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

, an engraver, who flourished about the year 1657, was a native of France. His first manner of engraving was partly copied from that of Francis de Poilly; but he afterwards adopted a manner of his own, which, though not original, he greatly improved; and, accordingly, he finished the faces, hands, and all the naked parts of his figures very neatly with dots, instead of strokes, or strokes and dots. This style of engraving has been of late carried to a high degree of perfection, particularly in England. Notwithstanding several defects in the naked parts of his figures, and in his draperies, his best prints are deservedly much esteemed. Such are “A Holy Family,” from Fran. Corlebet; “Virgin and Child,” from Simon Vouet; “The Pompous Cavalcade,” upon Louis the XlVth coming of age, from Chauveau; “The Virgin with the infant Christ,” holding some pinks, and therefore called “The Virgin of the Pinks,” from Raphael; “The Virgin de Passau,” from Salario;“” Christ carrying his Cross,“from Nicolas Mignard;” A dead Christ, supported by Joseph of Arimathea." He also engraved many portraits, and, among others, that of Charles II. of England. He likewise engraved from Leonardo de Vinci, Guido, Champagne, Stella, Coypel, and other great masters, as well as from his own designs.

There was another John Boulanger, a painter, who was born in 1606, and died in 1660. Mr. Fuseli informs us that he was a pupil of Guido, became painter to the court of Modena, and master of a school of art in that city. What remains of his delicate pencil in the ducal palace, proves the felicity of his invention, the vivid harmony of his colour, and in the attitudes a spirit bordering on enthusiasm. Such is the Sacrifice (if it be his, as fame asserts) of Iphigenia; though the person of Agamemnon is veiled in a manner too whimsical to be admitted in a heroic subject. Of his scholars, Tomaso Costa of Sassuolo, and Sigismondo Caula a Modenese, excelled the rest. Costa, a vigorous colourist, laid his hand indiscriminately ori every subject of art, greatly employed at Reggio, his usual residence, and much at Modena, where he painted the cupola of S. Vicenzo. Caula left his home only to improve himself at Venice, and returned with a copious and welltoned style bat sunk to a more languid one as he advanced in life.

, the elder, painter to the king, and professor in the French academy, was born at Paris in 1609, and was principally distinguished for his ability in copying the works of the most famous ancient painters, which he did with astonishing fidelity. Tbere are also in the church of Notre Dame at Paris three pictures of his own of considerable merit. He died at Paris in 1674, leaving the two following sons:

, eldest son of the preceding, was born at Paris in 1649, and acquired the principles of painting from his father, whom he resembled in his talent of imitating the works of the greatest masters. After a residence of five years in Italy, he was admitted into the academy, of which he became a professor, and employed by Louis XIV. at Versailles and Trianon. He excelled in history and portrait; his designs were accurate, and his colouring good. Besides his paintings in fresco, in two of the chapels of the Invalids, he painted several pieces for the churches and public buildings of Paris, several of which have been engraved. We have alsothree etchings done by him, from his own compositions, viz. a species of “Almanack;” “St. John in the Desert” and “St. Bruno in a landscape” its’ companion. He died at Paris in 1717. His brother Louis de Boullongne the younger, was born at Paris in 1654, and educated under his father, by whose instruction he made such improvement, that he obtained the prize of the academy at 18. His studies were completed at Rome, where he particularly studied the works of Raphael, and from his copies which were sent home, the Gobelin tapestries were executed. After his return he was received into the academy in 1680; and his works in the churches of Notre Dame and the Invalids, and particularly his frescos in the chapel of St. Augustin, were so much esteemed, that Louis XIV. honoured him with his special patronage, allowing him a considerable pension; conferring upon him the order of St. Michael; choosing him designer of medals to the academy of inscriptions, after the death of Anthony CoypeJ; appointing him his principal jminter, and ennobling him and all his descendants. The academy of painting also chose him first for its rector, and afterwards director, which place he occupied till his death. He chiefly excelled in historical and allegorical subjects. From his performances it appeared, that he had carefully studied the most eminent masters; his colouring was strong, his composition was in a good style, the airs of his heads had expression and character, and his figures were correctly designed. His regular attendance at the academy, and his advice to the students, commanded respect: and the general mildness and affability of his disposition engaged esteem among those who knew him. He raised a considerable fortune by his profession, and died in 1734. Two sisters of this family, “Genevieve” and “Magdalen,” painted well, and were members of the royal academy in 1669.

, D. D. archbishop of Armagh, primate and metropolitan of all Ireland, was born in or near London, Jan. 4, 1671, of a reputable and opulent family, received his first rudiments] of learning at Merchant-Taylor’s school, and was admitted from thence a commoner of Christ-church, Oxford, some time before the Revolution. His merit became so conspicuous there, that immediately after that great event, he was elected a demi of Magdalencollege, with the celebrated Mr. Addison, and Dr. Joseph Wilcox, afterwards bishop of Rochester and dean of Westminster, from whose merit and learning Dr. Hough, who was then restored to the presidentship of that college (from which he had been unwarrantably ejected in the reign of king James II.) used to call this election by the name of the golden election, and the same respectful appellation was long after made use of in common conversation in the college*, Mr. Boulter was afterwards made fellow of Magdalen-college. He continued in the university till he was called to London, by the invitation of sir Charles Hedges, principal secretary of state in 1700, who made him his chaplain;

* Dr. Welsted, a physician, was also The primate maintained a son of the of this golden election, and when he doctor’s, as a commoner, at Hart-halt became poor in the latter part of his in Oxford; and would effectually have life, the archbishop, though he was no provided for him, if the young gentlerelation, gave him, at the least, two man had not died before he had taken hundred pounds a year, till his death, a degree. Dr. Welsted was one of the Nor did his grace’s kindness to the editors of the Oxford Pindar, and doctor’s family end with his decease-, esteemed an excellent Greek scholar. and some time after he was preferred to the same honour by Dr. Thomas Tenison, archbishop of Canterbury. In these stations he was under a necessity of appearing often at court, where his merit obtained him the patronage of Charles Spencer, earl of Sunderland, principal secretary of state, by whose interest he was advanced to the rectory of St. Olave in Southwark, and to the archdeaconry of Surrey. The parish of St. Olave was very populous, and for the most part poor, and required such a liberal and vigilant pastor as Dr. Boulter, who relieved their wants, and gave them instruction, correction, and reproof. When king George I. passed over to Hanover in 1719, Dr. Boulter was recommended to attend him in quality of his chaplain, and also was appointed tutor to prince Frederic, to instruct him in the English tongue; and for that purpose drew up for his use “A set of Instructions.” This so recommended him to the king, that during his abode at Hanover, the bishopric of Bristol, and deanery of Christchurch, Oxford, becoming vacant, the king granted to him that see and deanery, and he was consecrated bishop of Bristol, on the fifteenth of November, 1719. In this last station he was more than ordinarily assiduous in the visitation of his diocese, and the discharge of his pastoral duty; and during one of these visitations, he received a letter by a messenger from the secretary of state, acquainting him, that his majesty had nominated him to the archbishopric of Armagh, and primacy of Ireland, then vacant by the death of Dr. Thomas Lindsay, on the 13th of July, 1724-, and desiring him to repair to London as soon as possible, to kiss the king’s hand for his promotion. After some, consultation on this affair, to which he felt great repugnance, he sent an answer by the messenger, refusing the honour the king intended him, and requesting the secretary to use his good offices with his majesty, in making his excuse, but the messenger was dispatched back to him. by the secretary, with the king’s absolute commands that he should accept of the post, to which he submitted, though not without some reluctance, and soon after addressed himself to his journey to court. Ireland was at that juncture not a little inflamed, by the copper-coin project of one Wood, and it was thought by the king and ministry, that the judgment, moderation, and wisdom of the bishop of Bristol would tend much to allay the ferment. He arrived in Ireland on the third of November, 1724, had no sooner passed patent for the primacy, than he appeared at all the public boards, and gave a weight and vigour to them; and, in every respect, was indefatigable in promoting the real happiness of the people. Among his other wise measures, in seasons of great scarcity in, Ireland, he was more than once instrumental in averting a pestilence and famine, which threatened the nation. When the scheme was set on foot for making a navigation, by a canal to be drawn from Lough -Neagh to Newry, not only for bringing coal to Dublin, but to carry on more effectually an inland trade in the several counties of the north of Ireland, he greatlv encouraged and promoted the design, not only with his counsel but his purse. Drogheda is a large and populous town within the diocese of Armagh, and his grace finding that the ecclesiastical appointments were not sufficient to support two clergymen there, and the cure over-burthensome for one effectually to discharge, he allotted out of his own pocket a maintenance for a second curate, whom he obliged to give public service every Sunday in the afternoon, and prayers twice every day. He had great compassion for the poor clergy of his diocese, who were disabled from giving their children a proper education, and maintained several of the sons of such in the university, in order to qualify them for future preferment, He erected four houses at Drogheda for the reception of clergymen’s widows, and purchased an estate for the endowment of them, after the model of primate Marsh’s charity; which he enlarged in one particular: for as the estate he purchased for the maintenance of the widows, amounted to twenty-four pounds a year more than he had set apart for that use, he appointed that the surplus should be a fund for setting out the children of such, widows apprentices, or otherwise to be disposed of for the benefit of such children, as his trustees should think proper. He also by his will directed, which has since been performed, that four houses should be built for clergymen’s widows at Armagh, and endowed with fifty pounds a year. During his life, he contracted for the building of a stately market-house at Armagh, which was finished by his executors, at upwards of eight hundred pounds expence. He was a benefactor also to Dr. Stevens’s hospital in the city of Dublin, erected for the maintenance and cure of the poor. His charities for augmenting small livings, and buying of glebes, amounted to upwards of thirty thousand pourids, besides what he devised by his will for the like purposes in England. Though the plan of the incorporated society for promoting English protestant working schools, cannot be imputed to primate Boulter, yet he was the chief instrument in forwarding the undertaking, which he lived to see carried into execution with consider, able success. His private charities were not less munificent, but so secretly conducted, that it is impossible to give any particular account of them: it is affirmed by those who were in trust about him, that he never suffered an object to leave his house unsupplied, and he often sent them away with considerable sums, according to the judgment he made of their merits and necessities. With respect to his political virtues, and the arts of government, when his health would permit him he was constant in his attendance at the council-table, and it is well known what weight and dignity he gave to the debates of that board. As he always studied the true interest of Ireland, so he judged, that the diminishing the value of the gold coin would be a means of increasing silver in the country, a thing very much wanted in order to effect which, he supported a scheme at the council- table, which raised the clamours of unthinking people, although experience soon demonstrated its wisdom. He was thirteen times one of the lords justices, or chief governors of Ireland; which office he administered oftener than any other chief governor on record. He embarked for England June 2, 1742, and after two days illness died at his house in St. James’s place, Sept. 27, and was buried in Westminster-abbey, where a stately monument has been erected to his memory. His deportment was grave, his aspect venerable, and his temper meek and humble. He was always open and easy of access both to rich and poor. He was steady to the principles of liberty, both in religion and politics. His learning was universal, yet more in substance than shew; nor would his modesty permit him to make any ostentation of it. He always preserved such an equal temper of mind that hardly any thing could ruffle, and amidst obloquy and opposition, steadily maintained a resolution of serving his country, embraced every thing proposed for the good of it, though by persons remarkable for their opposition to him: and when the most public-spirited schemes were introduced by him, and did not meet with the reception they deserved, he never took offence, but was glad when any part of his advice for the public good was pursued, and was always willing to drop some points, that he might not lose all; often saying, “he would do all the good to Ireland he could, though they did not suffer him to do all he would.” His life was mostly spent in action, and therefore it is not to be expected that he should have left many remains of his learning behind him nor do we know of any thing he bath written, excepting a few Charges to his clergy at his visitations, which are grave, solid, and instructive, and eleven Occasional Sermons, printed separately. In 1769, however, were published, at Oxford, in two volumes 8vo, “Letters written by his excellency Hugh Boulter, D. D. lord primate of all Ireland, &c. to several ministers of state in England, and some others. Containing an account of the most interesting transactions which passed in Ireland from 1724 to 1738.” The originals, which are deposited in the library of Christ church, in Oxford, were collected by Ambrose Philips, esq. who was secretary to his grace, and lived in his house during that space of time in which they bear date. They are entirely letters of business, and are all of them in Dr. Boulter’s hand-writing, excepting some few, which are fair copies by his secretary. The editor justly remarks, that these letters, which could not be intended for publication, have been fortunately preserved, as they contain the most authentic history of Ireland, for the period in which they were written: “a period,” he adds, “which will ever do honour to his grace’s memory, and to those most excellent princes George the first and second, who had the wisdom to place confidence in so worthy, so able, and so successful a minister; a minister who had the rare and peculiar felicity of growing still more and more into the favour both of the king and of the people, until the very last day of his life,” It is much to be regretted that in some of his measures, he was opposed by dean Swift, particularly in that of diminishing the gold coin, as it is probable that they both were actuated by an earnest desire of serving the country. In one affair, that of Wood’s halfpence, they appear to have coincided, and in that they both happened to encourage a public clamour which had little solid foundation. The writer of archbishop' Boulter’s Life in the Biog. Brit, seems to doubt whether he assisted Ambrose Philips in the paper called the “Freethinker;” but of this we apprehend there can be no doubt. It was published while he held the living of St. Olave’s.

His widow died March 3, 1754. On the contingency of his having no issue by her, which was the case, he had bequeathed five hundred pounds to Magdalen- college in Oxford, to be applied towards rebuilding the same; and a thousand pounds to Christ-church in the same university, to be applied to the purchase of an estate for founding five exhibitions of equal value, to be distributed among five of the poorest and most deserving of the commoners of that college, to be enjoyed by them for four years from the time of their election; and directed, that no commoner of above three years standing should be elected into the said exhibitions. Fie vested the said election in the dean and canons of that house, and directed that the exhibitioners should be chosen upon a public examination in the hall, and recommended the sons of clergymen to be in the first place, cesteris paribus, considered. He also bequeath* d the further sum of five hundred pounds to the last mentioned college, to buy an estate, to be distributed in equal exhibitions to five servitors of the said college, of whom none were to be capable of election who were of above two years standing, nor to enjoy the exhibition longer than for three years and he vested the right of election in the dean and chapter.

, who justly ought to be classed among public benefactors, the son of Matthew Boulton, by Christian, daughter of Mr. Peers, of Chester, was born at Birmingham Sept. 3, 1728, and was principally educated at a private grammar school, kept by the rev. Mr. Ansted. He learned drawing under Worlidge, and mathematics under Cooper, and laid in a stock of that useful knowledge by which he was enabled so highly to improve the manufactures of his country.' So early as the year 1745, Mr. Boulton invented and brought to great perfection, the inlaid steel, buckles, buttons, watch chains, &c. Great quantities of these were exported to France, from- whence they were re-purchased with avidity by the English, as the offspring of French ingenuity. His manufactory at Birmingham, however, being inadequate to his extensive improvements, and further experiments, he, in 1762, purchased a lease of the Soho, at Handsworth, in the county of Stafford, distant about two. miles; at that time, a barren heath, on the bleak summit of which stood a naked hut, the habitation of a warrener. These extensive tracts of common were converted by Mr. Boulton into the present superb ^manufactory, which was finished in 1765, at the expence of 9000l.; and in the year 1794, he purchased the fee simple of Soho, and much of the other adjoining lands.

Finding that the mill which he had erected fell infinitely short, even with the aid of horses, of the force which was necessary for the completion of his vast designs, Mr. Boulton, in 1767, had recourse to that master- piece of human ingenuity, the steam engine. This wonderful machine was yet in its infancy, and did not at first answer the expectations that had been formed of it. In 1769, Mr. James Watt, of Glasgow, obtained a patent for a prodigious improvement in the steam engine. This induced Mr. Boulton to form connexions with Mr. Watt, and invited him to settle at Soho, to which the latter consented. In 1775, parliament granted a prolongation of the patent for twenty-five years; and Messrs. Boulton and Watt entering into a partnership, established a very extensive manufactory of these engines at Soho, whence most of the great mines and manufactories in England continue to be supplied, and they are now applied in almost every mechanical purpose, where great power is requisite.

Amongst the various applications of the steam engine, that of coining seems to be of considerable importance, as by its powers, all the operations are concentrated on the same spot. It works a number of coining machines with greater rapidity and exactness by a few boys from twelve to fourteen years of age, than could be done by a great number of strong men, without endangering their fingers, as the machine itself lays the blanks upon the die perfectly concentral with it, and, when struck, displaces one piece and replaces another. The coining mill, which was erected in 1788, and has since been greatly improved, is adapted to work eight machines, and each is capable of striking from sixty to an hundred pieces of money in a minute, the size of a guinea, which is equal to between 30,000 and 40,000 per hour, and at the same blow, which strikes the face and reverse, the edge of the piece is also struck, either plain or with an inscription.

About the year 1773, the ingenious art of copying pictures in oil colours, by a mechanical process, was invented at Soho; and was brought to such a degree of perfection that the copies were taken for originals by the most experienced connoisseurs. This art was brought to perfection under the management of the late ingenious Mr. F. Eginton, who was no less celebrated for his paintings on glass.

Since the demise of the late empress Catherine of Russia, Mr. Boulton presented her successor, the late emperor Paul I. with some of the curious articles of his’manufactory, and in return received a polite letter of thanks and Approbation, together with a splendid collection of medals, minerals from Siberia, and specimens of all the modern money of Russia. Among the medals which, for elegance of design and beauty of execution, have never yet been equalled in this or any other country, is a massy one of gold, impressed with a striking likeness, it is said, of that monarch. This unrivalled piece was struck from a die engraved by the present empress dowager, who has, from her youth, taken great delight in the art of engraving on steel.

In a national view, Mr. Boulton’s undertakings have been highly valuable and important. By collecting around him artists of various descriptions, rival talents have been called forth; and, by successive competition, have been multiplied to an extent highly beneficial to the public. A barren heath has been covered with plenty and population; and these works, which in their infancy were little known and attended to, now cover several acres, give employment to more than six hundred persons, and are indubitably the first of their kind in Europe. No expence has been spared to render these works uniform and handsome in architecture, as well as neat and commodious. The same liberal spirit and taste have been displayed on the adjoining gardens and pleasure grounds, which at the same time that they form an agreeable separation from the proprietor’s residence, render Soho a much admired scene of picturesque beauty. As his great and expanded mind formed and brought to perfection the wonderful works thus briefly described, so he felt no greater felicity, than that of diffusing happiness to all around him. Mr. Boulton was not only a fellow of the royal societies of London and Edinburgh, but likewise of that which bears the title of the free and ceconomical at St. Petersburg, and many other foreigrt institutions of the highest celebrity in Europe. He died in his eighty-first year, at Soho, August 17, 1809, regretted as an illustrious contributor to the wealth and fame of his country, and a man of amiable and generous character. He was succeeded in estate and talents by his only son, the present proprietor of Soho, in conjunction with his partners.

, an eminent French historian and antiquary, was a Benedictine of the congregation of St. Maur, and born at Amiens, Aug. 6, 1685. After finishing his course of philosophy and divinity, he studied the learned languages with great success, and his superiors observing his decided taste for literature, made him librarian of St. Germain- des-prez. He afterwards assisted the celebrated Montfaucon in some of his works, and undertook himself an edition of Josephus. When, however, he had made considerable progress in this, he understood that a man of learning in Holland was employed on a similar design, and therefore, with a liberality not very common, sent to him all the collections he had formed for the work. On the death of father Le Long, of the oratory, in 1721, Bouquet was employed in making a collection of the historians of France. Of this important work, a brief account will not be uninteresting.

The first who attempted a collection of the kind was the famous Peter Pithou. It was his intention to have published a complete body of French historians, extracted from printed books and Mss. but he died in 1596, having published only two volumes on the subject, one in 8vo, the other in 4to. These carried the history no lower than the year 1285. Nothing more was done till 1635, when Du Chesne, who is called the Father of French history, took up the subject again, and published a prospectus for a history, to be comprised in fourteen volumes fol. and end with the reign of Henry II. The first two volumes accordingly came out in 1636, but the author died whilst the two next were in the press. These, however, were published in 1641, by his sou, who added a fifth volume, ending with the life of Philippe le Bel, in 1649. The next attempts were vain, though made under the auspices of such men as Colbert, Louvois, and chancellor D'Aguesseau: the plan proposed by the first miscarried through the obstinacy of the famous Ducange (who would have the work done in his own way, or have nothing to do with it) and the modesty of Mabillon. Another was, as we have just mentioned, put a stop to by the death of Le Long, who, having pointed out the materials in his “Bibliotheque Historique de la France,” was the fittest to have made use of them. In this state of things the Benedictine congregation of St. Maur recommended Bouquet, who accordingly went to work under the inspection of a society of teamed men named by the chancellor, in whose presence the plan of the work, and the materials fit to be made use of, were discussed. Bouquet was so assiduous in his labour, that about the end of the year 1729 he was ready with two volumes; but, owing to his removal to the abbey of St. John de Laon, they were not published until 1738, when the chancellor D'Aguesseau called him to Paris, and he then proceeded so rapidly, that the eighth was published in 1752. He had begun the ninth, in which he hoped to have completed what regarded the second race of the French kings; but, in 1754, was seized with a violent disorder, which proved fatal in tour days, April 6. He was a man of extensive learning, connected with all the learned men and learned societies of his time, and beloved for his personal virtues. For many years the work was continued by the congregation of St. Maur, but without the name of any editor. Seven more volumes have appeared since Bouquet’s death, and the sixteenth is now in the press, and almost ready for publication.

, a Latin poet of France, was born in 1503 at Vandeuvrt, near Langres, the son of a rich forge-master. Margaret de Valois appointed him preceptor to her daughter Jane d'Albret de Navarre, mother of Henry IV. He retired afterwards to Conde“, where he had a benefice, and died there about 1550. Bourbon left eight books of epigrams, and a didactic poem on the forge entitled” Ferrarie,“1533, 8vo;” De puerorum moribus,“Lyons, 1536, 4to, a series of moral distichs, with a commentary by J. de Caures. He was extremely well acquainted with antiquity and the Greek language. Erasmus praises his epigrams, and he appears to have been the friend and correspondent of Erasmus, Scaliger, Latimer, Carey, Harvey, Saville, Norris, Dudley, &c. having frequently visited England, where he was patronized by Dr. Butts, the king’s physician, and William Boston, abbot of Westminster, an hospitable man, with whom he speaks of having passed many pleasant hours in archbishop Cranmer’s garden at Lambeth. He treats sir Thomas More with great asperity in one of his epigrams, from which we may probably conclude that he inclined to protestantism, although this is not consistent with his history. His epigrams were published under the title of” Nugarumlibriocto," Paris, 1533, and often reprinted, particularly by Scaliger, 1577 in 1608 by Passerat, with notes; and lastly, by the abbe Brochard in 1723, a handsome quarto edition, printed at Paris.

, nephew to the above, and superior to him as a Greek and Latin poet, was the son of a physician. He taught rhetoric in several colleges at Paris, and cardinal du Perron appointed him professor of eloquence at the royal college. He was also canon of Langres, and one of the forty of the French academy. He retired at last among the fathers of the oratory, where he died August 7, 1644, aged seventy. Bourbon is justly considered as one of the greatest Latin poets whom France has produced. His poems were printed at Paris, 1651, 12mo. The “Imprecation on the Parricide of Henry IV.” is his chef-d'ceuvre. He wrote the two beautiful lines which are upon the gate of the arsenal at Paris, in honour of Henry the Great:

, lord Berners, was born about 1467, son and heir of sir Humphrey Bourchier by Elizabeth, daughter and heir of sir Frederick Tilney (widow of sir Thomas Howard), which Humphrey was killed at Barnet-field, on Edward IVth’s part, and buried in Westminster abbey, during the life of his father, who was sir John Bourchier, K. G. fourth son of William earl of Ewe, and baron Berners, by marriage with Margery, daughter and heir of Richard lord Berners. Lord Bourchier succeeded his grandfather, May 16, 1474, being then only seven years old. He was educated in Baliol college, Oxford, and afterwards travelled abroad, and returned a master of seven languages, and a complete gentleman. In 1405 he obtained the notice of Henry VII. by his valour in quelling the fury of the rebels in Cornwall and Devonshire, under the conduct of Michael Joseph, a blacksmith. In 1513 he was captain of the pioneers at the siege of Therouenne. In 1514, being made chancellor of the king’s exchequer for life, he attended the lady Mary, the king’s sister, into France, to her marriage with king Lewis XII. and in 1527 obtained i grant from the king of several manors. Afterwards he vas made lieutenant of Calais and the marches adjoining to France, and spending most of his time there, wrot< several learned works in that situation. There he made his will, March 3, 1532, bequeathing his body to be bur'ud in the chancel of the parish church of our lady, within the town of Calais, and appointing that an honest priest shouldsing mass there for his soul, by the space of three years, ie died March 16th following, leaving by Katherine his wie, daughter of John duke of Norfolk, Joane his daughter nd heir, married to Edmund Knyvet of Ashwelthorpe inNorfolk, esq.

Lord Berners is now principally known r his translation of “Froissart’s Chronicle,” which he mdertook by command of the king, and was published by 'inson, 1523 1525, 2 vols. fol. It is unnecessary to add h w much this translation has been superseded by that of Thmas Johnes, esq. which lately issued from the Hafod pre>, and has passed through two editions since 1803. Ofers of lord Berners’s works were a whimsical medley of ranslations from the French, Italian, and Spanish novels, hich seem to have been the mode then, as they were afterv.rds in the reign of Charles II. These were, “The Life f Sir Arthur, an Armorican Knight” “The famousesploits of sir Hugh of Bourdeaux” “Marcus Aureliui” and the “Castle of Love.” He also composed a bo: “Of the duties of the inhabitants of Calais,” and a comfy entitled “Ite in Vineam.” Of all these an ample account may be seen in our authorities.

, archbishop of Canterbury in the successi^eio-ns of Henry VI. Edward IV. Edward V. Richard III. tf Henry VII. was son of William Bourchier earl of Ewe in Normandy, and the countess of Stafford, and brother of Henry earl of Essex, and, consequently, related to the preceding lord Berners. He had his education in Neville’s-inn at Oxford, and was chancellor of that university three ears viz. from 1433 to 1437. His first dignity in the church was that of dean of the collegiate church of St. Martin’s in London; from which, in 1433, he was advanced, by pope Eugenius IV. to the see of Worcester but his consecration was deferred to May 15, 1436, by reason (as is supposed) of a defect in age. He had not sat a full year, before he was elected by the monks of Ely bishop of that see, and confirmed by the pope: but, the king refusing his consent, Bourchier did not dare to comply with the election,' for fear of incurriig the censure of the laws, which forbad, under very sevtfe penalties, the receiving the pope’s bull without the khg’s leave. Nevertheless, seven or eight years after, the see of Ely still continuing vacant, and the king consenting, he was translated thither, the 20th of December 1443. The author of the “Historia Eliensis” speaks very disadvantageously of him, as an oppressor, and neglectfi of his duty during his residence on that see, which was ten years twenty-three weeks and five days. At last he was elected archbishop of Canterbury, in the room of John Kemp, the 23d of April 1454. This election was the irre remarkable, as the monks were left entirely to trir liberty of choice, without any interposition either frc the crown or the papal chair. On the contrary, pof Nicolas Vth’s concurrence being readily obtained, t> archbishop was installed with great solemnity. In the m^th of December following, he received the red hat from vome, being created cardinal-priest of St. Cyriacus in Ttemis, but Bentham thinks this was not till 1464, The next ear, he was made lord high chancellor of England, but‘esigned that office in October the year following. So’ after his advancement to the see of Canterbury, he be^aia visitation in Kent, and made several regulations fothe government of his diocese. He likewise publish* 3 - constitution for restraining the excessive abuse of papa'rovisions, but deserved most highly of the learned world, r being the principal instrument in introducing the no 2 art of printing into England. Wood’s account^ althou not quite correct, is worth transcribing. Bourchier being informed that the inventor, Tossan^ alias John -ithenberg, had set up a press at Harlem, was extremely desirous that the English might be made masters of s^ 6116 ^ ^ an art. To this purpose he persuaded fcino Henry VI. to dispatch one Robert Tournour, belong to the wardrobe, privately to Harlem. This man, f ur ed with a thousand marks, of which the archbishop suried three hundred, embarked for Holland, and, to disise the matter, went in company with one Caxton, a, nnhant of London, pretending himself to be of the same profession. Thus concealing his name and his business, he went first to Amsterdam, then to Leyden, and at last settled at Harlem where having spent a -great deal of time and money, he sent to the king for a fresh supply, giving his Highness to understand, that he had almost compassed the enterprize. In short, he persuaded Frederic Corselli, one of the compositors, to carry off a set of letters, and embark with him in the night for London. When they arrived, the archbishop, thinking Oxford a more convenient place for printing than London, sent Corselli down thither. And, lest he should slip away before he had discovered the whole secret, a guard was set upon the press. And thus the mystery of printing appeared ten years sooner in the university of Oxford than at any other place in Europe, Harlem and Mentz excepted. Not long after, there were presses set up at Westminster, St. Alhan’s, Worcester, and other monasteries of note. After this manner printing was introduced into England, by the care of archbishop Bourchier, in the year of Christ 1464, and the third of king Edward IV."

Bourchier, we are told, was strangely imposed upon by the specious pretences of Richard duke of Gloucester, when he undertook to persuade the queen to deliver up the duke of York, her son, into the protector’s hands. He presided over the church thirty-two years, in the most troublesome times of the English government, those of Henry VI. and Edward IV. He also performed the marriage ceremony between Henry VII. and the daughter of Edward IV.; and had the happiness to be contemporary with many prelates of distinction in English history. He was certainly a man of learning; though nothing written by him has come down to us, if we except a few Sy nodical decrees. Dart tells us, he founded a chantry, which was afterwards surrendered to king Henry VIII. Archbishop Bourchier died at his palace of Knowle, on Thursday the thirtieth of March 1486, and was buried on the north side of the choir of his cathedral, by the high altar, in a tomb of marble, on which is an inscription merely recording the event.

Archbishop Bourchier’s benefactions are stated by Mr. Bentham as follows: He gave to the prior and convent of Christ Church in Canterbury, the alien priory of Cranfield in Essex, a grant of which he had obtained from the crown in the time of Edward the Fourth. To the church of Canterbury, besides the image of the Trinity, he bequeathed twenty-seven copes of red tissue, and left to his successor, in recompence for dilapidations, 2000l.; also 12 5l. to each of the universities, to be kept in chests, for the support of the poor scholars. The chest at Cambridge, which was united with Billingford’s, was in being in 1601, when 100l. was borrowed out of it for the use of the university; but this fund was afterward embezzled, through the iniquity of the times. The archbishop left also legacies to several monasteries.

, a Jesuit, and one of the most eloquent preachers France ever produced, was born at Bourges, Aug. 20, 1632, and entered the society of the Jesuits in 1648. After having passed some years in teaching grammar, rhetorick, philosophy, and divinity, his talents pointed him out for the office of preacher, and the extraordinary popularity of his sermons in the country, determined his superiors to call him to Paris in 1669, to take the usual course of a year’s preaching in their church of St. Louis, which soon became crowded with multitudes of both sexes both from the court and city; nor was this a transient impression, as whoever heard him once wished to hear him again, and even Louis XIV. listened with pleasure, although he appears to have introduced subjects in his discourses which could not be very acceptable in his court. On the revocation of the edict of Nantz, the king sent him into Languedoc to strengthen the new or pretended converts from the heresies of the protestant faith, and we are told the effect of his eloquence was great. His eloquence was undoubtedly superior to that of his contemporaries, and he has justly been praised for introducing a more pure style than was customary in the French pulpips. One effect of his preaching was, that great numbers of his hearers requested him to take their souls into his hands, and be the director of their consciences, in other words, to turn father confessor, with which he complied, and frequently sat five or six hours in the confessional, completing there, says his biographer, what he had only sketched in the pulpit. He was yet more admired for his charitable attentions and the sick and poor, among whom he passed much of his time, in religious conference and other acts of humanity. He died at Paris May 13, 1704, universally lamented and long remembered as the most attractive and eloquent of preachers. He had preached thirty -four years at court and in Paris. Father Bretonneau published two editions of his works, the first of 16 vols. 8vo. 1716, reckoned the best, or at least, the most beautifully printed; and the second in 18 vols. 12rrio. Comparisons have been formed between him and Massillon, but several are still inclined to give him the preference. There is warmth, zeal, and elegance in his style and reasoning, but he is frequently declamatory and verbose. It is difficult, however, for English critics to appreciate the merits of his sermons, calculated as they were for a class of hearers with whose taste we are unacquainted. Of his catholic spirit we have an instance on record, that in an interview with bishop Burnet at Paris, he told the English prelate that he believed “all honest protestants would be saved.”

, better known by the name of Brantôme, of which he was abbot, added to that title those of lord and baron of Richemont, chevalier, gentleman of the chamber to the kings Charles IX. and Henry III. and chamberlain to the duke of Alençon. He had the design of being created a knight of Maltha in a voyage he made to that isle during the time of the siege in 1565. He returned to France, where he was fed with vain expectations; but he received no other reward (as he tells us himself) than being welcomed by the kings his masters, great lords, princes, sovereigns, queens, princesses, &c. He died July 5, 1614, at the age of 87. His memoirs were printed in ten volumes, 12mo, viz. four of the French commanders; two of foreign commanders two of women of gallantry one of illustrious ladies; and one of duels. There is another edition of the Hague, 1741, 15 vols. 12mo, on account of the supplement, which makes five, and also a Paris edition 1787, 8 vols. 8vo. These memoirs may be of some use, if read cautiously, by those who would know the private history of Charles IX. of Henry III. and of Henry IV. Here the man is more represented than the prince. The pleasure of seeing these kings in their peculiarities in private life, added to the simplicity of Brantome’s style, renders the reading of his memoirs extremely agreeable. But some of his anecdotes are grossly indecent, and many of them fictions.

“Brantome,” (says M. Anquetil) “is in the hands of every body. All the world pretends to have read him; but he ought particularly to be put into the hands of princes, that they may learn how impossible it is for them to hide themselves they they have an importance in the eyes of their courtiers, which draws attention to all their actions; and that, sooner or later, the most secret of them are revealed to posterity. The reflections that would occur, on seeing that Brantome has got together all the little transactions, all the idle words that have escaped them, all the actions pretended to be indifferent, which were thought to be neglected and lost, and which nevertheless mark the character, would render them more circumspect. In reading Brantome a problem forces itself on the mind, which it is difficult to solve. It is very common to see that author joining together the most discordant ideas in regard to morals. Sometimes he will represent a woman as addicted to the most infamous refinements of libertinism, and then will conclude by saying that she was prudent, and a good Christian. So likewise of a priest, of a monk, or any other ecclesiastic, he will relate anecdotes more than wanton; and will tell us very gravely at the end, that this man lived regularly according to his station. Almost all his memoirs are full of similar contradictions in a sort of epigram. On which 1 have this question to propose: Was Brantome a libertine; who, in order to sport more securely with religion and morals, affects in the expression a respect to which the very matter of the recital gives the lie? or, Was he one of those persons who generally go under the name of amiable fops; who, without principles as without design, confound virtue and vice, making no real difference between one character and another? Whatever judgment we may form of him, we must always blame him for omitting to observe a proper reverence for decorum in his writings, and for frequently putting modesty to the blush. We perceive in Brantome the character of those young men, who, making a part of the court by their birth, pass their lives in it without pretensions and without desires. They amuse themselves with every thing: if an action has a ridiculous side, they seize it; if it has not, they give it one. Brantome only skims along the surface of a subject; he knows nothing of diving into an action, and unfolding the motives that gave it birth. He gives a good picture of what he has seen, relates in simple terms what he has heard; but it is nothing uncommon to see him quit his main object, return to it, quit it a and conclude by thinking no more of it. With all this irregularity he pleases, because he amuses.”

, grand-nephew of the former, comte de Montresor., attached to Gaston of Orleans, both while he was in favour, and when he had lost it, was several times deprived of his liberty for serving that prince. Disgusted with the tumult and the Artifices of the court, he took up the resolution of enjoying the sweets of privacy. He died at Paris in 1663. He left memoirs, known under the name of Montresor, 2 vols. 12mo, which are curious, as containing many particulars of the history of his time. Montresor makes no scruple of relating the projects he formed against the life of cardinal Richelieu.

, a learned French critic, who distinguished himself in the republic of letters by writing notes upon Lucian, Petronius, and Heliodorus, lived at the end of the 16th, and in the beginning of the 17th century, was of a good family of Sens, and educated with care. He applied himself to the study of the belles lettres and of the learned languages; and Baillet tells us, that he passed for a great connoisseur in the oriental tongues, and in the knowledge of manuscripts. These pursuits did not hinder him from being consummate in the law. He exercised the office of advocate to the parliament of Paris in 1627, when Mary of Medicis, hearing of his uncommon merit, made him master of the requests. He died suddenly at Paris in 1638. His edition of Heliodorus, which is one of the best, was published in 1619, 8vo That of Lucian at Paris, 1615, fol. with the notes of Micyllus, Guerinus, Marsilius, and Cognatus, and some short and learned ones by himself, at that time a very young man. Among the sources from which Bourdelot professes to have compiled his edition, are two ancient Mss. in the royal library at Paris, the existence of which Faber (ad Luciani Timonem, c. 1.) denies in the most positive terms. His Petronius was first published at Paris, 12mo, in 1618, a very scarce edition, and reprinted in 1645, 1663, and 1677.

, nephew to the above, and educated by him, was a very celebrated physician at Paris, where he died Feb. 9, 1685, aged seventy-six. In 1634, he obtained leave to adopt the name of Bourdelot, pursuant to his uncle’s desire, who on that condition left him his library and fortune. He wrote some treatises on “the Viper,” on “Mount Etna,” “La relation des appartmens de Versailles,” &c. with three volumes of “Conferences,” which were published by M. le Gallois.

, physician in ordinary to Louis XIV. and first physician to the duchess of Burgundy, was sister’s son to the preceding P. Michon Bourdelot, who enjoined him to change his name from Bonnet to Bourdelot, on the same terms that himself adopted that name, viz. his library and fortune. P. Bonnet Bourdelot was a skilful physician, and a man of general literature. He wrote some useful notes on the “Bibliotheque choisie de M. Colomies,” which were added to the Paris edition of 1731, and left a manuscript catalogue of all printed medical works, with lives and criticisms on the authors. He wrote also some papers on the history of music, which were used by his brother Bonnet in his “Histoire de la Musique,” 1715. He died in 1709, aged fifty-four.

, a very celebrated French painter, was born at Montpellier in 1616. His father, who was a glass-painter, gave him the first instructions in his art. When only seven years old, one of his uncles brought him to Paris, and placed him with a very indifferent painter, whose defects, however, were supplied by young Bourdon’s natural genius. Returning to Bourdeaux at the age of fourteen, he painted the cieling of a neighbouring chateau, and then went to Toulouse. Finding here no employment, he went into the army; but his captain, a man of some taste, judging that he would one day excel in his profession as an artist, gave him his discharge. He was eighteen when he went to Italy, and became acquainted with Claude Lorrain, whose manner, as well as that of Saccbi, Caravagio, and Bamboccio, he imitated with great success. After a residence of three years here, he happened to have a difference with a painter, who threatened to inform against him as a Calvinist, and Bourdon immediately set out for Venice, and thence to France. At the age of twenty-seven he painted his famous Crucifixion of St. Peter for the church of Notre Dame at Paris, which could not fail to raise his reputation. Du Guernier, a miniature painter, much employed at court, and whose sister he married, assisted him with his advice, and procured him work. But the civil wars interrupting the progress of the fine arts, in 1652 he went to Sweden, where queen Christina appointed him her first painter. While employed on many works for her, chiefly portraits, she mentioned to him one day some pictures which the king her father had found when he took Prague; these had till now remained unpacked, and she desired Bourdon to examine them. Bourdon reported favourably of them, particularly of some by Corregio, on which the queen requested he would accept them as a present from her. Bourdon, with corresponding liberality and disinterestedness, represented that they were some of the finest paintings in Europe, and that her majesty ought never to part with them, as a fit collection for a crowned head. The queen accordingly kept them, and took them with her to Rome when she abdicated the throne. After her death, the heirs of Don Livio Odeschalchi, who had purchased them, sold them to the regent duke of Orleans; and they afterwards made part of the fine collection known in this country by the name of the Orleans Collection.

Bourdon, however, not finding much exercise for his genius in Sweden, and the queen having become Roman catholic after her abdication, he returned to France, then more favourable to the arts, and soon had abundance of employment. Among his first performances after his return, were a “Dead Christ,” and the “Woman taken in adultery.” Some business occasioning him to go to Montpellier, during his short stay there he painted several portraits of persons of fashion. An anecdote is told, that, when in this place, a taylor who had a great esteem for him, and knew he was not rich, sent to him, by the hand of one Francis, a painter, a complete suit of clothes, cloak, and bonnet. Bourdon, in return, sent him his portrait dressed in this suit; but Francis, thinking it a very fine specimen of the art, presented the taylor with a copy, and kept the original. In 1663 he returned to Paris, where he continued to execute many fine pictures, until his death in 1671.

He had an uncommon readiness of hand, though he was frequently incorrect, and was particularly so in the extremities of his figures. As a proof of his expeditious manner of painting, it is reported, that in one day he painted twelve portraits afterlife, as large as nature, and those not the worst of his performances. His touch is extremely light, his colouring good, his attitudes are full of variety, v and sometimes graceful, and his expression is lively and animated. However, it must be confessed, that his conceptions were often extravagant, nor would many of his compositions abide a critical examination. His landscapes are in the taste of Titian, but they seem rather designed from imagination than after nature; yet, in several of them, the product of that imagination has a beautiful effect; and he usually enriched his pastoral scenes with a great number of figures and animals. His pictures are seldom finished, and those which appear most so, are not always his best. The most esteemed work of Bourdon is the Martyrdom of St. Peter, in the church of Notre Dame at Paris, which is considered as a curiosity. Sir Joshua Reynolds had his “Return of the Ark from captivity,” which he bequeathed to sir George Beaumont. Sir Joshua in his fourteenth discourse speaks very highly of this picture. As a proof of the value of Sebastian Bourdon’s piv-tures in this country, we may mention that in 1770, a holy family by him was sold by the late Mr. Christie, for 34 1l. 5s.

