66 degrees 33 minutes latitude, and 70 degrees longitude, which he found to be a very hot place, and full of muscatoes, he set sail the 12th of August, and coming into a straight followed the course of it for eighty leagues, till he came among many islands, where the water ebbed and flowed six fathom deep. He had hopes of finding a passage there, but upon searching farther in his boat, he perceived there was none. He then returned again into the open sea, and kept coasting southward as far as 54 degrees and a half of latitude: in which time he found another great inlet near forty leagues broad, between two lands, west, where the water ran in with great violence. This, he imagined, was the passage so long sought for; but the wind being then contrary, and two furious storms happening soon after, he neither thought it safe nor wise to proceed farther, especially in one small bark, and when the season was so far advanced. He, therefore, sailed for England the 11th of September; and arrived there in the beginning of October. By the observations which he made, he concluded, that the north parts of America are all islands. He made a third voyage to these parts again the year following, 1587. All the western merchants, and most of those of London, refused to be engaged farther in the undertaking; but it was encouraged by the lord treasurer Burleigh and secretary Walsinghain. Mr. Davis having, in his last voyage, discovered prodigious quantities of excellent cud-tish, in 56 degrees of latitude, two ships were sent along with him for fishing, and one only for the discovery of the North west passage. They sailed from Dartmouth the 19tii of May, and discovered land the 14th of June, at sixteen leagues distance, but very mountainous, and covered with snow. On the 21st of June the two barks left him, and went upon the fishing, after having promised him, not to depart till his return to them about the end of August, yet having finished their voyage in about sixteen days after, they set sail for England without any regard to their promise. Captain Davis, in the mean time, pursued his intended discovery, in the sea between America and Greenland, from 64 to 73 degrees of latitude. Having entered the Straights which bear his name, he went on northward, from the 21st to the 30th of June; naming one part Merchants Coast; another, the London Coast; another, Hope Sanderson in 73 degrees latitude, being the farthest he went that day. The wind coming northerly, he altered his course, and ran forty leagues west, without seeing any laud. On the 2d of July, he fell in with a great bank of ice, which he coasted southward till the 1 9th of July, when he came within sight of Mount Raleigh on the American coast, in about 67 degrees of latitude. Having sailed sixty leagues north-west into the gulf that lies beyond it, he anchored, July 23, at the bottom of that gulf, among many islands, which he named “The Earl of Cumberland’s Isles” He quitted that place again the same day, and sailed back south-east, in order to recover the sea; which he did the 29th in 62 degrees of latitude. The 30th he passed by a great bank, or inlet, to which he gave the name of Lumley’s Inlet; and the next day by a head land, which he called “The Earl of Warwick’s Foreland.” On the first of August he fell in with the southermost cape, named by him Chudley’s Cape: and, the 12th, passed by an island which he named Darcy’s Island. When he came in 52 degrees of latitude, not finding the two ships that had promised to stay for him, he was in great distress, having but little wood, and only half a hogshead of water left; yet, taking courage, he made the best of his way home, and arrived at Dartmouth September the 15th, very sanguine, that the north-west passage was most probable, and the execution easy; but secretary Walsinghaw dying not long after, all farther search was laid aside. Mr. Davis, notwithstanding, did not remain idle. For, August 26, 1591, he was captain of the Desire, rear admiral to Mr. Thomas Cavendish, in his second unfortunate expedition to the South -Sea; and is highly blamed by Mr. Cavendish, for having deserted him, and thereby being the cause of his overthrow. After many disasters, Mr. Davis arrived again at Bear-haven in Ireland, June 11, 1593. He performed afterwards no less than five voyages to the East-Indies, in the station of a pilot. One was in a Dutch ship, in which he set out, March 15, 1597-8, from Flushing, and returned to Middleburgh, July 23, 1600. Of the rest we have no account, except of that which he performed with sir Edward Michelbourne, in which were spent nineteen months, from December 5, 1604, to July 9, 1606. During this voyage Mr. Davis was killed, on the 27th of December, 1605, in a desperate fight with some Japonese near the coast of Malacca. He married Faith, daughter of sir John Fulford, of Fulford in Devonshire, knight, by Dorothy his wife, daughter of John lord Bouchier, earl of Bath, by whom probably he had issue: for some of his posterity are said to have been living about the middle of the last century, at or near Deptford.

“The account of his second voyage for the Discovery of the North-west Passage, in 1586,” seems to be of his composition; for he speaks always in the first person. There are likewise in print two letter.-? of his to Mr. Sanderson, one dated from Exeter, October 14, 1586; and the other from Sandridge, September 16, 1587. Hakluyt has also preserved “A Traverse Booke made by M. John Davis, in his third voyage for the discoverie of the Northwest Passage, anno 1587,” and it appears that he composed a treatise entitled “The World’s Hydrographicall Description,” for Hakluyt has extracted from it, and published, “A report of Master John Davis, of his three voyages made for the Discovery of the North-west Passage.” His voyage to the East Indies in a Dutch ship, in 1598, was written also by himself. It is said that “There is a flutter, [Routier] or Brief Directions for sailing into the East Indies, digested into a plain method by this same person, John Davis, of Limehouse, (as he is there called) written upon experiment of his five voyages thither, and home again.” But either it was not written by the same John Davis, who is the subject of this article, or else our John Davis was not killed in the East Indies, as we have said above upon the authority of Purchas, and of those that have copied from him.

, of Hereford, as he usually styled himself, a poet and schoolmaster, was born in that city, and sent when young from a grammar-school there, to the university of Oxford; but Wood has not discovered in what college he studied, nor does it appear that he took any degree. After leaving the university, he returned to his native place, where he obtained the character of a poet, and published several productions of the rhyming kind; but not finding, as it would indeed have been wonderful if he had found, much profit accrue, he set up a writing-school, first at Hereford, and afterwards in London, where he at length acquired the character of one of the first penmen in England. In 1611 we find him living in Fleet-street, and a Roman catholic. From Peck’s Desiderata it appears that Arthur Wilson was one of his pupils, and that the conversation of Davis and his family inspired him with some doubts of the religious kind. From his poems we learn that Davis left a brother, James, at Oxford, who was also a writing-master; and that he himself married a wife whose name was Croft, by whom, he says, he had a “crop of care,” meaning, probably, a large family. As a writing-master, he published some engraved books of instruction, or specimens, but Massey has seen only “The Writing School-master, or Anatomy of Fair Writing,” engraved, after his death, by Ingheenram, which he thinks does not support the high character given of his penmanship by his contemporaries. It is said he was some time tutor to prince Henry, who, according to Birch, wrote a very fine hand. He died about 1618, and, Fuller informs us, was buried in the church or church-yard of St. Giles’s in the Fields.

His poetical works are numerous, but discover very little taste or talent: 1. “St. Peter’s Complaint, with other Poems,” Loud. 1595, 4to. 2. “Mirum in modo; a glimpse of God’s glory, and the soul’s shape,” ibid. 1602, and 1616, 8vo. 3. “Microcosmus, or the Discovery of the Little World,” Oxon. 1603, 4to. 4. “The Holy Rood of Christ’s Church,” Lond. 1609, 4to, with Sonnets. 5. “Humours Heaven and Earth, with the civil wars of Death and Fortune,” ibid. 1609, 8vo. 6. “Wit’s Pilgrimage,” Lond. 4to, no date. 7. “Muse’s Sacrifice, or Divine Meditations,” ibid. 1612, 12mo. 8. “The Muse’s Tears for the loss of their hope, the heroic and never too much praised Henry, prince of Wales,” ibid. 1613, 4to, &c. &c. &c. Four of these volumes are noticed in the Censura Literaria, one in Beloe’s Anecdotes, and one in the British Bibliographer, by Mr. Haslewood, whose character of Davis’s poetry may be adopted with confidence. “Davis’s poetical attempts are generally heavy, dull, obscure, and inharmonious and his pages are remarkable for inconsistency. One while he is pouring forth celestial rhapsodies, and then * with jerkes of wit (as he terms them) to whip every vice,' blundering on expressions too gross for pen or press, while the reader, who may have been edified by his morality, is left to fill up the blank of a disgusting parenthesis. His witticisms are often feeble puns, double entendres, and occasionally have their point depending on a fabricated name. Yet though the whole of his pieces now class as rare, from their number it seems presumable they were not ill received. To us moderns, however, there seldom appears poignancy in his wit, or nerve in his poetry.”

