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

, a learned historian and lawyer of the sixteenth century, was born in Franconia, but the dates of his birth and death are unknown, and even his works, although of great merit, have been for many years so scarce as to have escaped the knowledge of the foreign librarians and collectors. Maximilian, duke and afterwards elector of Bavaria, enrolled him in the number of his aulic counsellors, and made him at the same time keeper of the archives, a situation which enabled Gewold to bring to light many important historical documents, and to publish the following volumes: 1. “Genealogia serenissimorum Bojariae ducum, etquorundam genuinas effigies a Wolfgango Kiliano seri eleganter incisae,” Antwerp, 1605, fol. reprinted at Augsburgh, 1620, and again in German, in 1623. 2. “Chronicon monasterii Reicherspergensis in Bojoaria, ante annos CD congestum,” &c. Munich, 1611, 4to. This is uncommonly rare, but has been reprinted in Ludewig’s “Scriptores rerum Germanicarum.” 3. “Antithesis ad clariss. viri Marquardi Freheri assertionem de Palatino electoratu,” Munich, 1612, 4to. There were other pamphlets between Freher and Gewold on the same subject. 4. “Orationes Alberti Hungeri,” Ingolstadt, 1616, 8vo. 5. “Henrici monachi in Rebdorf annales,” ibid. 1618, 4to. 6. “Delineatio Norici veteris ejusque confinium,” ibid. 1619, 4to. 7. “Wigulaei Hunds metropolis Salisburgensis,” a reprint at Munich, 1620, 3 vols. fol. by Gewold, with a continuation and notes. 8. “Defensio Ludovici IV. imperatoris ratione electionis contra Abr. Bzovium,” Ingolstadt, 1618, 4to. 9. “Commentarius de septemviratu Romani imperii,” ibid. 1621, 4to.

, an eminent lawyer, and one of the most learned men of his age, was born October 17, 1549, at Paris. He was the son of Leon Godefroi, counsellor to the Chatelet. He had acquired a great reputation in the parliament, but embracing the reformed religion, was obliged to retire to Geneva, and taught law both there and in some German universities. In 1618 he was sent by the elector palatine to Louis XIII. who, among other marks of favour, presented him with his picture, and a gold medal. But being again obliged to quit the palatinate, during war, he went to Strasburgh, where he died September 7, 1622, leaving a great number of valuable works; the principal of which are, 1. “Notae in quatuor Libros institutionum.” 2. “Opuscula varia juris.” 3. “Corpus juris civilis, cum notis.” These notes are excellent: the best editions are those by Vitré, 1628, and by Elzevir, 1683, 2 vols. fol. 4. “Praxis civilis, ex antiquis et recentioribus scriptoribus.” 5. “Index Chronologicus legum et novellarum a Justiniano imperatore compositarum.” 6. “Consuetudines Civitatum et Provinciarum Galliae, cum notis,” fol. 7. “Quaestiones politico ex jure communi in Historia desumptae.” 8. “Dissertatio de nobilitate.” 9. “Statuta regni Gallise cum jure communi collata,” fol. 10. “Synopsis statutorum municipalium,” an edition, Greek and Latin, of the “Promptuarium juris” of Harmenopules. “Conjectures,” and several “Lectures upon Seneca,” with a defence of these Conjectures, which had been attacked by Gruter. “A Collection of the ancient Latin Grammarians,” &c. The following works are also ascribed to Denis Godefroi “Avis pour reduire les Monnoies a leur juste Prix et Valeur,” 8vo. “Maintenue et Defense des Empereurs, Rois, Princes, Etats, et Republiques; centre les Censures Monitoires, et Excommunications des Papes,” 4to. “Fragmenta duodecim Tabularum suis nunc primum Tabulis restituta,” 1616, 4to. His “Opuscula” have been collected and printed in Holland, fol.