, veterinary surgeon, was a native of Lyons, and in his youth a soldier, after which he studied law, but quitted that pursuit on being appointed chief of the riding-school of Lyons, where he seems to have discovered the employment for which he was best fitted. From this time he applied himself to the principles of horsemanship, which he detailed in his “Nouveau Newcastle, ou Traite de Cavalerie,” Lausanne, 1747, 8vo. He laboured no less assiduously to rescue the veterinary art from the hands of ignorance and empiricism, and with that view published in 1750, his “Elemens d'hippiatrique, ou Nouveaux principes sur la connoissance des chevaux,” Lyons, 3 vols. 8vo. The knowledge he displayed in this work probably rendered it easy for him to obtain the leave of government to establish a veterinary school at Lyons, of the great utility of which the public soon became sensible, and many able scholars educated under Bourgelat extended this new branch of the medical art to every part of the kingdom. In 1765, he published his “Matiere medicale raisonnee a Tusage de l'ecole veterinaire,” Lyons, 8vo. His success at Lyons induced the government to invite him to Paris, and he founded a second school at Alford, near Charenton, and published several elementary treatises for the use of his scholars, such as “Cours theorique et pratique des bandages” “Traite de la ferrure,” 1776, 12mo; “L'Anatomie compared de tous les animaux,” and “Memoire sur les maladies contagieuses du betail,” 1776, 4to. After a life spent on this important science, he died in 1779, aged sixty-seven. At his death he bore the titles of inspector-general of the veterinary schools, and commissary-general of the stud. Besides his favourite pursuit, he was a man of general knowledge.

, knight of the Polish order of Merit, and an artist of distinguished reputation, was the descendant of a considerable family in Switzerland, but was born in London in 1756. His early destination was the army, under the patronage of lord Heathfield, who was his father’s - friend but having been instructedwhi|p a child in the rudiments of painting, by a foreigner of inconsiderable merit as a horse-painter, he became so attached to the study, as soon to relinquish the military profession, and devote himself wholly to the pencil. For this purpose he was placed under the tuition of Loutherbourg, and having, from his connexions and acquaintance, access to many of the most distinguished collections, he soon acquired considerable reputation by his landscapes and sea-pieces. In 1776, he travelled through Italy, France, and Holland, where his correct knowledge of the language of each country, added to the politeness of his address, and the pleasures of his conversation, procured him an introduction to the best society, and most valuable repositories of the arts on the continent. At his return to England, he exhibited several specimens of his studies at the royal academy, which obtained him reputation and patronage. In 1791 he was appointed painter to the king of Poland, whose brother, the prince primate, had been much pleased with his performances during his residence in this country; and at the same time he received the honour of knighthood of the order of Merit, which was afterwards confirmed by his present majesty, who, in 1794, appointed him landscapepainter to the king. Previous to this he had, in 1792, been elected a member of the royal academy. Some time before his death, by the will of the late Noel Desenfans, esq. an eminent picture-dealer, he became possessed of sufficient property to render a laborious application to his profession no longer necessary, and from that time he lived in the circle of his friends, highly respected for his talents and agreeable manners. He died Jan. 8, 1811, at his house in Portland- street, bequeathing his fine collection of pictures, and his fortune, to Dirlwich college. According to the terms of his will, he leaves the whole of these pictures, besides 10,000l. to keep them in due preservation, and 2,000/ for the purpose of repairing the gallery ki the college for their reception. He also bequeathed legacies of lOOOl. each to the master of the college, and to the chaplain and the fellows of the college are to be the residuary legatees, and are to possess, for its advantage, all the rest of his property, of every denomination. Most part of this will, however, does not take effect until after the death of Mrs. Desenfans, the widow of his benefactor; and after that event he directs that the body of the late Noel Desenfans, which is now deposited in a sarcophagus within a mausoleum in a chapel, attached to his late house in Charlotte-street, Portland-place, shall be removed, together with his own body (which has, by his desire, been deposited in the same mausoleum), and entombed in a sarcophagus, to be "placed in the chapel of Dulwich college. So singular a will, with respect at least to the place chosen for this collection, excited much surprise. The following circumstances, however, which have been communicated by an intimate friend of the testator, may in some measure account for it. After sir Francis became possessed of the Desenfans collection, by the owner’s friendly will in his favour, he wished to purchase the fee simple of his fine house in Charlotte-street, enlarge it, and endow it as a perpetual repository for the collection, easily accessible to the public, and particularly to students as a school of art; but unluckily, his landlord, a nobleman lately deceased, refused his consent, although he afterwards expressed an inclination to grant it, when too late. Sir Francis then conceived the design of hequeathing the collection to the British Museum, but did not execute it, from a fear that the pictures might not be kept entire and unmixed, he being told that it was in the power of the trustees to dispose of what might appear superfluous or inferior. Such was his respect for his deceased friend, that his only ambition was to discover a place where the collection might be kept together, and known in perpetuum, not as his, but as the Desenfans Collection. By whom Dulwich college, an hospital for poor men and women, remote from the residence of artists and men of taste, was suggested, we know not. It was a place sir Francis had probably never before seen; but, having once visited it, and been informed that his terms might be complied with there, without risk of alteration, he disposed of his property as we have related.

As an artist, sir Francis may be placed in the second rank. He was a close imitator of Loutherbourg. His conception of his subject, as well as the grouping of his figures, was happy, and in conformity with nature; but he was often defective in his finishing, and so much a mannerist in his colouring, that his paintings may be recognized by a very distant glance.

, was born at the village of Beaumains near Falaise, in the diocese of Seez, in 1724. He was educated at the grammar-school at Caen, whence he was removed to that university, and pursued his studies with great diligence and success till 1745, when he became a Benedictine monk of the abbey of St. Martin de Seez, then en regie, that is, under the direction of a conventual abbot. Some time after this, Dom Bourget was appointed prior claustral of the said abbey, and continued six years in that office, when he was nominated prior of Tiron en Perche; whence being translated to the abbey of St. Stephen at Caen, in the capacity of sub-prior, he managed the temporalities of that religious house during two years, as he did their spiritualities for one year longer; after which, according to the custom of the house, he resigned his office. His superiors, sensible of his merit and learning, removed him thence to the abbey of Bee, where he resided till 1764. He was elected an honorary member of the society of antiquaries of London, Jan. 10, 1765; in which year he returned to the abbey of St. Stephen at Caen, where he continued to the time of his death. These honourable offices, to which he was promoted on account of his great abilities, enabled him not only to pursue his favourite study of the history and antiquities of some of the principal Benedictine abbie.s in Normandy, but likewise gave him access to all their charters, deeds, register-books, &c. &c. These he examined with great care, and left behind him in ms. large and accurate accounts of the abbies of St. Peter de Jumieges, St. Stephen, and the Holy Trinity at Caen (founded by William the Conqueror and his queen Matilda), and a very particular history of the abbey of Bee. These were all written in French. The History of the royal abbey of Bee (which he presented to Dr. Ducarel in 1764) is only an abstract of his larger work. This ancient abbey, (which has produced several archbishops of Canterbury and other illustrious prelates of this kingdom) is frequently mentioned by our old historians. The death of this worthy Benedictine (which happened on new-year’s day, 1776) was occasioned by his unfortunate neglect of a hurt he got in his leg by falling down two or three steps in going from the hall to the cloister of the abbey of St. Stephen at Caen, being deceived by the ambiguous feeble light of a glimmering and dying lamp that was placed in that passage. He lived universally esteemed, and died sincerely regretted by all those who were acquainted with him and was buried in the church of the said abbey, Jan. 3, 1776.

, who was born at Nimes in 1678, became celebrated for his proficiency in natural history. The revocation of the edict of Nantes having forced his family to go and seek an asylum in Switzerland, Zurich was indebted to them for its manufactures of stockings, muslins, and several silk stuffs. Young Bourguet went through a course of study there; afterwards married at Berne, and settled at Neufeh&tel, where he became professor of philosophy and mathematics. He died Dec. 31, 1742, at the age of 64, after publishing, 1. A Letter on the formation of salts and crystals; Amsterdam, 1729, 12mo. 2. “La bibliotheque Italique,” 16 vols. 8vo. This journal, begun at Geneva in 1728, found a welcome reception among the learned, as a solid and useful book deserving to be continued, although deficient in style, and hastily written. He wrote also, “Traite des petrifactions,” Paris, 1742, 4to, and 1778, 8vo. Many of his learned papers on subjects of natural history were inserted in the literary journals, and his eloge is in the Helvetic Journal for 1745.

, a famous female enthusiast, was born Jan. 13, 1616, at Lisle in Flanders. She came into the world so very deformed, that a consultation was held in the family some days about stifling her as a monstrous birth. But if she sunk almost beneath humanity in her exterior, her interior seems to have been raised as much above it. For, at four years of age, she not only took notice that the people of Lisle did not live up to the principles of Christianity which they professed, but earnestly desired to be removed into some more Christian country; and her progress was suitable to this beginning. Her parents lived unhappily together, Mr. Bourignon using his spouse with too much severity, especially in his passion: upon which occasions, Antoinette endeavoured to soften him by her infant embraces, which had some little effect; but 'the mother’s unhappiness gave the daughter an utter aversion to matrimony. This falling upon a temper strongly tinctured with enthusiasm, she grew a perfect devotee to virginity, and became so immaculately chaste, that, if her own word may be taken, she never had, in all her life, not even by temptation or surprise, the least thought unworthy of the purity of the virgin state: nay, she possessed the gift of chastity in so abundant a manner, that her presence and her conversation shed an ardour of continence over all who knew her.

Her father, however, to whom all this appeared unnatural, considered her as a mere woman and, having found an agreeable match, promised her in marriage to a Frenchman. Easter-day, 1636, was fixed for the nuptials; but, to avoid the execution, the young lady fled, under the disguise of a hermit, hut was stopped at Blacon, a village of Hainault, on suspicion of her sex. It was an officer of horse quartered in the village who seized her; he had observed something extraordinary in her, and mentioning her to the archbishop of Cambray, that prelate came to examine her, and sent her home. But being pressed again with proposals of matrimony, she ran away once more: and, going to the archbishop, obtained his licence to set up a small society in the country, with some other maidens of her taste and temper. That licence, however, was soon retracted, and Antoinette obliged to withdraw into the country of Liege, whence she returned to Lisle, and passed many years there privately in devotion and great simplicity. When her patrimonial estate fell to her, she resolved at first to renounce it; but, changing her mind, she took possession of it; and as she was satisfied with a few conveniences, she lived at little expence: and bestowing no charities, her fortune increased apace. For thus taking possession of her estate, she gave three reasons: first, that it might not come into the hands of those who had no right to it; or secondly, of those who would have made an ill use of it; thirdly, God shewed her that she should have occasion for it to his glory. And as to charity, she says, the deserving poor are not to be met with in this world. This patrimony must have been something considerable, since she speaks of several maid servants in her house. What she reserved, however, for this purpose, became a temptation to one John de Saulieu, the son of a peasant, who resolved to make his court to her; and, getting admittance under the character of a prophet, insinuated himself into the lady’s favour by devout acts and discourses of the most refined spirituality. At length he declared his passion, modestly enough at first, and was easily checked; but finding her intractable, he grew so insolent as to threaten to murder her if she would not comply. Upon this she had recourse to the provost, who sent two men to guard her house; and in revenge Saulieu gave out, that she had promised him marriage, and even bedded with him. But, in conclusion, they were reconciled; he retracted his slanders, and addressed himself to a young devotee at Ghent, whom he found more tractable. This, however, did not free her from other applications of a similar nature. The parson’s nephew of St. Andrew’s parish near Lisle fell in love with her; and as her house stood in the neighbourhood, he frequency environed it, in order to force an entrance. Our recluse threatened to quit her post, if she was not delivered f*om this troublesome suitor, and the uncle drove himrom his house upon which he grew desperate, and someimes discharged & musquet through the nun’s chamber, giung out that she was his espoused wife. This made a nose in the city; the devotees were offended, and threatined to affront Bourignon, if they met her in the streets. At length she was relieved by the preachers, who publisied from their pulpits, that the report of the marriage wis a scandalous falsehood.

Some time afterwards she quitted her huse, and put herself as governess at the head of an hospitl, where she locked herself up in the cloister in 1658, havng taken the order and habit of St. Austin. But here agai, by a very singular fate, she fell into fresh trouble. Hetnospital was found to be infected with sorcery so much, hat even all the little girls in it had an engagement wit the devil. This gave room to suspect the governess; mo was accordingly taken up by the magistrates of LisU and examined but nothing could be proved against er. However, to avoid further prosecutions, she retire to Ghent in 1662 where she no sooner was, than she prdessed that great secrets were revealed to her. About thistime she acquired a friend at Amsterdam, who proved iithful to her as long as he lived, and left her a good esUe at his death his name was De Cordt he was one of te fathers of the oratory, and their superior at Mechlin, an was director also of an hospital for poor children. Th proselyte was her first spiritual birth, and is said to ha> given her the same kind of bodily pangs and throes as natural labour, which was the case also with her other siritual children and she perceived more or less of thespains, according as the truths which she had declared ojrated more or less strongly on their minds. Whence ancter of her disciples, a certain archdeacon, talking with D<Cordt before their mother on the good and new resolutionvhich they had taken, the latter observed, that her pain were much greater for him than for the former the archdicon, looking upon De Cordt, who was fat and corplent, whereas he was a little man himself, said, smiling, It is no wonder that our mother has had a harder labour fcyou than for me, since you are a great, huge child, wheas I am but a little one;" which discomposed the gravity of all the faces presei t: This has been recorded as a proof that our Antoinette’s disciples sometimes descended from the sublimity of ther devotion to the innocent raillery of people of the world

Our prophetess staid longer than she intended at Amsterdam, where sta published her book of “The light of the world,” and sme others; and finding all sorts crowd to visit her, sheentertained hopes of seeing her doctrine generally embrced but in that she was sadly deceived. For, notwithsanding her conversationswith heaven were, as it is said, requent, 90 that she understood a great number of thingsby revelation, yet she composed more books there than he had followers. The truth is, her visions and revelati*ns too plainly betrayed the visionary and enthusiastic toiper of her mind, and many of them were too grossly incbcent to proceed from a mind that was not tainted wit insanity. She had likewise some qualities not Yery well alculated to attract proselytes; her temper was morose an peevish; and she was extremely avaricious and greedy ofamassing riches. This quality rendered her utterly unchritable as to the branch of almsgiving, and so implacably nforgiving to such poor peasants as had robbed her of an trifle, that she used to prosecute them with the utmost rigour.

Her stay at Amsterdam was chiefly owing to the happiness she had in her dear De Cordt: that proselyte had advanced almost all his estate to some relations, in order to drain the island of Noordstrandt in Holstein, by which means he had acquired some part of the island, together with the tithes and government of the whole. He sold also an estate to madame Bourignon, who prepared to retire thither in 1668; but she rejected the proposal of Labadie and his disciples to settle themselves there with her. It seems they had offered De Cordt a large sum of money to purchase the whole island, and thereby obtained his consent to their settlement in it: this was cutting the grass under her feet, an injury which she took effectual care to prevent. Accordingly De Cordt dying on the 12th of Novemer 1669, made her his heir: which inheritance, however, brought her into new troubles. Many law-suits were raised to hinder her from enjoying it: nor were her doctrine and religious principles spared on the occasion. However, she left Holland in 1671, to go into Noordstrandt.

But stopping in her way at several places of Holstein, where she dismissed some disciples (who followed her, she found, for the sake of interest) she plied her pen, which was so prolific that she found it convenient to provide herself with a press, where she printed her books in French, Dutch, and German. Among others she answered all her adversaries, in a piece entitled, “The testimony of truth,” in which she handled the ecclesiastics in a severe manner. In these controversial pieces she" demonstrated her want of the first fundamental of all religion both natural and revealed, humility. Two Lutheran ministers raised the alarm against her by some books, in which they declared, that people had been beheaded and burnt for opinions more supportable than hers. The Labbadists also wrote against her, and her press was prohibited. In this distress she retired to Hensberg in 1673, but was discovered, and treated so ill by the people under the character of a sorceress, that she was very happy in getting secretly away. Afterwards, being driven from city to city, she was at length forced to abandon Holstein, and went to Hamburgh in 1676, as a place of more security; but her arrival was no sooner known, than they endeavoured to seize her. On this she lay hid for some days, and then went to East Friesland, where she got protection from the baron of Latzbourg, and was made governess of an hospital.

It is observable, that all other passions have their holidays, but avarice never suffers its votaries to rest. When our devotee accepted the care of this charity, she declared that she consented to contribute her industry both to the building and to the distribution of the goods, and the inspection of the poor, but without engaging any part of her estate; for which she alleged two reasons, one, that her goods had already been dedicated to God for the use of those who sincerely sought to become true Christians; the other, that men and all human things are very inconstant. On this principle, she resolved never to part with any thing, but refer all donations to her last will and testament; and accordingly, when she had distributed among these poor people certain revenues of the place annexed to this hospital by the founder, being asked if she would not contribute something of her own, she returned an answer in writing, that because these poor lived like beasts, who had no souls to save, she had rather throw her goods, which were consecrated to God, into the sea, than leave the least mite there. It was on this account that she found persecutors in East Friesland, notwithstanding the baron de Latzbourg’s protection; so that she took her way to Holland in 1680, but died at Franeker, on the 30th of October the same year.

We have already mentioned the crookedness of her outward form, which probably was the reason why she would never suffer her picture to be taken: however, her constitution was so tough, that, 'in spite of all the fatigues and troubles of her life, she seemed to be but forty years of age, when she was above sixty: and, though she was almost continually wearing her eyesight, both by reading and writing, yet she never made use of spectacles. She was lucky enough to have the three most remarkable periods of her life, as her birth, her arriving to the rank of an author, and her death, characterised by comets; a circumstance greatly favourable to a prophet and a teacher of a new religion. Her writings were voluminous, but it would be impossible to draw from them an accurate and consistent scheme of religion; for the pretended “Divine light,” that guides people of this class, does not proceed in a methodical way of reasoning and argument; it discovers itself by flashes, which shed nothing but thick darkness in the minds of those who investigate truth with the understanding, and do not trust to the reports of fancy, that is so often governed by sense and passion. Madame Bourignon’s intellect was probably in a disordered state. One of her principal followers was Peter Poiret, a man of bold and penetrating genius, who was a great master of the Cartesian philosophy, and who proves in his own example, that knowledge and ignorance, reason and superstition, are often divided by thin partitions, and that they sometimes not only dwell together in the same person, but also, by an unnatural and unaccountable union, afford mutual assistance, and thus engender monstrous productions.

Antoinette Bourignon had more disciples in Scotland than in any other country perhaps of the world. Not only laymen, but some of their ecclesiastics, embraced Bourignonism: and one of Antoinette’s principal books was published, entitled “The light of the world,” in English, in 1696; to which the translator added a long preface, to prove that this maid ought at least to pass for an extraordinary prophetess. Her tenets at one time gained so much ground in Scotland, as to become an object of great jealousy with the church, and measures were adopted by the General Assembly for checking the growth of this blasphemous heresy. Dr. George Garden, a minister of Aberdeen, was deposed in 1701, for teaching its “damnable errors,” and all candidates for orders are to this day required to abjure and renounce the Bourignian doctrine. Mr. Charles Lesley, in the preface to the second edition of his “Snake in the grass,” observed the errors of this sect and they were refuted at large by Dr. Cockburn, iti a piece entitled, Bourignonism detected, against messieurs Poiret, De Cordt, and the English translator of the “Lux Mundi,” who endeavoured to shew that she was inspired, and had received a commission from God to refoi'm Christianity. This was answered by the Bourignonists in an apology for their leader who has still a remnant left in. some parts of North Britain.

, the son of a clergyman, was born in Northamptonshire, Dec. 27, 1590, and was educated at Christ church, Oxford, where he took his master’s degree in 1616. About that time he preached under Dr. Piers, rector of St. Christopher’s, Threadneedle-street, London, and was much encouraged in his studies and profession by sir Samuel Tryon, knt. and inhabitant of that parish. In 1622, he got the living of Ashover, in Derbyshire, which he retained many years. During the rebel- 1 ­lion, he sided with the predominant party, and removed to London, where he became preacher of St. Sepulchre’s, and was much followed. In- 1656, he became rector of Waltham in Leicestershire, and having conformed at the restoration, was instituted to the rectory of Ailston in the same county. Wood says he was well acquainted with the fathers and schoolmen. He died Dec. 27, 1672, and was buried in the chancel of the church of Ailston. Besides some occasional sermons, he published, 1. “A Light from Christ, &c.” or a preparatory to the Sacrament, London, 1645, 8vo. 2. “Defence of Scriptures,” ibid. 1656, 4to. 3. “Defence and justification of ministers’ maintenance by tithes, &c.” against the Anabaptists and Quakers, ibid. 1659, 4to. 4. “A, Gold Chain of directions with twenty Gold Links of love to preserve firm love between husband and wife,” ibid. 1669, 12mo.

, an elegant Latin poet, and a very amiable man, of whom we regret that our memoirs are so scanty, was admitted a scholar of Westminsterschool in 1710, from whence he was elected to the university of Cambridge in 1714, where, in Trinity college, he took his degree of A. B. 1717, and A.M. 1721, and obtained a fellowship. He was afterwards for several years an usher in Westminster-school, and died of a lingering disorder December 2, 1747. He married; and in a letter which he wrote to his wife a few weeks before his death, gives the following reasons why he did not take orders “Though I think myself in strictness answerable to none but God and my own conscience, yet, for the satisfaction of the person that is dearest to me, I own and declare, that the importance of so great a charge, joined with a mistrust of my own sufficiency, made me fearful of undertaking it; if I have not in that capacity assisted in the salvation of souls, I have not been the means of losing any; if I have not brought reputation to the function by any merit of mine, I have the comfort of this reflection, I have given no scandal to it, by my meanness and unworthiness. It has been my sincere desire, though not my happiness, to be as useful in' my little sphere of life as possible-: my own inclinations would have led me to a more likely way of being serviceable, if I might have pursued them: however, as the method of education I have been brought up in was, I am satisfied, very kindly intended, I have nothing to find fault with, but a wrong choice, and the not knowing those disabilities I have since been truly conscious of: those difficulties I have endeavoured to get over; but found them insuperable. It has been the knowledge of theee discouragements, that has been the chief subject of my sleeping, as well as my waking thoughts, a fear of reproach and contempt.” While we admire the conscientious motives which induced him to contemplate, with reverential awe, the duties of a clergyman, we must regret the concurrence of events which, according to the conclusion of this letter, seems to have led him into a way of life not agreeable to his inclinations. Cowper, however, in one of his excellent letters, throws some light on those peculiar habits, which were not certainly very happily adapted to his situation as a public teacher. “I love,” says Cowper, “the memory of Vinny Bourne. I think him a better Latin poet thaa Tibullus, Propertius, Ausonius, or any of the writers in his way, except Ovid, and not at all inferior to him. I love him too, with a love of partiality, because he was usher of the fifth form at Westminster when I passed through it. He was so good-natured, and so indolent, that I lost more than I got by him; for he made me as idle as himself. He was such a sloven, as if he had trusted to his genius as a cloak for every thing that could disgust you in his person; and indeed in his writings he has almost made amends for all. His humour is entirely original he can speak of a magpie or a cat, in terms so exquisitely appropriated to the character he draws, that one would suppose him animated by the spirit of the creature he describes. And with all his drollery, there is a mixture of rational, and even religious reflection, at times, and always an air of pleasantry, good nature, and humanity, that makes him, in my mind, one of the most amiable writers in the world. It is not common to meet with an author who can make you smile, and yet at nobody’s expence; who is always entertaining, and yet always harmless; and who, though always elegant and classical, to a degree not always found in the classics themselves, charms more by the simplicity and playfulness of his ideas, than by the neatness and purity of his verse: yet such was poor Vinny. I remember seeing the duke of Richmond set fire to his greasy locks, and box his ears to put it out again.”

His writings, thus characterised, were published in 1772, under the title of “Miscellaneous Poems, consisting of originals and translations,” 4to, and certainly will be a lasting testimony of his talents. He was, perhaps, at the jtirue he wrote, the best Latin poet in Europe. Most of the pieces in this volume had been printed in his life-time, if we mistake not, in a smaller volume. Dr. Beattie, after noticing that Boileau did not know that there were any good poets in England, till Add i son made him a present of the “Musae Anglican*,” remarks that “those foreigners must entertain a high opinion of our pastoral poetry, who have seen the Latin translations of Vincent Bourne, particularly those of the ballads of ‘ Tweedside,’ ‘ William and Margaret,’ and Rowe’s * Despairing beside a clear stream,' of which it is no compliment to say, that in sweetness of numbers, and elegant expression, they are at least equal to the originals, and scarce inferior to any thing in Ovid or Tibullus.”

, a French dramatic writer and satirist, was born in 1638, at Mussi-l'évêque in Burgundy. He was not brought up at school, and could only speak the rude provincial dialect of his country, when he came to Paris in 1651, yet, by the perusal of good books, with his good memory, he was soon able to converse and to write elegantly in French. Having composed, by order of Louis XIV. a book of no great merit, entitled “Of the proper study of sovereigns,” 1671, 12mo, the king was so well pleased with it, that he would have appointed him sub-preceptor to Monseigneur, if Boursault had been master of the Latin language. The duchess of Angouleme, widow of a natural son of Charles IX. having taken him to be her secretary, he was engaged to turn every week the gazette into rhyme, which procured him a pension of 2000 livres. Louis XIV. and his court were much entertained with him; but, having employed his satire against the Franciscans and the Capuchins, he was silenced. The queen’s confessor, a Spanish cordelier, caused both the gazette and the pension to be suppressed; and would have had him imprisoned, had it not been for the interest exerted in his behalf by his patrons. He shortly after obtained a new licence, and published his gazette under the title of the “Merry Muse;” but it was again suppressed. He afterwards got into favour once more, and was made receiver of the excise at Montlugon, where he died of a violent colic, aged 63, Sept. 5, 1701. He wrote several theatrical pieces, and other works. The chief of them are, “Æsop in the city,” and “Æsop at court;” which long remained to the stage. These two pieces and the following are an agreeable satire on the ridiculous manners or the several ages and conditions of life. His verse in general is harmonious, but his style sometimes negligent, yet in general easy and suitable to the subject. 2. The “Mercure galante,” or “La comedie sans titre,” in which he ingeniously ridicules the rage for getting a place in the Mercure galaut. 3. “La satyre des satyres,” in one act. Boiltau’s satirical notice of Boursault, to avenge Moliere, with whom he had had a difference, gave occasion to this piece, which Boileau had interest enough and meanness enough to prevent being played. The satirist being some years afterwards at the baths of Bourbon, Boursault, at that time receiver of the excise at Montluc/>n, repaired thither on purpose to offer him his purse and his services. At this act of generosity Boileau was much affected; and they immediately engaged in a mutual friendship, of which Boursault was highly deserving by the gentleness of his manners, and the cheerfulness of his disposition. He behaved with less tolerance, however, towards his other censors; and was able sometimes to chastise them with effect. A cabal having prevented the success of the first representation of “Æsop in the city,” the author added to it a fable of the dog and the ox, applying the moral of it to the pit; which so effectually silenced the cabal, that the piece had a run of forty-three nights without interruption. Thomas Cornell le had a sincere regard for Boursault, whom he used to call his son, and insisted on his applying to be admitted a member of the academy. Boursault desired to be excused on account of his ignorance, adding with his usual simplicity, “What would the academy do with an ignorant and illiterate (ignare & non Lettre) member, who knows neither Latin nor Greek?” “We are not talking (returned Corneille) of a Greek or Latin academy, but of a French academy; and who understands French better than you?” There are likewise by him, 1. Some romances, “The marquis de Chavigny,” “The prince de Conde” which are written with spirit “Artemisia and Polyanthus and,” We should only believe what we see.“2. A collection of letters on subjects of respect, obligation, and gallantry; known under the name of” Lettres a Babet;“now forgotten. 3.” Lettres nouvelles,“with fables, tales, epigrams, remarks, bon-mots, &c. 3 vols. 12mo, several times reprinted, though mostly written in a loose and inelegant style: a miscellany, which was very popular when ii first came out; but is much less at present, as the tales and bon-mots which Boursault has collected, or put into verse, are found in many other books. His fables have neither the simplicity of those of La Fontaine, nor the elegant precision of Phaedrus. There is an edition of the” Theatre de Boursault," in 3 vols. 1746, 12mo.

, doctor of the Sorbonne, was born at Ecoven in the diocese of Paris, in 1679, and died at Paris in 1749, at the age of 70. He published, 1. “L'action de Dieu-sur les creatures,” Paris, 2 vols. 4to, or 6 vols. 12mo. This treatise, in which he endeavours to establish physical premotion by argument, was attacked by Malebranche; but it discovers the powers of a profound metaphysician. 2. A memoir presented to Peter the Great by the doctors of Sorbonne for the reunion of the Greek and Latin churches.- When the tzar appeared in the Sorbonne, Boursier addressed him on the subject of this memoir. The monarch immediately answered, that he Was but a soldier. Boursier replied, that he was a hero and that, as a prince, he was a protector of religion. “This re-union is not so easy a matter (said the tzar); there are three points that divide us: the pope, the procession of the Holy Ghost” As he had forgot the third point, which is the unleavened bread and the cup, Boursier recalled it to his mind. “As for that article,” returned the emperor, “we shall have no difficulty in coming to an agreement.” At the end of the conversation, the Russian sovereign asked for a memorandum of it: it was given him; but nothing more was ever heard of it. 3. An enormous quantity of publications on subjects of ecclesiastical controversy, enumerated by Moreri. There was another of the name, almost a contemporary, Philip Boursier, deacon of Paris, where he was born in 1693, and died in 1768, aged 77. He was the first author, in 1727, of the “Nouvelles ecclesiastiques;” in which work he had several coadjutors, as Messrs. d'Etemare, de Fernanville, Bergfer, de Russye, de Troya, Fontaine. But he alone composed the greatest part of the discourses that annually precede this periodical work.

, physician and doctor regent of the faculty of Paris, and associate-veteran of the academy of sciences, was born at Chartres Jan. 11, 1717. Many of his ancestors having been physicians, he determined on the same profession, which he practised at Paris with so much success that no physician was more consulted; yet this did not prevent his being jealous of Tronchin, Bordeu, and some others, of whom he spoke very illiberally, but he was a man otherwise of great kindness and benevolence. One anecdote is recorded as characteristic. A banker, who had experienced some heavy losses, was taken ill, and Bouvart, who was called in, suspected that this weighed on his mind, but could not obtain the secret from him. The banker’s wife, however, was more communicative, and told him that her husband had a payment of twenty thousand livres to make very shortly, for which he was unprovided. Bouvart, without making any professions of sorrow or assistance, went immediately home and sent the money to his patient, who recovered surprisingly. Bouvart wrote only two or three small tracts: one a critique on Tronchin’s book, “de colica Pictonum,” 1758, 8vo; a “Consultation sur une naissance tardive,” against the anatomists Petit and Bertin, 1765, 8vo; and a “Memou/e au sujet de l'honoraire des medicines,” 1768, 4to, all written in a keen, controversial style. He was also an opponent of inoculation for the small pox. He introduced the use of the polygala of Virginia in cases of the bite of venomous reptiles, and this was the subject of the only paper he contributed to the academy; but the remedy, although said to be successful in his hands, fell into disrepute. He died Jan. 19, 1787.

, a person of a very celebrated, but dubious character, was a native of Scotland, born on the 17th of January 1686 at or near Dundee, of an ancient family, by his own account, which had been for several hundred years possessed of an estate in the county of Angus in Scotland. In September 1702, at the age of sixteen, he was sent to the Scots college of Douay, where he studied until the year 1706, to the end of his tirst year of philosophy. From thence he was removed to Rome, and on the 9th day of December 1706, was admitted into the order of Jesus. After a noviciate of two years, he went, in the year 1712, to Fano, where he taught humanities during the space of two years. He then removed to Fermo, and resided there three years, until the year 1717, when he was recalled to Rome to study divinity in the Roman college. There he remained until the year 1721, when he was sent to the college of Arezzo, where he staid until the year 1723, and became reader of philosophy, and consultor to the rector of the college. He then was sent to Florence, where he remained but a short time, being in the same year removed to Macerata, at which place he continued until the year 1726. Between the two latter periods it seems probable that he made his last vows, his own account fixing that event in the month of March 1722, at Florence; though, as he certainly was that year at Arezzo, it is most likely to have been a year later.

Having thus been confirmed in the order of the Jesuits, and arrived at the age of almost forty years, it was reasonable to suppose that Mr. Bower would have passed through life with no other changes than such as are usual with persons of the same order; but this uniformity of life was not destined to be his lot. To whatever cause it is to be ascribed whether, according to his own account, to his disgust at the enormities committed by the inquisition, in which he performed the office of counsellor; or, as his enemies assert, to his indulgence of his passions, particularly with a nun to whom he was ghostly father; certain it is, that in the year 1726 he was removed from Macerata to Pe-r rugia, and from thence made his escape into England, where he arrived at the latter end of June or July, after various adventures, which it now becomes our duty to communicate to the reader, and which we shall do in his own wards premising, however, that the truth of the narrative has been impeached in several very material circumstances. Having determined to put into execution his design of quitting the inquisition and bidding for ever adieu to Italy, he proceeds: “To execute that design with seme safety, I purposed to beg leave of the inquisitor to visit the” Virgin of Loretto, but thirteen miles distant, and to pass a week there; but in the mean time to make the best of my way to the country of the Grisons, the nearest country to Macerata, out of the reach of the inquisition. Having therefore, after many conflicts with myself, asked leave to visit the neighbouring sanctuary, and obtained it, 1 set out on horseback the very next morning, leaving, as I purposed to keep the horse, his full value with the owner. I took the road to Loretto, but turned out of it at a small distance from llecanati, after a most violent struggle with myself, the attempt appearing to me, at that juncture, quite desperate and impracticable; anvl the dreadful doom reserved for me, should I miscarry, presenting itself to my mind in the strongest light. But the reflection that I had it in my p.ower to avoid being taken alive, and a persuasion that a man in my situation might lawfully avoid it, when every other means failed him, at the expence of his life, revived my staygered resolution and all my fears ceasing at once, 1 steered my course, leaving Loretto behind me, to Calvi in the dukedom of Urbino, and from thence through the Romania into the Boionese, keeping the by-roads, and at a good distance from the cities of Fano, Pisaro, Rimini, Forlu Faenza, and Imola, through which the high road passed. Thus I advanced very slowly, travelling, generally speaking, in very bad roads, and often in places where there was no road at all, to avoid not only the cities and jtowns, but even the- villages. In the mean time I^eldom had any other support than some coarse provisions, and a very small quantity even of them, that the poor shepherds, the countrymen, or wood cleavers, I met in those unfrequented by-places, could spare me. My horse fared not much better than myself; but in choosing my sleepingplace I consulted his convenience as much as my own; passing the night where I found most shelter for myself, and most grass for him. In Italy there are very few solitary farm-houses or cottages, the country people there all living together in villages; and I thought it far safer to lie where I could be any way sheltered, than to venture into any of them. Thus I spent seventeen days before I got out of the Ecclesiastical State; and I very narrowly escaped being taken or murdered on the very borders of that state. It happened thus:

"I had passed two whole days without any kind of subsistence whatever, meeting nobody in the by-roads that would supply me with any, and fearing to come near any house, as I was not far from the borders of the dominions of the pope I thought I should be able to hold out till I got into the Modenese, where I believed I should be in less danger than while I remained in the papal dominions; but finding myself about noon of the third day extremely weak, and ready to faint, I came into the high road that leads from Bologna to Florence, at a few miles distance from the former city, and alighted at a post house that stood quite by itself. Having asked the woman of the house whether she had any victuals ready, and being told that she had, I went to open the door of the only room in the house (that being a place where gentlemen only stop to change horses), and saw, to my great surprise, a placard pasted on it with a most minute description of my whole person, and the promise of a reward of 800 crowns, about 200l. English money, for delivering me up alive to the inquisition, being a fugitive from the holy tribunal, and 600 crowns for my head. By the same placard all persons were forbidden, on the pain of the greater excommunication, to receive, harbour, or entertain me, to conceal or to screen me, or to be any way aiding and assisting to me in making my escape. This greatly alarmed me, as the reader may well imagine; but I was still more affrighted when entering the room I saw two fellows drinking there, who, fixing their eyes upon me as soon as I came, continued looking at me very steadfastly. I strove, by wiping my face, by blowing- my nose, by looking out at the window, to prevent their having a full view of me. But one of them saying, ‘ The gentleman seems afraid to be seen,’ I put up my handkerchief, and turning to the fellow said boklly, ‘ What do you mean, you rascal? Look at me; I am not afraid to be seen.’ He said nothing, but, looking again steadfastly at me, and nodding his head, went out, and his companion immediately followed him. I watched them; and seeing them with two or three more in close conference, and, no doubt, consulting whether they should apprehend me or not, I walked that moment into the stable, mounted my horse unobserved by them, and, while they were deliberating in an orchard behind the house, rode off full speed, and in a few hours got into the Modenese, where I refreshed both with food and with rest, as I was there in no immediate danger, my horse and myself. I was indeed surprised to find that those fellows did not pursue me; nor can I any other way account for it but by supposing, what is not improbable, that as they were strangers as well as myself, and had all the appearUnce of banditti or ruffians fly ing out of the dominions of the pope, the woman of the house did not care to trust them with her horses. From the Modenese I continued my journey more leisurely through the Parmesan, the Milanese, and part of the Venetian territory, to Chiavenna, subject, with its district, to the Grisons, who abhor the very name of the inquisition, and are ever ready to receive and protect all who, flying from it, take refuge, as many Italians do, in their dominions. However, as I proposed getting as soon as I could to the city of Bern, the metropolis of that great protestant canton, and was informed that my best way was through the cantons of Ury and Underwald, and part of the canton of Lucern, all three popish cantons, I carefully concealed who I was and from whence I came. For though no inquisition prevails among the Swiss, yet the pope’s nuncio, who resides at Lucern, might have persuaded the magistrates of those popish cantons to stop me as an apostate and deserter from the order.

"Having rested a few days at Chiaveuna, I resumed my journey quite refreshed, continuing it through the country of the Grisons, and the two small cantons of Ury and Underwald to the canton of Lucern, There I missed my way, as I was quite unacquainted with the country, and discovering a city at a distance, was advancing to it, but very slowly, as I knew not where I was; when a countryman whom I met informed me that the city before me was Lucern. Upon that intelligence, I turned out of the road as soon as the countryman was out of sight; and that night I passed with a good r natured shepherd in his cottage, who supplied me with sheep’s milk, and my horse with plenty of grass. I set out very early next morning, making the best of my way westward, as I knew that Bern lay west of Lucern. But after a few miles the country proved very mountainous; and having travelled the whole day over mountains, I was overtaken amongst them by night. As I was looking out for a place where I might shelter myself during the night against the snow and rain, for it both snowed and rained, I perceived a light at a distance; and, making towards it, got into a kind of footpath, but so narrow and rugged that I was obliged to lead my horse and feel my way with one foot, having no light to direct me, before I durst move the other. Thus wita much difficulty I reached the place where the light was, a poor little cottage; and, knocking at the door, was asked by a man within who I was, and what I wanted. I answered that I was a stranger, and had lost my way. ‘Lost your way!’ replied the man; ‘there is no way here to lose.’ I then asked him in what canton I was; and upon his answering that I was in the canton of Bern, ‘I thank God,’ I cried out, transported with joy, ‘that I am.’ The good man answered, ‘And so do I.’ I then told him who I was, and that I was going to Bern, but had quite lost myself by keeping out of all the high roads to avoid falling into the hands of those who sought my destruction. He thereupon opened the door, received and entertained me with all the hospitality his poverty would admit of, regaled me with sour-krout and some new-laid eggs, the only provisions he had, and clean straw with a kind of rug for my bed, he having no other for himself and his wife. The good woman expressed as much satisfaction and good-nature in her countenance as her husband, and said many kind things in the Swiss language, which her husband interpreted for me in the Italian; for that language he well understood, and spoke so as to be understood, having learnt it as he told me in his youth while servant in a public-house on the borders of Italy, where both languages are spoken. I never passed a more comfortable night; and no sooner did I begin to stir in the morning, than the good man and his wife came both to know how I rested, and wishing they had been able to accommodate me better, obliged me to breakfast on two eggs, which Providence, they said, had supplied them with for that purpose. I then took leave of the wife, who, with her eves lifted up to heaven, seemed most sincerely to wish me a good journey. As for the husband, he would by all means attend me to the high road leading to Bern; which road, he said, was but two miles distant from that place. But he insisted on my first going back with him to see the way I had come the night before, the only way, he said, I could have possibly come from the neighbouring canton of Lucern. I saw it, and shuddered at the danger I had escaped; for I found that I had walked and led my horse a good way along a very narrow path on the brink of a dreadful precipice. The man made so many pious and pertinent remarks on the occasion, as both charmed and surprised me. I no less admired his disinterestedness than his piety: for, upon our parting, after he had attended me till I was out of all danger of losing my way, I could by no means prevail upon him to accept of any reward for his trouble. He had the satisfaction, he said, of having relieved me in the greatest distress, which was in itself a sufficient reward, and he cared for no other.

"I reached Bern that night, and purposed staying some time there; but being informed by the principal minister of the place, to whom I discovered myself, that boats went frequently down the Rhine at that time of the year with goods and passengers from Basil to Holland and advised by him to avail myself of that opportunity, I set out accordingly the next day, and crossing the popish canton of Soleurre in the night, but very carefully avoiding the town of that name, I got early the next morning to Bsil. There I met with a most friendly reception from one of the ministers of the place, having been warmly recommded to him by a letter I brought with me from his brotbr at Bern. As a boat was to sail in two days, he entertaiisd me very elegantly during that time at his house and embarked the third day, leaving my horse to my host inreturn for his kindness.