, a very eminent statesman, and secretary of state in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was, if not a native of Scotland, at least descended from those who were, as himself professed to sir James Mel vile. At what time he came into the court of queen Elizabeth, or in what state, is uncertain. It is most probable, that his parts and learning, together with that extraordinary diligence and wonderful address for which he was always distinguished, recommended him to Mr. Killigrew, afterwards sir Henry Kiiligrew, with whom he went in quality of secretary, at the time he was sent into Scotland, to compliment queen Mary upon the birth of her son. This was in 1566, and there is a good reason to believe that he remained from that time about the court, and was employed in several affairs of great consequence. In 1575, when the states of Brabant and Flanders assumed to themselves the administration of all affairs till his catholic majesty should appoint a new governor of the Low Countries, Mr. Davison was sent over with a public character from the queen to those states, under the plausible pretence of exhorting them to continue in their obedience to his catholic majesty; but, in reality, to see how things actually stood in that part of the world, that her majesty might be the better able to know how to proceed in respect to the several applications made to her from the prince of Orange, and the people of Holland. He executed this commission very successfully, and therefore the queen sent him over as her minister, to pacify the troubles that had arisen at Ghent; and when his presence was no longer necessary there, he was commissioned on her behalf to the States of Holland, in 1579. His conduct there gave equal satisfaction to the queen his mistress, and to those with whom he negotiated. He gave them great hopes of the queen’s assistance and support, and when a sum of money was desired, as absolutely necessary towards providing for their defence, he very readily undertook to procure it upon reasonable security; in consequence of which, a very considerable sum was sent from England, for which all the valuable jewels and fine plate that had been pledged by Matthias of Austria to the States of Holland, and which were the remains of the magnificence of the house of Burgundy, were transported to England. These journies, and the success attending them, gave Mr. Davison great reputation at court, insomuch, that in all matters of a nice and difficult nature, Davison was some way or other continually employed. Thus in 1583, when matters wore a serious aspect in Scotland, he was sent thither as the queen’s ambassador, in order to counteract the French ministers, and to engage the king of Scots and the people, both to slight the offers made them from that country, and to depend wholly upon assistance from England. Affairs in the Low Countries coming at last to a crisis, and the states resolving to depend upon queen Elizabeth, in the bold design they had formed of defending their freedom by force of arms, and rendering themselves independent, Mr. Davison, at this time clerk of the privy council, was chosen to manage this delicate business, and to conclude with them that alliance which was to be the basis of their future undertakings. In this, which, without question, was one of the most perplexed transactions in that whole reign, he conducted things with such a happy dexterity, as to merit the strongest acknowledgments on the part of the States, at the same time that he rendered the highest service to the queen his mistress, and obtained ample security for those expences which that princess thought necessary in order to keep danger at a distance, and to encourage the flames of war in the dominions of her enemy, whom at that juncture she knew to be meditating how he might transfer them into her own. Upon the return of Mr. Davison into England, after the conclusion of this treaty, he was declared of the privy-council, and appointed one of her majesty’s principal secretaries of state, in conjunction with sir Francis Walsingham; so that, at this time, these offices may be affirmed to have been as well filled as in any period that can be assigned in our history, and yet by persons of very different, or rather opposite dispositions; for Walsingham was a man of great art and intrigue, one who was not displeased that he was thought such a person, and whose capacity was still deeper than 'those who understood it best apprehended it to be. Davison, on the other hand, had a just reputation for wisdom and probity; and, though he had been concerned in many intricate affairs, yet he preserved a character so unspotted, that, to the time he came into this office, he had done nothing that could draw upon him the least imputation. It is an opinion countenanced by Camden, and which has met with general acceptance, that he was raised in order to be ruined, and that, when he was made secretary of state, there was a view of obliging him to go out of his depth in that matter, which brought upon him all his misfortunes. This conjecture is very plausible, and yet there is good reason to doubt whether it is well founded. Mr. Davison had attached himself, during the progress of his fortunes, to the potent earl of Leicester; and it was chiefly to his favour and interest that he stood indebted for this high employment, in which, if he was deceived by another great statesman, it could not be said that he was raised and ruined by the same hands. But there is nothing more probable than that the bringing about such an event by an instrument which his rival had raised, and then removing him, and rendering his parts useless to those who had raised him, gave a double satisfaction to him who managed this design. It is an object of great curiosity to trace the principal steps of this transaction, which was, without doubt, one of the finest strokes of political management in that whole reign. When the resolution was taken, in the beginning of October 1586, to bring the queen of Scots? to a trial, and a commission was issued for that purpose, secretary Davison’s name was inserted in that commission; but it does not appear that he was present when that commission was opened at Fotheringay castle, on the llth of October, or that he ever assisted there at all. Indeed, the management of that transaction was very wisely left in the hands of those who with so much address had conducted the antecedent business for the conviction of Anthony Babington, and his accomplices, upon the truth and justice of which, the proceedings against the queen of Scots entirely depended. On the 25th of October the sentence was declared in the star-chamber, things proceeding still in the same channel, and nothing particularly done by secretary Davison. On the 29th of the same month the parliament met, in which Serjeant Puckering was speaker of the house of commons; and, upon an application from both houses, queen Elizabeth caused the sentence to be published, which, soon after, was notified to the queen of Scots; yet hitherto all was transacted by the other secretary, who was considered by the nation in general as the person who had led this prosecution from beginning to end. The true meaning of this long and solemn proceeding was certainly to remove, as far as possible, any reflection upon queen Elizabeth; and, that it might appear in the most conspicuous manner to the world, that she was urged, and even constrained to take the life of the queen of Scots, instead of seeking or desiring it. This assertion is not founded upon conjecture, but is a direct matter of fact; for, in her first answer to the parliament, given at Richmond the 12th of November, she complained that the late act had brought her into a great strait, by obliging her to give directions for that queen’s death; and upon the second application, on the 24th of the same month, the queen enters largely into the consequences that must naturally follow upon her taking that step, and on the consideration of them, grounds her returning no definitive resolution, even to this second application. The delay which followed after the publication of the sentence, gave an opportunity for the French king, and several other princes, to interpose, but more especially to king James, whose ambassadors, and particularly sir Robert Melvile, pressed the queen very hard. Camden says, that his ambassadors unseasonably mixing threatenings with intreaties, they were not very welcome; so that after a few days the ambassadors were dismissed, with small hopes of succeeding. But we are elsewhere told, that, when Melvile requested a respite of execution for eight days, she answered, “Not an hour.” This seemed to be a plain declaration of her majesty’s final determination, and such in all probability it was, so that her death being resolved, the only point that remained under debate was, how she should die, that is, whether by the hand of an executioner, or otherwise. In respect to this, the two secretaries seem to have been of different sentiments. Mr. Davison thought the forms of justice should go on, and the end of this melancholy transaction correspond with the rest of the proceedings. Upon this, sir Francis Walsingham pretended sickness, and did not come to court, and by this means the whole business of drawing and bringing the warrant to the queen to sign, fell upon Davison, who, pursuant to the queen’s directions, went through it in the manner that Camden has related. But it is very remarkable, that, while these judicial steps were taking, the other method, to which the queen herself seemed to incline, proceeded also, and secretary Walsingham, notwithstanding his sickness, wrote the very day the warrant was signed, which was Wednesday, February 1st, 1586-7, to sir Amiss Pawlet and sir Drew Drury, to put them in mind of the association, as a thing that might countenance, at least, if not justify, this other way of removing the queen of Scots. It is true, that Mr. Davison subscribed this letter, and wrote another to the same persons two days after; but it appears plainly from the anssver, that the keepers of the queen of Scots considered the motion as coming from Walsingharn. The warrant being delivered to the lords of the council, they sent it down by Mr. Beale, their clerk, a man of sour and stubborn temper, and who had always shewn a great bitterness against the queen of Scots. The day of his departure does not appear; but queen Mary had notice given her on the Monday, to prepare for death on the Wednesday, which she accordingly suffered. As soon as queen Elizabeth was informed of it, she expressed great resentment against her council, forbad them her presence and the court; and caused some of them to be examined, as if she intended to call them to an account for the share they had in this transaction. We are not told particularly who these counsellors were, excepting the lord treasurer Burleigh, who fell into a temporary disgrace about it, and was actually a witness against Mr. Davison. As for the earl of Leicester and secretary Walsingharn, they had prudently withdrawn themselves at the last act of the tragedy, and took care to publish so much, by their letters into Scotland; but secretary Davison, upon whom it was resolved the whole weight of this business should fall, v.-deprived of his office, and sent prisoner to the Tower, at which nobody seerus to have been so much alarmed as the lord treasurer, who, though himself at that time in disgrace, wrote to the queen in strong terms, and once intended to have written in much stronger. This application bad no effect, for the queen having sent her kinsman Mr. Cary, son to the lord Hunsdon, into Scotland, to excuse the matter to king James, charged with a letter to him under her own hand, in which she in the strongest terms possible asserted her own innocence, there was a necessity of doing something that Davison[?] carry an air of evidence, in support of the turn she had now given to the death of that princess. On the 28th of March following, Davison, after having undergone various examinations, was brought to his trial in the star chamber, for the contempt of which he had been guilty, in revealing the queen’s counsels to her privy counsellors, and performing what he understood to be the duty of his office in quality of her secretary. We have several accounts of this trial, which, in a variety of circumstances, differ from each other. In this, however, they all agree, that the judges, who fined him ten thousand marks, and imprisonment during the queen’s pleasure, gave him a very high character, and declared him to be, in their opinions, both an able ana an honest man. One thing is very remarkable, that, in the conclusion of this business, sir Christopher Wray, chief justice of the queen’s bench, told the court, that though the queen had been offended with her council, and had left them to examination, yet now she forgave them, being satisfied that they were misled b? this man’s suggestions. Sir James Melvile, who wrote at that time, and who seems to have had some prejudice against Davison, said very candidly and fairly upon this occasion, that he was deceived by the council. As soon as the proceeding was over, the queen, to put it out of doubt with the king of Scots, that his mother was put to death without her privity or intention, sent him the judgment given against Davison, subscribed by those who had given it, and exemplified under the great seal, together with another instrument, under the hands of all the judges of England, that the sentence against his mother could not in the least prejudice his title to the succession. As for Mr. Davison, now left to a strange reward for his past services, a long imprisonment, which reduced him to indigence, he comforted himself with the thoughts of his innocence; and, to secure his memory from being blasted by that judgment which had withered his fortune, he had long before written an apology for his own conduct, which he addressed to secretary Walsingham, as the man most interested in it, and who could best testify whether what he affirmed was truth or not. In this he gave a very clear and natural detail of the transaction which cost him all his sufferings. It is allowed by all who have written on this subject, and especially by Camden, that he was a very unhappy, though at the same time a very capable and honest man. As such we have seen him recommended to queen Elizabeth by the treasurer Burleigh, and as such he was strongly recommended by the earl of Essex to king James I. It seems, that noble person stuck fast by him under his misfortunes, which plainly shews the party to which he had always adhered. That lord lost no opportunity of soliciting the queen in his favour, and never let slip any occasion of testifying for him the warmest and thesincerest affection. At length, it seems he was not altogether unsuccessful; for though, upon the death of secretary Walsingham, the queen absolutely rejected his motion, that Mr. Davison should come into his place, yet, afterwards, it seems that she yielded in some degree, as plainly appears by the earl’s letter to king James. That we are under an incapacity of tracing him farther, is owing to the profound silence of the writers of those times.

Davison came not suddenly or surprisingly into his high office, but easily, naturally, and gradually, in the very same way that his predecessors, Cecil, Smith, and Walsingham had done, and with the general approbation of all the council; and, as he was no mean or obscure person when called to that high employment, so he was not given to subserviency, at the peril of his life and reputation; and notwithstanding the star chamber sentence, he very well knew how to make his innocence plain, both to that age and to posterity.