, younger brother of the preceding, born in I 587, at Geneva, was also a very learned lawyer, and rose to the highest posts in that republic. He was five times syndic, and died there 1652. He left several works much esteemed; the following are the principal ones: I. “Opuscula varia, juridica, politica, historica, critica,” 4to. 2. “Fontes Juris civilis; de diversis Regulis Juris,” 1653, 4to. 3. “De famosis latronibus investigandis de jure praecedentiae de Salario animadversiones Juris civilis. De suburbicariis Regionibus de statu Paganorum sub Imperatoribus Christianis. Fragmenta Legum Juliae et Papioe collecta, et notis illustrata. Codex Theodosianus,” 1665, 4 vols.- fol. 4. “Veteris orbis descriptio Gracci Scriptoris, sub Constantio et Constante Imperantibus, Gr. et Lat. cum notis,” 4to. 5. “De Cenotaphio; de Dominio seu imperio marls et jure naufragii colligendi.” 6. Commentaries and Notes on several Orations of Libanius. 7. “L'Hist. Ecclesiastique de Philostorge, avec un Appendix.” 8. “Les Mercure Jesuite, ou Recueil des pieces concernant les Jesuites,” 1631, 2 vols. 8vo.

, an eminent modern Italian dramatist, was born at Venice in 1707. In his infancy the drama was his darling amusement, and all his time was devoted to the perusing comic writers, among whom was Cicognini, a Florentine, little known in the dramatic commonwealth. After having well studied these, he ventured to sketch out the plan of a comedy, even before he went to school. When he had finished his grammatical studies at Venice, and his rhetorical studies at the Jesuits’ college in Perugia, he was sent to a boarding-school at Rimini, to study philosophy, but he paid far more attention to the theatres, entered into a familiar acquaintance with the actors, and when they were to remove to Chiozza, made his escape in their company. This was the first fault he committed, which, according to his own confession, drew a great many others after it. His father had intended him to be a physician, like himself: the young man, however, was wholly averse to the study. He proposed afterwards to make him an advocate, and sent him to be a practitioner in Modena; but a horrid ceremony of ecclesiastical jurisdiction, at which he was present, inspired him with a melancholy turn, and he determined to become a Capuchin. Of this, however, he was cured by a visit to Venice, where he indulged in all the fashionable dissipation of the place. He was afterwards prevailed upon by his mother, after the death of his father, to exercise the profession of a lawyer in Venice, but by a sudden reverse of fortune he was compelled to quit at once both the bar and Venice. He then went to Milan, where he was employed by the resident of Venice in the capacity of secretary, and becoming acquainted with the manager of the theatre, he wrote a farce entitled “II Gondoliere Veneziano,” the Venetian Gondolier; which was the first comic production of his that was performed and printed. Some time after, Goldoni quitted the Venetian resident, and removed to Verona, where he got introduced to the manager of the theatre, for which he composed several pieces. Having removed along with the players to Genoa, he was for the first time seized with an ardent passion for a lady, who soon afterwards became his wife. He then returned with the company to Venice, where he displayed, for the first time, the powers of his genius, and executed his plan of reforming the Italian stage. He wrote the “Momolo,” “Courtisan,” the “Squanderer,” and other pieces, which obtained universal admiration. Feeling a strong inclination to reside some time in Tuscany, he repaired to Florence and Pisa, where he wrote “The Footman of two Masters,” and “The Son of Harlequin lost and found again.” He returned to Venice, and set about executing more and more his favourite scheme of reform. He was now attached to the theatre of S. Angelo, and employed himself in writing both for the company, and for his own purposes. The constant toils he underwent in these engagements impaired his health. He wrote, in the course of twelve months, sixteen new comedies, besides forty-two pieces for the theatre; among these many are considered as the best of his productions. The first edition of his works was published in 1753, in 10 vols. 8vo. As he wrote afterwards a great number of new pieces for the theatre of S. Luca, a separate edition of these was published, under the title of “The New Comic Theatre:” among these was the “Terence,” called by the author his favourite, and judged to be the master-piece of his works. He made another journey to Parma, on the invitation of duke Philip, and from thence he passed t Rome. He had composed 59 other pieces so late as 1761, five of which were designed for the particular use of Marque Albergati Capacelli, and consequently adapted to the theatre of a private company. Here ends the literary life of Goldoni in Italy, after which he accepted of an engagement of two years in Paris, where he found a select and numerous company of excellent performers in the Italian theatre. They were, however, chargeable with the same faults which he had corrected in Italy; and the French supported, and even applauded in the Italians, what they would have reprobated on their own stage. Goldoni wished to extend, even to that country, his plan of reformation, without considering the extreme difficulty of the undertaking. His first attempt was the piece called “The Father for Love;” and its bad success was a sufficient warning to him to desist from his undertaking. He continued, during the remainder of his engagement, to produce pieces agreeable to the general taste, and published twenty-four comedies; among which “The Love of Zelinda and Lindor” is reputed the best. The term of two years being expired, Goldoni was preparing to return to Italy, when a lady, reader to the dauphiness, mother to the late king, introduced him at court, in the capacity of Italian master to the princesses, aunts to the king. He did not live in the court, but resorted there, at each summons, in a post-chaise, sent to him for the purpose. These journeys were the cause of a disorder in the eyes, which afflicted him the rest of his life; for being accustomed to read while in the chaise, he lost his sight on a sudden, and in spite of the most potent remedies, could never afterwards recover it entirely. For about six months lodgings were provided him in the chateau of Versailles. The death, however, of the dauphin, changed the face of affairs. Goldoni lost his lodgings, and only, at the end of three years, received a bounty of 100 Louis in a gold box, and the grant of a pension of four thousand livres a year. This settlement would not have been sufficient for him, if he had not gained, by other means, farther sums. He wrote now and then comedies for the theatres of Italy and Portugal; and, during these occupations, was desirous to shew to the French that he merited a high rank among their dramatic writers. For this purpose, he neglected nothing which could be of use to render himself master of the French language. He heard, spoke, and conversed so much in it, that, in his 62d year, he ventured to write a comedy in French, and to have it. represented in the court theatre, on the occasion of the marriage of the king. This piece was the “Bourru Bienfaisant;” and it met with so great success, that the author received a bounty 'of 150 Louis from the king, another gratification from the performers, and considerable sums from the booksellers who published it. He published soon after, another comedy in French, called “L'Avare Fastueux.” After the death of Lewis XV. Goldoni was appointed Italian teacher to the princess Clotilde, and after her marriage, he attended the late unfortunate princess Elizabeth in the same capacity. His last work was the “Volponi,” written after he had retired from court. It was nis misfortune to live to see his pension taken away by the revolution, and, like thousands in a similar situation, he was obliged to pass his old age in poverty and distress. He died in the beginning of 1793. As a comic poet, Goldoni is reckoned among the best of the age in which he flourished. His works were printed at Leghorn in 1788—91, in 31 vols. 8vo. He has been reckoned the Moliere of Italy, and he is styled by Voltaire “The Painter of Nature.” Dr. Burney says that he is, perhaps, the only author of comic operas in Italy who has given them a little common sense, by a natural plot, and natural characters; and his celebrated comic opera of the “Buona Figliuola,” set by Piccini, and first performed in London Dec. 9th, 1766, rendered both the poet and composer, whose names had scarcely penetrated into this country before, dear to every lover of the Italian language and music, in the nation.