"The company in the boat consisted of a few traders, of a great many vagabonds, the very refuse of the neighbouring nations, and some criminals flying from justice, but I was not long with them for the boat striking again a rock not far from Strasburgh, I resolved not to wait till was refitted as it was not my design to go to Holland, but to pursue my journey partly in the common diligence stage coach, and partly on, post-horses, through France into Flanders.

"And here I must inform the reader, that thogh the cruelties of the inquisition had inspired me with great horror at their being encouraged under the name of religion, and I had thereupon begun to entertain many doub concerning other doctrines that I had till that time implicitly swallowed, as most Italian catholics do, without examination; nevertheless, as I had not thoroughly examined them, nor had an opportunity of examining them, being employed in studies of a quite different nature, I was not yet determined to quit either that church or the order. Having therefore got safe into French Flanders, I there repaired to the college of the Scotch Jesuits at Douay and discovering myself to the rector, I acquainted him with the cause of of my sudden departure from Italy, and begged him to give immediate notice of my arrival, as well as the raot^s of my flight, to Michael Angelo Tamburini, general of e order, and my very particular friend. My repairing tig to a college of Jesuits, and putting myself in their power is a plain proof, as may be observed here by the way, thar it was not because I was guilty of any crime, or to avoid tl punishment due to any crime, that I had fled from Italy for, had that been the case, no man can think that instead of repairing to Holland or England, as I might have easily done, and bid the whole order defiance, I would have thus delivered myself up to them, and put it in their power to inflict on me what punishment soever they pleased.

"The recor wrote, as I had desired him, to the general and the genral, taking no notice of my flight in his answer (for he could not disapprove it, and did not think it safe to appove it), ordered me to continue where I was till further-orders. I arrived at Douay early in May, and continued here till the latter end of June or the beginning of July, when the rector received a second letter from the general, acquainting him, that he had been commanded by the congregation of the inquisition to order me, wherever I was, back to Italy; to promise me in their name full pardon and forgiveness, if I obeyed; but if I did not obey, to treat ie as an apostate. He added, that the same order had bee transmitted soon after my flight to the nuncio* at the efferent Roman catholic courts; and he therefore advisedne to consult my own safety without farther delay. It’s to be observed here, that it is deemed apostacy in a prson of any religious order to quit his habit, and withdiw, without the knowledge of his superiors, from the c<lege, convent, or monastery, in which they have placechim; and that all bishops are not only impowered, but bind to apprehend such an apostate within the limits of tlir respective jurisdictions, and deliver him up to his supeors to be punished by them. As I had quitted the habi and withdrawn from the college of Macerata, without‘ave from my superiors who had placed me there, I shold have been treated as an apostate, had I been disco^red in my flight in a Roman catholic country, even wh’e no inquisition prevailed. But my returning voluntay, and resuming the habit, cleared me from the guilt oipostacy at the general’s tribunal, nay, and at that of tl inquisition itself. However, the congregation of the inquisition had it still in their power to oblige the general trecal me to Italy, and to treat me as an apostate if I d not obey; disobedience to an express command of a wful superior being deemed apostacy, and punished as ach with close confinement, and with bread and water for jod till the order is complied with. That order the geneal received; but his friendship forme, of which he had *iven me some remarkable instances, and his being fully convinced of my innocence, the inquisitor himself -having nothing to lay to my charge but my flight, prompted him to warn me of the danger that threatened me. Indeed I thought myself quite sate in the dominions of France; and should accordingly have lived there unmolested by the inquisition, what crime soever I had been guilty of cognizable by that tribunal alone; but as I had belonged to it, and was consequently privy to their hellish proceedings, they were apprehensive I should discover them to the world; and it was to prevent me from ever discovering them, that they obliged the general to order me back to Italy, and promise me, in their name, a free pardon if I complied, but to confine me for life it' I did not comply with the order.

"Upon the receipt of the general’s kind letter, the rector was of opinion, that I should repair by all means, and without loss of time, to England, not only as the safest asylum I could fly to in my present situation, but as a place where I should soon recover my native language, and be usefully employed, as soon as I recovered it, either there or in Scotland. I readily closed with the rector’s opinion, being very uneasy in my mind, as my old doubts in point of religion daily gained ground, and new ones aroseupon my reading, which was my only employment, :the books of controversy I found in the library of the college. The place being thus agreed on, and it being at the same time settled between the rector and me that I should set out the very next morning, I solemnly promised, at his request and desire, to take no notice, after my arrival in England, of his having been any ways privy to my flight, or of the general’s letter to him. This promise I have faithfully and honourably observed; and I should have thought myself guilty of the blackest ingratitude if I had not observed it, being sensible that, had it been known at Rome that either the rector or general had been accessary to my flight, the inquisition would have resented it severely on both. For though a Jesuit in France or in Germany is out of the reach of the inquisition, the general is not; and the high tribunal not only have it in their power to punish the general himself, who resides constantly at Rome, but may oblige hiuri to inflict what punishment they please on any of the order obnoxious to them.

“The rector went that very night out of town and in his absence, but not without his privity, I took one of the horses of vhe college early next morning, as if I were going for change of air, being somewhat indisposed, to pass a few days at Lisle. But steering a different course, I reached Aire that night, and Calais the next day. I was there in no danger of being stopped and seized at the prosecution of the inquisition, a tribunal no less abhorred in France than in England. But being informed by the general, that the nuncios at the different courts had been ordered, soon after my flight, to cause me to be apprehended in the Roman catholic countries through which I might pass, as an apostate or deserter from the order, I was under no small apprehension of being discovered and apprehended as such even at Calais. No sooner, therefore, did I alight at the inn, than I went down to the quay; and there, as I was very little acquainted with the sea, and thought the passage much shorter than it is, I endeavoured to engage some fishermen to carry me that very night in one of their small vessels over to England. This alarmed the guards of the harbour; and I should certainly have been apprehended, as guilty or suspected of some great crime, flying from justice, had not lord Baltimore, whom I had the good luck to meet at the inn, informed of my danger, and pitying my condition, attended me that moment with all his company to the port, and conveyed me immediately on board his yacht. There I lay that night, leaving every thing I had but the clothes on my back in the inn; and the next day his lordship set me on shore at Dover, from whence I came in the common stage to London.”

This is the narrative which, after thirty years, Mr. Bower gave the public as a genuine account. Whether owing to the inaccuracy of those who had formerly heard it, to the variations to which a tale frequently repeated is always liable, or to the neglect of veracity in the writer, it certainly differed from accounts which had been orally given by him too much not to furnish some suspicions of the author. On his arrival in England it appears to have been his first object to procure att introduction to some persons of respectability in the country destined for his’ future residence. He had heard of Dr. Aspinwall soon after his arrival; and that divine having formerly belonged to the order of Jesuits, he waited on him, and was kindly received. By this gentleman he was introduced to Dr. Clarke; and to them both he opened, as he says, his mind, without disguise, respecting his doubts relative to his faith. After several conferences with these gentlemen, and some with Berkeley, the bishop of Cloyne, then dean of Londonderry, added to his own reading and reasoning, he obtained, as he says, the fullest conviction that many of the favourite doctrines of Rome were not only evidently repugnant to scripture and reason, but wicked, blasphemous, and utterly inconsistent with the attributes of the supreme and infinite being. He therefore withdrew himself from the communion of the church without further delay, took leave of the provincial, quitted the order, and broke off all connection with those of the communion. This happened in the month of November, 1726.

By Dr. Aspinwall’s means he was introduced to all that gentleman’s friends and acquaintance; and among others to Dr. Goodman (physician to king George the first), who procured him to be recommended to lord Aylmer, who wanted a person to assist him in reading the classics. With this nobleman he continued several years on terms of the greatest intimacy; and was by him made known to all his lordship’s connections, and particularly to the family of lord Lyttelton, who afterwards became his warm, steady, and to the last, when deserted by almost every other person, his unalterable friend.

During the time he lived with lord Aylmer, he undertook, for Mr. Prevost, a bookseller, the “Historia Literaria,” a monthly publication in the nature of a review, the first number of which was published in the year 1730. He wrote the preface to that work, and several of the articles, in Italian; not being, as he asserts, yet sufficiently acquainted with the English to write in that language . In the mean time he closely applied to the study of the English tongue, and after six months began to think that he had no further occasion for a translator, and he employed him no more.

While he was yet engaged in writing the Historia Literaria, the proprietors of the “Universal History” would have engaged him in that undertaking. But though some advantageous offers were made him, he declined them, until the Historia Literaria was relinquished in 1734. In the next year he agreed with the proprietors of the “Universal History,” and was employed by them to 1744, being the space of nine years .

While he was engaged in the “Universal History,” he undertook, at the request of Mr. Charlton, of Apley castle, in Shropshire, the education of young Mr. Thompson, son of Mr. Thompson, of Cooley, in Berkshire: but the bad state of his health at that time did not allow him to continue more than a twelvemonth in that family; and upon his recovery, lord Aylmer engaged him to educate two of his children, one of whom afterwards became a captain in colonel Lee’s regiment, and the other a prebendary of Bristol.

By the emoluments arising from his tuition and his writings, it appears that in the year 1740 he had saved the sum of 1100l. in the Old South Sea annuities, with which he had resolved to purchase a life-annuity. In the disposition of this money he was engaged in a negociation for the loan of it, which afterwards proved fatal to his character. We shall again have recourse to Mr. Bower’s own account. Having determined to purchase this annuity, he proceeds in this manner: “This resolution I imparted to several of my protestant friends; and, among the rest, to sir Thomas Mostyn’s lawyer, and to sir Thomas himself, offering at the same time the above-mentioned sum to him, as he well remembers, and is ready to attest. But neither sir Thomas, nor any of my other protestant friends, caring to burthen their estates with a life-rent, I left my money in the funds till August 1741, when being informed that an act of parliament had passed for rebuilding a church in the city of London, St. Botolph’s Aldgate , upon life-annuities, at seven per cent I went upon that information into the city, with a design to dispose of my money that way. That this was my intention, Mr. Norris, eldest son to the late sir John Norris, with whom I advised about it at the time, still remembers, and is ready if required to declare. But I came too late, and found the subscription was closed. This disappointment I mentioned to Mr. Hill, whom I accidentally met in Will’s coffee-house, near the Royal Exchange; and upon his offering me the same interest that was given by the trustees of the above-mentioned church, the bargain was concluded in a few meetings, and the sum, of 1100l. transferred, Aug. 21, 1741, not to Mr. Sbirburn, as is said in the letter from Flanders, p. 64, but to Mr. Wright, Mr. Hill’s banker, as appears from the books of the Old South Sea annuities. Mr. Hill was a Jesuit, but transacted money matters as an attorney, and was in that way a very noted man, bore the character of a fair dealer, and dealt very largely in affairs of that nature with protestants as well as with papists. It was with him I immediately dealt; as is manifest from the orders on his banker or cashier, Mr. Wright, in p. 72 of the libel, which were all signed by him, and by nobody else; and he paid me so punctually, that some time after I added 2501. to the sum already in his hands, and received for the whole 94l. 10.s. a year. I afterwards resolved to marry; and it was chiefly upon that consideration, though not upon that alone, I applied to Mr. Hill to know upon what terms he would return me the capital. The terms ho proposed were as easy as I could expect: for he agreed' at once to repay it, only deducting what I had received over and above the common interest of four per cent, during the time it had been in his hands; and he did so accordingly, as soon as he conveniently could. Thus did this money transaction begin wth Mr. Hill, was carried on by Mr. Hill, and with Mr. Hill did it end.”

The Account of this transaction given by his opponents is materially different. By them it is asserted, that after a time he wished to return into the arms of the church he had renounced, and therefore, in order to recommend himself to his superiors, he had recourse to a method which he thought would effectually prove his sincerity towards them. He proposed to father Shirburn, then provincial in England, to give up to him, as representative of the society, the money he then possessed, on condition of being paid for it, during his life, an annuity at the rate of seven per cent. This offer was accepted; and on the 2Ist of August 175-1, he paid to father Shirbwn liOOl.; and on the 27th of February 1741-2, he paid to the same person 150l. more upon the same conditions. Nor did his confidence rest here; for, on the 6th of August 1743, he added another 100l. to the above sums, now augmented to 1350l. when the several annuities were reduced into one, amounting to )4l. 10s. for which a bond was given. This negotiation had the wished effect; and our author was re-admitted in a formal manner into the order of Jesus, at London, about the end of 1744 or beginning of 1745.

It seems difficult to assign a sufficient reason why, after having been re-admitted to the order, he should again grow dissatisfied with his situation; though some conjectures have been offered to account for it. Certain it is, however, he once more determined to break with the Jesuits, and obtain his money again. To accomplish this point, he engaged in the correspondence which afterwards was so much canvassed. It answered, however, his purpose; and he received his money back from the borrowers on the 20th of June 1747.

Being thus disengaged from his literary employment, though he had not then received back his money from the Jesuits, he, on the 25th of March 1747, put forth the proposals for his “History of the Popes;” a work, winch, he says, he undertook some years since at Rome, and then brought it down to the pontificate of Victor, that is, to the close of the second century. In the execution of this work at that period he professes to have received the first unfavourable sentiments of the pope’s supremacy. On the 13th of May 1748, he presented to the king the first volume; and on the death of Mr. Say, keeper of queen Caroline’s library (10th of September), one of his friends (Mr. Lyttelton, afterwards lord Lyttelton) applied to Mr. Pelham for that place for him, and obtained it. The next year, 1749, on the 4th of August, he married a niece of bishop Nicolson, and daughter of a clergyman of the church of England, a younger son of a gentleman’s family in Westmoreland, who had a fortune of 4000l. sterling, and then had a child by a former husband; which child he afterwards deposed on oath was no way injured by his marriage. He had been engaged in a treaty of marriage, which did not take effect, in 1745. In 1751, the second volume of the History of the Popes made its appearance. In the same year, 1751, Mr. Bower published by way of supplement to his second volume, seventeen sheets, which were delivered to his subscribers gratis; and about the latter end of 1753 he produced a third volume, which brought down his history to the death of pope Stephen, in 757. His constant friend Mr. Lyttelton, at this time become a baronet, in April 1754 appointed him clerk of the buck warrants, instead of Henry Read, esq. who held that place under the earl of Lincoln. This office was probably of no great emolument. His appointment to it, however, serves to shew the credit he was in with his patron.

It was in this year the first serious attack was made upon him on account of his “History of the Popes,” in a pamphlet printed at Douay, entitled “Remarks on the two first volumes of the late Lives of the Popes. In letters from a gentleman to a friend in the country,” 8vo; and written, as Mr. Bower asserted, by a popish priest, Butler, one of the most active and dangerous emissaries of Rome in this kingdom. His correspondence with the Jesuits at last came to light; and falling into the hands of a person who possessed both the sagacity to discover, and the industry to pursueand drag to public notice the practices of our historian, the warfare began in 1756, and ended in the total disgrace of Mr. Bower. After a careful perusal of the controversy, a list of which is here added in a note, we are compelled to believe that our author (who, shocking as it may be to observe, made an affidavit, denying the authenticity of letters we think fully proved) was clearly convicted of the material charges alleged against him. He repelled the attack, however, made on him, with great spirit; and continued to assert his innocence, and to charge his enemies with foul practices, long after his <c History of the Popes," as well as his own veracity, had fallen into contempt. We find, in the course of this controversy, he ran some hazard of being brought on the stage by Mr. Garrick, on account of the manner in which he mentioned that incomparable actor and his lady in one of his works.

From this period his whole time seems to have been spent in ineffectual attacks upon his enemies, and equally vain efforts to recover the reputation of himself and his “History of the Popes” which points he pursued with great spirit, considering the age to which he had then attained. Before the controversy had ended, he published his fourth volume; and in 1757 an abridgment of the first four volumes of his work was published in French at Amsterdam. In 1761 he seems to have assisted the author of “Authentic Memoirs concerning the Portuguese Inquisition, in a series of letters to a friend,” 8vo and about the same time produced the fifth volume of his History of the Popes. To this volume he annexed a summary view of the controversy between himself and the papists, in 180 pages; a performance, which, from the virulence of his abuse, was more calculated to impress the reader wikh the conviction of his guilt, than to arlbrd any satisfaction of his innocence.

Whether through the neglect of the work by the public, or his age, declining abilities, or to whatever other cause it is to be ascribed, the remainder of his history did not make its appearance until just before the author’s death, when the sixth and seventh volumes were published together, and these in so hasty and slovenly a manner, that the whole period from 16OO to 1758 was comprehended in twenty-six pages. He died on the 3d September 1766, at the age of eighty years, and was buried in Mary-le-bone church-yard, with an inscription maintaining his purity and innocence. By his will, made on the 1st of August 1749, which does not contain, as might be expected, any declaration of his religious principles , he bequeathed all his property to his wife, who, some time after his death, attested his having died in the protestant faith

, an ingenious scholar, who, from his Attachment to Spanish literature, was usually called by his friends Don Bowle, was a descendant from Dr. John Bowle, bishop of Rochester in the early part of the seventeenth century. He was born in 1725, and educated at Oriel college, Oxford, where he took his master’s degree in 1750, and having entered into holy orders, was presented to the vicarage of Idmiston, Wiltshire. In 1776 he was elected F. S. A. He was a man of great erudition, and muca respected for his various researches in antiquity, and varios other lucubrations in obscure literature. He had the honour or being one of the first detectors of Lauder’s forgeries, and according to Dr. Douglas’s account, had the juste-st claim to be considered as the original detector o! thai unprincipled impostor. In 1765, he was editor of “Miscellaneous pieces of ancient English Poesie,” containing Shakspeare’s “King John,” and some of the satires of Marston. To a very accurate and extensive fund of classical learning, he had added a comprehensive knowledge of most of the modern languages, particularly of the Spanish, Italian, and French; and in the course of his reading contracted a fondness for Cervantes’ admirable romance, which could scarcely be said to be kept within reasonable bounds. Don Quixote himself did not sally forth with more enthusiasm than Mr. Bowie, when in 1777 he published “A Letter to the rev. Dr. Percy, concerning a new and classical edition of Historia del valoroso CavaU lero Don Quixote de la Mancha, to be illustrated by annotations and extracts from the historians, poets, and romances of Spain and Italy, and other writers ancient and modern, with a glossary and indexes, in which are occasionally interspersed some reflections on the learning and genius of the author, with a map of Spain adapted to the history, and to every translation of it,” 4to. He gave also an outline of the life of Cervantes in the Gent. Mag. for 1731, and circulated proposals to print the work hy subscription at three guineas each copy. It appeared accordingly in 1781, in six quarto volumes, the first four consisting of the text, the fifth of the annotations, and the sixth is wholly occupied by the index, but the work did not answer his expectations. The literary journals were either silent or spoke slightingly of his labours; and the public sentiment seemed to be that annotations on Cervantes were not quite so necessary as on Shakspeare. He appears, however, to have taken some pains to introduce them to the public in a favourable light. In 1784 (Gent. Mag. LIV. p. 565) we find him lamenting certain “unfair practices respecting the admission of an account of the work into two periodical publications to which he had some reason to think he was entitled.” He adds, that the perpetrators of these practices were “a false friend, and another, whose encomium he should regard as an affront and real slander the one as fond of the grossest flattery, as the other ready to give it, and both alike wholesale dealers in abuse and detraction.” Nor was this all; in 1785 he published “Remarks on the extraordinary conduct of the Knight of the Ten Stars and his Italian Squire, to the editor of Don Quixote. In a letter to I. S. D. D.” 8vo. This produced an answer from the “Italian Squire,” Baretti, not of the most gentleman-like kind, entitled “Tolondron. Speeches to John Bowie, about his edition of Don Quixote,” 8vo, 1786, and with this the controversy ended. Mr. Bowie contributed many valuable hints and corrections to Granger’s History, and many criticisms and illustrations to Johnson and Steevens’s edition of Shakspeare, and Warton’s History of Poetry. His course of reading well qualified him for literary aid of this description. In the Archaeologia, vol. VI. VII. and VIII. are four papers by him, on the ancient pronunciation of the French language; on some musical instruments mentioned in “Le Roman de la Rose;” on parish registers; and on cards. He was also, under various signatures, a frequent contributor to the Gentleman’s Magazine, but as a divine he was not known to the public. He died Oct. 26, 1788.

, the most learned English printer of whom we have any account, was born in Dogwelt-court, White Fryars, London, on the 19th of December, 1699. His father, whose name was also William, was of distinguished eminence in the same profession; and his maternal grandfather (Thomas Dawks) was employed in printing the celebrated Polyglott Bible of bishop Walton. At a proper age, he was placed, for grammatical education, under the care of Mr. Ambrose Bonwicke, a non-juring clergyman of known piety and learning, who then lived at Headley, near Leatherhead in Surrey. Here Mr. Bowyer made such advances in literature as reflected the highest credit both on himself and his preceptor; for whose memory, to his latest years, he entertained the sincerest respect; and to whose family he always remained an useful friend. The attachment, indeed, was mutual; and the following instance of the good school-master’s benevolence made an indelible impression on the mind of his pupil. On the 30th of January, 1712-13, the whole property of the elder Mr. Bowyer was destroyed by a dreadful fire; on which occasion, Mr. Bonwicke, with great generosity, and no less delicacy (endeavouring to conceal its being his own act of kindness), took upon him, for one year, the expences of his scholar’s board and education. In June 1716, young Mr. Bowyer was admitted as a sizar at St. John’s college, Cambridge, of which Dr. Robert Jenkin was at that time master. The doctor had been a benefactor to the elder Mr. Bowyer in the season of his calamity; and the son, at the distance of sixty years, had the happiness of returning the favour to a relation of the worthy master, in a manner by which the person obliged was totally ignorant to whom he was indebted for the present he received, Mr. Bowyer continued at Cambridge under the tuition, first, of Dr. Anstey, and afterwards of the rev. Dr. John Nevvcome, till June 1722, during which time he obtained Roper’s exhibition, and wrote, in 1719, what he called “Epistola pro Sodalitio a rev. viro F. Roper mihi legato;” but it does not appear that he took his degree of bachelor of arts. Notwithstanding an habitual shyness of disposition, which was unfavourable to him at his first appearance, the regularity of his conduct, and his application to study, procured him the esteem of many very respectable members of the university. Here it was that he formed an intimacy with Mr. Markland and Mr. Clarke, two learned friends with whom he maintained a regular correspondence through life and their letters contain a treasure of polite literature and sound criticism. On the death of Mr. Bonwicke, his grateful scholar had an opportunity of requiting, in some measure, the obligations he had received, by officiating, for a time, in the capacity of a schoolmaster, for the benefit of the family; but before this, he had entered into the printing business, together with his father, in June 1722; and one of the first bucks which received the benefit of his correction, was the complete edition of Selden by Dr. David Wilkins, in three volumes, folio. This edition was begun in 1722, and finished in 1726; and Mr. Bowyer’s great attention to it appeared in his drawing up an epitome of Selden “de Synedriis,” as he read the proof-sheets, and tue several memoranda from “The privileges of the Baronage” and “Judicature in Parliament,” &c. which are now printed in his “Miscellaneous Tracts.” In 1727, the learned world was indebted to him for nn admirable sketch of William Baxter’s Glossary of the Roman Antiquities. The sketch was called “A View of a Book, entitled, * Reliquiae Baxtevianae.' In a Letter to a Friend;” a single sheet, 8vo. Very few copies were printed; and, having never been published, it is seldom found with the Glossary; but it was reprinted in the “Miscellaneous Tracts.” Dr. Wotton and Mr. Clarke were highly pleased with this first public proof given by Mr. Bowyer of his literary abilities. On the 20th of December, 1727, he lost an affectionate mother, upon which occasion he received a letter of pious consolation, from Mr. Chishull, the learned editor of the “Antiquitates Asiaticae.”

Very highly to his own and his father’s satisfaction, he entered, on the 9th of October, 1728, into the marriage state, with Anne Prudom, his mother’s niece. His happiness, however, with this accomplished woman, lasted bait little more than three years; he being deprived of her, by death, on the 17th of October, 1731. Of two sons, venom he had by her, William died an infant, and Thomas survived him. His friends Mr. Clarke and Mr. Chishull wrote him very affectionate and Christian letters on this melancholy event. In 1729, he ushered into the world a curious treatise, entitled “A Pattern for young Students in the University, set forth in the Life of Mr. Ambrose Bonwicke, some time scholar of St. John’s college, Cambridge.” (See Bonwicke). This little volume was generally ascribed to our learned printer, though it was in reality the production of Mr. Amtyruse Bonwicke the elder, but the preface was probably Mr. Buwyer’s. About the same time, it appears, from a letter of Mr. Clarke, that Mr. Bowyer had written a pamphlet against the Separatists; but neither the title nor the occasion of it are at present recollected. Through the friendship of the right honourable Arthur Onslow, he was, likewise, appointed, in 1729, printer of the Votes of the House of Commons; an office which he held, under three successive speakers, for nearly fifty years. In 1730, he was avowedly the editor of “A Discourse concerning the Confusion of Languages at Babel, proving it to have been miraculous, from the essential difference between them, contrary to the opinion of M. Le Clerc and others. With an Enquiry into the primitive language before that wonderful event. By the late learned William Wotton, D. D. &c.” In 1731, he took part in a controversy occasioned by a sermon of Mr. Bowman, a clergyman in Yorkshire, entitled “The Traditions of the Clergy destructive of Religion, with an Enquiry into the Grounds and Reasons of such Traditions.” This performance, which was charged with containing some of the sentiments that had been advanced by Dr. Tindal in his “Rights of the Christian Church,” and by Mr. Gordon in his “Independent Whig,” excited no small degree of offence; and several answers were written to it, and strictures made upon it, both of a serious and ludicrous nature. Mr. Bowyer, upon this occasion, printed a pamphlet, called “The Traditions of the Clergy not destructive of Religion; being Remarks on Mr. Bowman’s Sermon; exposing that gentleman’s deficiency in Latin and Greek, in ecclesiastical history, and true reasoning.” The dispute, like many others of a similar kind, is now sunk into oblivion. In 1733, he published “The Beau and Academick,” two sheets, in 4to; a translation from “Bellus Homo & Academicus, &c.” a poem recited that year at the Cornitia in the Sheldonian theatre, and afterwards printed in his Tracts. On the 7th of July, 1736, Mr. Bowyer was admitted into the Society of Antiquaries, of which he had been chosen printer in May preceding; and he was an active, as well as an early member of that respectable body, regularly attending their meetings, and frequently communicating to them luatters of utility and curiosity, which were reprinted in his “Tracts.” In conjunction with Dr. Birch, he was, also, materially concerned in instituting “The Society for the Encouragement of Learning.” Of this Mr. Nichols has given an interesting account. It was certainly well-meant, but injudicious, and became dissolved by its own insufficiency. On the 27th of December, 1737, Mr. Bowyer lost his father, at the age of seventy-four; and it is evident, from his scattered papers, that he severely felt this affliction; applying to himself the beautiful apostrophe of Æneas to Anchises, in Virgil:

His friend Mr. Clarke again addressed to him a letter of sympathy and consolation. In 1741, Mr. Bowyer corrected, and put into a convenient form, Heuset’s “Selectæ è Veteri Testamento Historiæ,” and “Selectæ ex Profanis, &c.” The prefaces to both these volumes were translated by Mr. Bowyer, and are inserted in his “Miscellaneous Tracts.” In 1742, he published a translation of Trapp’s “Latin Lectures on Poetry,” with additional notes. In translating this work, he had not only the advice, but the assistance, of his friend Mr. Clarke: and yet this gentleman had no high opinion of the original performance. He thought it a very superficial book; and was particularly offended with Trapp for affecting to find fault with Vossius on every little occasion.

Though it is not our intention to notice the works printed by Mr. Bowyer, excepting when he himself contributed to them by prefaces, notes, or other additions, yet we shall mention his having been the printer, in 1742, of the additional book of the Dunciad; as he received, on this occasion, testimonies of regard both from the great poet and his learned commentator. Among other friendly expressions of Dr. Warburton, he says, “I have never more pleasure when there (in London), than when I loll and talk with you at my ease, de qualibet ente, in your diningroom:” And again, “The Greek I know will be well printed in your edition, notwithstanding the absence of Senblerus” The same celebrated writer had long before told Mr. Bowyer, “No one’s thoughts will have greater weight with me than your own, in whom I have experienced so much candour, goodness, and learning.” It is not, however, to be concealed, that a difference afterwards arose between them, in which, as is commonly the case, each party was confident that he was right. Mr. Bowyer, who thought himself slighted, used often to remark, that, “after the death of the English Homer, the letters of his learned friend wore a different complexion.” “But, perhaps,” as Mr, Nichols candidly and judiciously observes, “this may be one of the many instances, which occur through, life, of the impropriety of judging for ourselves in cases which affect our interest or our feelings.” Mr. Bowyer, indeed, had a great sensibility of temper with regard to any neglects which were shewed him by his literary friends, in the way of his business. This did not proceed from a principle of avarice, but from a consciousness of the respect which was due to him from his acquaintance, as the first of his profession: for he expressed his resentment as strongly in cases where profit could be no material object, as he did in more important instances. Dr. Squire, then, dean of Bristol, not having appointed him to print a sermon which had been preached before the house of commons, on the general fast day, Feb. 13, 1761, Mr. Bowyer wrote to the doctor, upon the occasion, an expostulatory letter. Nor was this the only evidence he gave how much he was offended, when he thought that a slight had been put upon him from a quarter where he imagined he had a natural claim to favour.

In 1744, Mr. Bowyer is supposed to have written a small pamphlet on the present state of Europe, taken principally from Pufendorff. In 1746, he projected, what during his whole life he had in view, a regular edition of Cicero’s Letters, in a chronological order, on a plan which it is to be lamented that he did not complete; as an uniform series thus properly arranged would have formed a real history of Tully’s life, and those which cannot be dated might be thrown to the end without any inconvenience. In the same year he published “The Life of the Emperor Julian,” translated from the French of M. Bleterie, and improve^ with twelve pages of curious notes, and a genealogical table. The notes were not entirely Mr. Bowyer’s, but were drawn up, in part, by Mr. Clarke and other learned men. The translation, by Miss Anne Williams (Dr. Johnson’s inmate), and the two sisters of the name of Wilkinson, was made under Mr. Bowyr’s immediate inspection. In this year also, he printed, and is supposed to have assisted in thp composition of, “A Dissertation, in which the objections of a late pampinet (by bishop Ross) to the writings of the anci nits, after the mariner of Mr. Maryland, are clearly answered: those passages in Tuily corrected, on which some of the objections are founded; with Amendments of a few pieces of criticism in Mr. Maryland’s Epistola Critica,” 8vo. On the 2d of August, 1747, Mr. Bowyer entered a second time into the matrimonial state, with a most benevolent and worthy woman, Mrs. Elizabeth Bill, by whom he had no children. In 1750, he had the honour of sharing, with Dr. Burton, in the invectives most liberally bestowed by Dr. King, in his “Elogium Famse inserviens Jacci Etouensis, sive Gigantis: or, the Praises of Jack of Eaton, commonly called Jack the Giant.” Dr. King’s abuse was probably owing to his having heard that our learned printer had hinted, in conversation, his doubts concerning the doctor’s Latiriity. Mr. Bowyer drew up strictures in his own defence, which he intended to insert at the conclusion of a preface to Montesquieu’s Reflections, &c.; but, in consequence ol Mr. Clarke’s advice, they were omitted. In the same year, a prefatory critical dissertation, and some valuable notes, were annexed, by our author, to Kuster’s Treatise “De vero usu Verborum Mediorum;” a new edition of which work, with further improvements, appeared in 1773. He wrote, likewise, about the same time, a Latin preface to Leedes’s “Veteres Poeta? citati, &c.” Being soon after employed to print an edition of colonel Bladen’s translation of Cæsar’s Commentaries, that work received considerable improvements from. Mr. Bowyer’s hands, and the addition of such notes in it as are signed Typogr. In the subsequent editions of this work, though printed by another person, and in our author’s life-time, the same signature, contrary to decorum, and even justice, was still retained. In 1751, he wrote a long preface to Montesquieu’s “Reflections on the Rise and Fall of the Rouian Empire;” translated the Dialogue between Sylla and Socrates; made several corrections to the work from the Baron’s “Spirit of Laws,” and improved it with his own notes. A new edition, with many; new notes, was printed in 1759. He gave likewise to the public, in 1751, with a preface, the first translation that was made of Rousseau’s paradoxical oration on the effects of the arts and sciences, which gained the prize at the academy of Dijon, in 1750; and which first announced that singular genius to the attention and admiration of Europe. On the publication of the third edition of lord Orrery’s “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift,” in 1752, Mr. Bowyer wrote and printed, but never published, “Two Letters from Dr. Bentley in the shades below, to lord Orrery in a land of thick darkness.” The notes signed B, in the ninth quarto volume of Swift’s works, are extracted from these Letters, which are reprinted at large in his “Tracts.” In 1752, when Bp. Clayton published his “Vindication of the Histories of the Old and New Testament, in answer to the Objections of Lord Bolingbroke,” Mr. Bowyer drew up an analysis of the same, with an intention of sending it to the Gentleman’s Magazine: it is now printed in Mr. Nichols’s “Anecdotes.” In 1753, to allay the ferment occasioned by the Jew bill, he published, in quarto, “Remarks on a Speech made in Common Council, on the Bill for permitting persons professing the Jewish Religion to be naturalized, so far as Prophecies are supposed to be affected by it.” The design of this sensible little tract, which was written with spirit, and well received by those who were superior to narrow prejudices, was to shew, that whatever political reasons might be alleged against the Bill, Christianity would in no degree be prejudiced by the indulgence proposed to be gVanted to the Jews. In the same year, some of Mr. Bowyer’s notes were annexed to bishop Clayton’s translation of “A Journal from Grand Cairo to Mount Sinai, and back again.” In 1754, with a view of lessening his fatigue, he entered into partnership with a relation; but some disagreements arising, the connection was dissolved in 1757, and he resumed the active part of business. In 1760 he superintended a second edition of Arnald’s “Commentary on the Book of Wisdom,” and enriched it with the remarks of Mr. Markland. Upon the death of Mr. Richardson, in 1761, Mr. Bowyer, through the patronage of the late earl of Macclesfield, was appointed printer to the Royal Society; and, under the friendship of five successive presidents, had the satisfaction of continuing in that employment till his death. In the same year (1761), appeared “Verses on the Coronation of their late majesties, king George the Second and queen Caroline, October 4, 1727, spoken by the Scholars of Westminster school (some of them now the ornaments of the Nation) on January 15th following, being the Day of the Inauguration of Queen Elizabeth, their foundress with a Translation of all the Latin copies The whole placed in order of the transactions of that important day. Adorned with the Coronation Medals pf the Royal Pair, and a bust of our present king. To which is subjoined the Ceremonial of the august Procession, very proper to be compared with the approaching one; and a Catalogue of the Coronation Medals of the Kings and Queens of England.” The original part of this pamphlet, in which a great deal of humour is displayed, was entirely Mr. Bowyer' s: the Latin verses were translated partly by him, but principally by Mr. Nichols. Our learned printer’s next publication was of a more serious and weighty nature, an excellent edition of the Greek Testament, in two volumes, 1763, 12mo, under the following title: “Novum Testamentum Greecum, ad Fidem GrascorUm solum Codicum Mss. nunc primum expressum, adstipulante Joanne Jacobo Wetstenio, juxta Sectiones Jo. Albert! Bengelii divisum; et nova Interpunctione saepius illustratum. Accessere in altero Volumine Emendationes conjecturales virorum doctorum undecunque collectse.” This sold with great rapidity; though Mr. Bowyer, in his advertisements of it in the public papers, was pleased to add, that it boasted neither elegance of type nor paper, but trusted to other merits. The conjectural emendations are a very valuable addition to the Greek Testament, and were extremely well received by the learned. In a letter of thanks, from the president and fellows of Harvard college, in Cambridge, New-England, to Mr. Bowyer, in 1767, for several benefactions of his to that college, they express themselves as follows: “It is a particular pleasure to us to mention your very curious edition of the Greek Testament, in two volumes, with critical notes, and many happy conjectures, especially as to the punctuation, an affair of the utmost importance as to ascertaining the sense. This work, though small in bulk, we esteem as a rich treasure of sacred learning, and of more intrinsic value than many large volumes of the commentators.” A second edition of the Conjectures on the New Testament, with very considerable enlargements, was separately published, in one volume, 8vo, in 1772, a third in 4to, 1782, and a fourth from the interleaved -copy of Dr. Owen, which he bequeathed to the honourable and right reverend Dr. Shute Barrington, bishop of Durham, is just published (1812). Bishop Wavbnrton having censured apassage in the first edition, Mr. Bowyer sent him a copy of the second, with a conciliatory letter. In 1765, at the request of Thomas Hollis, esq. our learned printer wrote a short Latin preface to Dr. Wallis’s “Grammatica Linguae Anglicanse.” A larger English preface, which was written by him, and intended for that work, is printed in his “Tracts.” Some copies of this book were sent by him to the rev. Edward Clarke, when, chaplain to the earl of Bristol at Madrid, to be given to the Spanish literati. Towards the latter end of the same year, in consequence of overtures from a few respectable friends at Cambridge, Mr. Bowyer had some inclination to have undertaken the management of the University press, by purchasing a lease of its exclusive privileges. He went, accordingly, to Cambridge for this purpose; but the treaty proved fruitless, and he did not much regret the disappointment. In the beginning of 1766, by engaging in a partnership with Mr. Nichols, he was again enabled to withdraw, in some degree, from that close application, which had begun to be prejudicial to his health. His new associate had been trained by him to the profession, and had assisted him several years in the management of business. He was very happy in this connection; and it is unnecessary to add how successfully Mr. Nichols has trod in the steps of his worthy and learned friend and partner. In, that year (1766) Mr. Bowyer wrote an excellent Latin preface to “Joannis Harduini, Jesuitae, ad Censuram Scriptorum veterum Prolegomena; juxta Autographum.” In this preface he gives an account of the nature of the work, and of the manner in which it had been preserved. Mr. De Missy’s remarks on the celebrated Jesuit’s extraordinary production were published about the same time, in a letter to Mr. Bowyer, written in Latin. In 1767, he was appointed to print the Journals of the House of Lords, and the Rolls of Parliament. The noble peer to whom he was indebted for this appointment, and his gratitude to whom is testified in the inscription which he left behind him, to be placed in Stationers Hall, was the earl of Marchmont. Mr. Bowyer was now compelled, from the want of sufficient room, to exchange White Fryars for Red Lion-passage; and it was not without reluctance that he quitted a residence to which he had been accustomed from his infancy. His new printing-house was opened with the sign of his favourite Cicero’s Head: under which was inscribed, “M, T, Cicero, A Quo Primordia Preli,” in allusion to the well-known early editions of Tally’s Offices. Having printed this year Mr. Clarke’s excellent and learned work on “The Connexion of the Roman, Saxon, and English Coins,” he wrote some notes upon it, which are interspersed throughout the volume with those of the author. Part of the dissertation on the Roman Sesterce was, likewise, Mr. Bowyer’s production; and the index, which is an uncommonly good one, and on which he did not a little pride himself, was drawn up entirely by him. On the 14th of January, 177 J, he lost his second wife, who died at the age of seventy. His old friend, Mr. Clarke, who had administered consolation to him, on a similar occasion, nearly forty years before, again addressed him with tenderness on this event. In the Philosophical Transactions for 1771, was printed a very ingenious “Enquiry intothe value of the antient Greek and Roman Money,” by the late Matthew Raper, esq. The opinions advanced by this respectable gentleman, on these subjects, not coinciding with those of Mr. Bowyer, he printed a small pamphlet, entitled, “Remarks, occasioned by a late Dissertation on the Greek and Roman Money.” The pamphlet was intended as an appendix to Mr. Clarke’s Treatise on Coins. The opinions of many excellent writers in Germany and France having been ably controverted in that elaborate work, Mr. Bowyer transmitted a copy of it to the French king’s library, and inscribed his little appendix,

He was very desirous that Mr. Clarke’s book should be translated and reprinted in France; and he took some pains, though without success, to get it accomplished. In 1773, three little tracts were published by him, under the title of “Select Discourses 1. Of the Correspondence of the Hebrew months with the Julian, from the Latin of Professor Michaelis. 2. Of the Sabbatical years, from the same. 3. Of the years of Jubilee; from an anonymous writer, in Masson’s Histoire Critique de la Republique des Lettres.” In 1774, he corrected a new edition of Schrevelius’s Greek Lexicon, to which he added a number of words (distinguished by an asterisk) he had himself collected in the course of his own studies. Considerable additions, which are still in manuscript, were made by him to the Lexicons of Hederic and of Buxtorf, the Latin ones of Faber and of Littleton, and the English Dictionary of Bailey; and he left behind him many other proofs of his critical skill in the learned languages. His Greek and Latin grammars in general are filled with such curious explanatory notes, as bear the most convincing proofs of consummate critical knowledge in those languages, and that knowledge he applied particularly to the advancement of sacred learning. It was his constant custom, in the course of his reading, to note down every thing which he thought might contribute to illustrate any passage of Scripture, esper cially of the Greek Testament. In pursuance of this method, it is hardly to be conceived what a number of useful and curious remarks stand inserted in the margins of his theological books, which may greatly contribute to improve future editions. In 1774, was published “The Origin of Printing, in two essays. 1. The substance of Dr. Middleton’s Dissertation on the Origin of Printing in England. 2. Mr. Meerman’s Account of the Invention of the Art at Harlem, and its progress to Mentz, with occasional remarks; and an appendix.” (See Richard Atkins.) The original idea of it was Mr. Bowyer’s; but it was completed by Mr. Nichols. The two learned friends, whose assistance is acknowledged in the preface, were the rev. Dr. Henry Owen, and the late Mr. Cæsar de Missy. Though this work appeared without a name, it was immediately judged to be Mr. Bowyer’s, and was well received in the world of letters, and justly spoken of in terms of great commendation, both at home and abroad. A second edition, with very considerable improvements, was published in 1776, and a Supplement in 1781. When Mr. Nichols was engaged in printing the “Original Works of Dr. King of the Commons,” and the “Supplement to Swift,” Mr. Bowyer, by suggesting useful hints, and adding some illustrations, assisted him in both these undertakings. Our eminent printer now drew to the end of his literary career, which he closed with a new edition, in 1777, of Dr. Bentley’s “Dissertation on the Epistles of Phalaris.” Dr. Bentley was a writer whom he had always held in the highest estimation. In the republication of this great critic’s Dissertation, Mr. Bowyer inserted the remarks which had occurred to him in the course of many years attention to the subjects there treated of; and ascribed them to the respective authors irom whose books or personal communication they were selected. He was much indebted, on this occasion, to the friendly assistance of Dr. Salter and Dr. Owen.