"Let me here, at the end of the apology, remark finally concerning Davison, that, though he was not an honest man, yet he was so nearly one, as to be a very prodigy for the ministry of Elizabeth. He refused, it appears, to sign that very bond of association which was signed by all the nation, and which even the despairing Mary offered, on her liberty being granted, to sign herself. Yet he refused, though Leicester pushed on the association, and though Elizabeth urged him to sign it. Among the pleas which he advances for himself in his other apology, he particularly states * his former absolute refusal to sign the band of association, being earnestly pressed thereunto by her majesty’s self,‘ (Robertson, II. 483). This indeed is a very strong evidence of a manly virtuousness in him. But he did other things in the same spirit of virtue. He declined to act as a commissioner on the examination of Babington and his accomplices for their conspiracy in favour of Mary, and took a journey to Bath, in order to save himself from acting, (Robertson, II. 483). He was a means, too, of preventing the commissioners who were sent to try Mary at Fotheringay castle, from pronouncing sentence upon her immediately after the trial, and of obliging them to return first to London, and report their proceedings to Elizabeth, (Robertson, II. 483). We have already seen that he kept the warrant for the execution of Mary five or six weeks in his hands, without offering to present it to Elizabeth for her signing. We have equally seen that he actually neglected to obey a personal command of Elizabeth’s for bringing the warrant to her, and that he thus neglected for ’ many days,‘ even till the queen fired at his conduct, and sent him a peremptory order to bring it. Even then, and even when Paulet’s answer had been received, and all delay was now at an end for ever, he would not be concerned in sending away the warrant himself, but returned it into the hands from which he had received it, and left Cecil and the council to send it. And, as in all the time ’ before her trial, he neither is nor can be charged, to have had any hand at all in the cause of the said queen, or done any thing whatsoever concerning the same, directly or indirectly,‘ so, * after the return thence of the commissioners, it is well known to all her council, that he never was at any deliberation or meeting whatsoever, in parliament or council, concerning the cause of the said queen, till the sending down of her majesty’s warrant unto the commissioners by the lords and others of her council,’ (Robertson, II. 481).

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Montbar in the department of tlio Cote D'Or, May 29, 1716. His father, John Daubenton, was a notary in that place, and his mother’s name was Mary Pichenot. In his youth he distinguished himself by the sweetness of his temper, and by a diligent application to his Studies. The Jesuits of Dijon, under whose tuition he was first placed, noticed him in a peculiar manner. Having gone through the philosophical course taught by the Dominicans of Dijon, his father, who destined him for the church, and who had made him assume the ecclesiastical dress at the age of twelve, sent him to Paris to study theology, but his predilection for natural history induced him privately to study medicine. Accordingly he attended the lectures of Baron, Martiney, and Col de Villars, and likewise those of Winslow, Hunault, and Anthony Jussieu, in the botanic garden. The death of his father, which happened in 1736, leaving him at liberty to pursue the bent of his own inclinations, he took his degrees at Rheims in 1740 and 1741, after which he returned to his native province, where, doubtless, his ambition would have been for ever confined to the practice of medicine, had not a happy accident brought him upon a more brilliant theatre.

About 1742 Buffon drew him to Paris. At that time, the office of keeper and demonstrator of the cabinet of natural history was in a great measure nominal, and as Noguez, who possessed that title, had been long absent, his place was occasionally supplied by any one present. By the influence of Buffon, this office was revived, and conferred on Daubenton in 1745. His salary, which at first did not exceed 500 francs, was, by degrees, afterwards augmented to 2000, or, as some say, 4000. While he was only an assistant in the academy of sciences, Buffon, who acted as its treasurer, conferred upon him several favours. On his arrival at Paris he procured him. a lodging, and neglected nothing in order to secure to him ease and independence; while Daubenton pursued with indefatigable industry those labours which were necessary to second the views of his benefactor, and established by this means the two principal monuments of his own glory.

One of these is the cabinet of natural history in the botanical garden. That before his time served merely as a repository for the products of the different pharmaceutical operations, performed during the public lectures on chemistry, in order that they might be distributed to the poor while suffering under disease. It contained nothing appertaining to natural history, strictly so called, except a collection of shells made by Tournefort, which had afterwards been employed to amuse Lewis XV. during his infancy; but such was the industry of Daubenton, that, within a few years, he collected specimens of minerals, fruits, woods, shells, from every quarter, and methodically arranged them. By applying himself to ascertain, or to improve the operations necessary to preserve the different parts of organized bodies, he succeeded in giving to the inanimate forms of quadrupeds and birds the appearance of real life; and presented to the naturalist the most minute circumstances of. their characters, while at the same time he no less gratified the virtuosi by exhibiting them in their natural forms and colours.

Availing himself of the patronage of Buffon, and of his influence with the government, Daubenton soon formed and executed a very extensive plan: he conceived that all the productions of nature should find a place in the temple he had consecrated to her; he was fully aware that those objects which are regarded as the most important, could only be thoroughly known by a comparison of them with others; and that there existed no one that had not a greater or less affinity with the rest of nature. Impressed with this view of the subject, he made the most unremitting efforts to render his collection complete; whilst at the same time he bestowed the greatest attention on the formation of those anatomical preparations which for a long time distinguished the cabinet of Paris, and which, however disagreeable they may be to the common eye, are not the less useful to those who wish to penetrate beyond the move surface of organized beings, and who endeavour to render natural history a philosophical science, by illustrating the phenomena it exhibits.

The study and arrangement of these productions engrossed his whole attention, and seemed to constitute the only passion he ever experienced. Shut up for whole days in the cabinet, he incessantly occupied himself in changing the disposition of the objects he had accumulated, till by a scrupulous investigation of their several parts, and attempting every possible method, he fell upon that arrangement which was equally consonant to true taste and accurate science^ This passion for arrangement was again revived in full force during his latter years; when, in consequence of victories obtained by the republican arms, there was brought to the museum a fresh store of natural curiosities, and when circumstances permitted him to give to the whole a more complete illustration. At eighty-four years of age, when he stooped much, and both his hands and feet had suffered greatly from the gout, not being able to walk without assistance, he was conducted by two persons every morning to the cabinet, in order to superintend the arrangement of the minerals, the only department allotted to him according to the new organization of the establishment. The second monument that Daubenton has left behind him, and which must ever perpetuate his name, is his Description of Quadrupeds. It must, however, afford a subject of regret to every lover of science, that some circumstances prevented him from extending, as was his original intention, that description to all the productions contained in the cabinet of natural history. It is not now our business to analyze the descriptive part of the Natural History, a work as immense in its details as astonishing in the boldness of the plan, nor to characterize the new and important improvements introduced by him into this department of science. It may be sufficient, in order to convey some idea of the immensity of that work, to observe, that it comprehends not only the external characters, but the internal description of one hundred and eighty-two species of quadrupeds, of which fifty-eight had never been dissected, and thirteen were absolutely non-descripts. It contains, moreover, the external description of twenty-six species, five of which were wholly unknown. The number of new species there described by him is eighteen; but the new and interesting facts which he has brought forward respecting those species of which we had only before a very superficial knowledge, are extremely numerous. The greatest inerit of the work, however, consists in the order and disposition with which all the species are described. It delighted the author to repeat, that he was the first who had established an accurate system of comparative anatomy; the truth of which must certainly be admitted, in this sense, that as all his observations were conducted upon one uniform plan, and equally extended to every animal, it is extremely easy to comprehend their reciprocal relations; that as he was never biassed by any preconceived hypothesis, he has bestowed an equal attention upon every part, and in no instance ever omitted or concealed what could not be reconciled to his own system. This work of Daubenton may be considered as a rich mine, which all who devote themselves to similar pursuits, find it necessary to explore, and of which many have profited without due acknowledgment. Nothing more is frequently necessary than to exhibit a general view of his observations, and to place them under different heads, in order to obtain results highly interesting: it is in this sense that we must understand the expression of the celebrated Camper, “that Daubenton was unconscious of all the discoveries of which he was the author.”

It gives us a very unfavourable idea of Buffon that after this he should himself commence the enemy of Daubenton. He was, however, weak enough to listen to some parasites, who persuaded him that it would redound greatly to his honour to dismiss his associate; and, accordingly, Buffon actually published a new edition of his Natural History, in 13 volumes, 12mo, in which are omitted not only the anatomy, but even the external characters, of the animals which Daubenton had furnished for the large edition; and as nothing was substituted in their stead, the work exhibits no idea of the form, colour, or distinctive attributes of the animals; so that this small edition cannot supply any data whereby to ascertain the animals to which the author alludes, especially as they are not to be found either in Pliny, or Aristotle, who likewise, as is well known, neglected the descriptive details.

By these labours he had acquired a kind of popularity which proved very useful to him in a dangerous crisis. During the second year of the revolution, when it was left for an ignorant multitude to decide on the fate of the most intelligent and virtuous of men, the venerable octogenarian Daubenton found it necessary, in order to preserve the situation which he had filled with so much credit to himself during a period of fifty years, to solicit from the section of Sans Culottes a certificate of his civisrn. It was then scarcely possible for a professor, or an academician, to obtain one; but some sensible persons who intermingled with the populace in the hope of moderating their fury, presented him under the appellation of the Shepherd; and it was thus the shepherd Daubenton procured the necessary certificate as director of the museum of natural history. This paper is still preserved, and may serve as a curious proof of the degraded state of France at that period.

Notwithstanding the feebleness of his constitution, he arrived at a very advanced age without much disease, or loss of his faculties. This may be in some measure ascribed to the gentleness of his temper, and his remarkable resignation. He varied his studies also by frequently reading amusing books of the lighter kind. In 1799, he was named a member of the Conservative Senate, and was anxious to fulfil his new duties as he had formerly fulfilled all those with which he was charged; he was forced to make some change in his usual dress, and the weather being extremely rigorous, the first time he assisted at the sitting of that body, of which he had become a member, he was struck with an apoplexy, and fell senseless into the arms of his colleagues: the most prompt means were employed to afford him relief, but he only recovered his recollection for a short period, during which he evinced the same character as that he had uniformly displayed throughout life. With the utmost calmness, observing the progress of his disease, he pointed out to his friends the' different parts of his body which were still sensible, and unaffected by paralysis. He expired without a struggle on January 1, 1800, and was interred with the funeral honours due to the high character he supported among his countrymen.

, a French Jesuit, of some fame, was born at Auxerre October 21, 1648, and aftt-r performing his noviciate, became a member of the society of Jesuits at Nancy in 1683. After preaching with much success for some time, his health obliged him to desist, and he was chosen companion or assistant of the provincial. He was afterwards elected rector of the college of Strasburgh, and promoted to be provincial of Champagne. He would have been advanced to another ecclesiastical government, had not Louis XIV. requested that he might continue in the college of Strasburgh, more effectually to establish some regulations which he had begun when-first appointed rector. In 1700 the king appointed him confessor to Philip V. of Spain, and he remained in high favour with that prince until the courtiers, grown jealous of his power, prevailed upon the king to send him from the court in 1706. He was, however, recalled again in 1716, and being reinstated in his office, gained a still greater ascendancy over the mind of Philip V. This prince, when disgusted with his throne, and wishing to abdicate it, confided his design to Daubenton, who is said to have betrayed the secret to the duke of Orleans, which conduct terminated in his disgrace a second time, but the manner of it is variously represented by historians. He died, however, in 1723. His character is doubtful, some main.aining that he was a man of intrigue, and others that he made no improper use of his talents or influence. His works consist chiefly of funeral orations, and a life of St. Francis Regis, Paris, 1716, 4to, which was translated and published in English, Lond. 1738, 8vo, a work full of absurd miracles. He published likewise a more enlarged account of the merits of this saint, entitled “Scripta varia in causa beatificationis et canonrzationis J. F. Regis,” Rome, 1710 and 1712, 2 vols. folio.