, in Latin Gutheriusi, a learned and judicious antiquary, and lawyer, was born at Chaumont in Bassigny, and was admitted advocate to the parliament of Paris. After having attended the bar with honour for forty years, he retired into the country, and devoted himself wholly to study. He died in 1638. His principal works are, 1. “De vetere Jure Pontificio urbis Romae,” 1612, 4to, which gave so much satisfaction at Rome, that the senate conferred the rank of Roman citizen on him and his posterity. 2. “De Officiis domtis Augustae, publicse et privates,” 1628, 4to, and Leipsic, 1672, 8vo, &c. 3. “De jure Manium,” Leipsic, 1671, 8vo. He wrote also two small tracts, one “De Orbitate toleranda” the other, < Laus caecitatis," &c. These works are all esteemed, and some Latin verses which he wrote have been admired for their elegance.

, lord Cullen, an eminent lawyer ind judge in Scotland, was descended from a younger >ranch of the ancient family of the Grants, of Grant, in iat kingdom; his ancestor in a direct line, being sir John Grant, of Grant, who married lady Margaret Stuart, daughter of the earl of Athol. He was born about 1660, and received the first part of his education at Aberdeen; but, being intended for the profession of the law, was sent to finish his studies at Leyden, under the celebrated Voet, with whom he became so great a favourite by his singular application, that many years afterwards the professor mentioned him to his pupils, as one that had done honour to the university, and recommended his example to them. On his return to Scotland, he passed through the examination requisite to his being admitted advocate, with such abilities as to attract the particular notice of sir George Mackenzie, then king’s advocate, one of the most ingenious men, as well as one of the ablest and most eminent lawyers, of that age. Being-thus 'qualified for practice, he soon got into full employ, by the distinguishing figure which he made at the Revolution in 1688. He was then only twenty-eight years of age; but, as the measures of the preceding reign had led him to study the constitutional points of law, he discovered a masterly knowledge, when the convention of estates met to debate that important affair concerning the vacancy of the throne, upon the departure of king James to France. Some of the old lawyers, in pursuance of the principles in which they had been bred, argued warmly against those upon which the Revolution, which had taken place in England, was founded; and particularly insisted on the inability of the convention of estates to make any disposition of the crown. Grant opposed these notions with great strength and spirit, and about that time published a treatise, in which he undertook, by the principles of law, to prove that a king might forfeit his crown for himself and his descendants -, and that in such a case the states had a power to dispose of it, and to establish and limit a legal succession, concluding with the warmest recommendations of the prince of Orange to the regal dignity.

, a learned lawyer, was born at Delft in 1600. He wrote various works upon legal and political subjects, by which he acquired a considerable reputation. Among these are “Libertas Veneta, seu Venetorurn in se et suos imperandi Jus.” This was published in 1634, and in 1644 he defended the republic of Venice, in a dispute with the duke of Savoy concerning precedence; for which service, that republic created him a knight of St. Mark. He had also before this, attempted to confute Buchanan’s treatise “De Jure Majestatis,” in a work dedicated to Christina, queen of Sweden, who was known to be a great assertor of regal privileges. Grasswinkel defended the liberty of the seas against Selden, and Burgus, a native of Genoa, in his work “Maris Liberi Vindiciae,” and with so much judgment, in their opinion, that the States of Holland gave him a pension of 500 florins, with the title of Advocate-general of the marine, until an opportunity offered of rewarding his merit with a more honourable employment; which was afterwards that of advocate of the exchequer, and register and secretary of the chambre-mi-partie. He was author, likewise, of a treatise in two volumes, 4to, “On the Sovereignty of the States of Holland.” He died of an apoplexy at Mechlin, Oct. 12, 1666.

, a very eminent French antiquary and lawyer, was born at Nismes in the beginning of 1635, and being educated for the profession of the law, became an advocate of the parliament of Toulouse, and of the presidial court of Nismes, and director and secretary of the academy of that place. During his researches into matters of history and antiquities, he made a very fine collection of medals and manuscripts, among which were the originals of the proceedings of the popish inquisitors against the Albigenses. So highly was Graverol esteemed for learning, that no strangers of distinction visited Nismes without paying their respects to him, and such was his reputation in Italy that, in 1691, he was elected an associate of the Ricovrati of Padua; and when the states of Languedoc formed the plan of collecting their records respecting their fiefs and seignories, they considered Graverol as the only person fit to execute the work, which he was earnestly requested to undertake by the cardinal Bonzi. But his adherence to the protestant religion impeded his advancement in life, and involved him in serious troubles. He retired first to Orange in 1685, where he was very favourably received, but not thinking that a place of safety, left it for Swisserland or Holland. During this journey he was arrested and confined at Montpellier for about two months. After this he must have been released, and permitted to go home, as we find he died at Nismes Sept. 10, 1694. Among the works which contributed most to his reputation, are, 1. “Observations sur les arrets du parlement de Toulouse recueillespar la Rochefiavin,” Toulouse, 1682. 2. “Notice ou abrege historique des vingt-deux villes chefs des dioceses de la province de Languecloc,” 1 posthumous work published in 1696. 3. “Sorberiana, sive excerpta ex ore Samuelis Sorbiere,” Toulouse, 1691, 1714, Paris, 1694, and 1732. His other works were dissertations on medals and antiquities, most of which are printed with the “Sorberiana.” In the Journal des Savans for March 1685, two considerable works are announced by him, which the persecution he afterwards met with probably prevented him from completing; the one was a collection of letters to several crowned heads, written by cardinal Sadolet in the name of Leo X.; the other, a “Bibliotheque du Languedoc,” a kind of literary journal, in. which he was to give the lives of the eminent men of that province, and particulars of its history, &c.