Mr. Bowyer had always been subject to a bilious colic; and during the last ten years of his life, he was afflicted with the palsy and the stone. But, notwithstanding these infirmities, he preserved, in general, a remarkable cheerfulness of disposition; and received great satisfaction from the conversation of a few literary friends, by whom he continued to be visited. The faculties of his mind, though somewhat impaired, were strong enough to support the labour of almost incessant reading, which had ever been his principal amusement; and he regularly corrected the learned works, and especially the Greek books, which came from his press. This he did till within a very few weeks of his death; which happened on the 18th of November, 1777, when he had nearly completed his 78th year. The publications of Mr. Bowyer are an incontrovertible evidence of his abilities and learning; to which may be added that he was honoured with the friendship and patronage of many of the most distinguished ornaments of his age. We already have had occasion to mention the earls of Macclesfield and Marchmont, Dr. Wotton, Mr. Pope, Mr. Chishull, Mr. Clarke, Mr. Markland, bishop Warburton, the right honourable Arthur Onslow, Mr. Hollis, Dr. Salter, Mr, De Missy, Dr. Owen, and Dr. Heberden. To these, among other respectable names, might be added those of archbishop Seeker, bishop Kennett, bishop Tanner, bishop Sherlock, bishop Hoadly, bishop Lyttelton, bishop Pearce, bishop Lowth, bishop Barrington, bishop Hurd, bishop Percy, lord Lyttelton, lord Sandys, dean Prideaux, doctors Robert and John Freind, dean Freind, dean Milles, the very learned Dr. Taylor, chancellor of Lincoln, Dr. Barnard, Dr. Powell, Dr. Wilkins, Mr. Maittaire, Messrs. R. and S. Gale, Mr. Browne Willis, Mr. Spelman, Mr. Morant, Dr. Ducarel, Dr. Pegge, Mr. Garrick, and most of the distinguished scholars and antiquaries of his time. His connec^ tion with the late eminent and excellent Richard Gough, esq. so well known by his acquaintance with British topography and antiquities, is apparent from his last will; where his obligations to Dr. Jenkin, dean Stanhope, and Mr. Nelson, are acknowledged. The late excellent Dr. Robert Clayton, bishop of Clogher, so highly esteemed his friendship, that he not only honoured him by a regular epistolary intercourse, but presented him with the copy-right of all his valuable writings. Mr. Bowyer stood unrivalled, for more than half a century, as a learned printer; and some of the most masterly productions of this kingdom have undoubtedly appeared from his press. To his literary and professional abilities, he added an excellent moral character. His regard to religion was displayed in his publications, and in the course of his life and studies; and he was particularly distinguished by his inflexible probity, and an uncommon alacrity in assisting the necessitous. His liberality in relieving every species of distress, and his endeavours to conceal his benefactions, reflect great honour on his memory. Though he was naturally fond of retirement, and seldom entered into company, excepting with men of letters, he was, perhaps, excelled by few in the talent of justly discriminating the real characters of mankind. He judged of the persons he saw by a sort of intuition; and his judgments were generally right. From a consciousness of literary superiority, he did not always pay that particular attention tQ the booksellers which was expedient in the way of his business. Too proud to solicit the favours in that way which he believed to be his due, he was often disappointed in his expectations. On the other hand, he' frequently experienced friendships in cases where he had much less reason to have hoped for them so that, agreeably to his own expression, “in what he had received, and what he had fyeen denied, he thankfully acknowledged the will of Heaven.” The two great objects of Mr. Bowyer’s view, in the decline of his life, were to repay the benefactions his father had met with, and to be himself a benefactor to the meritorious of his own profession. These purposes are fully displayed in his last will: for which reason, and because it illustrates the turn of his mind in other respects, we shall insert it at large. After a liberal provision for his son, among other legacies are these “I likewise give to my son all my plate; except the small silver cup which was given to my father (after his loss by fire) by Mrs. James, and which I give to the Company of Stationers in London, hoping they will preserve it as a memorial. Having committed my body to the earth, I would testify my duty and gratitude to my few relations and numerous benefactors after my father’s loss by fire. I give and bequeath to my cousin Scott, lately of Westminster, brewer, and to his sister, fifty pounds each. I give and bequeath to my relations Mr. Thomas Linley and his wife one thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, to be transferred to them, or to the survivor of them; and which I hope they will take care to settle, at their deaths, for the benefit of their son and daughter. I give to the two sons and one daughter of the late reverend Mr. Maurice of Gothenburgh iuSweden, who married the only daughter of Mr. Richard Williamson, bookseller (in return for her father’s friendship to mine), one thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, to be divided equally between them. Among my father’s numerous benefactors, there is not, that I can hear of, one alive: to several of them I made an acknowledgement. But one respectable body I am still indebted to, the University of Cambridge; to whom I give, or rather restore, the sum of fifty pounds, in return for the donation of forty pounds made to my father at the motion of the learned and pious master of Saint John’s college, doctor Robert Jenkin: to a nephew of his I have already given another fifty pounds, as appears by his receipt of the thirty-first of May, one thousand seven hundred and seventy. The benefactions which my father received from Oxford I can only repay with gratiiude; as he received them, not from the university as a body, but from particular members. I give thirty pounds to the dean and chapter of Canterbury, in gratitude for the kindness of the worthy doctor Stanhope (sometime dean of Canterbury) to my father; the remembrance of which amongst the proprietors of his works I have long out-lived, as I have experienced by not being employed to print them: the like I might say of the works of Mr. Nelson, another respectable friend and patron of my father’s, and of many others. I give to doctor William Heberden my little cabinet of coins, with H ickes’s Thesau rus, Tristan, and the odd volume, Spanheim’s Numismata, Harduin’s Opera Selecta, in folio, Nummi Populorum et Urbium, in quarto, and any other of my books he chooses to accept: to the reverend doctor Henry Owen, such of my Hebrew books and critical books on the New Testament, as he pleases to take: to Richard Gough, esq. in like manner, my books on topographical subjects: to Mr. John Nichols, all books that relate to Cicero, Livy, and the Roman history, particularly the * Cenotaphia' of Noris and Pighius, my grammars and dictionaries, with Swift’s and Pope’s works: to my son, whatever books (not described above) he thinks proper to take. And now I hope I may be allowed to leave somewhat for the benefit of printing. To this end, I give to the master and keepers or wardens and commonalty of the mystery or art of a stationer of the city of London, such a sum of money as will purchase two thousand pounds three per cent, reduced Bank annuities, upon trust, to pay the dividends and yearly produce thereof, to be divided for ever equally amongst three printers, compositors or pressmen, to be elected from time to time by the master, wardens, and assistants, of the said company, and who at the time of such election shall be sixty-three years old or upwards, for their respective lives, to be paid half-yearly; hoping that such as sha.ll be most deserving will be preferred. And whereas I have herein before given to my son the sum of three thousand pounds four per cent, consolidated annuities, in case he marries with the consent of my executors: Now, I do hereby give and bequeath the dividends and interest of that sum, till such marriage take place, to the said company of stationers to be divided equally between six other printers, compositors or pressmen, as aforesaid, in manner as aforesaid; and, if my said son shall die unmarried, or married without such consent as aforesaid, then I give and bequeath the said capital sum of three thousand pounds to the company of stationers, the dividends and yearly produce thereof to be divided for ever equally amongst six other such old printers, compositors or pressmen, for their respective lives, to be qualified, chosen, and paid in manner as aforesaid. It has long been to me matter of concern, that such numbers are put apprentices as compositors without any share of school-learning, who ought to have the greatest: in hopes of remedying this, I give and bequeath to the said company of stationers such a sum of money as will purchase one thousand pounds three per cent, reduced bank annuities, for the use of one journeyman compositor, such as shall hereafter be described; with this special trust, that the master, wardens, and assistants, shall pay the dividends and produce thereof half-yearly to such compositor: the said master, wardens, and assistants of the said company, shall nominate for this purpose a compositor who is a man of good life and conversation, who shall usually frequent some place of public worship every Sunday unless prevented by sickness, and shall not have worked on a newspaper or magazine for four years at least before such nomination, nor shall ever afterwards whilst he holds this annuity, which may be for life, if he continues a journeyman; he shall be able to read and construe Latin, and at least to read Greek fluently with accents; f which he shall bring a testimonial from the rector of St. Martin’s Ludgate for the time being: I could wish that he shall have been brought up piously and virtuously, if it be possible, at Merchant Taylors, or some other public school, from seven years of age till he is full seventeen, and then to serve seven years faithfully as a compositor, and work seven years more as a journeyman, as I would not have this annuity bestowed on any one under thirty -one years of age: if after he is chosen he should behave ill, let him be turned out, and another be chosen in his stead. And whereas it may be many years before a compositor may be found that shall exactly answer the above description, and it may at some times happen that such a one cannot be found; I would have the dividends in the mean time applied to such person as the master, wardens, and assistants, shall think approaches nearest to what I have described. And whereas the above trusts will occasion some trouble: I give to the said company, in case they think proper to accept the trusts, two hundred and fifty pounds.” It is almost superfluous to add, that the trust was accepted, and is properly executed.

Mr. Bowyer, agreeably to his own direction, was buried at Low Leyton in Essex, where aneat monument is erected in the church to his father’s memory and his own, with a Latin inscription written by himself. A bust of him is placed in Stationers’ Hall, with a good portrait of his father, and another of his patron Mr. Nelson; all which, with good portraits of Steele and Prior, were presented to the Company of Stationers by Mr. Nichols.

Early in 1778, Mr. Nichols printed twenty copies of some short “Biographical Memoirs of Mr. Bowyer,” an octavo pamphlet of fifty-two pages, which were given in presents to his friends, and reprinted in the Gent. Mag. vol. XLVIII. These memoirs, although interesting in themselves, were not sufficient to grat:fy the friends and contemporaries of Mr. Bowyer, who foresaw that, with continued industry and research, Mr. Nichols might erect a more sumptuous monument to the memory of his learned predecessor. Accordingly from many valuable materials in his possession, and the aid of some literary friends, he produced in 1782, in a handsome quarto volume, closely printed, “Biographical and Literary Anecdotes of William Bowyer, Printer, F. S. A. and of many of his learned friends, containing au incidental view of the progress and advancement of literature in this kingdom from the beginning of the present century to the end of the year 1777.” The importance of this work was soon acknowledged by men of learning and curiosity. It contained memoirs of several hundreds of eminent scholars who had been unnoticed or imperfectly notice;! in biographical compilations, and opened so many new and rich sources of information and inquiry, that the author was further urged to extend his labours, and improve upon his own plan so as to include a larger portion of literary history. With this view, during the intervals he could spare from an extensive business, and the publication of many useful works, among which his elaborate ‘ History of Leicestershire’ stands prominent, amidst too his indefatigable attention to the affairs of the corporation of London, of which he was for many years a distinguished member, he was enabled in the present year to publish a new edition of his Memoirs of Bowyer, under the title of “Literary Anecdotes of the Eighteenth Century; comprizing Biographical Memoirs of William Bowyer,” &c. extended to six copious and closely printed volumes in octavo, illustrated by a series of engraved portraits. Of this work the editor of this Dictionary, or of any compilation of the kind, cannot speak without gratitude. It will appear, indeed, by our references, that our obligations are numerous and important, nor should we be content with this brief acknowledgment, but from a motive of delicacy, it being known to our readers that the author to whom we are so much indebted is at the same time the medium of conveying our praises to the public. We cannot help adding, however, that where we refer to Mr. Nichols’s “Anecdotes,” we wish it to be understood that it is for the purpose of more ample information than we have usually extracted, and that no book has perhaps ever been published in this or any country by which literary curiosity is so much excited, or so pleasingly gratified.

, an eminent philologer, historian, and antiquary, born Sept. 12, 1612, was the son of James Zuerius, minister at Bergen-op-Zoom, by Anne Boxhorn, the daughter of Henry Boxhorn, a minister of Breda, originally a Roman Catholic, but who embracing the reformed religion, became minister first in the duchy of Cleves, then at Woorden in Holland, and lastly at Breda, which place he left in 1625 when the Spaniards took it, and retired to Leyden: here he superintended the education of his grandson, the subject of the present article, who lost his father when only six years old, and as he had no male children, gave young Zuerius his name of Boxhorn. Under his tuition, the youth made great progress in his studies, and in 1629 published some good poetry on the taking of Boisleduc, and some other victories which the Dutch had gained. This was when he was only seventeen years old, and he was but twenty when he published some more considerable works, as will appear in our list, which induced the curators of the university of Leyden in the same year, 1632, to promote him to the professorship of eloquence. His reputation extending, chancellor Oxenstiern, the Swedish ambassador, made him great offers in queen Christina’s name, but preferring a residence in his own country, he was afterwards appointed professor of politics and history in the room of Daniel Heinsius, now disabled by age. For some time he carried on a controversy with Salmasius, but they were afterwards apparently reconciled. Besides his numerous works, he contributed frequently to the labours of his learned friends: his career, however, was short, as he died, after a tedious illness, at Leyden, Oct. 3, 1653, at the age of only forty -one. How industriously this time was employed will appear from the following list of his publications. 1. “Poemata,” 1629, 12mo. 2. “Granatarum encomium,” Amsterdam, 1631, 4to. 3. “Historian Augustas Scriptores,” a new edition with his notes, Leyden, 1631, 4 vols. 12mo, which Harwood calls beautiful but incorrect. 4. “Theatrum, sive Descriptio Comitatus et Urbium Hollandiae,” ibid. 1632, 4to. and translated into German the!-ame year by Peter Montanus. 5. An edition of “Plinii Panegyricus,” Leyden, 1632 and 1648, Amsterdam, 1649, 12mo. 6. A nimadversiones ad Suetonium Tranquillum,“Leyden, 1632 and 1645, 12mo. 7.” Poetae Satiric! minores, cum Commentariis,“ibid. 1632, 8vo. 8.” Respublica Leodiensium,“ibid. 1633, 24mo. 9.” Apologia pro Navigationibus Hollandorum, adversus Pontum Heuterum,“ibid. 1633, 24mo, and reprinted at London, 1636, 8vo. 10.” Emblemata Politica, et Dissertationes Politicae,“Amsterdam, 1634 and 1651, 12mo. 11.” Julii Csesaris Opera, cum commentariis variorum,“ibid. 16:34, fol. 12.” Grammatica regia, &c. pro Christina Succor um regina,“Holm. 1635, 12nio, Leyden, 1650. 13.” Catonis Disticha, Gr. Lat. cum Notis,“Leyden, 1635, 8vo. 14.” Orationes duae de vera Nobilitate et ineptiis sseculi,“ibid. 1635, fol. 15.” Oratio inauguralis de maj estate eioqueuti Romanae,“ibid. 1636, 4to. 16. 44 Orationes Tres, de theologia paganorum, fabulis poetarum, et animarum immortalitate,” ibid. 1636, 4to. 17. “Oratio funebris in obitum Dominici Molini,” ibid. 1636, fol. 18. “Character causarum Patroni,” ibid. 1637, 4to. 19. ' Character Amoris,“ibid. 1637, 4to. 20.” Panegyricus Principi Fred. Henrico, post Bred am oppugnatam dictus,“Leyden, 1637, fol. 21.” Quaestiones Roman se, cum Plutarchi qucetionibus Romanis, commentario uberrimo explicatis,“ibid. 1637, 4to, and reprinted in Graevius, vol. V. 22.” Monumenta illustrium virorum seri incisa et elogia,“ibid. 1633, fol. 23.” JuStinus, cum notis,“Amsterdam, 1638. 24.” Panegyricus in classem Hispanorum profligatam,“Leyden, 1639, fol. 25.” Oratio de Somniis,“ibid. 1639, 4to. 26.” Historia obsidionis Bredanae, &c.“ibid. 1640, fol. 27.” De Typographies artis inventione et inventoribus, Dissertatio,“ibid. 1640, 4to. In this he is inclined to think that the art of printing was first discovered at Haerlem, and not at Mentz, as he first supposed. 28. “Dissertatio de Trapezitis, vulgo Longobardis,” ibid. 1640, 8vo, and Groningen, 1658, 4to. 29. “Panegyricus in Nuptias principis Arausionensium Gulielmi, et Mariae, Britanniae regis filiae,” Leyden, 1641, fol. 30.” Oratio in excessum Cornelii Vander Myle,“ibid. 1642, fol. 31.” Oratio qua Ser. Henricae Mariae, magnae Britannise reginae urbem Leydensem subeuntis adventum veneratur,“ibid. 1642, fol. This compliment to our exiled queen, and a subsequent publication, Bayle informs us, was disliked by some republicans. 32.” Oratio in excessum principis Const. Alexandri,“ibid. 1642, fol. 33.” Commentarius in vitam Agricolae Corn. Taciti,“ibid. 1642, 12mo, and an Apology for this edition,” adversus Dialogistam,“Amsterdam, 1643, 12mo. 34.” Animadversiones in Corn. Taciturn, Amsterdam,“1643, and often reprinted. 35. The Belgic History to the time of Charles V. in Dutch, Leyden, 1644, 1649, 4to. 36.” Chronicon Zelandiae,“Middleburgh, 1644, 4to. 37. On the worship of the goddess Nehalennia, in Dutch, Leyden, 1647, 4to. 38.” Plinii Epistolae cum ejus Panegyrico,“ibid. 1648, and Amsterdam, 1659, 12mo. 39.” Dissertatio de Amnestia,“ibid. 1648, 12mo. 40.” Dissertatio de successione etjure primogenitorum, in adeundo principatu, ad Carolum II. Magnse Britanniae regem,“ibid. 1649, 4to. 41.” De Majestate Regum, Principumque liber singularis,“a defence of the former, ibid. 1649, 4to. 42.”Com.mentariolusde Statu Fcederatarum Provinciarum Belgii, Hague, 1649. Somi offence taken by the States of Holland obliged the author to alter part of this work in the edition 1650. 43. “Oratio funebris in excessum Adriani Falkoburgii Med. Doct.” Leyden, 1650, 4to. 44. “Hayraonis Hist, ecclesiastics Breviarium,” ibid. 1650, 12mo. 45. “Disquisitiones Politicae, ex omni historia selectae,” Hague, 1654, Erfurt, 1664, 12mo. 46. “Dissertatio de Groecse, Romanae, et Germanics? Linguarum harmonia,” Leyden, 1650. 47. “Historia Universalis Sacra et Profana a nato Christo ad annum 1650,” ibid. 1651, 1652, 4to, and Leipsic, 1675, 4to. Mencke, the continuator, speaks of this as an excellent account of theorigin and rights of nations. 48. “Orationes varii argumenti,” Amst. 1651, 12mo. 49. “Oratio in excessum Gul. principis Arausiee, comitis Nassovii, Leyd. 1651, fol. 50.” Metamorphosis Anglorurn,“Hague, 1653, 12mo. 51.” Originum Gallicaruna liber,“Amst. 1654, 4to. This critical history of ancient Gaul procured him much reputation. He was employed on it in his latter days, but did not live to publish it. The following are also posthumous 52.” Ideae orationum e selection materia modern! status politici desumptae,“Leyden, 1657, ]2mo, and Leipsic, 1661, 12mo. 53.” Institutionum seu disquisitionum Politicarum Libri Duo,“Leipsic, 1659, Amst. 1663. 54.” Chronologia sacra et prophana,“edited by Bosius, Francf. 1660, fol. 55.” Epistolae et Poemata,“Amst. 1662, 12mo, with his life written by James Baselius, a Calvinist minister, and reprinted at Leipsic in 1679, with a preface by Thomasius. 56.” Dissertatio de Imperio Romano," Jena, 1664, 12mo.

, an eminent English musician, chapel-master and organist to George II. and III. was the son of William Boyce, a joiner and cabinet-maker, and housekeeper of Joiners’-hall, where our musician was born, B'eb. 7, 1710. He was at first a singing-boy at St. Paul’s, and afterwards apprenticed to the celebrated Dr. Greene, who bequeathed to him his manuscripts. In 1734 he was a candidate for the place of organist of St. Michael’s church, Cornhill, with Froud, Young, James Worgan, and Kelway; but though unsuccessful in this application, Kelway being elected, he was appointee! the same year to the place of organist of Oxford chapel and in 1736, upon the death of Weltlon, when Kelway being elected organist of St. Martin' sin the Fields, resigned his place at St. Michael’s Cornhill, Boyce was not only elected organist of that church, but organist and composer in the chapel royal. The same year he set David’s “Lamentation over Saul and Jonathan,” which was performed at the Apollo Society. About the year 1743, he produced his serenata of “Solomon,” which was not only long and justly admired as a pleasing and elegant composition, but still affords great delight to the friends of English music whenever it is performed. His next publication was “Twelve Sonatas or Trios for two violins and a base,” which were longer and more generally purchased, performed, and admired, than any productions of the kind in this kingdom, except those of CorelH. They were not only in constant use, as chamber music, in private concerts, for which they were originally designed, but in our theatres, as act-tunes, and public gardens, as favourite pieces, during many years.

In 1749, he set the ode written by the rev. Mr. Mason, for the installation of the late duke of Newcastle, as chancellor of the university of Cambridge, at which time he was honoured with the degree of doctor in music by that university. Soon after this event, he set the “Chaplet,” a musical drama, written by the late Mr. Mendez, for Drury-lane theatre, which had a very favourable reception, and long run, and continued many years in use. Not long after the first performance of this drama, his friend Mr. Beard brought on the same stage the secular ode, written by Dryden, and originally set by Dr. Boyce for Hickford’s room, or the Castle concert, where it was first performed, in still life. This piece, though less successful than the Chaplet, by the animated performance and friendly zeal of Mr. Beard, was many times exhibited before it was wholly laid aside. These compositions, with occasional single songs for Vauxhall and Ranelagh, disseminated the fame of Dr. Boyce throughout the kingdom, as a dramatic and miscellaneous composer, while his choral compositions for the king’s chapel, for the feast of the sons of the clergy at St. Paul’s, and for the triennial meetings at the three cathedrals of Worcester, Hereford, and Gloucester, at the performances in all which places he constantly presided till the time of his death, established his’ reputation as an ecclesiastical composer, and able master of harmony. Dr. Boyce was one of the few of our church composers, who neither pillaged or servilely imitated Handel. There is an original and sterling merit in his productions, founded as much on the study of our own old masters, as on the best models of other countries, that gives to all his works a peculiar stamp and character of his own, for strength, clearness, and facility, without any mixture of styles, or extraneous and heterogeneous ornaments. On the decease of Dr Greene, in 1757, he was appointed by the duke of Devonshire, master of the king’s band; and, in 1758, on the death of Travers, organist of the chapel-royal. He published, at a great expence to himself, three volumes of cathedral music, being a collection in score of the most valuable compositions for that service by the several English masters of the preceding two centuries, which was designed to have been published by Dr. Greene: and in this Dr. Boyce was assisted by the first Dr. Hayes, of Oxford, and by Dr. Howard. Dr. Boyce died, of repeated attacks of the gout, Feb. 7, 1779, and was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral. An anonymous biographer records a very singular circumstance in Dr. Boyce’s history, namely, that he was from his youth incurably deaf.

, a writer who would scarcely have deserved notice, if he had not been obtruded on the public as the author of Junius’s Letters, was the second son of Alexander Macauley, esq. of the county of Antrim, in Ireland. He was born in 1746; was educated at Trinity college, Dublin; and was designed for the bar; but, instead of prosecuting his original views, came over to London, where, under the patronage of Mr. Richard Burke, he soon became known both in the literary and fashionable world. A propensity to extravagance had already reduced him to considerable embarrassments, when, in 1777, he married a lady of good fortune; but this relief was only temporary; for the same expensive habits still continued, and at length obliged him to accompany lord Macartney to Madras, in the capacity of a second secretary. He remained there after his lordship’s return, and died in 1791, having for some years previously to his death, held the lucrative office of master attendant, with little advantage to his circumstances. He wrote in Ireland, a political periodical paper, called “The Freeholder,” in 1772; an Introduction to lord Chatham’s speeches on the American war, reported and published by him; and the “Whig,” published in Almon’s newspaper, the London Courant, in 1780. In I?y4, he also wrote a few periodical essays called “The Indian Observer,” published at Madras. These were reprinted in an 8vo volume, in 1798, by thejate Mr. Laurence Dundas Campbell, with a view to establish an assertion which Almon first made, if we mistake not, purporting that Mr. Boyd was the author of Junius; but unfortunately the reader has “the bane and antidote” both before htm in this volume, and few attempts of the kind can be conceived more injudicious than a comparison between the styles of Boyd and Junius. Boyd wrote after Junius, and, like most political writers, aims at his style; and the only conclusion which his friends have arrived at amounts tu this absurdity, that an imitator must be an original writer; and even this in the case of Mr. Boyd is peculiarly unfortunate, for his imitations are among the most feeble that have been ever attempted. Mr. Campbell returned to the charge, however, in 1800, with a publication of “The miscellaneous works of Hugh Boyd, the author of the Letters of Junius: with an account of his Life and Writings,” 2 vols. 8vo.

, a Scotch writer of considerable reputation in the sixteenth century, the son of Robert Boyd, of Pinkill in Ayrshire, was born Jan. 13, 1562. Having lost his father early, he was educated under the inspection of his uncle, Mr. James Boyd, of Trochrig, who, with the then unpopular title of “Archbishop of Glasgow,” performed the offices of minister of the Barony parish in that city. Young Boyd, in his nature lively and headstrong, soon grew weary of academical discipline, quarreled with his preceptors, renounced his studies, and, eager to become a man of the world, presented himself at court. It is not unlikely that in this scheme ae relied chit fly on the patronage of liobert, fourth lord Boyd, who was probably the cousin-gernran of Boyd’s father. All, however, that we learn of his proficiency at cm:;c is, that he fought one duel, and was engaged in numberless broils. His relations advised him to follow the profession of arms in the Low Countries, for they could not tolerate his impetuous and unruly temper, and perhaps they were little inclined or little able to support him in a manner of life which had no determined object or aim. Boyd readily consented to become a soldier; but he chose France rather than the Low Countries, for the theatre of his future achievements. He went therefore to Paris, furnished with a small stock of money, all of which he soon lost at dice. This the author of his life ascribes to some secret fate, “occulto veluti fato” but says his more recent biographer, lord Hailes, we may absolve fate, for when the raw and self-sufficient go amongst sharpers, they ought to ascribe their ruin to folly.

Boyd, observing that young persons of quality, and even military men, were wont to attend academical lectures at Paris, resumed his studies. The teachers to whom he attached himself were, J. Marius d'Amboise, professor of philosophy; J. Passerat, professor of eloquence, not only a scholar, but a wit also, and a poet; and Gilb. Franc. Genebrand, professor of the Hebrew language, who afterwards by his zeal for the French league, tarnished the reputation that he had gained by his literary abilities. Guillonius also is mentioned amongst the professors under whom Boyd studied. He next resolved to apply himself to the civil law, and went to the university of Orleans, where that science was taught by J. Robertas, a man principally known for having dared to become the rival of Cujacius. But he soon quitted Orleans, and went to the university of Bourges. Cujacius, who taught the civil law there, received him with kindness, and possibly, not with the less kindness because his new scholar had quitted Orleans and professor Robertus. It was said that Boyd obtained the friendship of Cujacius, by writing some verses in the obsolete Latin language. Perhaps that learned man liked those verses best which approached nearest to the standard of the Twelve Tables.

While at Bourges, however, Boyd applied his mind to serious study, with more earnestness than could have been looked for from a person of his age and desultory temper. Btrt unfortunately his studies were interrupted, not by the constitutional fickleness of his own disposition, but by a public calamity. The plague broke out at Bourges, and Boyd, dreading the infection, fled to Lyons, and on its appearance at Lyons, he went into Italy. There he became acquainted with a person whom he calls Cornelius Varus, but having been seized with an ague, he returned to Lyons for change of air. It is said that the being deprived of the conversation and salutary advices of his friend Varus was the only regret which he had in quitting Italy. Varus flattered him with all the extravagance of Italian hyperboles, and finding that Boyd prided himself on the excellence of his Latin poetry, addressed some verses to him in which he asserts that Boyd surpassed Buchanan and all other British poets in a greater degree than Virgil surpassed Lucretius, Catullus, and all other Roman poets.

In 1587, a numerous army, composed of mercenary Germans and Swiss, invaded France, in support of the king of Navarre. Boyd joined the troops that marched from Auvergne to reinforce the army of Henry III. His commander was a Greek by birth, an officer of cavalry. Boyd mentions not his name; but describes him as one who, with the specious advantages of elocution, and a noble figure, was volatile, forward, easily provoked, and of ungovernable passion. The'temerity of this commander exposed his soldiers to more hazards in skirmishes with the peasants, than they would have found in storming of towns. Boyd received a shot in the ancle, and this is all we know, with certainty, of his military services.

In 1588, Boyd fixed his residence at Toulouse, and again applied himself to the study of the civil law under Fr. Rouldes, a celebrated professor. It appears that, about this time, he wrote some tracts on that science, and projected others; and that he even had it in view to compose a system of the law of nations. Toulouse having, about this time, by means of a popular insurrection, fallen into the hands of the faction of the league, Boyd, who had assisted the royal cause, was thrown into prison and, from the hatred of the Jesuits, was in great danger of his life. When he had obtained his liberty, which was granted him at the solicitations of the learned men of Toulouse, he went first to Bourdeaux, and thence to Rochelle. In this last journey he was attacked by robbers, and with difficulty escaped being assassinated by them, after having lost all the property he had with him. Disliking the air of Rochelle, he retreated to the borders of Poictou, where he enjoyed an agreeable rural retirement; devoting his time partly to polite literature, and partly to the aid of his friends, when they were occasionally exposed to the incursions of their enemies. He so equally applied himself te the study of learning and war, that it was not easy to say which he most preferred; but his character appears now to have been more decided than when in youth. Among men of the sword he appeared to be the accomplished soldier, and as eminently the scholar among those of the gown. In his person he was tall, compact, and well proportioned; his countenance was beautiful, sprightly, and engaging; and there was a singularly noble air in his discourse, aspect, voice, aud gesture. He was polite, pleasant, acute, courteous, a ready speaker, and entirely free from envy and avarice. He could easily bear with the boasting of the ignorant, but extremely disliked the abusive manner of writing which prevailed so much among the learned of his time. He thought it unworthy of a Christian, in a literary controversy, to throw out any thing, either in speech or writing, which should hurt the reputation of an adversary. In injuries of an atrocious nature, he chose to do himself justice by having recourse to the laws of arms. Among the ancients, Xenophon was his favourite as a philosopher, Cæsar as an historian, and Virgil as a poet. So admirably was he skilled in the Greek language, that he could write, dictate, and converse in it, with copiousness and elegance. He despised the centos, which were then not a little in fashion; and said, that however learned the authors of them might be, they were dull and ignorant men. Besides his epistles after the manner of Ovid, and his hymns, he wrote a variety of Latin poems, which have not been printed. He was the author of notes upon Pliny, and published an excellent little book, addressed to Lipsius, in defence of cardinal Bembo and the ancient eloquence. He translated, likewise, Cæsar’s Commentaries into Greek, in the style of Herodotus; but would not permit his translation to appear in public. He afterwards applied himself to the cultivation of poetry in his native Ianguage, and arrived at considerable excellence in it. In all his compositions, genius was more apparent than labour.

Boyd, at length, returned into Scotland, where he soon after died, of a slow fever, in April 1601, at Pinkill, his father’s seat, in the 38th or 39th year of his age; and was buried with his ancestors in the church of Dalie or Darlie. Among the manuscripts which he left behind him, the following were in sir Robert Sibbald’s possession: “In Institutiones Imperatoris Commenta,” 1591, folio. “L‘Estat du Royaume d’Escosse a present,” foj. “ Politicus, ad Joannem Metellanum, cancellariutn Scotiae.” w Scriptum de Jurisconsulto, ad Franciscum Balduinum.“”Poeta, ad Cornelium Varum Florentinum.“” Poemata varia.“” Epistolae.“But of these, the only works now known are his” Epistolae Heroidum,“and his” Hymni.“These are inserted in the” Delitiae Poetarum Scotorum,“Amst. 1637, in two volumes 12mo; and a great character has been given of them by several authors. His biographer questions whether any of the ancients have excelled him in elegiac poetry, and is positive that none of the Latins have equalled his hymns. Olaus Borrichius, an eminent critic, in his” Dissertationes Academic de Poetis,“says,” In Marco Alexandra Bodio, Scoto, redivivum spectamus Nasonem; ea est in ejusdem Epistolis Heroidum, lux, candor, dexteritas." The same critic speaks as highly of Boyd’s Hymns, but modern taste will not coincide with these praises. Boyd undoubtedly was a man of genius and elegant accomplishments, yet we learn this rather from his history than his writings.

, a nobleman of Scotland, of whose early years we have no account, began to make a figure in public life towards the end of the reign of James II. of Scotland. Being a man of great penetration and sound judgment, courteous and affable, he acquired the esteem and confidence of all ranks of people, as well as of his prince, who created him a baron by the title of lord Boyd, of Kilmarnock. In 1459, he was, with several other noblemen, sent to Newcastle, with the character of plenipotentiary, to prolong the truce with England, which had just fhen expired. On the death of James II. who was killed at the siege of Roxburgh, lord Boyd was made justiciary, and one of the lords of the regency, in whose hands the administration was lodged during the minority of the young king. His lordship had a younger brother who had received the honour of knighthood, sir Alexander Boyd of Duncow, a man in great credit with the king, whom he was appointed to teach the rudiments of military discipline; and between them, the two brothers found means to engross most of the places and preferments about the court. Sir Alexander began to instil into the young king, then twelve years old, that he was now capable of governing without the help of guardians and tutors, and that he might free himself from their restraint. This advice was readily listened to, and the king resolved to take upon himself the government, which, however, was no other than transferring the whole power, from the other regents, to the Boyds. The king was at this time at Linlithgow, and it was necessary to remove him to Edinburgh, to take upon him the regal government, which the Boyds effected, partly by force, and partly by stratagem. Haying got the king- to Edinburgh, lord Boyd began to provide for his own safety, and to avert the danger which, threatened him and his friends, for what they had done in the face of an act of parliament; and accordingly prevailed upon the king to call a parliament at Edinburgh, in October 1466; in which lord Boyd fell down upon his knees before the throne, where the king sat, and in an elaborate harangue, complained of the hard construction put upon the king’s removal from Linlithgow, and how ill this was interpreted by his enemies, who threatened that the advisers of that affair should one day suffer punishment; humbly beseeching his majesty to declare his own sense and pleasure thereupon, and that if he conceived any illwill or disgust against him for that journey, that he would openly declare it. The king, after advising a little with the lords, made answer, that the lord Boyd was not his adviser, but rather his companion in that journey; and therefore that he was more worthy of a reward for his courtesy, than of punishment for his obsequiousness or compliance therein; and this he was willing to declare in a public decree of the estates, and in the same decree provision should be made, that this matter should never be prejudicial to the lord Boyd or his companions. His lordship then desired, that this decree might be registered in the acts of the assembly, and confirmed by letters patent under the great seal, which was also complied with. At the same time also the king, by advice of his council, gave him letters patent, whereby he was constituted sole regent, and had the safety of the king, his brothers, sisters, towns, castles, and all the jurisdiction over his subjects, committed to him, till the king himself arrived to the age of twenty-one years. And the nobles then present solemnly promised to be assistant to the lord Boyd, and also to his brother, in all their public actions, and that they would be liable to punishment, if they did not carefully, and with faithfulness, perform what they then promised, to which stipulation the king also subscribed. Lord Boyd next contrived to be made Jord great chamberlain, and after this had the boldness to procure the lady Mary Stewart, the late king’s eldest daughter, in marriage for his son sir Thomas Boyd, notwithstanding the care and precaution of the parliament. The lord Boyd’s son was a most accomplished gentleman, and this match and near alliance to the crown, added to his own distinguished merit, raised him to a nearer place in the affection as well as confidence of his sovereign, by whom he was soon after created earl of Arran, and was now himself considered as the fountain from whence all honours and preferments must flow. The lord chamberlain, by this great accession of honour to his family, seemed to have arrived at the highest pinnacle of power and grandeur; but what seemed to establish his power, proved the very means of its overthrow. About this time, a marriage having been concluded, by ambassadors sent into Denmark for that purpose, between the young king of Scotland, and Margaret, a daughter of the king of Denmark, the earl of Arran was selected to go over to Denmark, to espouse the Danish princess in the king his brother-in-law’s name, and to conduct her to Scotland. The earl of Arran, judging all things safe at home, willingly accepted this honour; and, in the beginning of the autumn of 1469, set sail for Denmark with a proper convoy, and a noble train of friends and followers. This was, however, a fatal step, for the lord chamberlain, the earl’s father, being now much absent from the court in the necessary discharge of his office, as well as through age and infirmities, which was the case also of his brother sir Alexander Boyd; the earl of Arran had no sooner set out on his embassy, than every endeavour was tried to alienate the king’s affection from the Boyds. Every public miscarriage was laid at their door; and the Kennedies, their ancient enemies, industriously spread abroad reports, to inflame the people likewise against them. They represented to the king, that the lord Boyd had abused his power during his majesty’s minority; that his matching his son, the earl of Arran, with the princess Mary, was staining the royal blood of Scotland, was an indignity to the crown, and the prelude to the execution of a plot they had contrived of usurping even the sovereignty itself; for they represented the lord chamberlain as an ambitious, aspiring man, guilty of the highest offences, and capable of contriving and executing the worst of villanies: with what justice, history does not inform us. Buchanan only says the Boyds were the occasion of the king’s degeneracy into all manner of licentiousness, by their indulgence of his pleasures. The king, however, young, weak, credulous, and wavering, and naturally prone to jealousy, began to be alarmed, and was prevailed on to sacrifice, not only the earl of Arran, but all his family, to the resentment of their enemies, notwithstanding their ancestors’ great services to the crown, and in spite of the ties of blood which united them so closely. At the request of the adverse faction, the king summoned a parliament to meet at Edinburgh, the 20th of November, 1469, before which lord Boyd, the earl of Arran, though in Denmark, and sir Alexander Boyd of Duncow, were summoned to appear, to give an account of their administration, and answer such charges as should be exhibited against them. Lord Boyd, astonished at this sudden blow, betook himself to arms; but, finding it im-r possible to stem the torrent, made his escape into England; but his brother, sir Alexander, being then sick, and trusting to his own integrity, was brought before the parliament, where he, the lord Boyd, and his son the earl of Arran, were indicted of high-treason, for having laid hands on the king, and carried him, against an act of parliament, and contrary to the king’s own will, from Linlithgow to Edinburgh, in 1466. Sir Alexander alleged in his defence, that they had not only obtained the king’s pardon for that'offence in a public convention, but it was even declared a good service by a subsequent act of parliament; but no regard was had to this, because it was obtained by the Boyds when in power, and masters of the king’s person: and the crime being proved against them, they were found guilty by a jury of lords and barons; and sir Alexander Boyd, being present, was condemned to lose his head on the Castle-hill of Edinburgh, which sentence was executed accordingly. The lord Boyd would have undergone the same fate, if he had not inade his escape into England, where, however, he did not long survive his great reverse of fortune, dying at Alnwick in 1470. The earl of Arran, though absent upon public business, was declared a public enemy, without being granted a hearing, or allowed the privilege of defending himself, and his estates confiscated. Things were in this situation, when he arrived from Denmark, with the espoused queen, in the Frith of Forth. Before he landed he received intelligence of the wreck and ruin of his family, and resolved to retire into Denmark; and without staying to attend the ceremonial of the queen’s landing, he took the opportunity of one of those Danish ships which convoyed the queen, and were under his command, and embarking his lady, set sail for Denmark, where he met with a reception suitable to his high birth. From thence he travelled through Germany into France, and went to pay a visit to Charles duke of Burgundy, who received him most graciously, and being then at war with his rebellious subjects, the unfortunate lord offered him his service, which the duke readily accepted, and finding him to be a brave and wise man, he honoured and supported him and his lady, in a manner becoming their rank. But the king their brother, not yet satisfied with the miseries of their family, wrote over to Flanders to recal his sister home; and fearing she would not be induced to leave him, he caused others to write to her, and give her hopes that his anger towards her husband might be appeased, and that if she would come over and plead for him in person, there was no doubt but she might prevail with her brother to restore him again to his favour. The countess of Arran, flattered with these hopes, returned, and was no sooner arrived in Scotland, than the king urged her to a divorce from her husband, cruelly detained her from going back to him, and caused public citations, attested by witnesses, to be fixed up at Kilmarnock, the seat of the Boyds, wherein Thomas earl of Arran was commanded to appear in sixty days, which he not doing, his marriage with the king’s sister was declared null and void, and a divorce made (according to Buchanan), the earl still absent and unheard; and the lady Mary was compelled, by the king, to marry James lord Hamilton, a man much inferior to her former husband both in point of birth and fortune. This transaction was in 1474; and the earl of Arran, now in the last stage of his miseries, and borne down with the heavy load of his misfortunes, soon al'ter, died at Antwerp, and was honourably interred there. The character of him and of his father is variously represented. That they were ambitious, and regardless of the means of gratifying that ambition, cannot well be denied, nor are we permitted to censure with great asperity their enemies who effected their ruin by similar measures and with similar motives. Their fall undoubtedly holds out an useful lesson, but the experience of others, especially of examples in history, seldom checks the progress of that ambition that has once commenced in success.