, an. eminent French poet, was born near the head of the Vienne, in the Limousin, about 1507. Removing to the capital of the kingdom to finish his studies, he distinguished himself in such a manner by his skill in Greek, and his talent at poetry, that he became one of the professors of the university of Paris. In 1560 he succeeded John Stracellus in the post of king’s reader and professor of Greek; but before this he had been principal of the college of Coqueret, and tutor to John Antony de Baif, in the house of his father Lazarus de Baif, who was master of the requests. He continued to instruct this young pupil in the college of Coqueret; and he had also the famous Ronsard for his scholar there, during the space of seven years. His highest praise is, that his school produced a great number of able men; but imprudent generosity and want of management reduced him to poverty, and procured him a place in the list of those learned men, whose talents have been of little benefit to themselves. In the reign of Henry II. he had been preceptor to the king’s pages and Charles IX. honoured him with the title of his poet, took great delight in conversing with him, and endeavoured to support him in his old age. It will not now be thought much in his favour that Daurat had an uncommon partiality for anagrams, of which he was the first restorer. It is pretended, that he found the model of them in Lycophron, and brought them so much into vogue, that several illustrious persons gave him their names to anagrammatise. He undertook also to explain the centuries of Nostradamus, and with such imposing plausibility as to be considered in the light of his interpreter or subprophet. When he was near 80, having lost his first wife, he married a young girl; and by her had a son, for whom he shewed his fondness by a thousand ridiculous actions. In excuse for this marriage, he said that he would rather die by a bright sword than a rusty one. He had by his first wife, among other children, a son, who was the author of some French verses, printed in a collection of his own poems; and a daughter, whom he married to a learned man, named Nicolas Goulu, in whose favour he resigned his place of regius professor of Greek. He wrote a great many verses in Latin, Greek, and French, in some of which he attacked the protestants; and no book was printed, nor did any person of consequence die, without his producing some verses on the subject; as if he had been poet in ordinary to the kingdom, or his muse had been a general mourner. The odes, epigrams, hymns, and other poems in Greek and Latin, composed by Daurat, have been estimated at the gross sum of 50,000 verses; Scaliger had such an opinion of him as a critic, that he said he knew none but him and Cujacius, who had abilities sufficient to restore ancient authors; but he has presented the public with no specimen of that talent, except some remarks on the Sybilline verses in Opsopseus’s edition. Scaliger tells us, with some ridicule, however, that he spent the latter part of his life in endeavouring to find all the Bible in Homer. He died at Paris, Nov. 1, 1588, aged Si. His principal collection of verses is entitled “Joannis Aurati, Lemovicis, Poetse et interprets regii, Poematia, hoc est, Poematum libri quinque; Epigrammatum libri tres; Anagrammatum liber unus; Funerum liber unus; Odarum libri duo; Epithalamiorum liber unus; Eclogarum libri duo; Variarum rerum liber unus,” Paris, 1586, 8vo, a very singular collection, although of no great merit as to taste or versification. He deserves more praise as one of the revivers of Greek literature in France, and in that character his memory was honoured, in 1775, hy an eloge, written by the abbe Vitrac, professor of humanity at Limoges.

, a learned critic, especially in the Greek tongue, was born in 1708. A respectable family of the name of Dawes had long been situated at Stapleton, between Market-Bosworth and Hinckley in Leicestershire, and our critic was probably of the same family, but it does not appear, from the register of the parish, that he was born at that place. There was a Dr. Dawes, who, early in the last century, resided at Stapleton, and was a great scholar, and a searcher after the philosopher’s stone. It has been supposed, that he might be father to the subject of the present article; but of this fact no decisive evidence can be produced. All the traditions concerning Richard Dawes are, that the place of his birth was either MarketBosworth, or the vicinity of that town. Whoever his parents were, or whatever was their condition in life, it is probable that they perceived such marks of capacity in their son, as determined them to devote him to a literary profession; and accordingly he was put to the free grammar-school at Bosworth, where he had the happiness of receiving part of his education under the care of Mr. Anthony Blackwall. Here he laid the foundation of that critical knowledge of the Greek language which he afterwards displayed so conspicuously. In 1725, he was admitted a sizar of Emanuel college, in the university of Cambridge, where he proceeded bachelor of arts in 1729. On the 2d of October, 1731, he became a fellow of the college on the nomination of sir Wolston Dixie, bart. In 1733, he took the degree of master of arts. The next year he was a candidate for the place of esquire beadle of the university, but his application was not crowned with success. Whilst Mr. Dawes was at Cambridge, he distinguished himself by some peculiarities of conduct, which probably arose from a mixture of insanity in his constitution; and in his conversation he occasionally took such liberties on certain topics as gave great offence to those about him. Having indulged himself too much, at college, in an indolent sedentary way of life, he, at length, found it absolutely necessary to have recourse to some kind of exercise. In this case, being of a strong athletic frame of body, and not over-delicate in the choice of his company, he took to the practice of ringing; and, as such a genius could not stop at mediocrity, he quickly became the leader of the band, and carried the art to the highest perfection.

Another circumstance, though of a very different nature, by which Mr. Dawes rendered himself remarkable, was his taking a violent part against Dr. Bentley, and even endeavouring to depreciate that great man’s literature. In his “Miscellanea Critica,” on several occasions, he detracts from Dr. Bentley’s praises and did not scruple to assert, that the doctor, “nihil in Graecis cognovisse, nisi ex indicibus petitum,” knew nothing relative to Grecian literature, but what he had drawn from indexes; an assertion which could only proceed from extreme vanity, or personal dislike, or a bigoted attachment to a party. Indeed, the contempt with which writers of distinguished abilities sometimes speak of each other, is a disgrace to the republic of letters; and it is much to be lamented that a spirit so contrary to the dictates of justice and urbanity, should still continue to prevail among men who otherwise deserve to be held in esteem.

On the 10th of July, 1738, Mr. Dawes was appointed master of the free grammar-school in Newcastle-uponTyne, in the room of Mr. Edmund Lodge, who had resigned that office. The commencement of his duty was to take place at the Michaelmas following. In the same year, on the 9th of October, he was preferred, by act of common council, to the mastership of the hospital of the blessed Virgin Mary in Newcastle. The business of Mr. Dawes’s new station did not prevent him from prosecuting his inquiries into the nature, peculiarities, and elegancies of the Greek tongue; and accordingly, in 1745, he published his “Miscellanea Critica.” Mr. Hubbard, of Emanuel college, Cambridge, and Dr. Mason, of Trinity, assisted in the publication. It was Mr. Dawes’s design in this work, to afford such a specimen of his critical abilities, as should enable the learned world to judge what might be expected from him, in an edition which he had projected of all the Attic poets, as well as of Homer and Pindar. Though his scheme was never carried into execution, he has obtained, by his “Miscellanea Critica,” a very high place among those who have contributed to the promotion of Greek learning in England, and, as such, his name will be transmitted with honour to posterity. Accordingly, the book has been spoken of in terms of distinguished applause, by some of the first literary characters in Europe, particularly Valkener, Pierson, Koen, and Reiske. A second edition of it, in octavo, was given in 1781, from the Clarendon press, by the rev. Mr. Burgess, of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, now bishop of St. David’s, who has enriched the work with a learned preface, and a number of notes of great value and importance, and some assistance from Dawes’s Mss. procured by Dr. Farmer and Mr. Salter. Mr. Dawes’s situation at Newcastle was neither so happy nor so useful as might have been expected; in a great measure owing to the eccentricity of his disposition, and, indeed, to his imagination being in some respects disturbed. Hence he fancied that all his friends had slighted him, or used him ill; and of the jealousy of his temper he has left a remarkable instance, on a very trifling occasion. His printer, by an unfortunate mistake, in a passage of Terentianus Maurus, which Mr. Dawes had quoted in order to correct, had inserted a comma that destroyed the merit of the emendation. In consequence of this involuntary error, our author, in the Addenda to his Mis-cellanea, has expressed himself with great indignation, He declares, that he could not conjecture what fault he had committed against the printer, that he should envy him the honour, whatever it was, that was due to his correction; and he adds, that he knows not how it happened, that, for several years past, he had been ill used by those from whom he had deserved better treatment. With the corporation of Newcastle he became involved in altercations, and adopted a singular method of displaying his resentment, or rather his contempt; for in teaching the boys at school, he made them translate the Greek word for ass into alderman; which some of the lads did seriously, though otherwise well instructed. With such a disposition of mind, it is not surprising that his scholars were, at length, reduced to a very small number; so that it became expedient for him to consent to quit his station. Accordingly, at Midsummer, 1749, he resigned the mastership of the grammarschool, and the mastership of St. Mary’s hospital; and, in consideration of these sacrifices, the mayor and burgesses of Newcastle, on the 25th of September following, executed a bond, by which they engaged to grant him an annuity of eighty pounds a-year, during life.