, an eminent scholar, and illustrious lawyer of Italy, was born of genteel parents at Roggiano, February 18, 1664; and educated under Gregory Caloprese, a famous philosopher of that time, and his cousin-german. He went to Naples at sixteen, and there applied himself to the Latin and Greek languages, and to civil law; which application, however, did not make him neglect to cultivate, with the utmost exactness, his own native tongue. He was so fond of stu<jy, that he pursued it ten or twelve hours a day, to the very last years of his life; and, when his friends remonstrated agakist this unnecessary labour, he used to tell them that he knew of nothing which could afford him more pleasure. He went to Rome in 1689, and some years after was made professor of canon law, in the college of Sapieozia, by Innocent XL who esteemed him much; which employment he held as long as he lived. He does not, however, seem to have been of an amiable cast; at least he had not the art of making himself beloved. The free manner in which he spoke of all mankind, and the contempt with which he treated the greatest part of the learned, raised him up many enemies; and among others the famous Settano, who has made him the subject of some of his satires. It is said that he missed a cardinal’s hat because of his satirical turn of mind. When at Rome he used to bow to coach-horses, “because,” said he, “were it not for these poor beasts, these great people would have men, and even philosophers, to draw their coaches.” There were at one time doubts of his religious principles, and his pupil Metastasio seems inclined to justify these, by sinking this part of his history. Many universities of Germany would have drawn Gravina to them, and made proposals to him for that purpose; but nothing was able to seduce him from Rome. That of Turin offered him the first professorship of law, at the very time that he was attacked by the distemper of which he died, and which seems to have been a mortification in his bowels. He was troubled with pains in those parts for many years before; but they did not prove fatal to him till Jan. 6, 1718. He had made his will in April 1715, in which he ordered his body to be opened and embalmed.