, a descendant of the preceding, and fourth and last earl of Kilmarnock, was born in 1704, and was but thirteen years old when his father died: he discovered early a genius not unequal to his birth, but found the family estate pretty much encumbered, and great part of the patrimony alienated, which was by no means answerable to his lordship’s generous and noble disposition. It was also his misfortune to be too soon let loose among the gaieties and pleasures of life. As he grew up, instead of applying himself to study, he launched out into the world in pursuit of pleasures which were more expensive than his fortune could support, and by this means considerably reduced his estate, which, from the most probable conjecture, was the true reason of his taking up arms against the king. Indeed, his lordship himself owns in his confession to Mr. Foster (while under sentence), that his rebellion was a kind of desperate scheme, proceeding originally from his vices, to extricate himself from the distress of his circumstances; for he says, “the true root of all was his careJess and dissolute life, by which he had reduced himself to great and perplexing difficulties; that the exigency of his affairs was in particular very pressing at the time of the rebellion; and that, besides the general hope he had of mending his fortune by the success of it, he was also tempted by another prospect of retrieving his circumstances, by following the Pretender’s standard.” It does not appear that his lordship was in the original design of the rebellion: on the contrary, he declared both in his speech at the bar of the house of lords, and in his petition to the king after his sentence, that it was not tilt after the battle of Preston Pans that he became a party in it, having, till then, neither influenced his tenants or followers to assist or abet the rebellion; but, on the contrary, influenced the inhabitants of the town of Kilmarnock, and the neighbouring boroughs, to rise in arms for his majesty’s service, which had so good an effect, that two hundred men from Kilmarnock very soon appeared in arms, and remained so all the winter at Glasgow and other places. It is said, that when the earl joined the Pretender’s standard, he was received by him with great marks of esteem and distinction; was declared of his privy-council, made colonel of the guards, and promoted to the degree of a general (though his lordship himself says, he was far from being a person of any consequence among them). How he behaved in these stations (quite new to him, and foreign from his former manner of life), we cannot determine; but common fame says, he displayed considerable courage till the fatal battle of Culloden, when he was taken, or rather surrendered himself, prisoner, to the king’s troops, though involuntarily, and with a design to have facilitated his escape: for he acknowledged to Mr. Foster, whilst under sentence, that when he saw the king’s dragoons, and made towards them, he thought they had been Fitz-James’s horse; and that if he could have reached them by mounting behind one of the dragoons, his escape would have been more certain, than when he was on foot. Yet, in his speech to the house of lords, he made a merit of having surrendered himself, at a time when he said he could easily have made his escape, and in this he owned, when in a state of repentance, that he had not spoken truth. His lordship was brought to the Tower, and on Monday the 28th of July, 174-6, was, together with the earl of Cromartie, and lord Balmerino, conducted to Westminster-hall, and at the bar of the lord high-steward’s court, arraigned, and pleaded guilty to his indictment, submitting himself to his majesty’s mercy and clemency. On the Wednesday following, the three lords were again brought from the Tower to receive sentence, when the lord Kilmarnock being asked by the lord high-steward, if he had any thing to offer why sentence of death should not be passed upon him, his lordship, addressing himself to his grace and the whole august assembly, then consisting of an hundred and thirty-six peers, delivered an eloquent speech, after which, sentence of death was pronounced upon him, and he returned to the Tower. After this, he presented petitions to the king, the prince of Wales, and duke of Cumberland, wherein he set forth his family’s constant attachment to the revolution interest, and that of the illustrious house of Hanover; his father’s zeal and activity in support of both in the rebellion in 1715, and his own appearing in arms (though then but young) under his father, and the whole tenour of his conduct ever since that time. But the services of his forefathers could not satisfy the public demand for justice, nor avail him so far as to procure him pardon. He was beheaded on Towerhill, August 18, 1746, and was interred in the Tower church, with this inscription upon his coffin, viz. “Gulielmus Comes de Kilmarnock, decollat. 18 Augusti, 1746, aetat. suae 42.” His lordship’s whole deportment, from the time he was condemned till his execution, was suitable to one in his unhappy circumstances. He gave the most lively marks of a sincere humiliation and repentance for all his miscarriages, and his behaviour in the hour of death was resigned, but strictly decent and awful. He had himself observed, with great truth, that for a man who had led a dissolute life, and yet believed the consequences of death, to put on an air of daringness and absolute intrepidity, must argue him either to be very stupid or very impious. He was a nobleman of fine address and polite behaviour; his person was tall and graceful; his countenance mild, but his complexion pale; and he had abilities, which, if they had been properly applied, might have rendered him capable of bringing an increase of honour to his family, instead of ruin and disgrace. His lordship lived and died in the public profession of the church of Scotland, and left behind him a widow (who was the lady Anne Livingston, daughter of James earl of Linlithgow and Callander (attainted in 1715), with whom he had a considerable fortune), and three sons, the eldest of whom his lordship had educated in the principles of duty and loyalty to his majesty, and in whose service he fought against the rebels. He succeeded, upon the death of Mary, countess of Errol, in 1758, to her estate and honours, his mother having been undoubted heir of line of that noble family, and he was the sixteenth earl of Errol. He died June 3, 1778, leaving issue.

, an eminent Scotch divine, of the same family as the preceding, being a descendant of Robert Boyd, earl of Arran, sometime protector of Scotland, from whom descended James Boyd, baron of Trochrig, the father of the subject of this article. He was born in 1578, and educated at the university of Edinburgh, where he took his master’s degree. In 1604, according to the custom of the times, he travelled into France, and studied for some time under Rivet, improving himself in Greek and Hebrew, and in French, which he spoke with great fluency. He was afterwards invited by tt:e university of Montauban to be professor of philosophy, and in the mean time himself studied divinity, dnd was ordained according to the forms of the French reformed church. In 1608 he was removed to a professorship at Saumur, which he filled until 1614, and both as a preacher and teacher was much admired and eagerly followed. His fame reaching the ears of his sovereign, king James, he sent him a pressing invitation to fill the divinity chair in the university oi Glasgow, in consequence of which he removed thither in 1615, to the great sorrow of his friends at SaumiT, and the university at large. He was enabled soon, in conjunction with some able colleagues, to raise the reputation of the Glasgow university, the mode of study in which he reformed from the useless and disputatious modes of the schools. His situation, however, afcerwards became embarrassed from the disputes which arose respecting the scheme of king James to assimilate the churches of England and Scotland, which was highly unpopular in the latter country. Boyd’s education, and especially his associations abroad, had inclined him to the presbyterian form of church government, and finding that he could not under such circumstances retain his situation as preacher and professor at Glasgow, he resigned both, and went to live privately on an estate which he possessed. Endeavours were made to fix him in Edinburgh, and afterwards to recall him to Glasgow, but these not being successful, he finally retired from public life to Carrick, his estate, where he died Jan. 5, 1627. He wrote in very elegant Latin, a commentary on the epistle to the Ephesians, which was published under the title “Roberti Bodii Scoti Praelectiones in Epistolam ad Ephesios,” Lond. 1652, fol.

, a liberal patron of the arts, and an honour to his country, was born at Stanton in Shropshire, Jan. 19, 1719. His grandfather was the rev. John Boydell, D. D. vicar of Ashbourne, and rector of Mapleton in Derbyshire, whose son Josiah married Mary Milnes, eldest daughter of Samuel Milnes, esq. of Ash-house near Turnditch, Derbyshire, Jan. 22, 1718. Dr. Boydell was an excellent scholar, and for some time superintended the education of his grandson, intending him for the church, but dying in 1731, the youth was brought up by hisfatlver, a land-surveyor, who very naturally intended him for his own profession, and as a taste for drawing generally discovers itself very early, he might probably foresee great advantages from his son’s possessing this talent. Fortunately, however, for young Boydell, and for the arts, a trifling accident gave a more decided direction to his mind, and led him to aim at higher efforts in the art than the mere mechanism of ground-plans and outlines. This was no other than the sight of a print by Toms, a very indifferent artist, of sir John Glynne’s seat and the old castle attached to it, in “Baddeley’s Views of different Country Seats.” An exact delineation of a building that he had so often contemplated, afforded him pleasure, and excited some reflections which gave a new turn to his ambition. Considering it as an engraving, and from the copper of which might be taken an almost indefinite number of impressions, he determined to quit the pen, and take up the graver, as an instrument which would enable him to disseminate whatever work he could produce, in so much wider a circle. This resolution was no sooner made, than it was put in execution; for, with that spirit and perseverance which he manifested in every succeeding scene of life, he, at twenty-one years of age, walked up to the metropolis, and bound himself apprentice for seven years to Mr. Toms, the engraver of the print which had so forcibly attracted his attention. These, and accidents equally trifling, sometimes attract men of strong minds into the path that leads direct to fame, and have been generally considered as proving that they were born with some peculiar genius for some peculiar study. Sir J. Reynolds had the first fondness for his art excited by the perusal of “Richardson’s Treatise on Painting” and Mr. Boydell was induced to learn the art of engraving, by a coarse print of a coarse artist, representing a mis-shapen gothic castle.

His conduct during his apprenticeship was eminently assiduous. Eager to attain all possible knowledge of an art on which his mind was bent, and of every thing that could be useful to him, and^impelled by an industry that seemed inherent in his nature, he, whenever he could, attended the academy in St. Martin’s-lane to perfect himself in drawing; his leisure hours in the evening were devoted to the study of perspective, and to the learning of French without the aid of a master. After very steadily pursuing his business for six years, and finding himself a better artist than his teacher, he bought from Mr. Toms the last year of his apprenticeship, and became his own master. In 1745 or 1746 he published six small landscapes, designed and engraved by himself. This publication, from his having in most of the views chosen a situation in which a bridge formed part of the scenery, was entitled “The Bridge book,” and sold for a shilling. Small as this sum was, he sometimes spoke with apparent pleasure of a silversmith in Duke’s-court, St. Martin’s lane, having sold so many, that when he settled his annual account, he thought it would be civil to take a silver pint mug in part of payment, and this mug he retained until his dying day. He afterwards designed and engraved many other views, generally of places in and about London, and published the greater part of them at the low price of one shilling each. But even at this early period he was so much alive to fame, that after having passed several months in copying an historical sketch of Coriolanus by Sebastian Concha, he so much disliked his own engraving, that he cut the plate to pieces. Besides these, he engraved many prints from Brocking, Berchem, Salvator ilosa, &c. The manner in which many of them are executed, is highly respectable; and, being done at a time when the artist had much other business to attend to, displays an industry rarely to be paralleled, and proves that had he devoted all his time to engraving, he wcmld have ranked high in the profession. His facility of execution, and unconquerable perseverance, having thus enabled him to complete one hundred and fifty-two prints, tie collected the whole in one port-folio, and published it at fi,ve guineas. He modestly allowed that he himself had not at that time arrived at any eminence in the art of engraving, and that those prints are now chiefly valuable from a comparison of them with the improved state of the art within the last fifty years. In fact, there were at that time no eminent engravers in England, and Mr. Boydell saw the necessity of forcing the art by stimulating men of genius with suitable rewards. With the profits of the folio volume of prints above-mentioned, he' was enabled to pay very liberally the best artists of his time, and thus presented the world with English engravings from the works of the greatest masters. The encouragement that he experienced from the public was equal to the spirit and patriotism of his undertaking, and soon laid the foundation of an ample fortune. He used to observe, that he believed the book we have alluded to was the first that had ever made a lord mayor of London; and that when the smallness of the work was compared with what had followed, it would impress all young men with the truth of what he had often held out to them, “that industry, patience, and perseverance, if united to moderate talents, are certain to surmount all difficulties.” Mr. Boydell, though he never himself made any great progress as an engraver, was certainly the greatest encourager of the art that this country ever knew. The arts were at the time he began, at a very low ebb in this country. Wotton’s portraits of hounds ^nd horses, grooms and squires, with a distant view of the dog-kennel and stable; and Hudson’s portraits of gentlemen in great coats and jockey caps, were in high repute. Inferior prints from poor originals were almost the only works our English artists were thought capable of performing; and, mortifying as it must be to acknowledge it, yet it must be admitted, that (with the exception of the inimitable Hogarth, and two or three others) the generality of them were not qualified for much better things. The powers of the artists were, however, equal to the taste of a great majority of their customers; and the few people of the higher order who had a relish for better productions, indulged it in the purchase of Italian and Flemish pictures and French prints; for which, even at th?t time, the empire was drained of immense sums of money. To check this destructive fashion, Mr. Boydell sought for an English engraver who could equal, it not excel them; and jn Woollett he found one. The Temple of Apollo, from Claude, and two premium pictures from the Smiths of Chichester, were amongst the first large works which this excellent artist engraved; but the Niobe and the Phaeton, from Wilson, established his fame. For the first of them the alderman agreed to give the engraver fifty guineas, and when it was completed paid him a hundred. The second, the artist agreed to engrave for fifty guineas, and the alderman paid him one hundred and twenty. The two prints were published by subscription, at five shillings each. Proof prints were not at that time considered as having any particular value; the few that were taken off to examine the progress of the plate were delivered to such subscribers as chose to have them, at the subscription price. Several of these have since that time been sold at public auctions, at ten and eleven guineas each. By these and similar publications he had the satisfaction to see in his own time the beneficial effects of his exertions. We have before observed, that previous to his establishing a continental correspondence for the exportation of prints, immense sums were annually sent out of the country for the purchase of those that were engraved abroad; but he changed the course of the current, and for many of the later years of his life, the balance of the print-trade with the continent was very much in favour of Great Britain.

On the 5th of August 1732, Mr. Boy dell was chosen alderman of London, for the ward of Cheap, in the room of alderman Crichton, deceased. In the year 1785 he served the office of sheriff; and in 1790, was chosen lord mayor of London, an office of which he discharged the duties and the honours with a diligence, uprightness, and liberality, that may be equalled, but will rarely be exceeded.

Having been so successful in promoting the art of engraving in this country, he resolved to direct his next efforts to the establishing an English school of historical painting; and justly conceiving that no subject could be more appropriate for such a national attempt than England’s inspired poet, and great painter of nature, Shakspeare, he projected, and just lived to see completed, a most splendid edition of the works of that author, illustrated by engravings from paintings of the first artists that the country could furnish, and of which the expence was prodigious. These paintings afterwards formed what was termed “The Shakspeare gallery,” in Pall Mall; and we believe there are few individuals possessed of the least taste, or even curiosity, who have not inspected and been delighted by them.

It is always interesting to trace the origin of a great undertaking. The Shakspeare gallery arose from a conversation at the dining-table of Mr. Josiah Boydell (the alderman’s nephew and successor) in November 1786, in the presence of Mr. West, Mr. Romney, and Mr. P. Sandby, artists^ and Mr. Hayley, Mr. Hoole, Mr. Braithwaite, Mr. Nicol, and the alderman. The literary part of the company were joining with the professional gentlemen in complimenting the alderman on having lived to see the whole tide of the commerce in prints with the continent entirely changed from importing to exporting, and that effected in the space of one life, by the alderman’s great and munificent exertions. The only answer the alderman made to these compliments was, that he was not yet satisfied with what he had done; and that, old as he was, he should like to wipe away the stigma which all foreign critics threw on this nation, “that we had no genius for historical painting.” He said he was certain from his success in encouraging engraving, that Englishmen wanted nothing but proper encouragement and subjects to excel in historical painting, and this encouragement he himself would endeavour to find, if a proper subject was pointed out. Mr. Nieol (his majesty’s bookseller, and afterwards the alderman’s nephew by marriage) replied that there was one great national subject, concerning which there could be no difference of opinion, and mentioned Shakspeare 1 The proposition was received with acclamation by the alderman and the whole company; and on December 1 of the same year, the plan being considered, was laid before the public in a printed prospectus.

After having expended in his favourite plan of advancing the fine arts in England no less a sum than 350,000l. this worthy and venerable character was necessitated, by the stoppage of his foreign trade during a dozen years of war, to apply to parliament, in the beginning of 1804, for permission to dispose of the Shakspeare gallery, and his other collections of pictures and prints, by way of lottery. His letter to sir John William Anderson, bart. on the occasion of his introducing a petition for that purpose to the house of commons, is a document of too much curiosity and interest to the feelings to be omitted. We have therefore thrown it into a note.

Mr. Bpydell’s death was occasioned at last by a too scrupulous attention to his official duties. Always early

Your obedient and obliged Servant, John Boydell." in his attendance on public business, he arrived at the sessions-house in the Old Bailey, ^n Friday the 7th December, 1804, before any of the other magistrates, and before the fires were lighted. Standing near a grate while this was done, the damps were drawn out, and he took a cold: this produced an inflammation of the lungs, which terminated his life on the Tuesday following. He was interred with great civic pomp (the spontaneous result of private friendship and public respect), on the 19th of the same month, in the church of St. Clave, Jewry; leaving behind him for the instruction of mankind a striking example to what heights of fame and fortune men may attain by the united efforts of persevering industry, prudent enterprize, and honourable dealing.

The alderman had long before his death arrived at that period of life which demands additional repose; and certain it is, he could not have carried on his business in the manner it was carried on, without the active and unremitting exertions of his nephew and partner, Mr. Josiah Boydell; whose professional qualifications enabled him to appreciate the value and merits of the different works submitted to his inspection; and to point out the errors which ought to be corrected; and whose own productions, even at the very early period when he made a great number of drawings from the Orford collection, gave weight to his remonstrances.

It yet remains to be added to the character of alderman Boydell, that in his magisterial capacity, though inflexibly just, he was constitutionally merciful; and when masters came before him with complaints of their apprentices, or husbands with complaints of their wives, he always attempted, and very often successfully, to accommodate their differences; and, when he could with propriety, usually recommended the complaining party to amend his own conduct, as an example to those whom he accused. Wishing to disseminate a taste for the fine arts, he has within these few years presented to the corporation of the city of London, several valuable pictures, which now ornament the council chamber at Guildhall. Some of them commemorate the actions of our military distinguished characters, and others are calculated to impress upon the minds of the rising generation, the sentiments of industry, prudence, and virtue. Several of these well-imagined allegorical delineations by Rigaud, Smirke, Westall, &c. he has had engraved, and in the dissemination of either prints or books which had a moral tendency he always appeared to take great pleasure .

, a lexicographer and miscellaneous writer, was born June 13, 1667, at the city of Castres in Upper Languedoc. His great-grandfather and grandfather were masters of the riding-school at Nismes; his father was president of the supreme court at Castres, and his mother was Catherine, daughter of Campdomerius, a celebrated physician, circumstances which have been recorded to prove that he was of a good family. He was certainly of a conscientious one, his relations being exiles for their adherence to the protestant religion. He was first educated by his mother’s brother, Campdomerius, a noted divine and preacher of the reformed church, and then was sent to the protestant school at Puy Laurent, where he applied assiduously, and excelled all his schoolfellows in Greek and Latin. In 1685, when the persecution prevailed against the protestants in France, he followed his uncle to Holland, and pressed by want, was obliged to enter into the military service in 1687; but soon, by the advice of his relations, returned to his studies, and went to the university of Franeker, where he went through a regular course of education, and added to philosophy, divinity, history, &c. the study of the mathematics. In 1689 he came over to England, and the hopes of being able to return to France, which the protestants in general entertained, being disappointed, he was obliged to have recourse to his pen for a livelihood. His first employment appears to have been to transcribe and prepare for the press Camden’s letters from the Cotton ian library, for Dr. Smith, who afterwards published them. In 1692, he became French and Latin tutor to Allen Bathurst, esq. eldest son of sir Benjamin Bathurst, who, being much in favour with the princess Anne of Denmark, afterwards queen of Great Britain, he had hopes of some preferment at court. With this view he paid great attention to his pupil’s education (who was afterwards lord Bathurst), and for his use composed two compendious grammars, the one Latin, the other French; but the latter only was printed, and to this da,y is a standard book. His hopes of preferment, however, Appear to have been fallacious, which his biographer attributes to his siding with a different party from the Bathurst family in the political divisions which prevailed at that time in the nation, Boyer, like the rest of his countrymen who had fled hither for religion, being a zealous whig. After this, having made himself master of the English tongue, he became an author by profession, and engaged sometimes alone, and sometimes in conjunction with the booksellers, in various compilations, and periodical works of the political kind, particularly a newspaper called the “Post-Boy;” the “Political State of Great Britain,” published in volumes from 1710 to 1729 a “History of William III.” 3 vols. 8vo “Annals of the reign of Queen Anne,” 11 vols. 8vo, and a “Life of Queen Anne,” fol. all publications now more useful than when published, as they contain many state papers, memorials, &c. which it would be difficult to find elsewhere; but his name is chiefly preserved by his French Dictionary, 1699, 4to, and a French Grammar, of both which he lived to see several editions, and which still continue to be printed. His political principles involved him with Swift, who often speaks contemptuously of him, and with Pope, who has given him a place in the Dunciad. He died Nov. 16, 1729, at a house he had built in Five Fields, Chelsea, and was buried in Chelsea church-yard.

, of the French academy, was born at Alby in 1618. He came young to Paris, where he cultivated his talent for eloquence; but, having preached with little success, he quitted the pulpit for the stage, which he had been declaiming against, and now devoted himself to it for life, always satisfied with himself, but seldom with the public. Born with an imagination which submitted to no restraint, he made choice of subjects strangely complicated, and equivocal heroes who had no character whatever. Aiming always at the sublime, where the simplicity of nature was required, he fell into a strain of bombast, unintelligible perhaps to himself. He is the author of two-and-twenty dramatic pieces, full of fustian, and conducted without any knowledge of the drama. His Judith had a transient success. The epigram it produced from Racine is generally known. “Je pleure, helas! pour ce pauvre Holopherne, si mechamment mis a mort par Judith.” This piece, applauded during a whole Lent, was hissed off the stage in the Easter holidays. Champmeslee, asking the reason of the fickleness of the pit, was answered, that the hissers had been at Versailles at the sermons of the abbe Boileau, who had ridiculed him. Boyer, at length disheartened by this constant run of ill-success, brought out his tragedy of Agamemnon under a borrowed name, andRacine, his grand tormentor, applauded the piece. Boyer could not refrain from crying out in the pit, “It is however Boyer’s, in spite of Mons. de Racine;” but this transport cost him dear, for his tragedy was hissed at the next performance. He died at Paris, July 22, 1698, aged eighty.

, a learned French physician, was born at Marseilles, August 5, 1693. His father, intending to bring him up to business, gave him a suitable education, and afterwards sent him to Constantinople, to his uncle, who was consul there; but rinding him inclined to literature, and to the study of medicine, he sent him, on his return from the Levant, to the university at Montpellier. In 1717, he took the degree of doctor, and gave for jiis inaugural thesis, “A dissertation on Inoculation of the Small Pox,” which he had seen practised at Constantinople. On the plague breaking out at Marseilles, in 1720, he was sent there with five other physicians; and his conduct on that occasion having been approved, he was rewarded by the king with a pension, and was made physician to a regiment of guards. He was some years after invited to Hunspruche, a town in the bishopric of Treves, where an infectious fever was making great ravages, and, in 1742, to Paris, on a similar occasion. His success at these places occasioned him to be sent for to Beauvais, in. 1750, where by his judicious management he prevented -the spreading of an infections fever, infesting that country. For these services he was honoured' by the king with letters of nobility, and invested with the order of St. Michael. He died at Paris, April 2, 1768. His works are, “Methode indiquee contre la maladie epidemique convient de regner a Beauvais,” Paris, 1750, a quarto pamphlet, of only ten pages. “Methode a suivre dans le traitement de differentes maladies epidemiques qui regnent le plus ordinairernent dans la generality de Paris,” 1761, 12mo. He wrote, in 1745, a “Memoir” on the disease infesting the cattle at that time, which was sent to the royal society in London, and procured him a place in the list of their foreign members. He also gave a nevr edition of the “Codex medicamentarius,” seu “Pharmacopoeia Parisiensis,” 4to, a very useful and well digested work.

, a celebrated statesman, descended from an ancient and honourable family, and distinguished by the title of the great earl of Cork, was the youngest son of Mr. Roger Boyle of Herefordshire, by Joan, daughter of Robert Naylor of Canterbury, and born in the city of Canterbury, Oct. 3, 1566. He was instructed in grammar learning by a clergyman of Kent; and after having been a scholar in Ben'et college, Cambridge, where he was remarkable for early rising, indefatigable study, and great temperance, became student in the Middle Temple. He lost his father when he was but ten years old, and his mother at the expiration of other ten years; and being unable to support himself in the prosecution of his studies, he entered into the service of sir Richard Manwood, chief baron of the exchequer, as one of his clerks: but perceiving few advantages from this employment, he resolved to travel, and landed at Dublin in June 1588, with a very scanty stock, his whole property amounting, as he himself informs us, to 271. 3s. in money, two trinkets which his mother gave him as tokens, and his wearing apparel. He was then about two-and-twenty, had a graceful person, and all the accomplishments for a young man to succeed in a country which was a scene of so much action. Accordingly he made himself very useful to some of the principal persons employed in the government, by penning for them memorials, cases, and answers; and thereby acquired a perfect knowledge of the kingdom and the state of publia affairs, of which he knew well how to avail himself. In 1595 he married at Limeric, Joan, the daughter and coheiress of William Ansley of Pulborough, in Sussex, <esq. who had fallen in love with him. This lady died 1599, in labour of her first child (born dead) leaving her husband an estate of 500l. a year in lands, which was the beginning of his fortune. Some time after, sir Henry Wallop, of Wares, sir Robert Gardiner, chief justice of the king’s bench, sir Robert Dillam, chief justice of the common pleas, and sir Richard Binghim, chief commissioner of Connaught, envious at certain purchases he had made in the province, represented to queen Elizabeth that he was in the pay of the king of Spain (who had at that time some thoughts of invading Ireland), by whom he had been furnished with money to buy several large estates; and that he was strongly suspected to be a Roman catholic in his heart, with many other malicious suggestions equally groundless. Mr. Boyle, having private notice of this, determined to come over to England to justify himself: but, before he could take shipping, the general rebellion in Minister broke out, all his lands were wasted, and he had not one penny of certain revenue left. In this distress he betook himself to his former chamber in the Middle Temple, intending to renew his studies in the law till the rebellion should be suppressed. When the earl of Essex was nominated lord-deputy of Ireland, Mr. Boyle, being recommended to him by Mr. Anthony Bacon, was received by his lordship very graciously; and sir Henry Wallop, treasurer of Ireland, knowing that Mr. Boyle had in his custody several papers which could detect his roguish manner of passing his accounts, resolved utterly to depress him, and for that end renewed his former complaints against him to the queen. By her majesty’s special directions, Mr. Boyle was suddenly taken up, and committed close prisoner to the Gatehouse: all his papers were seized and searched; and although nothing appeared to his prejudice, yet his confinement lasted till two months after his new patron the earl of Essex was gone to Ireland, At length, with much difficulty, he obtained the favour of the queen to be present at his examination; and having fully answered whatever was alledged against him, he gave a short account of his behaviour since he first settled in Ireland, and concluded with laying open to the queen and her council the conduct of his chief enemy sir Henry Wallop. Upon which her majesty exclaimed with, her usual intemperance of speech, “By God’s death, these are but inventions against this young man, and all his sufferings are for being able to do us service, and these complaints urged to forestal him therein. But we find him to be a man fit to be employed by ourselves; and we will employ him in our service: and Wallop and his adherents shall know that it shall not be in the power of any of them, to wrong him. Neither -shall Wallop be our treasurer any longer.” Accordingly, she gave orders not only for Mr. Boyle’s present enlargement, but also for paying all the charges and fees his confinement had brought upon him, and gave him her hand to kiss before the whole assembly. A few days after, the queen constituted him clerk of the council of Munster, and recommended him to sir George Carew, afterwards earl of Totness, then lord president of Munster, who became his constant friend; and very soon, after he was made justice of the peace and of the quorum, throughout all the province. He attended in that capacity the lord president in all his employments, and was sent by his lordship to the queen with the news of the victory gained in December 1601, near Kinsate, over the Irish, and their Spanish auxiliaries, who were totally routed, 1200 being slain in the field, and 800 wounded. “I made,” says he, “a speedy expedition to the court, for I left my lord president at Shannon -castle, near Cork, on the Monday morning about two of the clock; and the next day, being Tuesday, I delivered my packet, and supped with sir Robert Cecil, being then principal secretary of state, at his house in the Strand; who, after supper, held me in discourse till two of the clock in the morning; and by seven that morning called upon me to attend him to the court, where he presented me to her majesty in her bedchamber.” A journey so rapid as this would be thought, even in the present more improved modes of travelling, requires all his lordship’s authority to render it credible.

Upon his return to Ireland, he assisted at the siege of Donboy, near Beer-haven, which was taken by storm, and the garrison put to the sword. After the reduction of the western part of the province, the lord president sent Mr. Boyle again to England, to procure the queen’s leave for his return; and having advised him to purchase sir Walter Raleigh’s lands in Munster, he gave him a letter to sir Robert Cecil, secretary of state, containing a very advantageous account of Mr. Boyle’s abilities, and of the services he had done his country; in consideration of which, he desired the secretary to introduce him to sir Walter, and recommend him as a proper purchaser for his lands in Ireland, if he was disposed to part with them. He wrote at the same time to sir Walter himself, advising 1 him to sell Mr. Boyle all his lands in Ireland, then untenanted, and of no value to him, having, to his lordship’s knowledge, never yielded him any benefit, but, on the contrary, stood him in 200l. yearly for the support of his titles. At a meeting between sir Robert Cecil, sir Walter Raleigh, and Mr. Boyle, the purchase was concluded by the mediation of the former .

In 1602, Mr. Boyle, by advice of his friend sir George Carew, paid his addresses to Mrs. Catherine Fenton, daughter of sir Geoffry Fenton, whom he married on the 25th of July, 1603, her father being at that time principal secretary of state. “I never demanded,” says he, “any marriage portion with her, neither promise of any, it not being in my considerations; yet her father, after my marriage, gave me one thousand pounds in gold with her. But that gift of his daughter to me, I must ever thankfully acknowledge as the crown of all my blessings; for she was a most religious, virtuous, loving, and obedient wife to me all the days of her life, and the mother of all my hopeful children .” He received on his wedding day, July 23, 1603, the honour of knighthood from his friend sir George Carew, now promoted to be lord-deputy of Ireland: March 12, 1606, he was sworn a privy counsellor to king James, for the province of Munster Feb. 15, 1612, he was sworn a privy counsellor of stete of the kingdom of Ireland Sept. 29, 1616, he was created lord Boyle, baron of Youghall: Oct. 16, 1620, viscount of Dungarvon, and earl of Cork. Lord Falkland, the lord-deputy, having represented his services in a just light to king Charles I. his majesty sent his excellency a letter, dated Nov. 30, 1627, directing him to confer the honours of baron and viscount upon the earl’s second surviving son Lewis, though he was then only eight years old, by the title of Baron of Bandonbridge, and viscount Boyle of Kinalmeaky in the county of Cork.

On the departure of lord-deputy Falkland, the earl of Cork, in conjunction with lord Lortus, was appointed one of the lords justices of Ireland, Oct. 26, 1629, and held that office several years. Feb. 16th following, the earl lost his countess, by whom he had fifteen children. Nov. 9 1631, he was constituted lord high treasurer of Ireland, and had interest enough to get that high office made hereditary in his family. Nevertheless, he suffered many mortifications during the administration of sir Thomas Wentworth, afterwards earl of Strafford, who, before he went to Ireland, had conceived a jealousy of his authority and interest in that kingdom, and now conceived that if he could humble the great earl of Cork, nobody in that country could give him much trouble. On the breaking out of the rebellion in Ireland in 1641, the earl of Cork, as soon as he returned from England (where he was at the time of the earl of Strafford’s trial), immediately raised two troops of horse, which he put under the command of his sons the lord viscount Kinalmeaky and the lord Brogbill, maintaining them and 400 foot for some months at his own charge. In the battle which the English gained at Liscarrol, Sept. 3, Io42, four of his sons were engaged, and the eldest was slain in the field. The earl himself died about a year after, on the 15th of September, in the 78th year of his age; having spent the last, as he did the first year of his life, in the support of the crown of England against Irish rebels, and in the service of his country. Though he was no peer of England, he was, on account of his eminent abilities and knowledge of the world, admitted to sit in the house of lords upon the woolpacks, ut consiliarius. When Cromwell saw the prodigious improvements he had made, which he little expected to find in Ireland, he declared, that if there had been an earl of Cork in every province, it would have been impossible for the Irish to have raised a rebellion.

He affected not places and titles of honour until he was well able to maintain them, for he was in the 37th year of his age when knighted, and in his 50th when made A baron. He made large purchases, but not till he was able to improve them; and he grew rich on estates which had ruined their former possessors. He increased his wealth, not by hoarding, but by spending; for he built and walled several towns at his own cost, but in places so well situated, that they were soon filled with inhabitants, and quickly repaid the money he had laid out, with interest, which he as readily laid out again. Hence, in the space of forty years, he acquired to himself what in some countries would have been esteemed a noble principality; and as they came to years of discretion, he bestowed estates upon his sons, and married his daughters into the best families of that country. He outlived most of those who had known the meanness of his beginning; but he delighted to remember it himself, and even took pains to preserve the memory of it to posterity in the motto which he always used, and which he caused to be placed upon his tomb, viz. “God’s providence is my inheritance.”

It is much to be regretted that so faithful a servant of the public should have lived at variance with the earl of Strafford, himself a man of virtue, talents, and patriotism, and afterwards a sacrifice to the fury of the republican party in England; yet it cannot be denied that the earl of Strafford behaved in a very arrogant and haughty manner to the earl of Cork; and that the conduct of the lord deputy was such, as it could not reasonably be expected any man of spirit would patiently submit to, and especially a man of so much worth and merit as the noble subject of this article. His lordship gave evidence at Strafford’s trial, that when he had commenced a suit at law, in a case in which he apprehended himself to be aggrieved, the earl of Strafford, in the most arbitrary manner, forbad his prosecuting his suit, saying to him, “Call in your writs, or if you will not, I will clap you in the castle; for I tell you, I will not have my orders disputed by law, nor lawyers.” We have, however, already seen that lord Cork had other enemies, who took various opportunities of displaying their jealousy of his power and talents. One singular opportunity was taken on the death of his second lady, which we shall detail, as including some traits of the taste and prejudices of the times. This lady was privately interred on the 27th of February 1629-30, but her funeral was publicly solemnized on the llth of March following; soon after which$ the earl of Cork purchased from the dean and chapter of St. Patrick’s church, the inheritance of the upper part of the chancel where the vault was, in which the bodies of her grandfather by the mother’s side, the lord chancellor Weston, and of her father sir Geoffry Fenton, were laid, over which the earl her husband caused a fine marble tomb to be erected. This presently gave offence to some people, who suggested that it stood where the altar ought to stand, of which they complained to the king, who mentioned it to Dr. Laud, then bishop of London; who after the lord Wentworth was made lord deputy of Ireland, and himself archbishop of Canterbury, moved him that it might be inquired into, as it was, and this affair made afterwards a very great noise. The earl of Cork procured a letter from Dr. Usher, then lord primate of Ireland, and also from Dr. Launcelot Bulkeiey, then archbishop of Dublin, justifying, that the tomb did not stand in the place of the altaf, and that instead of being an inconvenience, it was a great ornament to the church; which letters archbishop Laud transmitted to the lord deputy, and at the same time acquainted^ him that they did not give himself any satisfaction. The postscript to this letter, dated Lambeth, March 11, 1634, is very remarkable, and shews both the rise and the falsehood of the common opinion, that it was the lord deputy, afterwards earl of Strafford, who set this matter on foot out of prejudice to the earl of Cork. “I had almost forgot to tell you, that all this business about demolishing my lord of Cork’s tomb is charged upon you, as if it were done only because he will not marry his son to my lord Clifford’s daughter, and that I do it to join with you; whereas the complaint came against it to me out of Ireland, and was presented by me to the king before I knew that your lordship was named for deputy there. But jealousies know no end.” The archbishop afterwards wrote in very strong terms to the earl of Cork himself, in which he affirms the same thing, and deals very roundly with his lordship upon that and other subjects, advising him to leave the whole to the lord deputy and the archbishops. As to the issue of the affair, it appears clearly from a letter of the lord deputy Wentworth’s, dated August 23, 1634, to the archbishop, in which he delivers himself thus: “I have issued a commission, according to my warrant, for viewing the earl of Cork’s tomb: the two archbishops and himself, with four bishops, and the two deans and chapters, were present when we met, and made them all so ashamed, that the earl desires he may have leave to pull it down without reporting further into England; so as I am content if the miracle be done, though Mohammed do it, and there is an end of the tomb before it come to be entombed indeed. And for me that my lord treasurer do what he please; I shall ever wish his ways may be those of honour to himself, and dispatch to my master’s affairs; but go it as it shall please God with me, believe me, my lord, I will be still tlwrow and thorowout one and the same, and with comfort be it spoken by myself, and your grace’s commendations.” It may be added that though the tomb has been taken away above a century, yet the inscription that was upon it is still extant.

, earl of Orrery, fifth son of Richard earl of Cork, was born April 25, 1621, and created baron Broghill in the kingdom of Ireland when but seven years old. He was educated at the college of Dublin, and about the year 1636, sent with his elder brother lord Kinalmeaky to make the tour of France and Italy. Afterhis return he married lady Margaret Howard, sister to the earl of Suffolk. During the rebellion in Ireland, he commanded a troop of horse in the forces raised by his father, and on many occasions gave proofs of conduct and courage. After the cessation of arms, which was concluded in 1643, he came over to England, and so represented to the king the Irish papists, that his majesty was convinced they never meant to keep the cessation, and therefore sent a commission to lord Inchiquin, president of Munster, to prosecute the rebels. Lord Broghill employed his interest in that county to assist him in this service; and when the government of Ireland was committed to the parliament, he continued to observe the same conduct till the king was put to death. That event shocked him so much, that he immediately quitted the service of the parliament; and, looking upon Ireland and his estate there as utterly lost, embarked for England, and returned to his seat at Marston in Somersetshire, where he lived privately till 1649. In this retirement, reflecting on the distress of his country, and the personal injury he suffered whilst his estate was held by the Irish rebels, he resolved, under pretence of going to the Spa for his health, to cross the seas, and apply to king Charles II. for a commission to raise forces in Ireland, in order to restore his majesty, and recover his own estate. He desired the earl of Warwick, who had an interest in the prevailing party, to procure a licence for him to go to the Spa. He pretended to the earl, that his sole view was the recovery of his health; but, to some of his friends of the royal party, in whom he thought he could confide, he discovered hi* real design; and having raised a considerable sum of money, came to London to prosecute his voyage. The committee of state, who spared no pains to get proper intelligence, being soon informed of his whole design, determined to proceed against him with the utmost severity. Cromwell, at that time general of the parliament’s forces, and a member of the committee, was no stranger to lord Broghill’s merit; and considering that this young nobleman might be of great use to him in reducing Ireland, he earnestly entreated the committee, that he might have leave to talk with him, and endeavour to gain him, before they proceeded to extremities. Having, with great difficulty, obtained this permission, he immediately dispatched a gentleman to lord Broghill, to let him know that he intended to wait upon him. Broghill was surprised at this message, having never had the least acquaintance with Cromwell, and therefore desired the gentleman to let the general know that he would wait upon his excellency. But while he was expecting the return of the messenger, Cromwell entered the room; and, after mutual civilities, told him in few words, that the committee of state were apprised of his design of going over, and applying to Charles Stuart for a commission to raise forces in Ireland; and that they had determined to make an example of him, if he had not diverted them from that resolution. The lord Broghill interrupted him, and assured him that the intelligence which the committee had received was false; that he was neither in a capacity, nor had any inclination, to raise disturbances in Ireland; and concluded with entreating his excellency to have a kinder opinion of him. Cromwell, instead of making any reply, drew some papers out of. his pocket, which were the copies of several letters sent by lord Broghill to those persons in whom he most confided, and put them into his hands. Broghill, finding it was to no purpose to dissemble any longer, asked his excellency’s pardon for what he had said, returned him, Vol. VI. y his humble thanks for his protection against the committee, and entreated his advice how he ought to behave in so delicate a conjuncture. Cromwell told him, that though till this time he had been a stranger to his person, he was not so to his merit and character; that he had heard how gallantly his lordship had already behaved in the Irish wars; and therefore, since he was named lord lieutenant of Ireland, and the reducing that kingdom was now become his province, that he had obtained leave of the committee to offer his lordship the command of a general officer, if he would serve in that war: that he should have no oaths or engagements imposed upon him, nor be obliged to draw his sword against any but the Irish rebels. Lord Broghill was infinitely surprised at so generous and unexpected an offer: he saw himself at liberty, by all the rules of honour, to serve against the Irish, whose rebellion and barbarities were equally detested by the royal party and the parliament: he desired, however, the general to give him some time to consider of what he had proposed to him. Cromwell briskly told him, that he must come to some resolution that very instant; that he himself was returning to the committee, who were still sitting; and if his lordship rejected their offer, they had determined to send him to the Tower. Broghill,' rinding that his life and liberty were in the utmost danger, and charmed with the frankness and generosity of Cromwell’s behaviour, gave him his word and honour, that he would faithfully serve him against the Irish rebels; upon which, Cromwell once more assured him, that the conditions which he had made with him should be punctually observed; and then ordered him to repair immediately to Bristol, to which place forces should be sent him, with a sufficient number of ships to transport him into Ireland.

He soon raised in that kingdom a troop and a regiment of 1500 men, with which he joined Cromwell on his arrival; and, acting in the course of the war conjointly with Cromwell and Ireton, contributed greatly to the reduction of the Irish. Cromwell was so exceedingly struck with his conduct and courage, that after he was declared protector, he sent for lord Broghill, made him one of his privy council, and allowed him as great a share of his conh'dence as any man, except Thurloe . In 1656, the protector, either suspecting Monk’s attachment to his person, or desirous of relieving the people of Scotland, who complained of this man’s severity, proposed to lord Broghill to go to that kingdom with an absolute authority; to which his lordship consented, upon condition that he should have a discretionary power to act as he should see proper; that no credit should be given to any complaints, till he had an opportunity of vindicating himself; and that he should be recalled in a year. Cromwell kept his word to him; for though the complaints against Broghill were more numerous than those against Monk, upon giving, at his return to London when the year was expired, an account of the reasons of his conduct, Cromwell conceived a higher esteem for him than ever.