, archbishop of York, the youngest son of sir John Dawes, baronet, by Jane his wife, the daughter and only child of Richard Hawkins, of Braintree, in the county of Essex, gent, was born Sept. 12, 1671, at Lyons, (a seat which came by his mother) near Braintree, and received the first rudiments of learning at Merchant-taylors’-school in London, from Mr. John Hartcliffe, and Mr. Ambr. Bonwicke, successively masters of that school; under whose care he made great proficiency in the knowledge of the classics, and was a tolerable master of the Hebrew tongue, even before he was fifteen years of age; which was chiefly owing to the additional care that Dr. Kidder, afterwards bishop of Bath and Wells, took of his education. In act term 1687, he became a scholar of St. John’s college in Oxford, and after his continuance there two years or upwards, was made fellow. But his father’s title and estate descending to him, upon the death of his two brothers, which happened about the same time, he left Oxford, and entering himself a nobleman in Catherine-hall, Cambridge, lived in his eldest brother’s chambers; and, as soon as he was of fit standing, took the degree of master of arts. His intention, from the very first, was to enter into holy orders; and therefore to qualify himself for that purpose, among other introductory works, he seems to have made some of our late eminent divines a considerable branch of his study, even before he was eighteen years of age: and he shewed always a serious and devout temper of mind, and a true sense and love of piety and religion. After he had taken his master of arts’ degree, not being of age to enter into holy orders, he thought it proper to visit the estate he was now become owner of, and to make a short tour into some other parts of the kingdom, which he had not yet seen. But his intended progress was, in some measure, stopped by Ims happening to meet with Frances, the eldest daughter of sir Thomas Darcy, of Braxstead-lodge, in Essex, baronet, a fine and accomplished woman, to whom he paid his addresses, and, not long after, married. As soon as he came to a competent -age, he was ordained deacon and priest by Dr. Compton, bishop of London. Shortly after, he was created doctor in divinity, by a royal mandate, in order to be qualified for the mastership of Catherine-hall; to which he was unanimously elected, in 1696, upon the death of Dr. John Echard. At his coming thither he found the bare case of a new chapel, begun by his predecessor; to the completion of which he contributed very liberally, and, among other beneficial acts to his college, he obtained, through his interest with queen Anne, and her chief ministers, an act of parliament for annexing the first prebend of Norwich which should become vacant, to the mastership of Catherine-hall for ever. Not long after his election, he became vice-chancellor of Cambridge, and discharged that dignity with universal applause. In 1696, he was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to king William; and, shortly after, was presented by his majesty without interest or solicitation, and merely, as the king said, by way of pledge of his future favour, to a prebend of Worcester, in which he was installed August 26, 1698, On the 10th of November 1698, he was collated by archbishop Tenison to the rectory, and, the 19th of December following, to the deanery, of Bocking in Essex, and behaved in that parish in a very charitable and exemplary manner. After queen Anne’s accession to the throne, he was made one of her majesty’s chaplains, and became so great a favourite with her, that he had a reasonable expectation of being advanced to some of the highest dignities in the church. Accordingly, though he happened accidentally to miss of the bishopric of Lincoln , which became vacant in 1705; yet her majesty, of her own accord, named him to the see of Chester, in 1707, upon the death of Dr. Nicholas Stratford: and he was consecrated February 8, 1707-8. In 1713-4, he was, by the recommendation of his worthy predecessor Dr. John Sharp, translated to the archiepiscopal see of York, being elected thereto February 26, and enthroned by proxy the 24th of March following. He continued above ten years in this eminent station, honoured and respected by all. At length a diarrhoea, to which he had been subject several times before, ending in an inflammation of his bowels, put a period to his life April 30, 1724, in the fifty-third year of his age. He was buried in the chapel of Catherine-hall, Cambridge, near his lady, who died December 22, 1705, in the twenty-ninth year of her age. By her he had seven children, William, Francis, William, Thomas, who all died young; and Elizabeth, Jane, and Darcy, who survived him. In person he was tall, proportionable, and beautiful. There was in his look and gesture something easier to be conceived than described, that gained every one’s favour, even before he spoke. His behaviour was easy and courteous to all; his civility free from formality; his conversation lively and cheerful, but without any tincture of levity. He had a genius well fitted for a scholar, a lively imagination, a strong memory, and a sound judgment. He was a kind and loving husband, a tender and indulgent parent, and so extraordinary good a master, that he never was observed to be in a passion; and took care of the spiritual as well as the temporal welfare of his domestics. In his episcopal capacity, he visited his large diocese with great diligence and constancy, Nottinghamshire one year, and Yorkshire another; but every third year he did not hold any visitation. He performed all the offices of his function with becoming seriousness and gravity. He took great care and caution, to admit none but sufficient labourers into the Lord’s harvest; and when admitted, to appoint them stipends adequate to their labour. He administered justice to all with an equal and impartial hand; being no respecter of persons, and making no difference between the poor and rich, but espousing all into the intimacy of his bosom, his care, his affability, his provision, and his prayers.

So strict an observer was he of his word, that no consideration whatever could make him break it; and so inviolable in his friendship, that without the discovery of some essential fault indeed, he never departed from it. A great point of conscience it was with him, that his promises should not create fruitless expectances; but when, upon proper considerations, he was induced to do it, he always thought himself bound to employ his utmost interest to have the thing effected; and till a convenient opportunity should present itself, was not unmindful to support the petitioner (if in mean circumstances) at his own expence: for charity indeed was his predominant quality. Both as a bishop and peer of the realm, he considered himself as responsible for the souls committed to his charge in one respect, and as intrusted with the lives and fortunes of his fellow subjects, in the other. If in some parliamentary debates (in which he made a very considerable figure), he happened to dissent from other great men, who might have the same common good in view, but seemed to pursue it in a method incongruous to his sentiments, this ought to be accounted his honour, and a proof of his integrity, but cannot, with any colour of justice, be deemed party prejudice, or a spirit of contradiction in him; because those very men, whom he sometimes opposed, at other times he joined himself to, whenever he perceived them in the right. He associated himself with no party, it being his opinion, that whoever enters the senate house, should always carry his conscience along with him; that the honour of God, the renown of his prince, and the good of his fellow subjects, should be, as it were, the polar-star to guide him; that no multitude, though never so numerous; no faction, though never so powerful; no arguments, though never so specious; no threats, though never so frightful; no offers, though never so advantageous and alluring; should blind his eyes, or pervert him to give any the least vote, not directly answerable to the sentiments of his own breast. After his death appeared “The whole Works of sir William Dawes, bart.” &c. 3 vols. 8vo, with a preface and life, 1733, including those published by himself, viz.

, one of the sons of the preceding, was born in his father’s house in Aldersgate-street in 1566, and entered a commoner of St. Alban’s hall, Oxford, in 1582. In 1588, being then B. A. he was elected a fellow of Oriel college, took his master’s degree, entered into holy orders, and became a very favourite preacher in the university. In the beginning of the reign of James I. with leave of his college, he travelled for three years, improving himself in learning and experience, and, as Wood tells us, “he was about to say,” in Calvinism. After his return he was made vicar of St. Mary’s in Oxford, in 1608, where his preaching obtained him the general respect both of the university and city. But being disappointed in the provostship of his college in 1621, he left Oxford, and was beneficed at Thurlow in Suffolk, where he die-d 1627. Wood gives him the character of a person of great reading, and admirably versed in the fathers, schoolmen, and councils. He published 1 Twelve Sermons,“1615, 4to. 2.” Conciones ad Clerum,“Oxon. 1612 and 1615. 3.” Day’s Dyall, or, his Twelve Howres, that is, Twelve severall lectures by way of Catechisme, as they were delivered by him in the chapel of Oriel college in Oxford, in the years of our Lord God 1612 and 1613,“Oxford, 1614. On the title-page is a dial, and under it the quotation from St. John, ii. 9.” Are there not twelve hours in the day?“4.” Commentaries on the first eight Psalms of David,“ibid. 1620, 4to. His brother, Lionel Day, was of Balliol and Oriel colleges, rector of Whichford, near Brailes in Warwickshire, where he died in 1640. He published a” Concio ad Clerum."

From a comparison of dates it appears to have been in 1769, when he came of age, that he formed this curious project. Accompanied by a Mr. Bicknell, a barrister, rather older than himself, he went to Shrewsbury to explore the Foundling hospital, and from these children, Mr. Day, in the presence of Mr. Bicknell, selected two girls of twelve years each; both beautiful: one fair, with flaxen locks and light eyes, whom he called Lucretia; the other, a clear auburn brunette, with darker eyes, more glowing bloom, and chesnut tresses, he called Sabrina. These girls were obtained on written conditions, for the performance of which Mr. Bicknell was guarantee. They were to this effect: that Mr. Day should, within the twelvemonth after taking them, resign one into the protection of some respectable tradeswoman, giving one hundred pounds to bind her apprentice; maintaining her, if she behaved well, till she married, or began business for herself. Upon either of these events he promised to advance four hundred pounds more. He avowed his intention of educating the girl he should retain, with a view to make her his future wife: solemnly engaged never to violate her innocence; and if he should renounce his plan, to maintain her decently in some creditable family till she married, when he promised five hundred pounds as her wedding portion. It would, probably, be quite unnecessary to make any appeal to the feelings of parents, or to offer any remarks on the conduct of the governors of this hospital respecting this strange bargain, for the particulars of which we are indebted to Miss Seward. The narrative goes on to inform us, that Mr. Day went instantly into France with these girls, not taking an English servant, that they might receive no ideas, except those which himself might chuse to impart, and which he soon found were not very acceptable. His pupils teazed and perplexed him; they quarrelled; they sickened of the small pox; they chained him to their bed-side, by crying if they were ever left alone with any person who could not speak English. Hence he was obliged to sit up with them many nights, and to perform for them the lowest offices of assistance. They lost no beauty, however, by their disease, and came back with Mr. Day in eight months, when Sabrina was become the favourite. He placed Lucretia with a chamber milliner, and she afterwards became the wife of a linendraper in London. With Sabrina he actually proceeded during some years, in the execution of his favourite project; but none of his experiments had the success he wished. Her spirit could not be armed against the dread of pain and the appearance of danger, a species of courage which, with him, was a sine qua non in the character of a wife. When he dropped melted sealing-wax upon her arms, she did not endure it heroically; nor when he fired pistols at her petticoats, which she believed to be charged with balls, could she help starting aside, or suppress her screams. When he tried her fidelity in secret-keeping, by telling her of well-invented dangers to himself, in which greater danger would result from its being discovered that he was aware of them, he once or twice detected her having imparted them to the servants, and to her play-fellows. He persisted, however, in these foolish experiments, and sustained their continual disappointment during a whole year’s residence in the vicinity of Lichfield. The difficulty seemed to be in giving her motive to self-exertion, self-denial, and heroism. It was against his plan to draw it from the usual sources, pecuniary reward, luxury, ambition, or vanity. His watchful cares had precluded all knowledge of the value of money, the reputation of beauty, and its concomitant desire of ornamented dress. The only inducement, therefore, which this girl could have to combat and subdue the natural preference in youth of ease to pain, and of vacant sport to the labour of thinking, was the desire of pleasing her protector, though she knew not how, or why he became such; and in that desire fear had greatly the ascendant of affection. At length, however, he renounced all hopes of moulding Sabrina into the being which his disordered imagination had formed; and, ceasing now to behold her as a wife, placed her at a boardingschool at Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, where, durin^ three years, she gained the esteem of her instructress, grew feminine, elegant, and amiable. She is still living, an ornament to the situation in which she is placed.