His first publication was a piece entitled “Prisci Censorini Photistici Hydra Mystica; sive, de corrupta morali doctrina dialogus,” Coloniic, 1691, 4to but really printed at Naples. This was without a name, and is very scarce the author having printed only fifty copies, which he distributed among his friends. 2. “L'Endimione di Erilo Cleoneo, Pasture Arcade, con nn Discorso di Bione Crateo,” Rome, 1692, 12mo. The Endymion is Alexander Guidi’s, who, in the academy of the Arcadians, went under the name of Erilo Cleoneo; and the discourse annexed, which illustrates the beauties of this pastoral, is Gravina’s, who conceals himself under that of Bione Crateo. 3. “Delle Antiche Favola,” Rome, 1696, 12 mo. 4. A Collection of pieces under the name of “Opuscula,” at Rome in lu96, 12mo; containing, first, “An Essay upon an ancient Law;” secondly, “A Dialogue concerning the excellence of the Latin Tongue,” thirdly, “A Discourse of the change which has happened in the Sciences, particularly in Italy;” fourthly, “A Treatise upon the Contempt of Death;” fifthly, upon “Moderation in Mourning;” sixthly, “The Laws of the Arcadians.” A collection of such of these as regard literary history and study was published in 1792, for the use of young students, by the present learned bishop of St. David’s. But the greatest of all his works, and for which he will be ever memorable, is, 5. His three books, “De Ortu et Progressu Juris Civiiis;” the first of which was printed at Maples, in 1701, 8vo, and at Leipsic in 1704, 8vo. Gravina afterwards sent the two other books of this work to John Burchard Mencken, librarian at Leipsic, who had published the first there, and who published these also in 1708, together with it, in one volume 4to. They were published also again at Naples in 1713, in two volumes, 4to, with the addition of a book, “De Romano Imperio;” and dedicated to pope Clement XI. who was much the author’s friend. This is reckoned the best edition of this famous work; for, when it was reprinted at Leipsic with the “Opuscula” abovementioned, in 1717, it was thought expedient to call it in the title-page, “Editio novissima ad nuperam Neapolitanam emt-ndata et aucta.” Gravina 1 s view, in this “History of Ancient Law,” was to induce the Roman youth to study it in its original records in the Pandects, the Institutes, and the Code, and not to content themselves, as he often complained they did, with learning it from modern abridgments, drawn up with great confusion, and in very barbarous Latin. Such knowledge and such language, he said, might do well enough for the bar, where a facility of speaking often supplied the place of learning and good sense, before judges who had no extraordinary share of either; but were what a real lawyer should be greatly above. As to the piece “De Romano Imperio,” Le Clerc pronounces it to be a work in which Gravina has shewn the greatest judgment and knowledge of Roman antiquity. The next performance we find in the list of his works is, 6. * c Acta Consistoriaiia creationis Em in. et Rev Cardinalium institute a S. D. N. Clemente XL P. M. diebus 17 Maii et 7 Junii anno salmis 1706. Accessit eorundem Cardinalium brevis delineatio,“Colonise, 1707, 4to. 7.” Delia Ragione Poetica Libri duo,“Rome, 1708, 4to. To a subsequent edition of this in 1716, was added a letter” De Poesi,“from which Blackwell, in his Inquiry into the life and writings of Homer, has taken many observations. Dr. Warton says that Gravina’s remarks have a novelty and penetration in them. 8. << Tragedie cinque,” ISlapofi, 1712, 8vo. These five tragedies are, “II Papimano;” “II Palamede” “L'Andromeda” “L'Appio Ciaudio;” “II Servio Tullio.” Gravina said that he composed these tragedies in three months, without interrupting l^is lectures; yet declares in his preface, that he should look upon all those as either ignorant or envious, who should scruple to prefer them to what Tasso, Bonarelli, Trissino, and others, had composed of the same kind. This at least shews that Gravina, great as his talents were, had too high an opinion of them. They could not, it is true, have been written by Sophocles himself in a more Grecian style; but he is entitled to more fame from having educated and formed the taste of Metastasio, who was his pupil, and to whom he left a legacy, amounting in our money to nearly 4000l. with his library, and a small estate in the kingdom of Naples. 9. “Orationes,” Nap. 1712, 12mo. These have been reprinted more than once, and are to be found with his < Opuscula“in the edition of 61 Origines Juris Civilis,” printed at Leipsic, in 1717. 10. <l Delia Tragedia Libro uno,“Napoli, 1715, 410. This work, his two books” Delia Ragione Poetica,“his discourse upon the” Endymion" of Alexander Guidt, and some other pieces, were printed together at Venice in 1731, 4to, but a more complete edition of his works was published at Naples by John Antony Sergi, 1756 1758, 3 vols. 4to.