After the death of Cromwell, Broghill did his utmost to serve his son, to whom his lordship, in conjunction with lord Howard and some others, made an offer, that if he would not be wanting to himself, and give them a sufficient authority to act under him, they would either force his enemies to obey him, or cut them off. Richard, startled at this proposal, answered in a consternation, that he thanked them for their friendship, but that he neither had done, nor would do, any person any harm; and that rather than that a drop of blood should be spilt on his account, he would lay down that greatness which was a burden to him. He was so fixed in his resolution, that whatever the lords could say was not capable of making him alter it; and they found it to no purpose to keep a man in power who would do nothing for himself. Lord Broghill, therefore, finding the family of Cromwell thus laid aside, and not being obliged by any ties to serve those who assumed the government, whose schemes too he judged wild and ill-concerted, from this time shewed himself most active and zealous to restore the king, and for that purpose repaired forthwith to his command in Munster; where, finding himself at the head of a considerable force, he determined to get the army in Ireland to join with him in the design, to gain, if possible, sir Charles Coote, who had great power in the north, and then to send to Monk in Scotland. Whilst meditating this design, a summons came to him from the seven commissioners, sent over by the committee of safety to take care of the affairs of Ireland, requiring him to attend them immediately at the castle of Dublin. His friends advised him to be upon his guard, and not put himself in the power of his enemies; but, as he thought himself not strong enough yet to take such a step, he resolved to obey the summons. Taking, therefore, his own troop with him as a guard, he set out for Dublin. When he came to the city, leaving his troop in the suburbs, he acquainted the commissioners, that, in obedience to their commands, he was come to know their farther pleasure. Next day, on appearing before them, they told him, that the state was apprehensive he would practise against their government, and that therefore they had orders to confine him, unless he would give sufficient security for his peaceable behaviour. He desired to know what security they expected. They told him, that since he had a great interest in Munster, they only desired him to engage, on the forfeiture of his life and estate, that there should be no commotion in that province. He now plainly perceived the snare which was laid for him; and that, if he entered into such an engagement, his enemies themselves might raise some commotions in Munster. He saw himself, however, in their power, and made no manner of doubt but that if he refused to give them the security they demanded, they would immediately put him up in prison. He therefore desired some time to consider of their proposal; but was told, they could give him no time, and expected his immediate answer. Finding himself thus closely pressed, he humbly desired to be satisfied in one point, namely, whether they intended to put the whole power of Munster into his hands? if they did, he said, he was ready to enter into the engagement they demanded; but if they did not, he must appeal to all the world how cruel and unreasonable it was, to expect he should answer for the behaviour of people over whom he had no command. The commissioners found themselves so much embarrassed by this question, that they ordered him to withdraw; and fell into a warm debate in what manner to proceed with him. At last Steel, one of the commissioners, who was also lord chancellor of Ireland, declared himself afraid, that even the honest party in Ireland would think it rery hard to see a man thrown into prison, who had dons such signal services to the Protestants; but that, on the other hand, he could never consent to the increase of lord Broghill’s power, which the state was apprehensive might one day be employed against them. He therefore proposed that things should stand as they did at present; that his lordship should be sent back to his command in Munster in a good humour, and be suffered at least to continue there till they received further instructions from England. This proposal was agreed to by the majority of the board, and lord Broghill being called in, was told in the most obliging manner, that the board was so sensible of the gallant actions he had performed in the Irish wars, and had so high an opinion of his honour, that they would depend upon that alone for his peaceable behaviour.

Upon his return to Munster, he applied himself as closely as ever to form a party for the king’s restoration. After making sure of his own officers, the first person of weight he engaged in the design was colonel Wilson, governor of Limerick, in which place there was a garrison of 2000 men; and having now secured all Munster, he sent a trusty agent to sir Charles Coote, to persuade that gentleman to do in the north of Ireland, what he himself had done in the south. Sir Charles, who had taken disgust at the superiority of lieutenant-general Ludlow, and the parliament’s commissioners, and thought his eminent services not sufficiently rewarded by the presidency of Connaught, came readily into the design. Lord Broghill being empowered by most of the chief officers in Ireland under their hands, dispatched his brother, the lord Shannon, to the king, then in Flanders, with a letter quilted in the neck of his doublet, to acquaint his majesty with the measures he had taken, and inviting him to come into his kingdom of Ireland; assuring him that if he pleased to land at Cork, he should be received with a sufficient force to protect him against all his enemies. At the same time he dispatched a messenger to general Monk, then on his march from Scotland, to let him know what they were doing in Ireland, and to persuade him to do the like. Shannon was scarce embarked for Flanders, when lord Broghill received a letter from sir Charles Coote, to acquaint him that their design of declaring for the king had taken air, and that he had therefore been obliged to declare somewhat sooner than they had agreed upon; and to conjure his lordship to declare himself likewise; which Broghill did immediately. that he might not desert his friend, though he was a little apprehensive that sir Charles’s precipitancy might ruin their design. By this means those who had assumed the government of Ireland, finding themselves in the midst of two powerful parties, made little or no resistance; and lord Broghill and sir Charles Coote secured that kingdom for his majesty.

Upon the king’s restoration, lord Broghill came to England; but, instead of being thanked for his service in Ireland, he was received with the utmost coldness. Upon inquiry, he learnt that sir Charles Coote had assured the king that he was the first man who stirred for him in Ireland; that lord Broghill opposed his majesty’s return, and was not at last brought to consent to it without much difficulty. His lordship, recollecting that he had still by him sir Charles’s letter, in which were these words, “Remember, my lord, that you first put rne on this design; and I beseech you, forsake me not in that which you first put me upon, which was, to declare for king and parliament,” desired his brother Shannon to put it into the hands of the king; who being fully convinced by it how serviceable Broghill had been to him, looked upon him with as gracious an eye as he could himself desire or expect. His lordship was soon after (Sept. 5, 1660 V) made earl of Orrery, sworn of the king’s privy- council, appointed one of the lords justices, and lord president of Munster.

After the king’s return the Irish Roman catholics sent over sir Nicholas Plunket, and some other commissioners, with a petition to his majesty, praying to be restored to their estates. As this would in effect have ruined the Protestants, they therefore chose the earl of Orrery, Montrath, and six more, to oppose theif adversaries before the king and his council. The Irish commissioners were so apprehensive of the earl’s eloquence and address upon this occasion, that they offered him eight thousand pounds in money, and to settle estates of seven thousand pounds a year upon him, if he would not appear against them; which proposal the earl rejected with proper disdain. When the cause came to a hearing, after the Irish commissioners had offered all they thought proper, the earl of Orrery boldly affirmed to the king that his Protestant subjects in Ireland were the first who formed an effectual party for restoring him; that the Irish had broken all the treaties which had been made with them; that they had fought against the authority both of the late and present king; and had offered the kingdom of Ireland to the pope, to the king of Spain, and the king of France. Lastly, to the great surprise, not only of the Irish, but of his own brother-commissioners, he proved his assertions by producing several original papers signed by the Irish supreme council, of which sir Nicholas Plunket himself was one. This last unexpected blow decided the dispute in favour of the Protestants; and obliged his majesty to dismiss the Irish commissioners with some harsher expressions than he commonly made use of.

Soon after this affair, his lordship, with sir Charles Coote, lately made earl of Montrath, and sir Maurice Eustace, were constituted lords justices of Ireland, and commissioned to call and hold a parliament. Some time before the meeting of the parliament, he drew with his own hand the famous act of settlement, by which he fixed the property, and gave titles to their estates to a whole nation. When the duke of Ormond was declared lord lieutenant, the earl of Orrery went into Munster, of which province he was president. By virtue of this office, he heard and determined causes in a court called the residency-court; and acquired so great a reputation in his judicial capacity, that he was offered the seals both by the king and the duke of York after the fall of lord Clarendon; but, being very much afflicted with the gout, he declined a post that required constant attendance. During the first Dutch war, in which France acted as a confederate with Holland, he defeated the scheme formed by the duke de Beaufort, admiral of France, to get possession of the harbour of Kinsale, and took advantage of the fright of the people, and the alarm of the government, to get a fort erected under his own directions, which was named Fort Charles. He promoted a scheme for inquiring into, and improving the king’s revenue in Ireland; but his majesty having applied great sums out of the revenue of that kingdom which did not come plainly into account, the inquiry was never begun. Ormond, listening to some malicious insinuations, began to entertain a jealousy of Orrery, and prevailed with the king to direct him to lay down his residential court; as a compensation for which, his majesty made him a present of 8000l. Sir Thomas Clifford, who had been brought into the ministry in England, apprehensive that he cpuld not carry his ends in Ireland whilst Orrery continued president of Munster, procured articles of impeachment of high treason and misdemeanours to be exhibited against him in the English house of commons; but his lordship being heard in his place, gave an answer so clear, circumstantial, and ingenuous, that the affair was dropt. The king laboured in vain to reconcile him to the French alliance, and the reducing of the Dutch. At the desire of the king and the duke of York, he drew the plan of an act of limitation, by which the successor would have been disabled from encroaching on civil and religious liberty; but the proposing thereof being postponed till after the exclusion-bill was set on foot, the season for making use of it was past. The iing, to hinder his returning to Ireland, and to keep him about his person, offered him the place of lord-treasurer; but the earl of Orrery plainly told his majesty that he was guided by unsteady counsellors, with whom he could not act. He died in October 1679, aged fifty-eight; leaving behind him the character of an able general, statesman, and writer. He had issue by his lady, two sons and five daughters. His writings are these: 1. “The Irish colours displayed; in a reply of an English Protestant to a letter of an Irish Roman catholic,” London, 1662, 4to. 2. “An answer to a scandalous letter lately printed, and subscribed by Peter Walsh, procurator for the secular and regular popish priests of Ireland, entitled A letter desiring a just and merciful regard of the Roman catholics of Ireland, given about the end of October 1660, to the then marquis, now duke of Ormond, and the second time lord lieutenant of that kingdom. By the right honourable the earl of Orrery, &c. being a full discovery of the treachery of the Irish rebels since the beginning of the rebellion there, necessary to be considered by all adventurers, and other persons estated in that kingdom,” Dublin, 1662, 4to. 3. “A poem on his majesty’s happy restoration.” 4. “A poem on the death of the celebrated Mr. Abraham CowJey,” London, 1667, fol. 5. “The history of Henry V. a tragedy,” London, 1668, fol. 6. “Mustapha, the son of Soliman the Magnificent, a tragedy,” London, Ifi67, fol. and 1668. 7. “The Black Prince, a tragedy,” London, 1672, fol. 8. “Triphon, a tragedy,” London, 1672, fol. These four plays were collected and published together in 1690, folio, and make now the entire first volume of the new edition of the earl’s dramatic works. 9. “Parthenissa, a romance in three volumes,” London, 1665, 4to, 1667, fol. 10. “A Dream.” In this piece he introduces the genius of France persuading Charles II. to promote the interest of that kingdom, and act upon French principles. He afterwards introduces the ghost of his father, dissuading him from it, answering all the arguments the genius of France had urged, and proving to him from his own misfortunes and tragical end, that a kind’s

chief treasure, and only real strength, is the affections of his people. 11. “A treatise upon the Art of War.” 12. Poems on the Fasts and Festivals of the Church.“His posthumous works are: 1.” Mr. Anthony, a comedy,“1692. 2.” Guzman, a comedy,“1693. 3.” Herod the great, a tragedy,“1694. 4.” Altemira, a tragedy,“brought upon the stage by Mr. Francis Manning, in 1702, with a prologue by Henry St. John, esq. afterwards lord viscount Boiingbroke, and an epilogue by the hon. Charles Boyle, esq. the late earl of Orrery, who also interspersed several songs in the work itself. 5.” State letters," published in 1742, fol. Mr. Morrice the editor, who was his biographer and chaplain, says that his patron drew up a very curious account of what was done in the court or camp, in which he had any part, or could speak of with certainty. But this has never been published. The duke of Ormond having by his majesty’s command consulted with the earl of Orrery upon the propositions to be laid before the parliament of Ireland in 1677, his lordship delivered to him five sheets of paper containing the most effectual methods of protecting the nation from foreign and domestic enemies, advancing the Protestant interest, increasing the revenue, and securing private property. But these, with other papers, were destroyed when lord Orrery’s house was burnt to the ground in 1690, by a party of king James’s soldiers, with the duke of Berwick at their head; Lionel, then earl of Orrery, and grandson to our author, being a minor, and abroad on his travels.

It is more pleasing to recur to his private character, which Dr. Campbell has described with more truth. He was, says this biographer, a kind and good, as well as a very well-bred and courteous husband: and lady Orrery was esteemed one of the handsomest and most prudent women about the court. He was a tender, and even a fond parent; but very attentive to the education and behaviour of his children, by which the benefit they received was not small. As a landlord, he was both attentive to his own interest, and indulgent to his tenants. If a man was oppressed, no one more readily relieved him; if a farmer’s family was numerous, or his circumstances narrow, his assistance was never wanting; but he was in all cases solicitous that the people should thrive, as well as obtain subsistence; and his saying was, “that the greatest charity consisted in keeping people from needing it.” With this view, he procured by the royal favour, grants of fairs and markets for Rathgogran and Ballymaathra, two villages of his, which by this means were so far improved that he afterwards obtained charters, by which they were erected into boroughs, each sending two members to the Irish parliament, and established besides manufactures in them for their better support. But in nothing his goodness and beneficence of heart appeared more than in his treatment of his domestics. He was alike careful of their bodies, estates, and minds; they lived in the utmost plenty, but he suffered no waste; *nd for debauchery, he had the utmost abhorrence. He provided for them according to their several capacities, that, having lived well with him, they might not fall into indigence after they Jeft him. He frequently observed, that the meanest of them had a soul to be saved, as well as himself; and therefore, he not only obliged his chaplain to have a due attention to their spiritual concerns, but frequently inspected the discharge of his duty in this particular. His lordship loved company, and kept always an open table, to which all the gentlemen in the country were welcome; and this was a public benefit, the conversation on such occasions being as delicate as the provisions.

, the most illustrious philosopher of modern times, was the seventh son, and the fourteenth child of Richard earl of Cork, and born at Lismore, in the province of Munster, in Ireland, the 25th of Jan. 1626-7. He was committed to the care of a country nurse, with instructions to bring him up as hardy as if he had been her own son; for his father, he tells us, “had a perfect aversion for the fondness of those parents which made them breed their children so nice and tenderly, that a hot sun or a good shower of rain as much endangers them as if they were made of butter or of sugar.” By this he gained a strong and vigorous constitution, which, however, he afterwards lost, by its being treated too tenderly. He acquaints us with several misfortunes which happened to him in his youth. When he was about three years old, he lost his mother, who was a most accomplished woman, and whom he regrets on that account, because he did not know her. A second misfortune was, that he learned to stutter, by mocking some children of his own age; of which, though no endeavours were spared, he could never perfectly be cured. A third, that in a journey to Dublin, he had like to have been drowned, if one of his father’s gentlemen had not taken him out of a coach, which, in passing a brook raised by some sudden showers, was overturned and carried away with the stream.

While he continued at home, he was taught to write a very fair hand, and to speak French and Latin by one of the earl’s chaplains, and a Frenchman that he kept in the house. In 1635, his father sent him over to England, in order to be educated at Eton school under sir Henry Wotton, who was the earl of Cork’s old friend and acquaintance. Here he soon discovered a force of understanding which promised great things, and a disposition to cultivate and improve it to the utmost. While he remained at Eton, there were several extraordinary accidents that befel him, of which he has given us an account; and three of which were very near proving fatal to him. The first was, the sudden fall of the chamber where he lodged, when himself was in bed; when, besides the hazard he ran of being crushed to pieces, he had certainly been choked with the dust during the time he lay under the rubbish, if he had not had presence of mind enough to have wrapped his head up in the sheet, which gave him an opportunity of breathing without hazard. A little after this, he had been crushed to pieces by a starting horse that rose up suddenly and threw himself backwards, if he had not happily disengaged his feet from the stirrups, and cast himself from his back before he fell. A third accident proceeded from the carelessness of an apothecary’s servant; who, mistaking the phials, brought him a strong emetic instead of a cooling julep.

He remained at Eton between three and four years; after which, his father carried him to his own seat at Stalbridge, in Dorsetshire, where he remained some time under the care of the rev. William Douch, one of his chaplains, who was the rector of the place. In the autumn of 1638, he attended his father to London, and remained with him at the Savoy, till his brother Mr. Francis Boyle espoused Mrs. Elizabeth Killegrew; and then, towards the end of October, within four days after the marriage, the two brothers, Francis and Robert, were sent abroad upon their travels, under the care of Mr. Marcombes. They embarked at Rye, in Sussex, and from thence proceeded to Dieppe, in Normandy; then they travelled by land to Ilouen, to Paris, and from thence to Lyons; from which city they continued their journey to Geneva, where his governor had a family; and there the two gentlemen pursued their studies quietly, and without interruption. Mr. Boyle, during his stay here, resumed his acquaintance with the mathematics, or at least with the elements of that science, of which he had before gained some knowledge. For he tells us in his own memoirs, that while he was at Eton, and afflicted with an ague, before he was ten years old, by way of diverting his melancholy, they made him read Amadis de Gaul, and other romantic books, which produced such restlessness in him, that he was obliged to apply himself to the extraction of the square and cube roots, and to the more laborious operations of algebra, in order to fix and settle the volatility of his fancy.

While he remained at Geneva, he made some excursions to visit the adjacent country of Savoy, and even proceeded so far as to Grenoble in Dauphine. He took a view also of those wild mountains, where Bruno, the first author of the Carthusian monks, lived in solitude, and where the first and chief of the Carthusian abbies is seated. Mr. Boyle relates, that “the devil, taking advantage of that deep raving melancholy, so sad a place, his own humour, which was naturally grave and serious, and the strange stories and pictures he found there of Bruno, suggested such strange and hideous distracting doubts of some of the fundamentals of Christianity, that though, he says, his looks did little betray his thoughts, nothing but the forbiddenness of self-dispatch hindered his acting it.” He laboured under this perplexity and melancholy many months: but at length getting out of it, he set about inquiring into the grounds and foundation of the Christian religion; “that so,” says he, “though he believed more than he could comprehend, he might not believe more than he could prove; and owe the steadfastness of his faith to so poor a cause, as the ignorance of what might be objected against it.” He became confirmed in the belief of Christianity, and in a conviction of its truth; yet not so, he says, but, that “the fleeting clouds of doubt and disbelief did never after cease now and then to darken the serenity of his quiet; which made him often say, that injections of this nature were such a disease to his faith, as the tooth-ach is to the body; for though it be not mortal, it is very troublesome.”

September 1641, he quitted Geneva, after having spent one-and-twenty months in that city; and, passing through Switzerland, and the country of the Grisons, entered Lombardy. Then, taking his route through Bergamo, Brescia, and Verona, he arrived at Venice; where having made a short stay, he returned to the continent, and spent the winter at Florence. Here he employed his spare hours in reading the modern history in Italian, and the works of the celebrated astronomer Galileo, who died at a village near this city during Mr. Boyle’s residence in it. It was at Florence that he acquired the Italian language; which he understood perfectly, though he never spoke it so fluently as the French. Of this indeed he was such a master, that, as occasion required, he passed for a native of that country in more places than one during his travels.

March 1642, he began his journey from Florence to Rome, which took up but five days. He surveyed the numerous curiosities of that city; among which, he tells us, “he had the fortune to see pope Urban VIII. at chapel, with the cardinals; who, severally appearing mighty princes, in that assembly looked like a company of common friars.” He visited the adjacent villages, which had any thing curious or antique belonging to them; and had probably made a longer stay, had of the heat of the climate disagreed with his brother. He returned to Florence, from thence to Leghorn, and so by sea to Genoa. Then passing through the county of Nice, he crossed the sea at Antibes, where he incurred some danger for refusing to honour the crucifix: from whence he went to Marseilles by land. He was in that city in May 1642, when he received his father’s letters, which informed him of the rebellion broke out in Ireland, and how difficultly he had procured the 250l. then remitted to them, in order to help them home. But they never received this money; and were obliged to go to Geneva with their governor Marcombes, who supplied them with as much at least as carried them thither. They continued there a considerable time, without either advices or supplies from England: upon which Mr. Marcombes was obliged to take up some jewels on his own credit, which were afterwards disposed of with as little loss as possible; and with the money thus raised, they continued their journey for England, whither they arrived in 1644. On his arrival Mr. Boyle found his father dead; and though the earl had made an ample provision for him, as well by leaving him his manor of Stalbridge in England, as other considerable estates in Ireland, yet it was some time before he could receive any money. However, he procured protections for his estates in both kingdoms from the powers then in being; from whom also he obtained leave to go over to France for a short space, probably to settle accounts with his governor Mr. Marcombes: but he could not be long abroad, since we find him at Cambridge the December following.

March 1646, he retired to his manor at Stalbridge, where he resided for the most part till May 1650. A room is still shown here, in which our author studied, and where he is said to have nlade his earliest experiments in natural philosophy and chemistry. He made excursions, sometimes to London, sometimes to Oxford and in February 1647, he went over to Holland but he made no considerable stay any where. During his retirement at Stalbridge, he applied himself with incredible industry to studies of various kinds, to those of natural philosophy and chemistry in particular, and omitted no opportunity of obtaining the acquaintance of persons distinguished for parts and learning, to whom he was in every respect a ready, useful, generous assistant, and with whom he held a constant correspondence. He was also one of the first members of that small, but learned body of men, which, when all aca-' demical studies were interrupted by the civil wars, secreted themselves about 1645; and held private meetings, first in London, afterwards at Oxford, for the sake of canvassing subjects of natural knowledge, upon that plan of experiment which lord Bacon had delineated. They styled themselves then the Philosophical College; and after the restoration, when they were incorporated and distinguished openly, took the name of the Royal Society. His retired course of life, however, could not hinder his reputation from rising to such a height, as made him be taken notice of by some of the most eminent members of the republic of letters’; so that, in 1651, we find Dr. Nathanael Highmore, a very eminent physician, dedicating to him a book, under the title of “The history of Generation:” examining the several opinions of divers authors, especially that of sir Kenelm Digby, in his Discourse upon Bodies.

In 1652, he went over to Ireland, in order to visit and settle his estates in that kingdom; and returned from thence in August 1653. He was soon after obliged to go over to Ireland again; where he had spent his time very unpleasantly, if it had not been for his intimate friend and acquaintance, sir William Petty, in whose conversation he was extremely happy. In the summer of 1654, he returned to England, and put in execution a design he had formed some time, of residing at Oxford; where he continued for the most part till April 1668, and then he settled at London in the house of his sister lady Ranelagh in Pall Mall. At Oxford he chose to live in the house of Mr. Crosse, an apothecary, rather than in a college; for the sake of his health, and because he had more room to make experiments. Oxford was indeed at that time the only place in England where Mr. Boyle could have lived with much satisfaction; for here he found himself surrounded with a number of learned friends, such as Wiikins, Wallis, Ward, Willis, Wren, &c. suited exactly to his taste, and who h;-d resorted thither for the same reasons that he had done; the philosophical society being novr removed from London to Oxford. It was during his residence here that he invented that admirable engine, the air-pump; which was perfected for him by the very ingenious Mr. Robert lioolce, in 1678 or 1679. By this he made several experiments, and was enabled to discover and demonstrate several qualities of the air, so as to lay a founelation for a complete theory. He was not, however, satis, fied with this, but laboured incessantly in collecting and digesting, chiefly from his own experiments, the materials requisite for this purpose. He declared against the philosophy of Aristotle, as having in it more of words than things, promising much and performing little; and as giving the inventions of men for indubitable proofs, instead of building upon observation and experiment. He was so zealous for, and so careful about, this true method of learning by experiment, that, though the Cartesian philosophy then made a great noise in the world, yet he would never be persuaded to read the works of Descartes; for fear he should be amused and led away by plausible accounts of things, founded on fancy, and merely hypothetical.

But philosophy and inquiries into nature, though they engaged his attention deeply, did not occupy it entirely; since we find, that he still continued to pursue critical and theological studies. Inthese he had the assistance of some great men, particularly Dr. Edward Pocock, Mr, Thomas Hyde, and Mr. Samuel Clarke, all of great eminence for their skill in the oriental languages. He had also a strict intimacy with Dr. Thomas Barlow, at that time head-keeper of the Bodleian library, and afterwards bishop of Lincoln, a man of various and extensive learning. In 1659, Dr. Wallis, so distinguished for his mathematical and philosophical learning, dedicated to him his excellent treatise on the Cycloid. This year also Mr. Boyle, being acquainted with the unhappy circumstances of the learned Sanderson, afterwards bishop of Lincoln, who had lost all his preferments for his attachment to the royal party, conferred upon him an honorary stipend of 50l. a year. This stipend was given as an encouragement to that excellent master of reasoning, to apply himself to the writing of cases of conscience and accordingly he printed his lectures “de obligatione conscientise,” which he read at Oxford, 1647, and dedicated them to his friend and patron. The dedication bears date Nov. 22, 1659.

Upon the restoration of Charles II. he was treated with great civility and respect by the king, as well as by the two great ministers, Southampton and Clarendon. He was solicited by the latter to enter into orders, for Mr. Boyle’s distinguished learning and unblemished reputation induced lord Clarendon to think that so very respectable a personage would do great honour to the clergy. Mr. Boyle considered all this with due attention; but reflected, that in his present situation, whatever he wrote upon religion, would have so much the greater weight, as coming from a layman; since he well knew, that the irreligious fortified themselves against all that the clergy could offer, by supposing and saying that it was their trade, and that they were paid for it. He considered likewise that$ in point of fortune and character, he needed no accessions; and indeed he never had any appetite for either. But bishop Burnet, who preached his funeral sermon, and to whom Mr. Boyle communicated memorandums concerning his own life, tells us, that what had the greatest weight in determining his judgment was, “the not feeling within himself any motion or tendency of mirjd which he could safely esteem a call from the Holy Ghost, and so not venturing to take holy orders, lest he should be found to have lied unto it.” He chose therefore to pursue his philosophical studies in such a manner as might be most effectual for the support of religion; and began to communicate to the world the fruits of those studies. The first of them was printed at Oxford, 1660, in 8vo, under the title of 1. “New experiments, physico-mechanical, touching the spring of the Air and its effects, made for the most part in a new pneumatical engine: addressed to his nephew the lord Dungarvan.” This work was attacked by Franciscus Linus and Mr. Hobbes, which occasioned Mr. Boyle to subjoin to a second edition of it, printed at London, 1662, in 4to, “A Defence,” &c. in which he refuted the objections of those philosophers with equal candour, clearness, and civility. A third edition was printed in 1682, 4to. 2. “Seraphic Love; or, some motives and incentives to the Love of God, pathetically discoursed of in a letter to a friend,” 1660, 8vo. This piece, though it did not appear till now, 'was finished as early as the year 1648. It has run through many editions, and been translated into Latin. The fame of Mr. Boyle’s great learning and abilities extended itself even at this time beyond the bounds of our island, so that the grand duke of Tuscany, a prince distinguished for learning, was extremely desirous of a correspondence with him: of which he was advertised in a letter, dated Oct. 10, 1660, from Mr. Southwell, then resident at Florence. 3. “Certain physiological Essays and other Tracts,” 1661, 4to. They were printed again in 1669, 4to, with large additions, especially of “A Discourse about the absolute rest of bodies” and were translated into Latin. 4. “Sceptical Chemist,” 1662, 8vo, a very curious and excellent work reprinted in 1679, 8vo, with the addition of divers experiments and notes about the producibleness of chemical principles.

In 1662, a grant of the forfeited impropriations in the kingdom of Ireland was obtained from the king in Mr. Boyle’s name, though without his knowledge; which nevertheless did not hinder him from interesting himself very warmly for procuring the application of those impropriations to the promoting religion and learning. He interposed likewise in favour of the corporation for propagating the gospel in New England; and was very instrumental in obtaining a decree in the court of chancery, for restoring to that corporation an estate which had been injuriously repossessed by one col. Bedingfield, a papist, who had sold it to them for a valuable consideration. His activity in matters of this nature was so much the more honourable, as his inclination led him generally to be private and retjred. But whenever the cause of virtue, learning, or religion, required it, his interest and endeavours were never wanting; and what is very remarkable, were seldom employed but with success. In 1663, the royal society being incorporated by king Charles II. Mr. Boyle was appointed one of the council; and, as he might be justly reckoned among the founders of that learned body, so he continued one of its most useful and industrious members during the whole course of his life.

In June 1663 he published, 5. “Considerations touching the usefulness of experimental Natural Philosophy,” 4to, reprinted the year following. 6. “Experiments and considerations upon Colours; to which was added a letter, containing observations on a diamond that shines in the dark,” 1663, 8vo, reprinted in the same size in 1670. It was also translated into Latin. This treatise is full of curious and useful remarks on the hitherto unexplained doctrine of light and colours; in which he shews great judgment, accuracy, and penetration, and may be said to have led the way to that mighty genius, the great sir Isaac Newton, who has since set that important point in the clearest and most convincing light. 7. “Considerations upon the style of the Holy Scriptures,” 1663, 8vo. A Latin translation of it was printed at Oxford, where most of his writings were published in 1665. It was an extract from a larger work entitled “An Essay on Scripture;” which was afterwards published by sir Peter Pett, a friend of Mr. Boyle.

In 1664 he was elected into the company of the royal mines; and was all this year taken up in the prosecution of various good designs, which probably was the reason why he did not send abroad any treatises either of religion or philosophy. The year following, however, appeared, 8. “Occasional Reflections upon several subjects; whereto is prefixed a discourse about such kind of thoughts,” 1665, 8vo, reprinted in 1669, 8vo. This piece is addressed to Sophronia, under whose name he concealed that of his beloved sister, the viscountess of Ranelagh. The thoughts themselves are on a vast variety of subjects, written many years before; some indeed upon trivial occasions, but all with great accuracy of language, much wit, more learning, and in a wonderful strain of moral and pious reflection. Yet this exposed him to the only severe censure that ever was passed upon him, and that too from no less a man than the celebrated dean Swift; who, to ridicule these discourses, wrote “A pious meditation upon a Broomstick, in the style of the honourable Mr. Boyle.” A certain writer, by way of making reprisals upon Swift for his treatment of Mr. Boyle, which he affirms to be as cruel and unjust as it is trivial and indecent, has observed, that, from this very treatise, which he has thus turned into ridicule, he borrowed the first hint of his Gulliver’s Travels. He grounds his conjecture upon the following passage, to be found in the Occasional Reflections: “You put me in mind of a fancy of your friend Mr. Boyle, who was saying, that he had thoughts of making a short romantic story, where the scene should be laid in some island of the southern ocean, governed by some such rational laws and customs as those of the Utopia or the New Atalantis. And in this country he would introduce an observing native, that, upon his return home from his travels made in Europe, should give an account of our countries and manners under feigned names; and frequently intimate in his relations, or in his answers to questions that should be made him, the reasons of his wondering to fi-nd our customs so extravagant, and differing from those of his own country. For your friend imagined that, by such a way of exposing many of our practices, we should ourselves be brought unawares to condemn, or perhaps to laugh at them; aikl should at least cease to wonder, to find other nations think them as extravagant as we think the manners of the Dutch and Spaniards, as they are represented in our travellers’ books.” The same year Mr. Boyle published an important work, entitled, 9. “INew experiments and observations upon Cold; or, an experimental history of cold begun: with several pieces thereunto annexed,” 1665, 8vo, reprinted in 1683, 4to.

His excellent character in all respects had procured him so much esteem and affection with the king, as well as with every body else, that his majesty, unsolicited, nominated him to the provostship of Eton college in August 1665. This was thought the fittest employment for him in the kingdom; yet, after mature deliberation, though contrary to the advice of all his friends, he absolutely declined it, for which he had several reasons. He thought the duties of that employment might interfere with his studies: he was unwilling to quit that course of life, which, by experience, he found so suitable to his temper and constitution: and, above all, he was unwilling to enter into orders: which he was persuaded was necessary to qualify himself for it. In this year and the next, he was much interested in an affair that made a very great noise in the world; and the decision of which, from the high reputation he had gained, was in a manner universally expected from him. The case was this: one Mr. Valentine Greatracks, an Irish gentleman, persuaded himself that he had a peculiar gift of curing diseases by stroking; in which though he certainly succeeded often, yet he sometimes failed; and this occasioned a great controversy, in which most of the parties concerned addressed themselves to Mr. Boyle. Among the rest, the famous Mr. Henry Stubbe wrote a treatise upon this subject, entitled “The miraculous Conformist; or, an account of several marvellous cures, performed by the stroking of the hands of Mr. Valentine Greatracks; with a physical discourse thereupon, in a letter to the honourable Robert Boyle, esq.” Mr. Boyle received this book upon the 8th of March 1666; and wrote a letter to Mr. Stubbe the next morning, which shews how extremely tender Mr. Boyle was of religion; and how jealous of admitting and countenancing any principle or opinions that he thought might have a tendency to hurt or discredit it But what is most incumbent on us to observe at present is, that this letter is certainly one of the clearest testimonies of Mr. Boyle’s vast abilities and extensive knowledge, that is any where extant. It is a very long- letter, upwards of twenty pages in 8vo very learned and very judicious wonderfully correct in the diction and style, remarkably clear in the method and form, highly exact in the observations and remarks, and abounding in pertinent and curious facts to illustrate his reasoning. Yet it appears from the letter itself, that it was written within the compass of a single morning <i fact we should have imagined next to impossible, if it had not been attested by one whose veracity was never questioned, that is, by Mr. Boyle himself. In 1666, Dr. Wallis addressed to Mr. Boyle his piece upon the Tides; as did the famous physician, Dr. Sydenham, his method of curing fevers, grounded upon his own observations. Mr. Boyle likewise published that year, 10. “Hydrostatical paradoxes made out by new experiments, for the most part physical and easy,” 8vo, which he printed at the request of the royal society, those experiments having been made at their desire about two years before. 11.“The Origin of Forms and Qualities, according to the Corpuscular philosophy, illustrated by considerations and experiments,” 1666, 4to, and reprinted the year following, in 8vo. This treatise did great honour to Mr. Boyle, whether we consider the quickness of his wit, the depth of his judgment, or his indefatigable pains in searching after truth. We must not forget to observe, that, both in this and the former year, he communicated to his friend Mr. Oldenburg, who w,is secretary to the royal soqiety, several curious and excellent short treatises of his own, upon a great variety of subjects, and others transmitted to him by his learned frienus both at home and abroad, which are printed and preserved in the Philosophical Transactions. Another thing it may not be improper to observe, that, in the warm controversy raised by Mr. Stubbe at this time about the royal society, Mr. Boyle escaped all censure; and though Mr. Stubbe, among others, attacked it in several pamphlets with all the fiiry imaginable, yet he preserved a just icspect for Mr. Boyle’s great learning and abilities, who, on his parr, showed a singular goodness of temper in bearing, as he uid, with so much indecent treatment from a person whom he had highly obliged, because he thought him, with all his faults, capable of being useful to the world. About this time, namely, 1668, Mr. Boyle resolved to settle himself in London for life; and removed, for that purpose, to the house of his sister, the lady Ranelagh, in Pall Mall. This was to the infinite benefit of the learned in general, and particularly to the advantage of the royal society; to whom he gave great and continual assistance, as the several pieces communicated to them from time to time, and printed in their Transactions, abundantly testify. Those who applied to him, either to desire his help, - or to communicate to him any new discoveries in science, he had his set hours for receiving; otherwise it is easy to conceive, that he would have had very little of his time to himself. But, besides these, he kept a very extensive correspondence with persons of the greatest figure, and most famous for learning, in all parts of Europe.

In the midst of all these studies and labours for the public, he was attacked by a severe paralytic distemper, of which, though not without great difficulty, he got the better, by strictly adhering to a proper regimen; and returning to his pursuits, in 1671, he published, 14. “Considerations on the usefulness of experimental and natural philosophy, the second part,” 4to. And, 15. “A collection of tracts upon several useful and important points of practical philosophy,” 4to; both which works were received as new and valuable gifts to the learned world. 16. “An essay about the origin and virtue of Gems,” 1672, 8vo. 17. “A collection of tracts upon the relation between flame and air; and several other useful and curious subjeccs;” besides furnishing, in this and in the former year, a great number of short dissertations upon a vast variety of topics, addressed to the royal society, and inserted in their Transactions. 13. “Essays on the strange subtlety, great elficacy, and determinate nature of Effluvia;” to which were added variety of experiments on other subjects, 1673, 8vo. The same year Anthony le Grand, the famous Cartesian philosopher, printed his “Historia Naturae,” &c. at London, and dedicated it to Mr. Boyle. He does justice to Mr. Boyle’s universal reputation for extensive learning and amazing sagacity in every branch of experimental philosophy; and says of him, what Averroes said of Aristotle, that nature had formed him as an exemplar or pattern of the highest perfection to which humanity can attain. 19. “A collection of tracts upon the saltness of the sea, the moisture of the air, the natural and preternatural state of bodies; to which is prefixed a dialogue concerning cold,” 1674, 8vo. 20. “The excellency of theology compared with natural philosophy,” 1673, 8vo. 21. “A collection of tracts, containing suspicions about hidden qualities of the air; with an appendix touching celestial magnets; animadversions upon Mr. Hobbes’s problem about a vacuum; a discourse of the cause of attraction and suction,” 1674, 8vo. 22. “Some considerations about the reconeileableness of reason and religion. By T. E. a layman. To which is annexed, a discourse about the possibility of the Resurrection by Mr. Boyle,” 1675, 8vo; both these pieces were of his writing; only he thought fit to mark the former with the final letters of his name. Among other papers that he communicated this year to the royal society, there were two discourses, connected into one, that deserve particular notice. The former was entitled “An experimental discourse of quicksilver growing hot with gold;” the other related to the same subject; and both of them contained discoveries of the utmost importance. In 1676, he pub. lished, 23. “Experiments and notes about the mechanical origin or production of particular qualities, in several discourses on a great variety of subjects, and, among the rest, of Electricity.”

He had been many years a director of the East India company, and very useful in tins capacity to that great body, especially in procuring their charier; and the only return he expected for his labour was, the engaging the company to come to some resolution in favour of the propagation of the gospel, by means of their flourishing factories in that part of the world, As a proof of his own inclination to contribute, as far as in him lay, for that purpose, he caused five hundred copies of the gospels and acts of the apostles, in the Malayan tongue, to be printed at Oxford in 1677, 4to, and to be sent abroad, at his own expence. This appears from the dedication, prefixed by his friend Dr. Thomas Hyde, to that translation, which was published under his direction. It was the same spirit and principle, which made him send, about three years before, several copies of Grotius “de Veritate Christianas religionis,” translated into Arabic by Dr. Edward Pocock, into the Levant, as a means of propagating Christianity there. There was printed in 1677, at Geneva, a miscellaneous collection of Mr. Boyle’s works in Latin, without his consent, or even knowledge; of which there is a large account given in the Philosophical Transactions. In 1678, he communicated to Mr. Hooke a short memorial of some

It was upon the 30th of November 1680, that the royal society, as a proof of the just sense of his great worth, and of the constant and particular services which through a course of many years he had done them, made choice of him for their president; but he being extremely, and, as he says, peculiarly tender in point of oaths, declined the honour done him, by a letter addressed to his much respected friend Mr. Robert Hooke, professor of mathematics at Gresham college. About this time, Dr. Burnet being empioyed in compiling his admirable History of the Reformation, Mr. Boyle contributed very largely to the ex pence of publishing it; as is acknowledged by the doctor in his preface to the second volume. It was probably about the beginning of the year 1681, that he was engaged in promoting the preaching and propagating of the gospel among the“Indians; since the letter, which he wrote upon that subject, was in answer to one from Mr. John Elliot of New England, dated Nov. 4, 1680. This letter of Mr. Boyle is preserved by his historian; and it shews, that he had a great di-Hke to persecution on account of opinions in religion. He published in 1633, nothing but a short letter to Dr. Beal, in relation to the making of fresh water out of salt; but in 1684 he printed two very considerable works; 29.” Memoirs for the natural history of human blood, especially the spirit of that liquor,“8vo. 30.” Experiments and considerations about the porosity of bodies," 8vo.

In 1685, he obliged the world with, 31. “Short memoirs for the natural experimental history of mineral waters, with directions as to the several methods of trying them, including abundance of new and useful remarks, as well as several curious experiments.” 32. “An essay on the great effects of even, languid, and unheeded motion; whereunto is annexed an experimental discourse of some hitherto little regarded causes of the salubrity and insalubrity of the air, and its effects;” reprinted in 1690, 8vo. None of his treatises, it is said, were ever received with greater or more general applause than this. 33. “Of the reconcileableness of specific medicines to the corpuscular philosophy; to which is annexed, a Discourse about the advantages of the use of simple medicines,” 8vo. Besides these philosophical tracts, he gave the world likewise, same year, an excellent theological one, 34. “Ofthehi^h veneration man’s intellect owes to God, peculiarly for his wijclom and power,” 8vo. This was part of a much larger work, which he mentioned in an advertisement, to prevent any exception from being taken at the abrupt manner of its beginning. At the entrance of the succeeding year, canie abroad his, 35. “Free inquiry into the vulgarly received notion of Nature;” apiece, which was then, and will always be, greatly admired by those who have a true zeal and relish for pure religion and sound philosophy. It was translated into Latin, and reprinted in 12 mo the year after.