After this, Mr. Day paid his addresses to two sisters in succession, both of whom rejected him. His appearance and manners were indeed not much calculated to charm, and the austere singularities of his sentiments, and the caprices of his temper, all which were parts of the system of happiness he had formed to himself, were tolerable, even by his friends, for a very short period. With the second of these ladies, indeed, he was so enamoured as to tell her that he would endeavour to acquire external refinements; but, finding the progress he made insufficient to abate her dislike, he returned to his accustomed plainness of garb and neglect of his person; and, notwithstanding these disadvantages, he found a lady, a Miss Milnes of Yorkshire, then residing in London, to whom, after a singular courtship, he was united in 1778. The best part of his conduct in this affair was his settling her whole fortune, which was as large as his own, upon herself, totally out of his present or future controul. What follows is of a less amiable complexion. They retired soon after their marriage, first to Stapleford Abbots in Essex, and afterwards to Anningsley, near Chertsey, in Surrey. Here they had no carriage; no appointed servant about Mrs. Day’s own person; no luxury of any sort. Music, in which she was a distinguished proficient, was deemed trivial. She banished her harpsichord and music books. Frequent experiments upon her temper, and her attachment, were made by him whom she lived but to obey and love. Over these, we are told, she often wept, but never repined; and no wife, bound in the strictest fetters, as to the incapacity of claiming a separate maintenance, ever made more absolute sacrifices to the most imperious husband than did this lady, whose independence had been secured. She is even said to have died broken-hearted for his loss, about two years after his departure.

The whole of their residence at Anningsley, however, was not passed in inflicting or tolerating caprice. Some of Mr. Day’s experiments were of a more praiseworthy kind. His neighbours of the lowest class, being as rough and as wild as the commons on which they dwelt, he tried if by mutual attrition he could not polish both and, though the event fell short of his expectation, he was not wholly unsuccessful. Many of the peasants he took to work on, his farm, and in his selection of them it was always his object to accommodate those who could not find employmerit elsewhere, until they could meet with some fresh job. But so fond were they of their new master, that they wanted frequently to be reminded that their stay was only intended to be temporary. During the winter season they were so numerous, that it was scarcely in the power of a farm of more than two hundred acres, of a family on the spot, and of the contiguous neighbourhood, to raise for them a shadow of employment from day to day. Mr. Day, whenever he walked out, usually conversed with them in the fields, and questioned them concerning their families. To most of them, in their turn, he sent blankets, corn, and butchers meat. He gave advice and medicines to the sick, and occasionally brought them into his kitchen to have their meals for a few weeks among the servants. Once or twice he took them into his service in the house, on the sole account of their bad health, a circumstance which by many persons would have been deemed an ample cause for dismission. When the cases of sickness which came before him were difficult and critical, he frequently applied to London for regular advice; but good diet was often found more salutary than all the materia medica. Mrs. Day aided the benevolent exertions of her husband by employing the neighbouring poor in knitting stockings, which were occasionally distributed amongst the labourers. Mr. Day’s modes and habits of life were such as the monotony of a rural retirement naturally brings upon a man of ingenuity and literary taste. To his farm he gave a personal attention, from the fondness which he had for agriculture, and from its being a source to him of health and amusement. It was an additional pleasure to him, that hence was derived employment for the poor. He had so high an opinion of the salutary effects of taking exercise on horseback, that he erected a riding-house for the purpose of using that exercise in the roughest weather. Though he commonly resided in the country during the whole of the winter season, and was fond of shooting as an art, he for many years totally abstained from field sports, apprehending them to be cruel; but, at last, from, the same motive of humanity, he resumed the gun. He rose about eight, and walked out into his grounds soon after breakfast. But much of the morning, and still more of the afternoon, were usually passed at his studies, or in literary conversations when he was visited by his friends.

At length, Mr. Day, who suffered no species of controul to interfere with whatever he fancied, or undertook, fell a victim to a part of his own system. He thought highly of the gratitude, generosity, and sensibility of horses; and that whenever they were disobedient, unruly, or vicious, it was owing to previous ill usage from men. Upon. his own plan therefore he reared, ted, and tamed a favourite foal, and when it was time it should become serviceable, disdaining to employ a horse-breaker, he would use it to the bit and the burthen himself. The animal, however, disliking his new situation, heeded not the soothing voice to which he had been accustomed, but plunged, threw his master, and instantly killed him with a kick. This melancholy accident happened on Sept. 28, 1789, as he was returning from Anningsley to his mother’s house at Bare-hill, where he had left Mrs. Day. He was interred at Wargrave, in Berkshire, in a vault which had been built for the family.

In the very flattering, and by no means just or discriminative, character of Mr. Day, given in the Biographia Britannica, his life is represented to have been “one uniform system of exertions in the cause of humanity. He thought nothing mis-spent or ill-bestowed, which contributed, in any degree, to the general sum of happiness. In his pursuit of knowledge, though he deemed it highly valuable as a private and personal acquisition, he had a particular view to the application of it to the purposes of philanthropy. It was to be able to do good to others, as well as to gratify the ardent curiosity and activity of his own mind, that he became an ingenious mechanic, a wellinformed chemist, a learned theoretical physician, 'and an expert constitutional lawyer. But though his comprehensive genius embraced almost the whole range of literature, the subjects to which he was the most attached, and which he regarded as the most eminently useful, were those that are comprehended in historical and ethical science. Indeed, every tiling was important in his eyes, not merely as it tended to advance the individual, but in proportion to its ability in disclosing the powers, and improving the general interests, of the human species.”

His poetical talents, if not of the first rate, evinced considerable taste and elegance, but were not always equally usefully employed. His first publication, “The Dying Negro,” published in 1773, some part of which was written by his friend Mr. Bicknell, contributed its share to create that general abhorrence of the slave-trade which ended at length in the abolition of a traffic so disgraceful to the nation. His other poems were, “The Devoted Legions,” 1776, and “The Desolation of America,” 1777, both of the political cast. His prose effusions on national affairs consist of “The Letters of Marius, or reflections upon the Peace, the East India Bill, and the present crisis,” 1784; the “Fragment of a letter on the Slavery of the Negroes,” expressing his regret that the friends of freedom in America had not learned to share that blessing with their slaves; “A Dialogue between a justice of peace and a farmer,” 1785; and “A Letter to Arthur Young, esq. on the bill then depending in parliament to prevent the Exportation of Wool,” 1788.

, brother to the bishop of Ossory, was born at Saltonstall, in Yorkshire, in 1572. At the age of nineteen he was entered of Merton college in Oxford, and having continued there, and at St. Alban’s hall, until he was admitted doctor in medicine, he went and settled at York. In 1626, he published, at London, “Spadacrene Anglica, or the English Spaw Fountain,” being a brief treatise of the acid or tart fountain in the forest of Knaresborough, in Yorkshire. In a later edition, there are accounts of other mineral waters found in the forest. “Admiranda Chymica, Tractatulus, cum Figuris,” Frankfort, 1630, 8vo, which has been several times reprinted. Sam. Norton, Wood says, was esteemed half author of this book, there being in it some of his tracts; as “Catholicon physicorum,” “Mercurius redivivus,” &c. Deane is supposed to have died about the time the civil wars broke out, but in what year is not known.

, an excellent mathematician, mechanic, and astronomer, was born at Chamberry, the capital of Savoy, in 1611; and descended from a noble family, which had produced several persons creditably distinguished in the church, the law, and the army. He was a great master in all the parts of the mathematics, and printed several books on that subject, which were very well received. His principal performances are, an edition of Euclid’s Elements, where he has struck out the unserviceable propositions, and annexed the use to those he has preserved; a discourse of fortification; and another of navigation. These performances, with some others, were first collected into three volumes in folio, under the title of “Mundus Mathematicus,” comprising a very ample course of mathematics. The first volume includes the first six books of Euclid, with the eleventh and twelfth; an arithmetical tract; Theodosius’s spherics; trigonometry; practical geometry; mechanics; statics; universal geography; a discourse upon the loadstone; civil architecture, and the carpenter’s art. The second volume furnishes directions for stone-cutting; military architecture; hydrostatics; a discourse of fountains and rivers hydraulic machines, or contrivances for waterworks; navigation; optics; perspective; catoptrics, and dioptrics. The third volume has ki it a discourse of music pyrotechnia, or the operations of fire and furnace a discourse of the use of the astrolabe gnomonics, or the art of dialling; astronomy; a tract upon the calendar; astrology; algebra; the method of indivisible and conic sections. The best edition of this work is that of Lyons, printed in 1690; which is more correct than the first, is considerably enlarged, and makes four vols. in folio. Dechales, though not abounding in discoveries of his own, is yet allowed to have made a very good use of those of other men, and to have drawn the several parts of the science of mathematics together with great clearness and judgment. It is said also, that his probity was not inferior to his learning, and that both these qualities made him generally admired and beloved at Paris; where for four years together he read public mathematical lectures in the college of Clermont He then removed to Marseilles, where he taught the art of navigation; and aiterwards became professor of mathematics in the university of Turin, where he died March 28, 1678, aged 67.

, a dramatic writer of very little value, flourished in the reign of James I. The exact periods of his birth and decease are not ascertained; but he could not have died young, as his earliest play bears date 1600, and his latest 1637. Mr. Oldys thinks that he was living in 1638, and that he was in the King’s-bench prison from 1613 to 1616, or longer. It is supposed he had acquired reputation even in the time of queen Elizabeth, whose decease and funeral he commemorates in his “Wonderful Year,” 1603. He was contemporary with Ben Jonson, with whom he quarrelled. Of this we have usually bad the following account: that “Jonson, who certainly could never ‘bear a rival near the throne,’ has, in his ‘ Poetaster,’ the Dnnciad of that author, among many Other poets whom he has satirised, been peculiarly severe on Decker, whom he has characterised under the name of Crispinus. This compliment Decker has amply repaid in his ‘ Satyromastix, or the untrussing a humourous Poet,’ in which, under the title of young Horace, he has made Ben the hero of his piece.” The provocation, however, on the part of Jonson is completely overthrown by Mr. Gilchrist, whose accurate research has established the fact that the Crispinus of Jonson was not Decker, but Marston. In the Biog. Dramatics, is a long list of forgotten plays by Decker; and his “Gull’s Hornbook,” a scarce little tract by him, was elegantly and curiously reprinted in 1813.