, a celebrated lawyer, and master of the rolls in the seventeenth century, descended from a very ancient family, was born at Brad fieldball, near Manningtree, in Essex, about 1594. Where he had his early education is not known, but he studied law in Lincoln’s-inn, and practised with considerable success. In August 1638 he was chosen recorder of Colchester, and representative for that place in the parliament which met at Westminster April 13, 1640, and again in the parliament which met Nov. 3 of the same year. The measures he at first supported were those of the party which finally overthrew the government, and although he argued chiefly against such abuses as might have been reformed by a better understanding between the conflicting parties, yet his violence against the court, and particularly a bitter speech he made against archbishop Laud, seem to prove that he was too much swayed by the popular clamour of the times, and too readily became one of the committees for the redress of grievances, real or imaginary, as well as for bringing those to punishment who were most obnoxious to the people. In 1642 he was made one of the lieutenants of the county of Essex, in pursuance of the parliament’s ordinance for the militia, and in August the same year, came down to Colchester and proclaimed sir John Lucas a traitor, for intending to assist the king. When he came, however, to penetrate more deeply into the designs of the reformers, he began to withdraw his countenance from them, and when in 1647 he was appointed one of the commissioners to treat with the king at Newport, in the isle of Wight, his majesty had every reason to be pleased with his candour and moderation. On his return to parliament, he argued for accepting the king’s concessions, and being at the same time one of the commissioners for disbanding the army, was, among others, forcibly excluded from the house by a party of soldiers. After the murder of the king, he went abroad for some time, but in 1656 we find him elected to Cromwell’s parliament as one of the sixteen, representatives for the county of Essex, but not approved by the council, against whose decision he signed a spirited re* monstrance. In February 1659-60 he was chosen one of the new council of state, in whom the executive power was lodged by the remains of the long parliament that restored Charles II.; and a few months after, he was also chosen speaker of the house of commons in what was called the “Healing parliament” which met April 25, 1660. In May following, he waited on the king at Breda, and on his majesty’s arrival, and the settlement of the government, was appointed master of the roils Nov. 3, 1660, which office he filled for nearly twenty-four years with great ability and integrity. He was aiso appointed in the same year chief steward of the borough or St. AlbanV, and recorder of Harwich, and from the restoration to the time or his death, continued to represent Colchester in parliament. For several years he entertained Dr. Gilbert Burntt, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, as his chaplain, or preacher at the rolls; and much assisted him in his “History of the Reformation.” Burnet in his “Own Times” has given an affectionate and probably faithful character of sir Harbottle, who appears to have been a man of real worth, piety, and moderation in his latter days. Sir Harbottle died Dec. 31, 1683, aged about ninety, and was buried in the chancel of St. Michael’s church, St. Alban’s. He was twice married, first to Mary, daughter of sir George Croke, an edition of whose “Reports” he published, 3 vols. folio; and secondly to Anne, daughter of sir Nathaniel Bacon, of Culford-hall, in Suffolk. Other particulars of his family may be seen in our authorities.