In the month of May this year, our author, though very unwillingly, was constrained to make his complaint to the public, of some inconveniences under which he had long laboured; and this he did by “an advertisement about the loss of many of his writings addressed to J. W. to be communicated to those of his friends that are virtuosi; which may serve as a kind of a preface to most of his mutilated and unfinished writings.” He complains in this advertisement of the treatment he met with from the plagiaries, both at home and abroad; and though it might have been difficult in any other man to have done so, without incurring the imputation of self-conceit and vanity, yet Mr. Boyle’s manner is such, as only to raise in us an higher esteem and admiration of him. This advertisement is inserted at length in his life. He now began to find that his health and strength, notwithstanding all his care and caution, gradually declined, as he observes in a letter to M. le Clerc, dated May 30, 1689; which put him upon using every possible method of husbanding his remaining time for the benefit of the learned. In doing this, as a certain writer says, he preferred generals to particulars; and the assistance of the whole republic of letters to that of any branch, by what ties soever he might be connected therewith. It was with this view, that he no longer communicated particular discourses or new discoveries to the royal society; because this could not be done, without withdrawing his thoughts from tasks which he thought of still greater importance. It was the more steadily to attend to these, that he resigned his post of governor of the corporation for propagating the gospel in New England; nay, he went so far as to signifyto the world, that he could no longer receive visits as usual, in an advertisement, which begins in the following manner. “Mr. Boyle finds himself obliged to intimate to those of his friends and acquaintance, that are wont to do him the honour and favour of visiting him, 1. That he has by some unlucky accidents, namely, by his servant’s breaking a bottle of oil of vitriol over a chest which contained his papers, had many of his writings corroded here and there, or otherwise so maimed, that without he himself 'fill up the lacunae out of his memory or invention, they will not be intelligible. 2. That his age and sickliness have for a good while admonished him to put his scattered, and partly defaced, writings into some kind of order, that they may not remain quite useless. And, 3. That his skilful and friendly physician, sir Edmund King, seconded by Mr. Boyle’s best friends, has pressingly advised him against speaking daily with so many persons as are wont to visit him, representing it as what cannot but much waste his spirits,” &c. He ordered likewise a board to be placed over his door, with an inscription signifying when he did and did not receive visits.

Among the other great works, which by this means he gained time to finish, there is reason to believe, that one was a collection of elaborate processes in chemistry; concerning which he wrote a letter to a friend, which is still extant; but the piece itself was never published, though we read in the letter, “that he left it as a kind of hermetic legacy to the studious disciples of that art.” Besides these papers, committed to the care of one whom he esteemed his friend, he left also very many behind him at the time of his death, relating to chemistry; which, as appears by a Jetter directed to one of his executors, he desired might be inspected by three physicians whom he named, and that gome of the most valuable might be preserved. “Indeed,” says the writer of his life, “it is highly reasonable to suppose, that many important discoveries were contained in them; chemistry being his favourite study, and opening to him perpetually such a new scene of wonders, as easily persuaded him of the possibility of transmuting metals into gold. This persuasion of his is evident from several parts of his writings, and was avowed by himself to the great Dr. Halley, the lateroyal astronomer, who related to me his conversation with him upon that subject. And it was probably in consequence of this opinion, that he took so much pains to procure, as he did in August 1689, an act for the repeal of a statute made in the fifth year of king Henry IV. against the multiplying of gold and silver.”

In the mean time Mr. Boyle published some other works before his death; as, 38. “Medicina Hydrostatica or, Hydrostatics applied to the materia medica, shewing how, by the weight that divers bodies used in physic have in water, one may discover whether they be genuine or adulterate. To which is subjoined a previous hydrostatical way of estimating ores,” 1690, 8vo. He informs us, in the postscript of this treatise, that he had prepared materials for a second volume, which he intended to publish; but it never appeared. 39. “The Christian virtuoso; shewing that, by being addicted to experimental philosophy, a man is rather assisted than indisposed to be a good Christian.” The first part. To which are subjoined, 1. A discourse about the distinction that represents some things as above reason, but not contrary to reason. 2. The first chapters of a discourse, intituled, Greatness of mind promoted by Christianity, 1690, 8vo. In the advertisement prefixed to this work, he mentions a second part of the Christian virtuoso; which, however, he did not live to finish. But the papers he left behind him for that purpose are printed, imperfect as they are, in the edition of his collected works. The last work, which he published himself, was in the spring of 1691; and is intituled, 40. <l Experimenta & observationes physicje; wherein are briefly treated of, several subjects relating to natural philosophy in an experimental way. To which is added, a small collection of strange reports," 8vo.

He was buried in St. Martin’s church in the Fields, Westminster, on the 7th of January following: and his funeral sermon was preached by his friend Dr. Gilbert Burnet, bishop of Salisbury. The bishop made choice upon this occasion of a text very apposite to his subject, namely, “For God giveth to a man, that is good in his sight, wisdom, knowledge, and joy.” Eccles. xi. 26. After explaining the meaning of the words, he applies the doctrine to the honourable person deceased; of whom, he tells us, he was the better able to give a character, from the many happy hours he had spent in conversation with him, in the course of nine-and-twenty years. He gives a large account of Mr. Boyle’s sincere and unaffected piety, and more especially of his zeal for the Christian religion, without having any narrow notions concerning it, or mistaking, as so many do, a bigoted heat in favour of a particular sect, for that zeal which is the ornament of a true Christian. He mentions, as a proof of this, his noble foundation for lectures in defence of the gospel against infidels of all sorts; the effects of which have been so conspicuous in the many volumes of excellent discourses which have been published hi consequence of that noble and pious foundation . He had, says our prelate, designed it in his life-time, though some accidents did, upon great considerations, divert him from settling it; but not from ordering by his last will, that a liberal provision should be made for one who should, in a very few well-digested sermons, every year set forth the truth of the Christian religion in general, without descending to the subdivisions among Christians. He was at the charge of the translation and impression of the New Testament into the Malayan tongue, which he sent over all the East Indies. He gave a noble reward to him that translated Grotius’s incomparable book of the truth of the Christian religion into Arabic: and was at the charge of a whole impression, which he took care should be dispersed in all the countries where that language is understood. He was resolved to have carried on the impression of the New Testa-, meut in the Turkish language; but the company thought it became them to be the doers of it, and so suffered him only to give a large share towards it. He was at 700l. charge in the edition of the Irish Bible, which he ordered to be distributed in Ireland: and he contributed liberally, both to the impression of the Welsh Bible, and of the Irish Bible for Scotland. He gave, during his life, 300l. to advance the design of propagating the Christian religion in America; and, as soon as he heard that the East India company were entertaining propositions for the like design in the East, he presently sent a hundred pounds for a beginning, as an example; but intended to carry it much farther when it should be set on foot to purpose. When he understood how large a share he had in impropriations, he ordered considerable sums to be given to the incumbents in those parishes, and even to the widows of those who were dead before this distribution of his bounty. He did this twice in his life-time, to the amount of above 600l. and ordered another distribution, as far as his estate would bear, by his will. In other respects his charities were so bountiful and extensive, that they amounted, as this prelate tells us, from hfs own knowledge, to upwards of 1000l. per annum.

But that part of his discourse which concerns us most, is, the copious and eloquent account he has given of this great man’s abilities. “His knowledge,” says he, “was of so vast an extent, that if it were not for the variety of vouchers in their several sorts, I should be afraid to say all I know. He carried the study of the Hebrew very far into the rabbinical writings, and the other oriental tongues, He had read so much of the fathers, that he had formed a clear judgment of all the eminent ones. He had read a vast deal on the scriptures, had gone very nicely through the various controversies in religion, tind was a true master of the whole body of divinity. He read the whole compass of the mathematical sciences; and, though he did not set himself to spring any new game, yet he knew the abstrusest parts of geometry. Geography, in the several parts of it that related to navigation or travelling; history and books of novels, were his diversions. He went very nicely through all the parts of physic; only the tenderness of his nature made him less able to endure the exactness of anatomical dissections, especially of living animals, though he knew these to be most instructing. But for the history of nature, ancient and modern, of the productions of allcountries, of the virtues and improvements of plants, of ores, and minerals, and all the varieties that are in them jn different climates, he was by much, by very much, the readiest and' the perfectest I ever knew, in the greatest compass, and with the nicest exactness. This put him in the way of making all that vast variety of experiments beyond any man, as far as we know, that ever lived. And in these, as he made a great progress in new discoveries, so he used so nice a strictness, and delivered them with so scrupulous a truth, that all who have examined them have found how safely the world may depend upon them. But his peculiar and favourite study was chemistry, in which he was engaged with none of those ravenous and ambitious designs that drew many into it. His design was only to find out nature, to see into what principles things might be resolved, and of what they were compounded, and to prepare good medicaments for the bodies of men. He spent neither his time nor fortune upon the vain pursuits of high promises and pretensions. He always kept himself within the compass that his estate might well bear and, as he made chemistry much the better for his dealing in it, so he never made himself either worse or the poorer for it. It was a charity to others, as well as an entertainment to himself; for the produce of it was distributed by his sister and others, into whose hands he put it.” To thiseulogium of the bishop, we will only add that of the celebrated physician, philosopher, and chemist, Dr. Herman Boerhaave; who, after having declared lord Bacon to be the father of experimental philosophy, asserts, that “Mr. Boyle, the ornament of his age and country, succeeded to the genius and enquiries of the great chancellor Verulam. Which,” says he, “of all Mr. Boyle’s writings shall I recommend? All of them. To him we owe the secrets of fire, air, water, animals, vegetables, fossils: so that from his works may be deduced the whole system of natural knowledge.” The reader perhaps recollects, that Mr. Boyle was born the same year in which lord Bacon died. “Sol occubuitj nox nulla secuta est.”

As to the person of this great man, we are told that he was tall, but slender; and his countenance pale and emaciated. His constitution was so tender and delicate, that he had divers sorts of cloaks to put on when he went abroad, according to the temperature of the air; and in this he governed himself by his thermometer. He escaped indeed the small-pox during his life; but for almost forty years he laboured under such a feebleness of body, and such lowness of strength and spirits, that it was astonishing how he could read, meditate, make experiments, and write as he did. He had likewise a weakness in his eyes, which made him very tender of them, and extremely apprehensive of such distempers as might affect them. He imagined also, that if sickness should confine him to his bed, it might raise the pains of the stone to a degree which might be above his strength to support; so that he feared lest his last minutes should be too hard for him. This was the ground of all the caution and apprehension with which he was observed to live: but as to life itself, he had that just indifference for it, which became a philosopher and a Christian. However, his sight began to grow dim, not above four hours before he died; and, when death came upon him, it was with so little pain, that the flame appeared to go out merely for want of oil to maintain it. The reader may wonder that Mr. Boyle was never made a peer; especially when it is remembered, that his four elder brothers were all peers. A peerage was, however, often offered him, and as often refused by him. It is easy to imagine, that he might have had any thing he should express an inclination for. He was always a favourite at court: and king Charles II. James II. and king William, were so highly pleased with his conversation, that they often used to discourse with him in the most familiar manner. Not that Mr. Boyle was at any time a courtier; he spake freely of the government, even in times which he disliked, and upon occasions when he was ohliged to condemn it; but then he always did it, as indeed he did every thing of that nature, with an exactness of respect.

Mr. Boyle was never married: but Mr. Evelyn was assured, that he once courted the beautiful and ingenious daughter of Gary, earl of Monmouth; and that to this passion was owing his Seraphick Love. In the memorandum of Mr. Boyle’s life, set down by bishop Burnet, it is remarked, that he abstained from marriage, at first out of policy, afterwards more philosophically; and we find, by a letter of Dr. John Wallis to him, dated at Oxford, July 17, 1669, that he had an overture made him with respect to the lady Mary Hastings, sister to the earl of Hunting, don. But it does not appear from any of his papers, that he had ever entertained the least thoughts of that kind; nay, there is a letter of his, written when he was young to the lady Barrymore his niece, who had informed him of a report that he was actually married, which almost shews that he never did. The letter is written with great politeness, and in the true spirit of gallantry; and is a clear proof, that though Mr. Boyle did not choose to marry, yet it was no misanthropic cynical humour which restrained him from it. It is impossible to entertain the reader better, than by presenting him with that part of it which concerns the point in question. " It is high time for me to hasten the payment of the thanks I owe your ladyship for the joy you are pleased to wish me, and of which that wish possibly gives me more than the occasion of it would. You have certainly reason, madam, to suspend your belief of a marriage, celebrated by no priest but fame, and made unknown to the supposed bridegroom. I may possibly ere long give you a fit of the spleen upon this theme; but at present it were incongruous to blend such pure raillery, as I ever prate of matrimony and amours with, among things I am so serious in, as those this scribble presents you. I' shall therefore only tell you, that the little gentleman and I are still at the old defiance. You have carried away too many of the perfections of your sex, to leave enough in this country for the reducing so stubborn a heart as mine; whose conquest were a task of so much difficulty, and is so little worth it, that the latter property is always likely to deter any, that hath beauty and merit enough to overcome the former. But though this untamed heart be thus insensible to the thing itself called love, it is yet very accessible to things very near of kin to that passion; and esteem, friendship, respect, and even admiration, are things that their proper objects fail not proportionably to exact of me, and consequently are qualities, which, in their highest degrees, are really and constantly paid my lady Barrymore by her most obliged humble servant, and affectionate uncle,

Mr. Boyle’s posthumous works are as follow: 1. “The general history of the Air designed and begun,” 1692, 4to. Concerning the nature and value of this work, we have the testimonies of two of the most ingenious and able men of that age, Mr. Locke and Mr. Molineux. Mr. Locke, in a letter to Mr. Molineux, dated December 26, 1692, observes, that, though this treatise was left imperfect, “yet I think,” says he, “the very design of it will please you; and it is cast into a method, that any one who pleases may Add to it under any of the several titles, as his reason and observation shall furnish him with matter of fact. If such men as you are, curious and knowing, would join to what Mr. Boyle had collected and prepared, what comes in their way, we might hope in some time to have a considerable history of the air, than which I scarce know any part Of natural philosophy would yield more variety and use. But it is a subject too large for the attempts of any one man, and will require the assistance of many hands, to make it an history very short of complete.” To which Mr. Molineux answered: “I am extremely obliged to you for Mr. Boyle’s book of the air, which lately came to my hands. It is a vast design, and not to be finished but by the united labours of many heads, and indefatigably prosecuted for many years; so that I despair of seeing any thing complete therein. However, if many will lend the same helping hands that you have done, I should be in hopes; and certainly there is not a chapter in all natural philosophy of greater use to mankind than what is here proposed.” 2. “General heads for the natural history of a conntryy great or sinall; drawn out for the use of travellers and navigators. To which are added, other directions ior navigators, &c. with particular observations on the most noted countries in the world. By another hand.” 1692, 12mo. These general heads were first printed in the Philosophical Transactions, being drawn up by Mr. Boyle, at the request of the royal society. The other directions added in this edition were drawn up by various persons at divers times, by order of the royal society, and printed in different numbers of the Philosophical Transactions; but, being in pursuance of the plan sketched out by Mr. Boyle, were very properly annexed to the preceding ones. 3. A paper of the honourable Robert Boyle’s, deposited with the secretaries of the royal society, October 14, 1680, and opened since his death; being an account of his making the phosphorus, Sept. 30, 1680; printed in the Philosophical Transactions. 4. An account of a way of examining waters, as to freshness or saltness.To be subjoined as an appendix to a lately printed letter about sweetened water, Oct. 30, 1683; printed in the Philosophical Transactions. 5. “A free discourse against customary swearing, and a dissuasive from cursing,” 1695, 8vo. 6. “Medicinal experiments: or, a collection of choice remedies, chiefly simple, and easily prepared, useful in families, and fit for the service of the country people. The third and last volume, published from the author’s original manuscript; whereunto are added several useful notes, explicatory of the same,” 1698, 12mo. The first edition of this book was printed in 1688, under the title of Receipts sent to a friend in America: in 1692, it was reprinted with the Addition of a second part, and a new preface: and in 1698, as we now observe, was added the third and last volume. They have been all several times reprinted since in a single volume, and justly accounted the best collection of the kind.

, earl of Orrery, second son of Roger second earl of Orrery, by lady Mary Sackville, daughter to Richard earl of Dorset and Middlesex, was born in August 1676, at his father’s house in Chelsea; and at fifteen entered a nobleman of Christ-church, in Oxford, under the care of Dr. Francis Atterbury, afterwards bishop of Rochester, and Dr. Freind. Dr. Aldrich, the head of that society, observing his uncommon application, drew up for his use that compendium of logic which is now read at Christ-church, wherein he styles him “the great ornament of our college.” Having quitted the university, he was in 1700 chosen member for the town of Huntington. A petition being presented to the house of commons, complaining of the illegality of his election, he spoke in support of that election with great warmth; and this probably gave rise to his duel with Mr. Wortley, the other candidate, in which, though Mr. Boyle had the advantage, the wounds he received threw him into a dangerous fit of sickness that lasted for many months. On the death of his elder brother, he became fourth earl of Orrery; soon after, he had a regiment given him, and was elected a knight of the Thistle. In 1706 he married lady Elizabeth Cecil, daughter to the earl of Exeter. In 1709 he was promoted to the rank of major-general, and sworn of her majesty’s privy council. He was envoy extraordinary from the queen to the states of Flanders and Brabant, with an appointment of ten pounds a day, at a very critical juncture, namely, during the treaty of Utrecht. There, some in authority at Brussels, knowing they were soon to become the emperor’s subjects, and that his imperial majesty was not on good terms with the queen, shewed less respect to her minister than they had formerly done: upon which, Orrery, who considered their behaviour as an indignity to the crown of Great Britain, managed with so much resolution and dexterity, that, when they thought his power was declining, or rather that he had no power at all, he got every one of them turned out of his post, Her majesty, in the tenth year of her reign, raised him to the dignity of a British peer, under the title of lord Boyle, baron of Marston, in Somersetshire. On the accession of king George I. he was made a lord of the bedchamber, and lord -lieutenant and custos rotulorum of the county of Somerset. His frequent voting against the ministers gave rise to a report that he was to be removed from all his posts; upon which he absented himself from the court: but his friends assuring him that they had ground to believe the king had a personal esteem for him, he wrote a letter to his majesty, signifying that though he looked upon his service as a high honour, yet, when he first entered into it, he did not conceive it was expected from him that he should vote against his conscience and his judgment; that he must confess it was his misfortune to differ widely in opinion from some of his majesty’s ministers; that if those gentlemen had represented this to his majesty as a crime not to be forgiven, and his majesty himself thought so, he was ready to resign those posts he enjoyed, from which he found he was already removed by a, common report, which was rather encouraged than contradicted by the ministers. The king going soon after to Hanover, lord Orrery’s regiment was taken from him; which his lordship looking upon as a mark of displeasure, resigned his post of lord of the bedchamber.

On the 28th of September 1722, he was committed close prisoner to the Tower, by warrant of a committee of the lords of the privy council, upon suspicion of high treason, and of being concerned in Layer’s plot. His confinement brought on such a dangerous fit of sickness, that, as Dr. Mead remonstrated to the council, unless he was immediately set at liberty, he would not answer for his life twenty-four hours: upon which, after six months imprisonment, he was admitted to bail. Upon the strictest inquiry, no sufficient ground for a prosecutiofi being found, he was, after passing through the usual forms, absolutely discharged. After this he constantly attended in his place in the house of peers, as he had done before, and though he never spoke in that assembly, his pen was frequently employed to draw up the protests entered in its journals. He died after a short indisposition, on the 21st of August, 1731. He had a good' relish for the writings of the ancients, and gave some productions of his own.

Lord Orford, in enumerating his works, attributes to him a translation of the life of Lysander from Plutarch, which he says is published in the English edition of that author; but the life of Lysander in that edition is given to one Lemau, a Cambridge man. His first appearance as an author, was when Dr. Aldrich, dean of Christ- church, finding him to be a good Grecian, put him upon publishing a new edition of the epistles of Phalaris, which appeared in the beginning of 1695, under the title of “Phalaridis Agrigentinorum tyranni epistolae. Ex Mss. recensuit, versione, annotationibus, &. vita insuper auctoris donavit Car. Boyle, ex aede Christi, Oxon,” 8vo. In this edition he was supposed to have been assisted by Aldrich and Atterbury. The authenticity of these epistles being called in question by Dr. Bentley, Mr. Boyle wrote an answer, entitled “Dr. Bentley’s Dissertation on the epistles of Phalaris examined.” In laying the design of this work, in reviewing a good part of the rest, in transcribing the whole, and attending the press, half a year of Atterbu-ry’s life was employed, as he declares in his “Epistolary Correspondence,” 1783, vol. II. p. 22. His lordship wrote a comedy, called “As you find it,” printed in the second volume of the works of Roger earl of Orrery. He was also author of a copy of verses to Dr. Garth, upon his Dispensary, and of a prologue to Mr. Southerne’s play, called “The Siege of Capua.”

, earl of Cork and Orrery, a nobleman who added fresh lustre to his name and family, was the only son and heir of Charles, the fourth earl of Orrery (the subject of the preceding article), by the lady Elizabeth Cecil, daughter of John earl of Exeter. He was born on the 2d of January, 1706-7, and put early under the tuition of Mr. Fenton, the author of Mariamne, and one of the coadjutors of Mr. Pope in the translation of the Odyssey, by whom he was instructed in English; and carried through the Latin tongue from the age of seven to thirteen. Between this amiable poet and his noble pupil a constant friendship subsisted; and his lordship always spoke of him after his decease, and often with tears, as “one of the worthiest and modestest men that ever adorned the court of Apollo.” After passing through Westminster school, lord Boyle was admitted as a nobleman at Christ-church, Oxford, of which college, as we have already seen, his father had been a distinguished ornament. One of his first poetical essays was an answer to some verses by Mrs. Howe, on an unsuccessful attempt to draw his picture.

When the earl of Orrery was committed prisoner to the Tower on account of Layer’s plot, such was the filial piety of his son, that he earnestly entreated to be shut up with his noble father; but this indulgence was thought too considerable to be granted. Not long after he had completed the twenty-first year of his age, he married, on the 9th of May 1728, lady Harriet Hamilton, the third and youngest daughter of George earl of Orkney. Though this marriage had the entire approbation of lord Orrery, it unfortunately happened that a dissension arose between the two earls, which placed the young couple in a very delicate and difficult situation; but lord Boyle maintained at the same time the tenderest affection for his wife, and the highest attachment to his father. The earl of Orrery, however, was too much irritated by the family quarrel, to see at first his son’s conduct in a proper point of light, although his excellent understanding could not fail in the end to get the better of his prejudices, when a reconciliation took place, and the little coldness which had subsisted between them served but the more to endear them to each other. The earl of Orrery was now so much pleased with lord Boyle, that he could scarcely be easy without him; and when in town, they were seldom asunder. It is to be lamented, that this happiness was rendered very transient by the unexpected death of lord Orrery and that the stroke was embittered by circumstance peculiarly painful and affecting to his noble son and successor. The father, whilst under the impression of his dissension with the earl of Orkney, had made a will, by which he had bequeathed to Christ-church, Oxford, his valuable library, consisting of above ten thousand volumes, together with a very fine collection of mathematical instruments. The only exceptions in favour of lord Boyle were the Journals of the House of Peers, and such books as related to the English history and constitution. The earl of Orrery left, besides, though he was greatly in debt, several considerable legacies to persons nowise related to him. Upon his reconciliation with his son, he determined to alter his will, and had even sent for his lawyer with that view, when the suddenness of his decease prevented the execution of his just and reasonable design. The young lord Orrery, with a true filial piety and generosity, instead of suffering his father’s effects to be sold, took his debts upon himself, and fulfilled the bequests, by paying the legacies, and sending the books and mathematical instruments within the limited time to Christ-church. The loss, however, of a parent, thus aggravated and embittered, left a deep impression upon his mind, and was succeeded by a fit of illness which endangered his life, and obliged him to repair to Bath. Whilst he was in that city, he received a letter from a friend, with a copy of verses inclosed, exhorting him to dispel his grief by poetry r and to shew that Bath could inspire, as well as Tunbridge;. from which place he had written some humorous verses the year before. To this letter his lordship returned the following answer:

In a few months lord Orrery so far recovered his health and spirits as to be able to attend his public duty as an English baron. He took his seat in the house of peers in the session of parliament which opened on the 13th of January, 1731-2, and soon distinguished himself by a speech in opposition to the ministry, against the mutiny-bill; the inconsistency of a standing army with the liberties of a free people being at that period the topic constantly insisted upon by the patriotic party. Though no notice is taken of his lordship’s speech in Timberland’s Debates, it is certain that he acquired considerable credit on this occasion. Mr. Budgell, in the dedication to his Memoirs of the Family of the Boyles, published in 1732, celebrates our noble lord as having displayed the united forces of reason and eloquence; and Mr. Ford, in a letter to Dr. Swift, written in the same year, mentions with pleasure a character which the dean had given of the earl of Orrery, and says, that he was extremely applauded for a speech he made against the army- bill. The approbation which his lordship received in this lirst exertion of his parliamentary talents, did not encourage him to become a public speaker; and we meet with only another instance in which he took any active part in a debate/ on the 13th of February, 1733-4, in favour of the duke of Marlborough’s bill for preventing the officers of the land forces from being deprived of their commissions, otherwise than by judgment of a court martial to be held for that purpose, or by address of either house of parliament. The delicacy of lord Orrery’s health, his passion for private life, and the occasions he had of sometimes residing in Ireland, seem to have precluded him from a very constant and regular attendance in the English house of peers. However, he did not fail to go thither when he apprehended himself to be called to it by particular duty; and we find his name to a considerable number of the protests which were so frequent during the grand opposition to sir Robert Waipole’s administration.

In the summer of 1732 the earl of Orrery went over to Ireland to re-establish his affairs, which were much embarrassed by the villainy of his father’s agent. As the family seat at Charleville had been burnt to the ground by a party of king James’s army in 1690, his lordship resided sometimes with a friend at that place, and sometimes at Cork. Whilst he was in this city, he met with a most severe affliction, in the loss of his countess, who died on the 22d of August, 1732. The character of this amiable lady has been drawn by lord Orrery himself, in his Observations on Pliny. The countess was interred with her ancestors, at Taplow, in Bucks; and Mr. S. Wesley, in a poem on her death, fully displayed her excellent qualities and virtues. Mr. Theobald did the same, in his dedication of Shakspeare’s Works to the earl. The dedication, it seems, was originally intended for her ladyship; and therefore lord Orrery is represented as succeeding to it by the melancholy right of executorship. Mr. Theobald professes to have borrowed many hints from hearing his patron converse on Shakspeare; and adds, “Your lordship may reasonably deny the loss of the jewels which I have disparaged in the unartful setting.” Such language, however, must be considered as partly complimentary; for if the earl of Orrery had contributed any material criticisms upon our great dramatic poet, they would undoubtedly have been distinctly specified. Some pathetic verses on the death of the countess, dated Marston, Dec. 17, 1734, were addressed by his lordship to Mrs. Rowe, who lived in his neighbourhood, and with whom he had an intimate friendship during the latter part of her life. How much this ingenious and excellent lady valued his esteem and regard, is evident from her observing, that “his approbation would be her vanity and boast, if she could but persuade herself she deserved it.” The house where she was born belonged to him; and he always passed by it, after her decease, with the utmost veneration. It appears from Mrs. Rowe’s posthumous letter to his lordship, that he had charged her with “a message to his Henrietta (Harriet), when she met her gentle spirit in the blissful regions.”

Whilst our noble lord resided in Ireland, he commenced a friendship with dean Swift, which produced also that of Mr. Pope. The earl having sent a copy of verses to the dean on his birth-day, they were so pleasing to that celebrated genius, that he begged the author “to accept his most humble thanks for the honour done him by so excellent a performance on so barren a subject.” “In spite,” says the dean, “of those who love me not, it will be said in future ages, that one of lord Orrery’s first essays in poetry was these verses on Dr. Swift.” There are, indeed, several evidences in Pope’s and Swift’s letters, of the sincere esteem they entertained for his lordship.

In October 1733, lord Orrery returned to England, and having now no attachment to London, he disposed of his house in Downing-street, Westminster, as likewise of his seat at Britwell, near Windsor, and retired to his seat at Marston, in Somersetshire. As this place had been much neglected by his ancestors, and was little more than a shell of a large old house, he amused himself in building offices, in fitting out and furnishing apartments, and laying out gardens and other plantations. Study and retirement being his principal pleasures, he took care to supply the loss he had sustained from his father’s will, by furnishing his library anew with the best authors. In the summer of 1734, probably in his way to France, where he sometimes went, he visited the tomb of his ancestors, Roger Boyle, esq, and Joan his wife, in Preston church, near Feversham. This monument, when the title of earl of Cork devolved upon him, he intended to have repaired, if his life had been prolonged. In the middle of the year 1735, we find him again in Ireland. On the 31st of October, in the same year, an amiable relation, and a most promising youth, Edmund duke of Buckingham, died at Rome, upon which melancholy event, lord Orrery paid a just tribute to the memory of the young nobleman, in an elegiac poem. It was printed in 1736, and is one of the most pleasing specimens which our author has afforded of his poetical abilities. In the winter of 1735-6, the duke of Dorset being then lord lieutenant of Ireland, the eail of Orrery neglected no opportunity of endeavouring to render his administration easy. If Dr. Swift is to be credited, Ireland was about that time in a wretched condition. As a proof of it, the dean asserted in a letter to Mr. Pope, that lord Orrery had 3000l. a year in the neighbourhood of Cork, and that more than three years rent was unpaid. In April 1737, his lordship, who was then at Cork, earnestly pressed Dr. Swift to accompany him to England; but the doctor, who never saw Marston, did not accept the invitation. Lord Orrery took over with him to Mr. Pope all the letters of that great poet to Swift, which the dean had preserved or could find, which were not more in number than twenty-five. About this time, our noble author, that his sons might be educated under his own eye, and also have the benefit of attending Westminster-school, took a small house in Duke-street, Westminster. On the 30th of June, 1738, the earl of Orrery, after having been six years a widower, married, in Ireland, Mrs. Margaret Hamilton, only daughter and heiress of John Hamilton, esq. of Caledon, in the county of Tyrone, grand-daughter of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Meath, and niece of Dr. Dopping, bishop of Ossory. Swift, in a letter to Miss Hamilton, on her intended nuptials, after pretending a prior claim, as she had made so many advances to him, and confessed “herself to be nobody’s goddess but his,” archly waves it, and politely “permits lord Orrery to make himself the happiest man in the world; as I know not,” he adds, “any lady in this kingdom of so good sense or so many accomplishments.” He gives a great character of her, likewise, in his last printed letter to Mr. Pope. In this lady, the earl of Orrery, with gratitude to Heaven, acknowledged that the loss of his former countess was repaired. In 1739 he published a new edition, 2 vols. 8vo, of the dramatic works of his great-grandfather. Though these volumes cannot be particularly valuable, they are now become exceedingly scarce. In 1741 he published separately, in folio, “The first Ode of the first book of Horace imitated, and inscribed to the earl of Chesterfield;” and “Pyrrha, an imitation of the fifth Ode of the first book of Horace.” In the preface to the last, lord Orrery characterises Dacier’s and Sanadon’s translations, and makes some observations on Horace, which shew that he entered with taste and spirit into the peculiar excellencies of that poet. In 1742 he published in one volume, folio, the “State Letters” of his great-grandfather, the first earl; to which were prefixed Morrice’s memoirs of that eminent statesman. On the 25th of August, 1743, his lordship was presented by the university of Oxford to the honorary degree of D. C. L.; and he was, likewise, F.R. S. Lord Boyle, in 1746, being settled at Oxford, and Mr. Boyle in the college at Westminster, their father quitted London, and fixed his residence at Caledon, in Ireland. During one of his occasional visits to England, after the publication of the second volume of the Biographia Britannica, he thanked Dr. Campbell, “in the name of all the Boyles, for the honour he had done to them, and to his own judgment, by placing the family in such a light as to give a spirit of emulation to those who were hereafter to inherit the title.” Lord Orrery resided in Ireland, with very little intermission, from 1746 to 1750; happy in that domestic tranquillity, that studious retirement and inactivity, from which, as he himself expressed it, he was scarcely ever drawn, but with the utmost reluctance. “Whenever,” as he observed in a private letter, “we step out of domestic life in search of felicity, we come back again disappointed, tired, and chagrined. One day passed under our own roof, with our friends and our family, is worth a thousand in any other place. The noise and bustle, or, as they are foolishly called, the diversions of life, are despicable and tasteless, when once we have experienced the real delight of a fire-side.” These sentiments, which do so much honour to the rectitude of his lordship’s understanding, and the goodness of his heart, reflect, at the same time, a just reproach on the absurd and criminal dissipation that prevails for the most part among persons of rank and fortune. During the earl of Orrery’s residence in Ireland, he employed his leisure in laying out gardens and plantations at Caledon, and in improving and adorning its fine situation. On his return to Marston, he continued his alterations and improvements in the house and gardens at that place, many of the plans for which were designed by lord Boyle, who had a taste for architecture. In the mean while, the amusement of our noble author’s winter evenings was his translation of “The Letters of Pliny the Younger, with observations on each letter, and an Essay on Pliny’s life, addressed to Charles lord Boyle.” The essay is dated Leicester-fields, January 27, 1750-1; and, together with the translation, was published at London, in the following April, in 2 vols. 4to. This work met with so good a reception from the public, that three editions of it in octavo have since been printed. In the summer of the same year, lord Orrery addressed to his second son Hamilton a series of letters, containing “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift, dean of St. Patrick’s, Dublin.” This work gave rise to many strictures and censures on his lordship for having professed himself Swift’s friend while he was exposing his weaknesses. Subsequent inquiries into Swift’s character have proved that the portrait he drew was not unfaithful. To this, however, we shall have occasion to recur in our account of Swift.

On the 3d of December, 1753, by the death of Richard the third earl of Burlington, and fourth earl of Cork, without issue male, lord Orrery succeeded to that nobleman’s Irish tides, viz. earl of Cork, viscount Dungarvan, and lord Boyle, baron of Youghall. About this time, Mr. Moore undertook the periodical publication called “The World;” to which our noble author contributed three papers, viz. No. 47, 68, 161. The two first are papers of some humour, intended to ridicule the practice of duelling, as it prevailed in the last age; and the third is a father’s account of his son, Charles lord Dungarvan, whose weakness of temper was such, that he could not resist the temptation to indulgences which at last proved fatal. The earl of Cork was a contributor, likewise, to the “Connoisseur,” carried on by Mr. Thornton and Mr. Coiman. In the last number of this publication, G. K. which was his lordship’s signature, is distinguished, by the ingenious authors, as their “earliest and most frequent correspondent;” and “we are sorry,” they add, “that he will not allow us to mention his name; since it would reflect as much credit on our work, as we are sure will redound to it from his compositions.” His communications to the “Connoisseur” were the most part of No. 14 and 17 the letter signed Goliah English, in No. 19 great part of No. 33 and 40 and the letters, signed “Reginald Fitzworm,” “Michael Krawbridge,” “Moses Orthodox,” and “Thomas Vainall,” in No. 102, 107, 113, and 129. These papers are chiefly of the humourous kind; and they confirm, in no small degree, Mr. Buncombe’s character of our author, that “for humour, innocent humour, no one had a truer taste, or better talent.” On the 20th of September, 1754, the earl and countess of Cork, with their daughter lady Lucy Boyle, began a tour to Italy. His lordship’s chief object was Florence, in which city and its neighbourhood he resided nearly a year. Whilst he was at that place, he presented to the academy della Crusca, his friend Dr. Samuel Johnson’s English Dictionary. His inveterate enemy, the gout, introduced by a severe winter, overtook him even in Italy, and prevented his attendance on the exercises of the academy. He enjoyed, at Florence, a general esteem; and, by a free conversation with books and men, and the assistance of manuscripts, collected materials for the History of Tuscany, which he intended to write in a series of Letters, twelve of which only he lived to finish. In November 1755; he arrived at Marston, having, in his return to England, on account of the commencement of the war with France, gone through Germany and part of Holland. The situation of public affairs, in this country, at the beginning of the year 1757, being such as required, in our national councils, the most exertion of wisdom and integrity, one of lord Cork’s friends urged him, in an ode, to exchange his retirement for a more active scene.

When Dr. Swift’s “History of the four last years of Queen Anne” appeared in 1758, and it was reported that our noble lord had consented to the publication of that work, he requested his friends to contradict the report. His opinion was, that the more the work was examined, the less it would answer the end either of the author or of the publisher. In that year he sustained, by the death of his excellent lady, Margaret countess of Cork and Orrery, the severest domestic affliction which could befal him. She departed this life, after a short illness, on the 24th of November, in lodgings at Knightsbridge, to which she had been removed, at her own request, a few days before, from a tender apprehension that her lord would quit his house, just taken, in Marlboro ugh-street, if she died there. This shock, however, he supported with the resignation becoming a man and a Christian. We have already seen the high opinion which Dr. Swift entertained of her ladyship. The earl of Cork, in his distress, took refuge, like Pliny, in his studies, as the best retreat from grief, and published, in the beginning of 1759, in one volume, octavo, from an original manuscript presented to him by a relation, “Memoirs of the Life of Robert Cary, earl of Monmouth,” with a preface, and explanatory notes, and a short but tender dedication to his youngest son. It is dated Marlborough-street, January 13, 1759, and signed, “Now, alas! your only parent.” There is, also, as a frontispiece, engraved from an old painting by Marc Garrard, “The Royal Procession of queen Elizabeth, to visit her cousin german, Henry lord Hunsdon, governor of Berwick.” A second edition of the Memoirs appeared in 1760. Mrs. Lennox was considerably indebted to lord Cork, in her translation of Brumoy’s Greek Theatre, published in 1759. The preface was written by him; and he also translated “The Discourse upon the Theatre of the Greeks,” “The Original of Tragedy,” and “The Parallel of the Theatres.” Some smaller things, of his lordship’s writing, are in the Gent. Mag. On September the 16th, 1759, the earl of Cork lost his eldest son, Charles lord viscount Dungarvan, already mentioned. The earl survived him about three years, during which he divided his lime between his house in Great George-street, Westminster, and his seat in Somersetshire. An hereditary gout, which. all his temperance could only parry, not subdue, put a comparatively early period to his life, at Marston house, on the 16th of November, 1762, in the 56th year of his age. His remains were deposited near to those of his second lady, in the burial-place of his family in Frome church.

His last work was posthumous, “Letters from Italy,” written in 1754 and 1755, to William Duucombe, esq. and published, in 1774, by the rev. Mr. John Buncombe, who well knew and highly esteemed lord Cork’s talents and virtues. Mr. Buncombe has prefixed a life of his lordship, with the following particulars of his character: “The character of John earl of Cork, as a writer and as a man, may partly be collected from his own works, and partly from the testimonies which have been given of him by some of the most distinguished among his contemporaries. I shall only beg leave to add, that, in every domestic and social relation, in alltthe endearing connections of life, as a husband, a father, a friend, a master, he had few equals. The lustre which he received from rank and title, and from the personal merit of his family, he reflected back, unimpaired and undhninished; and though ‘the post of honour’ which he chose and preferred was ‘a private station,’ though he was neither a statesman nor a soldier, like the first lord Cork, the first lord Orrery, and his own father; the rival of Palladio, like the late lord Burlington; or the rival of Bacon, like Mr. Robert Boyle; yet in a general taste for literature, or, as they are commonly called, polite studies, he was by no means inferior to his ancestors. Being much in the great world at the beginning of his life, he despised and detested it when he arrived at years of reflection. His constitution was never strong, and he was very thankful that it was not so; as his health was a true and no very irksome excuse to avoid those scenes, by which his body would have been hurt, and his mind offended. He loved truth even to a degree of adoration. He was a real Christian; and. as such, constantly hoped for a better life, there trusting to know the real causes of those effects, which here struck him with wonder, but not with doubt.”

Dr. Johnson, less biassed by friendship, and more discriminating, said of him, “My friend, the late earl of Cork, had a great desire to maintain the literary character of his family: he was a genteel man, but did not keep up the dignity of his rank. He was so generally civil, that nobody thanked him for it.” Warburton, in his letters to bishop Hurd, lately published, employs the full measure of his coarse censure on him for publishing his character of Swift.

, third earl of Burlington and fourth earl of Cork, another branch of the illustrious family of Boyle, was born on the 25th of April, 1695; and was married on the 21st of March, 1720-1, to the lady Dorothy Savile, the eldest of the two daughters and co-heirs of William Savile, marquis of Halifax. By this lady he had three daughters, the youngest of whom, Charlotte, alone survived him. She was married to the duke of Devonshire, and was mother to the late duke, and grandmother to the present. On the 18th of June, 1730, the earl of Burlington was installed one of the knights’ companions of the most noble order of the garter; and in June 1731, he was constituted captain of the band of gentlemen pensioners. In 1732, being at the city of York, the lord mayor, aldermen, and corporation, sent a deputation to return their thanks to him for the favour he had done them in building their assembly-room, and for his other benefactions to the city, and to beg his acceptance of the freedom of it; which was, accordingly, presented to him in a gold box. In 1733, he resigned his place of captain of the band of pensioners. After this he lived retired, employing himself in adorning his gardens at Chiswick, and in constructing several pieces of architecture. Never, says lord Orford, were protection and great wealth more generously and more judiciously diffused than by this great person, who had every quality of a genius and artist, except envy. Though his own designs were more chaste and classic than Kent’s, he entertained him in his house till his death, and was more studious to extend his friend’s fame than his own. Nor was his munificence confined to himself, and his own houses and gardens. He spent great sums in contributing to public works, and was known to choose that the expence should fall on himself, rather than that his country should be deprived of some beautiful edifices. His enthusiasm for the works of Inigo Jones was so active, that he repaired the church of Covent-garden, because it was the production of that great master, and purchased a gate-way of his at Beaufort-garden in Chelsea, and transported the identical stones to Chiswick with religious attachment. With the same zeal for pure architecture, he assisted Kent in publishing the designs for Whitehall, and gave a beautiful edition of the antique baths from the drawings of Palladio, whose papers he procured with great cost. Besides his works on his own estate at Lanesborough in Yorkshire, he new fronted his house in Piccadilly, built by his father^ and added the grand colonnade within the court. It is recorded that his father being asked, why he built his house so far out of town? replied, because he was determined to have no building beyond him. This is now in the heart of that part of the town. Our nobility formerly wished for town-houses, and not for town-neighbourhoods, but the latter being now obtruded upon them is probably the cause of their paying so little attention to the keep of their London-palaces. Bedford-house has been levelled to the ground some years, and Burlington-house is likewise said to be doomed to destruction.