, vicar of St. Alkmond’s parish, Shrewsbury, was a native of Ireland, and descended from a very ancient and respectable family in that country, being distantly related to the family of lord Kinsale, to whom he was ordained chaplain. He was educated at Trinity college, Dublin; and his acquaintance with several eminent clergymen brought him to England. In 1770 he accepted the curacy of Shawbury in Shropshire, of which the rev, Mr. Stillingfleet was rector. In January, 1774, he was presented by the lord chancellor to the vicarage of St. Alkmond, which was the subject of a satirical poem, entitled “St. Alkmond’s Ghost,” by an inhabitant of the parish. This was owing to a prejudice conceived against him, as being a methodist, which, however, he soon overcame by his general conduct and talents. To a fund of information derived from reading and reflection, he added a degree of sprightliness and humour, which always rendered his conversation agreeable on every subject. la principle, he was warmly attached to the doctrines of our excellent church, as set forth in her articles and homilies. In the pulpit he was a laborious servant, preaching generally twice, and for some time before his death, three times, every Sunday, and a lecture on Wednesday evening, besides reading the regular service. His sermons were extempore, but in language dignified, in reasoning perspicuous, embellished by apposite allusions, and ornamented with many of the graces of oratory, and he never appealed to the passions of his auditors, but through the medium of the understanding. To the dogmas of Socinus he was an able and unwearied adversary, both from the pulpit and the press, as may be seen by referring to his “Christ Crucified,” 2 vols. 12mo. He was particularly attached to our venerable constitution, and when those pernicious doctrines were broached, which, under the delusive and fascinating title of “Rights of Man,” hurled the monarch of France from his throne, and threatened to involve this country in the same dreadful scenes of ruin and devastation, he strenuously defended the cause of religion and social order. His natural constitution was good, and supported him under many painful fits of rheumatic gout, which weakened his knees so much, as to render it necessary sometimes to sit in the pulpit. Among many temporal losses, none seemed to affect him so much as the death of his youngest son in August, 1803, after serving some time as midshipman under his relation the hon. capt. De Courcy. In the close of his last sermon from Revelation, chap. vi. v. 2. on the evening of the fast day, an allusion to the memory of those whom “we had resigned into the rcy arms of Death,” so far affected him, as to cause an involuntary flow of tears, and obliged him abruptly to conclude. A slight cold taken on that day brought on a return of his disorder, from which he gradually recovered, until a few hours before his death, when a sudden attack in his stomach rendered medical aid useless. Having commended his soul into the hands of his Redeemer, he sunk back, and expired, Nov. 4, 1803. His memory will be long esteemed by his parishioners, and many others who attended his ministry, during a period of thirty years. His remains were interred at Shawbury, on the 9th, and on that occasion a great number of his friends voluntarily joined the funeral procession, and rendered to his memory their last tribute of respect and gratitude. His published works are “Jehu’s Eye-glass on True and False Zeal;” “Nathan’s Message to David, a Sermon;” two Fast Sermons, 1776; “A Letter to a Baptist Minister;” “A Reply to Parmenas,” 1776 “The Rejoinder,” on Baptism, 1777; “Hints respecting the Utility of some Parochial Plan for suppressing the Profanation of the Lord’s Day,” 1777; two Fast Sermons, 1778; “Seduction, or the Cause of injured Innocence pleaded, a Poem,” 1782; “The Seducer convicted on his own Evidence,” 1783; “Christ Crucified,” 1791, 2 vols.; and a Sermon preached at Hawkstone chapel, at the presentation of the standard to the two troops of North Shropshire yeomanry cavalry, in 1798. In 1810, a volume of his “Sermons” was published, with a biographical preface and portrait.

, a great mathematician, and greater enthusiast, the son of Rowland Dee, gentleman sewer to Henry VIII. and grandson of Bedo Dee, standard bearer to lord de Ferrars at the battle of Tournay, was born at London, July 13, 1527; and, after some time spent at school there, and at Chelmsford in Essex, sent to John’s college in Cambridge, where he informs us of his progress in the following words: “Anno 1542, I was sent, by my father Rowland Dee, to the university of Cambridge, there to begin with logic, and so to proceed in the learning of good arts and sciences; for I had before been meetly well furnished with understanding of the Latin tongue, I being then somewhat above 15 years old. In the years 1543, 1544, 1545, I was so vehemently bent to study, that for those years I did inviolably keep this order, only to sleep four hours every night; to allow to meat and drink, and some refreshing after, two hours every day; and of the other eighteen hours, all, except the time of going to, and being at, the divine service, was spent in my studies and learning.” In 1547 he went into the Low Countries, on. purpose to converse with Frisius, Mercator, &c. and other learned men, particularly mathematicians; and in about eight months alter returned to Cambridge, where, upon the founding of Trinity college by Henry VIII. he was chosen one of the fellows, but his bias was to the study of mathematics and astronomy. He brought over with him from the Low Countries several instruments “made by the direction of Frisius, together with a pair of large globes made by Mercator; and his reputation was very high. His assiduity, however, in making astronomical observations, which in those days were always understood to be connected with the desire of penetrating into futurity, brought some suspicion upon him; which was so far increased by a very singular accident that befel him, as to draw upon him the imputation of a necromancer, which he deserved afterwards rather mre than now. This affair happened soon after his removal from St. John’s-college, and being chosen one of the fellows of Trinity, where he” was assigned to he the under-reader of the Greek tongue, Mr. Pember being the chief Greek reader then in Trinity-college. Hereupon,“says he,” I did set forth, and it was seen of the university, a Greek comedy of Aristophanes, named in Greek Eijpwij in Latin, Pax; with the performance of the scarabaeus, or beetle, his flying up to Jupiter’s palace with a man and his basket of victuals on his back; whereat was great wondering, and many vain reports spread abroad of the means how that was effected."

We come now to that period of his life, by which he has been most known, though for reasons which have justly rendered him least regarded. He was certainly a man of uncommon parts, learning, and application; and might have distinguished himself in the scientific world if he had been possessed of solid judgment; but he was very credulous, superstitious, extremely vain, and, we suspect, a little roguish; but we are told that it was his ambition to surpass all men in knowledge, which carried him at length to a desire of knowing beyond the bounds of human faculties. In short, he suffered himself to be deluded into an opinion, that by certain invocations an intercourse or communication with spirits might be obtained; from whence he promised himself an insight into the occult sciences. He found a young man, one Edward Kelly, a native of Worcestershire, who was already either rogue or fool enough for his purpose, and readily undertook to assist him, for which he was to pay him 50l. per annum. Dec. 2, 1581, they began their incantations; in consequence of which, Kelly was, by the inspection of a certain table, consecrated for that purpose with many superstitious ceremonies, enabled to acquaint Dee with what the spirits thought fit to shew and discover. These conferences were continued for about two years, and the subjects of them were committed to writing, but never published, though still preserved in Ashmole’s museum. In the mean time, there came over hither a Polish lord, one Albert Laski, palatine of Siradia, a man of great parts and learning; and, as a late writer observes, of large fortune too, or he would not have answered their purpose. This nobleman was introduced by the earl of Leicester to Dee, and became his constant visitant. Having: himself a bias to those superstitious arts, he was, after much intreaty, received by Dee into their company, and into a participation of their secrets. Within a short time, the palatine of Siradia, returning to his own country, prevailed with Dee and Kelly to accompany him, upon the assurance of an ample provision there; and accordingly they went all privately from Mortlake, in order to embark for Holland; from whence they travelled by land through Germany into Poland, where, Feb. 3, 1584, they arrived at the principal castle belonging to Albert Laski. When Laski had been sufficiently amused with their fanatical pretences to a conversation with spirits, and was probably satisfied that they were impostors, he contrived to send them to the emperor Rodolph II. who, being quickly disgusted with their impertinence, declined all farther interviews. Upon this Dee applied himself to Laski, to introduce him to Stephen king of Poland; which accordingly he did at Cracow, April 1585. But that prince soon detecting his delusions, and treating him with contempt, he returned to the emperor’s court at Prague; from whose dominions he was soon banished at the instigation of the pope’s nuncio, who gave the emperor to understand, how scandalous it appeared to the Christian world, that he should entertain two such magicians as Dee and Kelly. At this time, and while these confederates were reduced to the greatest distress, a young nobleman of great power and fortune in Bohemia, and one of their pupils, gave them shelter in the castle of Trebona; where they not only remained in safety, but lived in splendour, Kelly having in his possession, as is reported, that philosophical powder of projection, by which they were furnished with money very profusely. Some jealousies and heart-burnings afterwards happened between Dee and Kelly, that brought on at length an absolute rupture. Kelly, however, who was a younger man than Dee, seems to have acted a much wiser part; since it appears, from an entry in Dee’s diary, that he was so far intimidated as to deliver up to Kelly, Jan. 1589, the powder, about which it is said he had learned from the German chemists many secrets which he had not communicated to Dee.