Of the surviving sons of Grotius, Cornelius and Dier cleric followed the profession of arms, and Peter was bred to the law, and became pensionary of Amsterdam and de* puty of the states-general. His brother William was a lawyer and a man of learning, and was the correspondent and confident of Grotius during his whole life, and it was to him he addressed the last letter in his collection, dated a few months before his death.

, the celebrated historian of Italy, was descended of an ancient and noble family at Florence, where he was born March 6, 1482. His father, Peter Guicciardini, an eminent lawyer, bred up his son in his own profession; in which design he sent him, in 1498, to attend the lectures of M. Jacobo Modesti, of Carmignano, who read upon Justinian’s Institutes at Florence, but his son submitted to this resolution with some reluctance. He had an uncle who was archdeacon of the metropolitan church of Florence, and bishop of Cortona; and the prospect of succeeding to these benefices, which yielded near 1500 ducats a year, had Bred the ambition of the nephew. He had hopes of rising from such a foundation through richer preferments by degrees to the highest, that of a cardinal; and the reversion of the uncle’s places might have been easily obtained. But, though his father had five sons, he could not think of placing any of them in the church, where he thought there was great neglect in the discipline. Francis proceeded therefore with vigour in the study of the law, and took his degrees at Pisa, in 1505; but, looking upon the canon law as of little importance, he chose to be doctor of the civil law only. The same year he was appointed a professor of the institutes at Florence, with a competent salary for those times. He was now no more than twenty-three years of age, yet soon established a reputation superior to all the lawyers his contemporaries, and had more business than any of them. In 1506 he married Maria, daughter of Everardo Salviati, by far the greatest man in Florence; and, in 1507, was chosen standing counsellor to several cities of the republic. Two years after he was appointed advocate of the Florentine chapter, a post of great honour and dignity, which had been always filled with the most learned counsellors in the city; and, in 1509, he was elected advocate of the order of Calmaldoli.

, a German lawyer and historian, was born February 25, 1671, near Nuremberg, and was the son of a clergyman, who died 1689. He was successively professor of philosophy, rhetoric, and the law of nature and nations, at Halle; and frequently consulted on public affairs at Berlin, where his talents were so well known, that he obtained the title of privy-counsellor for his services on various occasions. Gundling was indefatigable, had an excellent memory, great wit, vivacity, and eloquence; but his warmest admirers wished that his numerous writings had contained less satire, and more moderation and politeness. He died rector of the university of Halle, December 16, 1729, leaving several valuable works on literature, history, law, and politics: the principal are, 1.“Historia Philosophic moralis,” 8vo. 2. “Otia,” or a collection of dissertations on various physical, moral, political, and historical subjects, 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “De jure oppignorati Territorii,” 4to. 4. “Status naturalis Hobbesii in corpore juris civilis defensus et defendendus,” 4to. 5. “De statu Reipublicae Germanicse sub Conrado I.” 4to. Ludwig has refuted this work in his “Germania Princeps.” 6. “Gundlingiana,” in German. 7. “Commentaria de Henrico Aucupe,” 4to. 8. “Via ad veritatem,” or a course of philosophy, 3 vols. 8vo. Gundling had a great share in the “Observationes Hallenses,” an excellent collection in 11 vols. 8vo.