Lord Burlington’s house at Chiswick, the idea of which was borrowed from a well-known villa of Palladio, is a model of taste, though not without faults. Other works designed by lord Burlington were, the dormitory at Westminster-school, the assembly-room at York, lord Harrington’s at Petersham (afterwards lord Camelford’s), except the octagon buildings at each end, which were added by Shepherd; the duke of Richmond’s house at Whitehall, and general Wade’s in Cork-street. Both these last were ill-contrived and inconvenient; but the latter has so beautiful a front, that lord Chesterfield said, “as the general could not live in it to his ease, he had better take a house over against it, and look at it.”, Pope dedicated to him his Epistle IV. and addressed to him his incomparable letter oa a Journey to Oxford with Lintot. He is also to be noticed with honour as the first patron of bishop Berkeley, whom he loved for his taste in architecture. He died December 1753, and by his death the title of Earl of Burlington became extinct. His lady, Dorothy Saville, had no less attachment to the arts than her lord. She drew in crayons, and succeeded admirably in likenesses, but working with too much rapidity, did not do justice to her genius.

, earl of Cork and Orrery, the second son of John, earl of Orrery, the subject of the last article but one, was born in February 1730, and educated at Westminster-school, where the masterly manner in which he acted the part of Ignoramus, and spoke the epilogue, did great credit to his genius. In June 1748, he was matriculated at Oxford, and December following was admitted student of Christ-church, and proceeded regularly to the degree of LL. B. In 1762 he succeeded his father in the earldom, his elder brother having deceased three years before. In 1763, he was created LL. D. by diploma, and at the same time appointed high steward of the university of Oxford. He continued student of Christ church on a faculty till his death, which happened at Marston house, Jan. 17, 1764. He is recorded as an author from having contributed two papers to the “World,” drawn up with vivacity, elegance, and humour, and affording a proof that if his life had been continued, he would have added new literary honour to his celebrated name and family. These papers are No. 60 and 170.

, Lord Carleton, and lord president of the council in the reign of king George I. was descended from Richard Boyle, first earl of Cork in Ireland, and was third son of Charles lord Clifford of Lanesborough in the county of York, by Jane, youngest daughter of William Seymour, duke of Somerset. Being elected a member of the house of commons, he scon distinguished himself to such advantage, that in March 1700-1, he was appointed chancellor and nnder-treasurer of the exchequer by king William, and was admitted into a high degree of favour and confidence with that prince. He continued in that post till the 11th of February, 1707-8, when he was made one of the principal secretaries of state, in the room of Robert Harley, esq. and was consequently one of the ministry when the reputation of England was carried to so great an height, and when the queen obtained so many successes in defence of the common cause of Europe. In this station he took all occasions of shewing his regard for men of genius and learning; and soon after the battle of Blenheim, was employed by the lord treasurer Godolphin, at the solicitation of the lord Halifax, to go to Mr. Addison, and desire him to write some piece, which might transmit the memory of that glorious victory to posterity. Mr. Addison, who was at that time but indifferently lodged, was surprised with this visit from a person of Mr. Boyle’s rank and station; who, after having acquainted him with his business, added, that the lord treasurer, to encourage him to enter upon this subject, had already made him one of the commissioners of the appeals; but entreated him to look upon that post only as an earnest of something more considerable. In short, Mr. Boyle said so many obliging things, and in so graceful a manner, as gave Mr. Addison the utmost spirit and encouragement to begin that poem, which he entitled “The Campaign;” soon after the publication of which, he was, according to Mr. Boyle’s promise, preferred to a considerable post. In 1710, Mr. Boyle was one of the managers at the trial of Dr. Sacheverell; but upon the general change of the ministry, not long after, was dismissed from the post of secretary of state; in which he was succeeded by Henry St. John, esq. afterwards lord viscount Bolingbroke. “I never,” says Swift, “remember such bold steps taken by a court; I am almost shocked at it, though I did not care if they were all hanged.” Upon the accession of his late majesty king George I. in 1714, he was created a baron of this kingdom, by the title of baron Carleton of Carleton, in the county of York, and was soon after made lord president of the council, in which post he continued till his death, which happened on Sunday the 14th of March, 1724-5, at his house in Pall-mall, now the residence of his royal highness the Prince Regent. Mr. Budgell tells us, that he was endowed with great prudence and a winning address; and that his long experience in public affairs had given him a thorough knowledge in business. He spoke frequently while he was a member of the house of commons; and it was allowed by very good judges, that he was never once known to say an imprudent thing in a public debate, or to hurt the cause which he engaged in; a circumstance peculiar to himself above most other speakers in so public an assembly. The author of the “Spectator,” in the dedication to him of the third volume of that work, observes likewise, that there was no person, whose merit was more universally acknowledged by all parties, and who had made himself more friends and fewer enemies: that his great abilities and unquestioned integrity in those high employments which he had passed through, would not have been able to have raised this general approbation, had they not been accompanied with that moderation in a high fortune, and that affability of manners, which were so conspicuous through all parts of his life: that his aversion to any ostentatious arts of setting to show those great services which he had done the public, contributed likewise not a little to that universal acknowledgment which was paid him by his country: and that he was equally remarkable for the great figure which he made in the senate, as for that elegance and politeness, which appeared in his more retired conversation. Davis, in his characters published under the name of Mackay, says of him, “He is a good companion in conversation; agreeable among the ladies; serves the queen very assiduously in council; makes a considerable figure in the house of commons; by his prudent administration obliges every body in the exchequer; and in time may prove a great man.” To this Swift added in his copy of the book, “had some very scurvy qualities, particularly avarice.”

, a learned clergyman of the seventeenth century, and nephew to the dean of Canterbury, hereafter mentioned, was of a good family in Kent, and was educated at Eton school, from which he was admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, in May 1620. Here he took the degree of A. B. in 1623, of A. M. 1627, and was elected fellow in 1651. He proceeded B. D. and was appointed one of the university preachers in 1634; and in 1640, was presented to the rectory of Mautboy in Norfolk, upon the death of Mr. Thomas D'Engayne; but before he left college, he gave to its library a fine set of Binnius’s Councils. His patron was William Paston, esq. his friend and contemporary at college, to whose sou sir Robert Paston, bart. of Oxnead in that county, a volume of his “Sermons,” Lond. 1672, 4to, was dedicated sometime after his decease, by his friend the editor, Roger Flynt, who had likewise been of Bene r t college. He died either in 1665 or 1667, March 10. He was a much admired preacher, a favourite of the bishop of Norwich (the celebrated Hall), and a chaplain to Charles I. His editor, in the preface to the above “Sermons,” informs us that it was with difficulty he obtained leave of the dying author to make them public, and obtained it only upon condition that he should say nothing of him. He has, however, given a short, but excellent character of him.

, one of the translators of the Bible in the reign of James I. was son of William Bois, rector of West-Stowe, near St. Edmundsbury, in Suffolk, and born at Nettlestead in that county, Jan. 3, 1560. He was taught the first rudiments of learning by his father; and his capacity was such, that at the age of five years he read the Bible in Hebrew, and before he was six could write it in an elegant hand. He went afterwards to Hadley school, and at fourteen was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he distinguished himself by his skill in the Greek; and such was his diligence that we are told he would go to the university library in summer, at four in the morning, and remain till eight in the evening without any intermission. Happening to have the small-pox when, he was elected fellow, to preserve his seniority, he caused himself to be carried, wrapped up in blankets, to be admitted. He applied himself for some time to the study of medicine, but fancying himself affected with every disease he read of, he quitted that science. June 21, 1583, he was ordained deacon, and next day, by virtue of a dispensation, priest. He was ten years chief Greek lecturer in his college, and read every day. He voluntarily read a Greek lecture for some years, at four in the morning, in liis own chamber, which was frequented by many of the fellows. On the death of his father, he succeeded him in the rectory of West Stowe; but his mother going to live with her brother, he resigned that preferment, though he might have kept it with his fellowship. At the age of thirty-six, he married the daughter of Mr. Holt, rector of Boxworth, in Cambridgeshire, whom he succeeded in that living, 1596. On quitting the university, the college gave him one hundred pounds. His young wife, who was bequeathed to him with the living, which was an advowson, proving a bad economist, and himself being wholly immersed in his studies, he soon became so much in debt, that he was forced to sell his choice collection of books to a prodigious disadvantage. The loss of his library afflicted him so much, that he thought of quitting his native country. He was, however, soon reconciled to his wife, and he even continued to leave all domestic affairs to her management. He entered into an agreement with twelve of the neighbouring clergy, to meet every “Friday at one of their houses by turns, to give an account of their studies. He usually kept some young scholar in his house, to instruct his own children, and the poorer sort of the town, as well as several gentlemen’s children, who were boarded with him. When a new translation of the Bible was, by James I. directed to be made, Mr. Bois was elected one of the Cambridge translators. He performed not only his own, but also the part assigned to another (part of the Apocrypha), with great reputation, though with little profit: for he had no allowance but his commons. The king indeed nominated him one of the fellows of his new college at Chelsea, but he never derived any benefit, as the scheme was not executed. He was also one of the six who met at Stationers-hall to revise the whole translation of the Bible, which task they went through in nine months, having each from the company of stationers during that time thirty shillings a week. He afterwards assisted sir Henry Saville in publishing the works of St. Chrysostom, and received a present of one copy of the book, for many years labour spent upon it: which however was owing to the death of sir Henry Saville, who intended to have made him fellow of Eton. In 1615, Dr. Lancelot Andrews, bishop of Ely, bestowed on him, unasked, a prebend in his church. He died 1643, in the 84th year af his age; leaving a great many manuscripts behind him, particularly a collation of the text of the Gospels and Acts. When he was a young student at Cambridge, he received from the learned Dr. Whitaker these three rules, for avoiding those distempers which usually attend a sedentary life, to which he constantly adhered: the first was, to study always standing; the second, never to study in a window; the third, never to go to bed with his feet cold . The work mentioned above, which Wolfius says is” Liber infrequentissimus etrarissime occurrens,“owing to very few copies having been printed, was entitled” Veteris interpretis cum Beza aliisque recentioribus Collatio in Quatuor Evangeliis et Apostolorum Actis, autore Johanne Boisio, Eccl. Eliensis Canonico, opus auspiciis rev. Praesulis Lancelot!, Winton. Episc. caeptum et perfectum," Lond. 1655, 12mo.

, dean of Canterbury, descended from John de Bosco, who entered England with theConqueror, and allied to a family so opulent and extensive as to be divided into eight branches, each residing in their respective seats in the county of Kent, was born in 1571. He was the fourth son of Thomas Boys of Eythorne in that county, esq. hy Christian, daughter and co-heiress of John Seajles, of Wye, esq. Having most probably received the earlier part of his education at the king’s school in Canterbury, he went to Cambridge in 1586, where he became a scholar of Corpus Christi college, and proceeded to the degree of M. A. in 1593> He was about this time elected to a fellowship of Clare-hall, which is appropriated to a native of Kent.

He entered on the duties of a parish priest first at Hollingbourne in his native county, of which place, however, he was not the vicar, as Mr. Masters conjectures; and to the inhabitants of it he dedicated his Exposition of the Festival Epistles and Gospels. In 1597, he was preferred by his uncle, sir John Boys, who had been the patron of his studies at the university, to the rectory of Bettishanger near Deal. In the same year he was also collated by archbishop Whitgift to the mastership of East-bridge hospital in Canterbury. In 1599, the same patron presented him to the vicarage of Tilmanstone, adjoining to Bettishanger. He had now acquired the character of a distinguished theologist, and proceeded soon afterwards to the degree of D. D. He was likewise what then was termed “a painful preacher,” one who in preaching was frequent and laborious, as his works testify, which were all delivered originally in the pulpit.

His merit becoming known to James I. he was appointed one of the first fellows of Chelsea-college; but that scheme, as we have had occasion to remark in the preceding article, never having been carried into execution, his title was only nominal. Of this college we shall give some account in the life of Dr. Sutclifte the founder. In 1618, Dr. Boys was collated by archbishop Abbot to the rectory of Great Mongeham, adjoining also to his benefice of Bettishanger, and resigned the vicarage of Tilmanstone. On the death of Mr. Fotherby, king James promoted him to the deanry of Canterbury, to which he was admitted May 3, 1619; but this preferment he did not enjoy long, dying suddenly in his study Sept. 26, 1625, aged fifty-four.

If we examine his “Postils,” or the Defence of our Liturgy, we shall have reason to admire his unwearied diligence, and his profound knowledge; to respect him as a scholar and a divine. His style, indeed, partakes of the quaintness of the age, but upon the whole we think him less blameable on this score than some of his contemporaries. His main object was opposition to popery. He accordingly attacks the pope both with unsparing ridicule. and with elaborate argument. In a sermon preached on the Gunpowder treason, he introduced a parody on the Lord’s Prayer in Latin, “Papa noster qui es llomae, maledicetur nomen tuum, intereat regnum tuum, impediatur voluntas tua, sicut in coelo sic et in terra. Potum nostrum in ccena dominica da nobis hodie, et remitte nummos nustros quos tibi dedimus ob indulgentias, et ne nos indticas in haeresin, sed libera nos a miseria, quoniam tuum est infernum, pix et sulphur in saecula sseculorurn.” Granger gives this prayer in English, as if Dr. Boys had used it in that language, and adds, what he certainly could not know, that “he gained great applause by turning the Lord’s Prayer into an execration.” The truth is, he only quoted it, saying “I have another prayer, and forasmuch as it is in Latin, &c.” It occurs in a ms. of sir Henry Fynes, who says he found it in an old book. Sir Henry Fynes was born in 1587, and Dr. Boys’s works could not be deemed an old book in his time.

His “Postils,” a series of Sermons on the book of Common Prayer, Epistles, and Gospels, &c. were first published in 1614, 4to; and afterwards reprinted in folio, 1622 and 1629, with some additional lectures. The editions of 1622 and 1629 have an engraved frontispiece, with four portraits of the author in different attitudes. After his death his remains, viz. “Certaine Sermons,” were printed, 1631, 4to. He is also said to have written a “Defence of bishop Andrews’s Tortura Torti,” against Becanus the Jesuit. The manuscript of his Postils was deposited by his nephew Edward in the library of Bene't college, Cambridge.

He married Angela, the daughter of Robert Bargrave of Bridge, in the county of Kent, esq. and sister to his successor dean Bargrave. She survived him many years, and was rudely treated by the rebels in 1642, at the age of eighty. To his memory a very fine monument was placed by her, in the dean’s chapel, in Canterbury cathedral, where he was buried.

, esq. F. A. and L. S. S. was born at Deal in Kent, Sept. 7, 1735; and was for many years an eminent surgeon at Sandwich, in the same county. He was the eldest of two sons of the late William Boys, esq. commodore by commission in the royal navy, and lieutenant-governor of Greenwich hospital, by his wife Elizabeth Pearson of Deal; and was descended, paternally, from an ancient and knightly family, who were seated at Bonnington, in the parish of Goodnestone, in Kent, at the beginning of the fourteenth century.

Mr. Boys, early in life, shewed a strong propensity to cultivate literature and science. Every moment he could spare from his professional duties was devoted to some useful pursuit. Residing within a mile of Richborough, (the ancient fthutupium,) he was soon led to investigate the history of his neighbourhood. He acquired an uncommon facility in decyphering ancient Mss. and inscriptions; and being fortunately in very easy circumstances, independently of his professional income, he was enabled to gratify his taste at no inconsiderable expence; and gradually collected together many valuable and curious books, manuscripts, coins, and other antiquities. He likewise applied himself with great zeal and success to the study of natural history; to mathematics, astronomv, and other branches of philosophy. In 1786 he circulated, among his friends, proposals to print, privately, “Collections for a History of Sandwich, with notices of the other Cinque ports; and pf Richborough.” Disclaiming all views of profit, he proposed to fix such a price on the work as should merely defray the expence of printing and engraving; and so conscientiously did he adhere to this proposal, that, after the distribution of the book, he found himself a considerable loser. A part of the volume (printed at the Canterbury press) appeared in 1788; and a second part, completing this elaborate and valuable work, in 1792; making together a volume in quarto of 877 pages.

This was his principal literary production; but being of a most liberal and communicative disposition, he was at all times ready to assist his friends with hints and observations on any subject which had engaged his attention. Thus, in 1783, we find him communicating to the late rev. John Duncombe some “Observations on the Antiquities of Reculver;” which are inserted by that writer in his History of Reculver and Herne: and, in 1784, appeared a small work of 25 pages in quarto, with three plates, entitled “A Collection of the minute and rare Shells lately discovered in the sand of the sea-shore near Sandwich, by William Boys, esq. F. S. A. considerably augmented, and a11 their figures accurately drawn, as magnified with the microscope, by George Walker, bookseller at Faversham;” which in the preface is candidly acknowledged, by the editor, to be the joint production of Mr. Boys and himself, assisted by their common friend, the late Edward Jacob, esq. of Faversham. Plancus, in a treatise “De Conchis minus notis,” printed at Venice in 1739, is the only writer who had before described shells so minute as those which are the subject of Mr. Walker’s work.

In 1792, Mr. Boys communicated to the society of antiquaries “Observations on Kits-Goity house in Kent,” which have been inserted in the Archaeologia, vol. XL; and Mr. Pennant, Dr. Latham, and many other antiquaries and naturalists in their respective works acknowledge their obligations for assistance contributed by him. Dr. Latham, in his Index Ornithologicus, has given his name to a new species of Fern communicated by Mr. Boys. In 1787 Mr. Boys was appointed surgeon to the sick and wounded seamen at Deal; but this appointment, during the progress of the late war, was found to require so much of his time and attention that in 1796 he was induced to relinquish entirely his medical practice at Sandwich, and to reside near the naval hospital at Walmer till 1799, when the commissioners of the sick and hurt office accepted his resignation of the office of surgeon of the hospital, and appointed to it his fourth son, Edward Boys, M. D. who now holds it. At this period he returned to Sandwich, but with very impaired health. In the month of February of that year, he had a slight attack of apoplexy, and in December following, another and more alarming paroxysm occurred, from the effects of which he did not recover for nine or ten. months. On the 2d of March 1803, his servant, on coming into the parlour where he was sitting after breakfast, found him fallen back in his chair in a state of apoplexy. He remained in this state, but with symptoms which, for some days, at intervals, encouraged his friends to hope that he might still recover, till the 15th of the same month in the afternoon, when he placidly breathed his last.

He was for many years a very useful magistrate of the town in which he resided; having been elected a jurat of Sandwich in 1761, and served the office of mayor in 1767 and 1782. In 1775, when the corporation found it expedient to oppose an intended act of parliament for draining the general valleys of East Kent, on the grounds that the remedy proposed to be adopted might, without effecting the professed object of the bill, prejudice, if not totally destroy, the haven and harbour of Sandwich; Mr. Boys drew up a very sensible memorial on the subject, which was printed in 4to at the Canterbury press, but without his name, under the title of “The Case of the inhabitants and corporation of the town and port of Sandwich, in the county of Kent, touching a bill lately brought into the house of commons, to enable the commissioners of sewers, for several limits in the eastern parts of the county of Kent, more effectually to drain and improve the lands within the general valleys.” The attention he paid to this subject rendered him afterwards very useful as one of the commissioners of sewers for East Kent, at whose meetings he was a constant attendant as long as his health permitted.

He was twice married, first in 1759, to Elizabeth, daughter of Mr. Henry Wise, jurat of Sandwich, who died in 1761, by whom he had a son and daughter: and secondly, in 1762, to Jane, daughter of Thomas Fuller, esq. and coheiress of her uncle John Paramor, esq. of Statenborough, who died in 1783, and by whom he had eight children. An elegant mural monument has been erected in the parish church of St. Clement at Sandwich, by his family, with a Latin inscription.

a protestant dissenting minister, was born at Leeds in Yorkshire, in January, 1659-60. After early instruction under the care of his parents, he received the first part of his education for the ministry at the private academy of the rev. Mr. Frankland, near Kendal, in Westmoreland, and completed it under the tuition of the rev. Mr. Edward Veal, who kept a private academy at Stepney, near London. Having continued in these seminaries five years, and availed himself of the opportunities which he enjoyed in the latter situation of attending on the preaching of many able divines, both conformists and non-conformists, he entered on the exercise of his ministry about the year 1680. In 1683, finding that he could not discharge the duties of his function in England without molestation, he accepted an invitation to be joint pastor with Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Daniel Williams, in Dublin; and had afterwards for his coadjutor the rev. Mr. Thomas Emlyn, so well known for his writings and his sufferings. This connection subsisted for more than ten years with mutual friendship and uninterrupted harmony; but it was at length dissolved in consequence of Mr. Emlyn’s sentiments concerning the doctrine of the Trinity. On this occasion the zeal of Mr. Boyse for the orthodox led him to take some steps that were thought injurious to his former colleague, and inconsistent with the friendship that had subsisted between them; though he disapproved the prosecution which Mr. Emlyn suffered, and behaved towards him with a greater degree of kindness than any of the other dissenting ministers of Dublin. The latter years of Mr. Boyse^s life were embittered by bodily disorders and straitened circumstances. His funeral sermon was preached in December, 1728; but the precise time of his death is not known. He was considered as a pious, learned, and useful divine; assiduous in the exercise of his ministry, and in his conduct generally esteemed. He had a principal concern in promoting the act of toleration in Ireland. His works were published in 1728, in 2 vols. fol. The first contains 71 sermons, 6 dissertations on the doctrine of justification, and a paraphrase on those passages of the New Testament which chiefly relate to that doctrine. One of his sermons, originally printed separately, on “the Office of a Christian Bishop,” was ordered to be burnt by the Irish parliament in Nov. 1711. The second volume contains several pieces, of which the principal is a“Vindication of the true Deity of our blessed Saviour,” in answer to Mr. Emlyn’s “Humble inquiry into the Scripture account of Jesus Christ, &c.” As Mr. Boyse’s answer was published at the time when Mr. Emlyn was under prosecution for his sentiments, his conduct did not escape censure from the friends of Emlyn, who did not think it candid, liberal, or ingenuous.

, the only son of the preceding, and whose life affords an excellent moral, was born in the year 1708, and after receiving the rudiments of education in a private school in Dublin, was sent at the age of eighteen to the university of Glasgow. His father’s int?ntion was, that he might cultivate the studies that are preparatory to entering into the ministry, but before he had resided many months at Glasgow, he contracted an attachment for a Miss Atchenson, the daughter of a tradesman in that city, and married her about a year after, probably without the consent of the parents on either side. By this imprudent match his studies were in some measure interrupted, and his expenses increased. The family of his wife were either unwilling or unable to support their new relation, and he soon found it necessary to repair to Dublin in hopes of receiving assistance from his father. On this expedition he was accompanied by his wife and her sister; but notwithstanding this additional incumbrance, and tue general levity of his conduct, his father received him with kindness, and out of the scanty and precarious income which he derived from his congregation by voluntary subscriptions, and from a small estate of eighty pounds a year in Yorkshire, endeavoured to maintain his son, and to reclaim him to the prosecution of his studies. Tenderness like this, however, which only to mention is to excite gratitude, produced no corresponding effects on t>ur poet, who abandoned his mind and time" to dissipation and idleness, without a thought of what he owed to his father or to himself. In this course too he was unhappily encouraged by the girl he married, who, while she imposed upon the good old man by a show of decency, and even sanctity, became in fact devoid of all shame, and at length shared her favours with other men, and that not without the knowledge of her husband, who is said to have either wanted resolution to resent her infidelity, or was reconciled by a share of the profits of his dishonour. Such a connection and such a mind, at an age when the manly and ingenuous feelings are usually strongest, may easily account for the miseries of his subsequent life.

His father died in the year 1728, and his whole property having been exhausted in the support of his son, the latter repaired in 1730 to Edinburgh, where his poetical genius raised him many friends and some patrons of considerable eminence, particularly the lords Stair, Tweedale, and Stormont; and there is some reason to think that he was occasionally entertained at their houses. In 1731, he published a volume of poems, to which was subjoined a translation of the Tablature of Cebes, and a Letter upon Liberty which had been before published in the Dublin Journal. This volume, which was addressed to the countess of Eglinton, a lady of great accomplishments, procured him much reputation. He also wrote an elegy on the viscountess Stormont, entitled, “The Tears of the Muses/‘ in compliment to her ladyship’s taste as a patroness of poets. Lord Stormont was so much pleased with this mark of respect to the memory of his lady, that he ordered a handsome present to be made to the author, whom, however, it was not easy to find. Such was Boyse’s unsocial turn and aversion to decent company, that his person was known only among the lower orders, and Lord Stormont’ s generous intention would have been frustrated, if his agent had not put an advertisement into the papers desiring the author of” The Tears of the Muses“to call upon him. By means of lady Eglinton and lord Stormont, Boyse became known to the duchess of Gordon, who likewise was a person of literary taste, and cultivated the correspondence of some of the most eminent poets of her time. She was so desirous to raise Boyse above necessity, that she employed her interest in procuring the promise of a place for him; and accordingly gave him a letter, which he was next day to deliver to one of the commissioners of the customs at Edinburgh.” But it unluckily happened that he was then some miles distant from the city, and the morning on which he was to have ridden to town with her grace’s letter, proved to be rainy. This trivial circumstance was sufficient to discourage Boyse, who was never accustomed to look beyond the present moment: he declined going to town on account of the rainy weather; and while he let slip the opportunity, the place was bestowed upon another, which the commissioner declared he kept for some time vacant, in expectation of seeing a person recommended by the duchess of Gordon."

Sueh is the story of this disappointment in which all Boyse’s biographers have acquiesced, although it is not very consistently told. If the commissioner kept the place open for some time, which seems to imply weeks, Boyse might have easily repaired the neglect of not presenting his letter next day; but the truth perhaps was that he disliked the offer of regular employment, and loitered about until he could pretend that it was no longer in his choice. It is certain that this as well as every other kind intention of his patrons in Scotland, were defeated by his perverse conduct, and that he remained at Edinburgh until contempt and poverty were followed by the dread of a jail.

While any prospect, however, remained of a more advantageous lot, he could still depend on the friends who first noticed him, and he had no sooner communicated his design of going to England, than the duchess of Gordon gave him a recommendatory letter to Mr. Pope, and obtained another for him to sir Peter King, then lord chancellor. Lord Stormont also recommended him to his brother, the solicitor general, afterwards the celebrated lord Mansfield. On his arrival in London, in 1737, he waited on Pope, but, as he happened to be from home, he never repeated the visit. By the lord chancellor he is said to have been received with kindness, and to have occasionally been admitted to his lordship’s table; so sordid were his habits, however, and such his aversion to polite company, that this latter part of his historv, which he used to relate himself, has been doubted by those who lived near enough to the time to have known the fact. But whatever advantage he derived from the recommendations he brought from Scotland, it does not appear that it made any alteration in his habits. In London he was soon reduced to indigence, from which he attempted no means of extricating himself, but by writing complimentary poems, or mendicant letters, except that he frequently applied for assistance to some of the more eminent dissenters, from whom he received many benefactions, in consequence of the respect which they paid to the memory of his father. But such supplies were soon dissipated in the lowest gratifications, and his friends were at length tired of exerting their bounty that was so useless to the object of it. The author of his life in Gibber’s work informs us, that often, when he had received half a guinea, in consequence of a supplicating letter, he would go into a tavern, order a supper to be prepared, drink of the richest wines, and spend all the money that had been just given him in charity, without having any one to participate and regale with him, and while his wife and child were starving at home.

About the year 1738 he published a second volume of poems, but with what success is not known and, as he did not put his name to this volume, his biographer has not been able to find any mention of it. In the year J 740 he was reduced to the lowest state of poverty, having no clothes left in which he could appear abroad; and what bare subsistence he procured was by writing occasional poems for the magazines. Of the disposition of his apparel, Mr. Nichols received from Dr. Johnson, who knew him well, the following account. He used to pawn what he had of this sort, and it was no sooner redeemed by his friends, than, pawned again. On one occasion Dr. Johnson collected a sum of money for this purpose, and in two days the clothes were pawned again. In this state he remained in bed, with no other covering than a blanket, with two holes, through which he passed his arms when he sat up to write. The author of his life in Gibber, adds, that when his distresses were so pressing as to induce him to dispose of his shirt, he used to cut some white paper in slips, which he tied round his wrists, and in the same manner supplied his neck. In this plight he frequently appeared abroad, while his other apparel was scarcely sufficient for the purposes of decency. While in this wretched state, he published “The Deity,” a poem , which was highly praised by some of the best critics of the age. Among those whose praise was of considerable value, Hervey introduced the mention of it in his Meditations, “as a beautiful and instructive poem;” and Fielding, in his Tom Jones, after extracting a few lines, adds that they are taken from “a very noble poem called the Deity, published about nine years ago (1749), and long since buried in oblivion; a proof that good books no more than good men, do always survive the bad.” These encomiums tended to revive the poem, of which a third edition was published in 1752; and it has since been reprinted in various collections . An account of the Deity was sent to the Gentleman’s Magazine, and, although not inserted, was probably the means of Boyse’s introduction to Mr. Cave, from whom he obtained some supplies for writing and translating in that jourual between the years 1741 and 1743. Cave’s practice was to pay by the hundred lines, which after a while he wanted poor Boyse to make what is called the long hundred. His usual signature for his poems was Y. or Alcæus. When in a spunging-house in Grocer’salley, in the Poultry, he wrote the following letter to Cave, which was communicated by the late Mr. Astle to the editor of the Biographia Britannica.

The Ode on the British Nation, mentioned here, is a translation from Van Haren, a Dutch poet, from whose works he translated some other passages. The “part of Stowe” was a part of his poem on lord Cobham’s gardens.

By a letter to Dr. Birch, dated Oct. 23, 1742, it appears that he had, among many similar projects, an intention of publishing a translation of Voltaire’s poetical works, and sent to the Doctor a specimen of three of his Ethic epistles. On the next day, he sent another letter supplicating assistance, and assuring Dr. Birch that his distress was not in any way the effect of his own misconduct! In a letter dated Nov. 5, after acknowledging Dr. Birch’s kindness to him, and urging him to make his case known to others, he gives the following account of himself:

Mrs. Boyse was generally employed in conveying his letters of this description, and if she felt so much on delivering the above, her feelings were again tried on the 16th of the same month, when Boyse sent another importunate letter, which Dr. Birch probably found it necessary to disregard. When he had thus exhausted the patience of some, he made attempts on the humanity of others by yet meaner expedients. One of these was to employ his wife in circulating a report that he was just expiring; and many of his friends were surprized to meet the man in the streets to-day, to whom they had yesterday sent relief, as to a person on the verge of dissolution. Proposals for works written, or to be written, was a more common trick: besides the translation of Voltaire, we find him, in one of his letters, 'thanking sir Hans Sloane’s goodness in encouraging his proposals for a life of sir Francis Drake. But these expedients soon lost their effect: his friends became ashamed of his repeated frauds and general meanness of conduct, and could only mix with their contempt some hope that his brain was disordered.

In 1743, he published without his name, an ode on the battle of Dettingen, entitled “Albion’s Triumph,” a fragment of which is printed in the last edition of the Poets. In 1745 we find him at Reading, where he was employed by the late Mr. David Henry in compiling a work, published in 1747, in two volumes octavo, under the title of “An historical Review of the Transactions of Europe, from the commencement of the war with Spain in 1739 to the insurrection in Scotland in 1745; with the proceedings in parliament, and the most remarkable domestic occurrences during that period. To which is added, An impartial History of the late Rebellion, interspersed with characters and memoirs, and illustrated with notes.” To this he affixed his name, witli the addition of M. A. a degree which it is probable he assumed without authority. The work, however, considered as a compilation of recent and consequently very imperfectly-known events, is said to possess considerable merit. In a letter, published by Mr. Nichols, we have some information relative to it, and to the present state of his mind and situation. “My salary is wretchedly small (half a guinea a week) both for writing the history and correcting the press; but I bless God I enjoy a greater degree of health than I have known for many years, and a serene melancholy, which I prefer to the most poignant sensations of pleasure I ever knew. All I sigh for is a settlement, with some degree of independence, for my last stage of life, that I may have the comfort of my poor dear girl to be near me, and close my eyes. I should be glad to know if you have seen my history, from which you must not expect great things, as I have been over-persuaded to put my name to a composure, for which we ought to have had at least more time and better materials, and from which I have neither profit nor reputation to expect. I am now beginning * The History of the Rebellion,‘ a very difficult and invidious task. All the accounts I have yet seen are either defective, confused, or heavy. I think myself, from my long residence in Scotland, not unqualified for the attempt, but I apprehend it is premature; and, by waiting a year or two, better materials would offer. Some account, I think, will probably be published abroad, and give us light into many things we are now at a loss to account for. I am about a translation (at my leisure hours) of an invaluable French work, entitled * L’Histoire Universelle,' by the late M. Bossuet, bishop of Meaux, and preceptor to the dauphin, eldest son of Lewis XIV. I propose only to give his dissertations on the ancient empires, viz. the Egyptian, Assyrian, Grecian, and Roman, which he has described with surprising conciseness, and with equal judgment and beauty. I design to inscribe it to the right honourable Mr. Lyttelton, one of the lords of the treasury, one of the most amiable men I have ever known, and to whose uncommon goodness, if you knew my obligations, you would esteem him as much as he deserves.”

During his residence at Reading, his wife died, and notwithstanding the good sense expressed in the above letter, he put on airs of concern on this occasion, which inclines us to think that intemperance had in some degree injured his reason. Being unable to purchase mourning, he tied a piece of black ribbon round the neck of a lapdog which he carried about in his arms; and when in liquor, he always indulged a dream of his wife’s being still alive, and would talk very spitefully of those by whom he suspected she was entertained. This he never mentioned, however, but in his cups, which was as often as he had money to spend. The manner, it is added, by his biographer, of his becoming intoxicated, was very particular. As he had no spirit to keep good company, he retired to some obscure alehouse, and regaled himself with hot twopenny, which, though he drank in very great quantities, yet he had never more than a pennyworth at a time. Such a practice rendered him so completely sottish, that his abilities, as an author, were sensibly impaired.

After his return from Reading, his behaviour, it is said, became so decent, that hopes were entertained of his reformation. He now obtained some employment from the booksellers in translating, of which, from the French language at least, he was very capable; but his former irregularities had gradually undermined his constitution, and enfeebled his powers both of body and mind. He died, after a lingering illness, in obscure lodgings near Shoelane, in the month of May 1749. The manner of his death is variously related. Mr. Giles, a collector of poems, says he was informed by Mr. Sandby, the bookseller, that Boyse was found dead in his bed, with a pen in his hand, and in the act of writing: and Dr. Johnson informed Mr. Nichols that he was run over by a coach, when in a fit of intoxication; or that he was brought home in such a condition as to make this probable, but too far gone to be able to give any account of the accident.

Another of Mr. Nichols’s correspondents produces a letter from Mr. Stewart, the son of a bookseller at Edinburgh, who had long been intimately acquainted with Mr. Bpyse, in which the particulars of his death are related in a different manner. “Poor Mr, Boyse was one evening last winter attacked in Westminster by two or three soldiers, who not only robbed him, but used him so barbarously, that he never recovered the bruises he received, which might very probably induce the consumption of which he died. About nine months before his death he married a cutler’s widow, a native of Dublin, with whom he had no money; but she proved a very careful nurse to him during his lingering indisposition. She told me, that Mr. Boyse never imagined he was dying, as he always was talking of his recovery; but, perhaps, his design in this might be to comfort her, for one incident makes me think otherwise. About four or five weeks before he breathed his last, his wife went out in the morning, and was surprised to find a great deal of burnt papers upon the hearth, which he told her were old bills and accompts; but I suppose were his manuscripts, which he had resolved to destroy, for nothing of that kind could be found after his death. Though from this circumstance it may be inferred that he was apprehensive of death, yet, I must own, that he never intimated it to me, nor did he seem in the least desirous of any spiritual advice. For some months before his end, he had left off drinking all fermented liquors, except now and then a glass of wine to support his spirits, and that he took very moderately. After his death I endeavoured all I could to get him decently buried, by soliciting those dissenters who were the friends of him and his father, but to no purpose; for only Dr. Grosvenor, in Hoxton-square, a dissenting teacher, offered to join towards it. He had quite tired out those friends in his life-time; and the general answer that I received was, ‘That such a contribution was of no service to him, for it was a matter of no importance how or where he was buried.’ As I found nothing could be done, our last resource was an application to the parish; nor was it without some difficulty, occasioned by the malice of his landlady, that we at last got him interred on the Saturday after he died. Three more of Mr. Johnson’s amanuenses, and myself, attended the corpse to the grave. Such was the miserable end of poor Sam, who was obliged to be buried in the same charitable manner with his first wife; a burial, of which he had often mentioned his abhorrence.”

Although there is too much reason to believe that no part of Boyse’s character has been misrepresented in the preceding narrative, he must not be deprived of the evidence which Mr. Nichols’s correspondent has advanced in his favour. He assures us that he knew him from the year 1732 to the time of his death; and that he never saw any thing in his wife’s conduct that deserved censure; that he was a man of learning; and when in company with those by whom he was not awed, an entertaining companion; but so irregular and inconsistent in his conduct, that it appeared as if he had been actuated by two different souls on different occasions. These last accounts are in some degree confirmed by the writer of his life in Gibber’s collection, who says that while Boyse was in his last illness he had no notion of his approaching end, nor “did he expect it until it was almost past the thinking of.” His mind, indeed, was often religiously disposed; he frequently thought upon that subject; and probably suffered a great deal from the remorse of his conscience. The early impressions of his good education were never entirely obliterated; and his whole life was a continual struggle between his will and reason, as he was always violating his duty to the one, while he fell under the subjection of the other. It was, adds the same author, in consequence of this war in his mind, that he wrote a beautiful poem called “Recantation.”

Such was the life of a man whose writings, as far as we have been able to discover them, are uniformly in favour of virtue, remarkable for justness of sentiment on every subject in which the moral character is concerned, and not unfrequently for the loftiness and dignity which mark the effusions of a pure and independent mind. To reconcile such a train of thought with his life, with actions utterly devoid of shame or delicacy, or to apologize for the latter with a view to remove the inconsistency between the man and his writings, if not impossible, must at least be left to those who have no scruple to tell us that genius is an apology for all moral defects, and that none but the plodding prudent sons of dulness would reveal or censure the vices of a favourite poet. Such is already the influence of this perversion of the powers of reasoning, that if it is much longer indulged, no men will be thought worthy of compassion or apology, but those who err against knowledge and principle, who act wrong and know better. The life of Boyse, however, as it has been handed down to us, without any affected palliation, will not be wholly useless if it in any degree contribute to convince the dissipated and thoughtless of what dissipation and thoughtlessness must inevitably produce. It is much to be regretted, that they who mourn over the misfortunes of genius have been too frequently induced by the artifice of partial biographers, to suppose that misery is the inseparable lot of men of distinguished talents, and that the world has no rewards for those by whom it has been instructed or delighted, except poverty and neglect. Such is the propensity of some to murmur without reason, and of others to sympathize without discrimination, that this unfair opinion of mankind might be received as unanswerable, if we had no means of looking more closely into the lives of those who are said to have been denied that extraordinary indulgence to which they laid claim. Where the truth has been honestly divulged, however, we shall find that of the complaints which lenity or affectation have encouraged and exaggerated in narrative, some will appear to have very little foundation, and others to be trifling and capricious. Men of genius have no right to expect more favourable consequences from imprudence and vice than what are common to the meanest of mankind. Whatever estimate they may have formed of their superiority, if they pass the limits allotted to character, happiness, or health, they must not hope that the accustomed rules of society are to be broken, or the common process of nature is to be suspended, in order that they may be idle without poverty, or intemperate without sickness. Yet the lives of men celebrated for literary and especially for poetical talents, afford many melancholy examples of these delusions", which, if perpetuated by mistaken kindness, cannot add any thing to genius but a fictitious privilege, which it is impossible to vindicate with seriousness, or exert with impunity.

If the life of Boyse be considered with a reference to these remarks, it will be found that he was scarcely ever in a situation of distress, of which he could justly complain. He exhausted the patience of one set of friends after another, with such unfeeling contempt and ingratitude, that we are not to wonder at his living the precarious life of an outcast, of a man who belongs to no society, and whom no society is bound to maintain. Among his patrons were many persons of high rank and opulence, whom he rendered ashamed of their patronage, and perhaps prevented from the exercise of general kindness, lest it might be disgraced by the encouragement of those who dissipate every favour in low and wanton excesses.

What can be urged in his favour from internal evidence ought not to be concealed. We do not find in his works much of the cant of complaint: and, although he submitted to every mean art of supplication, he does not seem to have resented a denial as an insult, nor to have taken much pains to make the worse appear the better cause. In his private letters, indeed, he sometimes endeavoured by false professions and imaginary misfortunes, to impose upon others, but he did not impose upon himself. He had not perverted his own mind by any of the impious sophistries which by frequent repetition become mistaken for right reason. He was not, therefore, without his hours of remorse; and towards the latter part of his life, when his heart was softened by a sense of inward decay, he resolved in earnest to retrieve his character.

As a poet, his reputation has been chiefly fixed on the production entitled “Deity,” which, although irregular and monotonous, contains many striking proofs of poetical genius. The effort indicates no small elevation of mind, even while we must allow that success is beyond all human power. His other pieces may be regarded as curiosities, as the productions of a man who never enjoyed the undisturbed exercise of his powers, who wrote in circumstances of peculiar distress, heightened by the consciousness that he could obtain only temporary relief, that he had forfeited the respect due to genius, and could expect to be rewarded only by those to whom he was least known. We are told that he wrote all his poems with ease and even rapidity. That many of his lines are incorrect will not, therefore, excite surprize, especially when we consider that he wrote for immediate relief, and not for fame, and that when one piece had produced him a benefaction, he generally dismissed it from his mind, and began another, about which he had no other care than that it might answer the same purpose.