The noise their adventures made in Europe induced queen Elizabeth to invite Dee home, who, in May 1689, set out from Trebona towards England. He travelled with great pomp and solemnity, was attended by a guard of horse; and, besides waggons for his goods, had uo less than three coaches for the use of his family; for he had married a second wife, and had several children. He landed at Gravesend Nov. 23; and, Dec. 9, presented himself at Richmond to the queen, who received him very graciously. He then retired to his house at Mortlake; and collecting the remains of his library, which had been torn to pieces and scattered in his absence, he sat down to study. He had great friends; received many presents; yet nothing, it seems, could keep him from want. The queen had quickly notice of this, as well as of the vexations he suffered from the common people, who persecuted him as a conjuror, which at that time was not a title equivalent to an impostor. The queen, who certainly listened oftener to him than might have been expected from her good sense, sent him money from time to time: but all would not do. At length he resolved to apply in such a manner as to procure some settled subsistence; and accordingly, Nov. 9, 1592, he sent a memorial to her majesty by the countess of -Warwick, in which he very earnestly pressed her, that commissioners might be appointed to hear his pretensions, and to examine into the justness of his wants and claims. This had a good effect; for, on the 22d, two commissioners, sir Thomas Gorge, knt. and Mr. Secretary Wolley, were actually sent to Mortlake, where Dee exhibited a book, containing a distinct account of all the memorable transactions of his life, those which occurred in his last journey abroad only excepted; and, as he read this historical narration, he produced all the letters, grants, and other evidences requisite to confirm them, and where these were wanting, named living witnesses. The title of this work, the original of which still remains in the Cotton library, and a transcript of it among Dr. Smith’s written collections, runs thus: “The compendious rehearsal of John Dee, his dutiful declaration and proof of the course and race of his studious life for the space of half an hundred years now by God’s favour and help fully spent, and of the very great injuries, damages, and indignities which for these last nine years he hath in England sustained, contrary to her majesty’s very gracious will and express commandment, made unto the two honourable commissioners by her most excellent majesty thereto assigned, according to the intent of the most humble supplication of the said John, exhibited to her most gracious majesty at Hampton-court, ann. 1592, Nov. 9.” Upon the report made by the commissioners to the queen, he received a present, and promises of preferment; but these promises ending like the former in nothing, he engaged his patroness, the countess of Warwick, to present another short Latin petition to the queen, but with what success does not appear. In Dec. 1594, however, he obtained a grant to the chancellorship of St. Paul’s. But this did not answer his end: upon which he applied himself next to Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, by a letter, in which he inserted a large account of all the books he had either published or written: and in consequence of this letter, together with other applications, he obtained a grant of the vvardenshipof Manchester-college. Feb. 15D6, he arrived with his wife and family in that town, and was installed in his new charge. He continued there about seven years; which he is said to have spent in a troublesome and unquiet manner. June 1604, he presented a petition to king James, earnestly desiring him that he might be brought to a trial; that, by a formal and judicial sentence, he might be delivered from those suspicions and surmises which had created him so much uneasiness for upwards of fifty years. But the king, although he at first patronized him, being better informed of the nature of his studies, refused him any mark of royal countenance and favour; which must have greatly affected a man of that vain and ambitious spirit, which all his misfortunes could never alter or amend. November the same year he quitted Manchester with his family, in order to return to his house at Mortlake; where he remained but a short time, being now very old, infirm, and destitute of friends and patrons, who had generally forsaken him. We find him at Mortlake in 1607; where he had recourse to his former invocations, and so came to deal again, as he fancied, with spirits. One Hickman served him now, as Kelly had done formerly. Their transactions were continued to Sept. 7, 1607, which is the last date in that journal published by Casaubon, whose title at large runs thus: “A true and faithful relation of what passed for many years between Dr. John Dee, a mathematician of great fame in queen Elizabeth and king James their reigns, and some spirits, tending, had it succeeded, to a general alteration of most states and kingdoms in the world. His private conferences with Rudolph emperor of Germany, Stephen. king of Poland, and divers other princes, about it. The particulars of his cause, as it was agitated in the emperor’s court by the pope’s intervention. His banishment and restoration in part; as also the letters of sundry great men and princes, some whereof were present at some of these conferences, and apparitions of spirits to the said Dr. Dee, out of the original copy written with Dr. Dee’s own hand, kept in the library of sir Thomas Cotton, knt. baronet. With a preface confirming the reality, as to the point of spirits, of this relation, and shewing the several good uses that a sober Christian may make of all. By Meric Casaubon, D. D. Lond. 1659,” fol.

The books which Dee printed and published are, 1. “Propaedumata aphoristica; de prsestantiorib.ua quibustlam naturae virtutibus aphorismi,” Lond. 1558, 12mo. 2. “Monas hieroglyphica ad regem Romanorum Maxirnilianum,” Antwerp, 1564. 3. “Epistola ad eximium ducis Urbini mathematicum, Fredericum Commandinum, praefixa libello Machometi Bagdedini de superficierum divi­^ionibus, edita opera Devi et ejusdem Commandini Urbinatis,” Pisauri,!570. 4. “The British Monarchy, otherwise called the Petty Navy Royal,” 1576, a ms. in the Ashmolean museum. 5. “Preface Mathematical to the English Euclid, published by sir Henry Billingsley, knt.” where he says many more arts are wholly invented by name, definition, property, and use, than either the Grecian or Roman mathematicians have left to our knowledge, 1570. 6. “Divers and many Annotations and Inventions dispersed and added after the tenth book of the English Euclid,” 1570. 7. “Epistola prseiixa ephemeridibus Joannis Feldi a 1557, cui rationem declaraverat ephemericles conscribendi.” 8. “Parallaticee com mentation is praxeosque nucleus quidam,” Lond. 1573. This catalogue of Dee’s printed and published books is to be found in his Compendious Rehearsal, &c. as well as in his letter to archbishop Whitgift. Among them are, l.“The great volume of famous and rich discoveries, wherein also is the history of king Solomon every three years, his Ophirian voyage, the originals of presbyter Joannes, and of the first great charn and his successors for many years following. The description of divers wonderful isles in the northern, Scythian, Tartarian, and the other most northern seas, and near under the north pole, by record written 1200 years since, with divers other rarities,” 1576. 2. “The British complement of the perfect art of Navigation. A great volume. In which are contained our queen Elizabeth her tables gubernautic for navigation by the paradoxal compass, invented by him anno 1.557, and navigation by great circles, and for longitudes and latitudes, and the variation of the compass, finding most easily and speedily, yea, if need be, in one minute of time, and sometimes without sight of sun, moon, or stars, with many other new and needful inventions gubernautic,” 1576. 3. “De modo evangelii Jesu Christ! publicandi, propagandi, stabiliendique, inter infideles atlanticos. Volumen magnum libris distinctum qtiatuor: quorum primus ad serenissimam r.ostram potentissimamque reginam Elizabetham inscribiiur; secundus ad summos privati sutc sacra: majestatis consilii senatores; tertius ad Hispaniarum regem Philippum quartus ad pontificem Romanum,” 1591. 4. “Speculum unitatis, sive, apologia pro fratre llogerio Bacone Anglo; in quo docetur nihil ilium per daemoniorum fecisse auxilia, sed pbilosopbum fuisse maximum naturaliterque, et modis homini Christiano licitis maximas fecisse res, quas indoctum solet vulgus in dtemoniorum referre facinora, ' 1557. 5.” De nubium, soils, lunse, ac reliquorum planetarum, imo, ipsius stelliferi cceli, ab intimo ternc centro distantiis, mutuisque intervallis, et eorundem omnium magnitudine, liber anofeutTixo;, ad Edvardum Sextum, Anglisc regem,“1551. 6.” The philosophical and poetical original occasions of the configurations and names of the heavenly Asterisms written at the request of the honble. lady, lady Jane, duchess of Northumberland,“1553. 7.” De hominis corpore, spiritu, et anima: sive, microcosmicum totius naturalis philosophise compendium.“8.” De unico mago et triplice Herode, eoque antichristiano,“1570. 9.” Reipublicae Britannicoe synopsis,“in English, 1562. 10.” Cabbalæ Hebraicæ compendiosa tabella,“1562. 11.” De itinere subterraneo,“, lib. 2. 1560. 12.” Trochilica inventa," lib. 2. 1553, &c. &c.

, or Doering, an ingenious but unfortunate physician, was a native of Saxony, who took his degrees in physic at Leyden, and came to England, according to Mr. Martyn, in the train of a foreign ambassador; but another account pays, that soon after he came to London he was appointed secretary to the British ambassador at the Russian court. Both accounts may probably be true. Dr. Pulteney thinks he settled in London about 1720, where he practised physic and midwifery, and having a strong bias to the study of botany, became one of the members of the society established by Dr. Dillenius and Mr. Martyn, which subsisted from 17*1 to 1726. In 1736 he removed to Nottingham, tinder the recommendation of sir Hans Sloane, and was at first well received, and very successful in his treatment of the smallpox, which disease was highly epidemical at that place soon after his arrival; but he incurred the censure of the faculty by his pretensions to a nostrum. In 1737 he published “An Account of an improved method of treating the Small-pox, in a letter to sir Thomas Parkyns, bart.” 8vo. By this it appears, that his medicine was of the antiphlogistic kind, and that he was one of the first who introduced the cool regimen.

Dr. Deering shewed his attachment to botanical pursuits by his assiduity in collecting such ample materials for his “Catalogue,” in less than two years after settling at Nottingham. It was published under the title “A Catalogue of Plants naturally gruuiog and commonly cultivated in divers parts of England, more especially about Netting-­ham, &e.” 1738, 8vo. This useful work might have been greatly enlarged and improved by the author had he been endowed with some degree of prudence, or a happier temper; but owing to the want of these he very early lost the little interest which his character and success had at first gained. Yet he was a man of great learning, and master of nine languages, ancient and modern. He had also a knowledge of designing, and was an ingenious mechanic. After his failure in the practice of medicine, his friends attempted several schemes to alleviate his necessities. Among others, they procured him a commission in the regiment raised at Nottingham on account of the rebellion; but this proved more honourable than profitable. He was afterwards employed in a way more agreeable to his genius and talents; being furnished with materials, and enabled, with the assistance of John Plumtree, esq. and others, to write “The History of Nottingham,” which, however, he did not live to publish. He had been troubled with the gout at a very early period, and in the latter stage of his life he suffered long confinements in this disease, and became asthmatical. Being at length reduced to a degree of poverty and dependence, which his spirit could not sustain, oppressed with calamity and complicated disease, he died April 12, 1749, Two of his principal creditors administered to his effects, and buried him in St. Peter’s church-yard, opposite the house in which he lived. He left a Hortus Siccus of the plants in his “Catalogue,” a volume of paintings of the fungi, by his own hand, and some Mss. His “Nottinghamia Vetus et Nova,” or History of Nottingham, was published by his administrators, George Ayscough, printer, and Thomas Wellington, druggist, at Nottingham, in 1751, 4to, embellished with plates. One of the most remarkable articles in this volume is, a complete description of that curious machine, the stockingframe, invented upwards of two centuries ago by William Lee, M. A. of St. John’s college, Cambridge, a native of Woodborough, near Nottingham. All the parts are separately and minutely described in the technical terms, and illustrated by two views of the whole, and by a large table, delineating with great accuracy, every constituent part of the machine.

“During the first fury of high-flying,” says he, “I fell a sacrifice for writing against the madness of that high party, and in the service of the dissenters.” He alludes here to “The shortest Way with the Dissenters,” which, he published in 1702, and which is a piece of exquisite irony, though there are certainly passages in it that might have shewn considerate men how much the author had been in jest, He complains how hard it was, that this should not have been perceived by all the town, and that not one man can see it, either churchman or dissenter. This is one of the strongest proofs, how much the minds of men were inflamed against each other, and how little the virtues of mutual forbearance and personal kindness existed amid the clamour of contradiction, which then shook the kingdom, and gave rise to some of the most remarkable events in our annals. The commons shewed their zeal, however they may have studied their dignity, by prosecuting several libellists. On Feb. 25, 1703, a complaint was made in the house of commons, of “The Shortest Way with the Dissenters,” and it was ordered to be burnt by the hands of the common hangman.