, a most learned lawyer, an$ upright judge, was born at Alderley, in Gloucestershire, November J, 1609. His father was a barrister of Lincoln’s Inn, a man of such tenderness of conscience, as to withdraw from his profession because unwilling to tamper with truth in giving that colour to pleadings which barristers call doing their best for their client;" and this, with some other practices, customary in those days, appearing unworthy of his character, he retired to his estate in the country, where he died in 1614, at which time his son was but five years old. His wife having died two years before, their son was committed to the guardianship of Anthony Kingscot, esq. to whom he was related, and by whom, for grammatical learning, he was placed under the care of Mr. Staunton, vicar of Wotton-under-Edge, a noted puritan. In 1626 he was admitted of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, under the* tuition of Obadiah Sedgwick, another puritan, where he laid the foundation of that learning and knowledge, on which he afterwards raised so vast a superstructure. Here, however, he fell into many levitres and exr travagances, and was preparing to go along with his tutor, who went chaplain to lord Vere into the Low Countries, with a resolution of entering himself into the prince of Orange’s army, when he was diverted from this design by being engaged in a law-suit with sir William Whitmore, who laid claim to part of his estate. Afterwards, by the persuasions of Serjeant Glanville, who happened to be his counsel in this case, and had an opportunity of observing his capacity, he resolved upon the study of the law, and was admitted of Lincoln’s Inn, November 8, 1629. Sensible of the time he had lost in frivolous pursuits, he nowstudied at the rate of sixteen hours a day, and threw aside all appearance of vanity in his apparel. He is said, indeed, to have neglected his dress so much, that, being a strong and well-built man, he was once taken by a pressgang, as a person very fit for sea-service; which pleasant mistake made him regard more decency in his cloaths for the future, though never to any degree of extravagant finery. What confirmed him still more in a serious and regular way of life, was an accident, which is related to have befallen one of his companions. Hale, with other young students of the inn, being invited out of town, one of the company called for so much wine, that, notwithstanding all Hale could do to prevent it, he went on in his excess till he fell down in a fit, seemingly dead, and was with some difficulty recovered. This particularly affected Hale, in whom the principles of religion had been early implanted, and therefore retiring into another room, and, falling down upon his knees, he prayed earnestly to God, both for his friend, that he might be restored to life again, and for himself, that he might be forgiven for being present and countenancing so much excess: and he vowed to God, that he would never again keep company in that manner, nor drink a health while he lived. His friend recovered; and from this time Mr. Hale forsook all his gay acquaintance, and divided his whole time between the duties of religion and the studies of his profession. Noy, the attorney-general, who was one of the most eminent men of his profession, took early notice of him, directed him in his studies, and discovered so much friendship for him, that Mr. Hale was sometimes called Young Noy.

Some time before the civil wars broke out, he was called to the bar, and began to make a figure in the world; but, observing how difficult it was to preserve his integrity, and yet live securely, he resolved to follow those two maxims of Pomponius Atticus, who lived in similar times; viz. “To engage in no faction, nor meddle in public business, and constantly to favour and relieve those that were lowest.” He often relieved the royalists in their necessities, which so ingratiated him with them, that he became generally employed by them in his profession. He was one of the counsel to the earl of Strafford, archbishop Laud, and king Charles himself 5 as also to the duke of Hamilton, the earl of Holland, the lord Capel, and the lord Craven. Being esteemed a plain honest man, and of great knowledge in the law, he was equally acceptable to the presbyterians and the loyalists. In 1643 he took the covenant, and appeared several times with other lay -persons among the assembly of divines. He was then in great esteem with the parliament, and employed by them in several affairs, particularly in the reduction of the garrison at Oxford; being as a lawyer added to the commissioners named by the parliament to treat with those appointed by the king. In that capacity he was instrumental in saving the university, by advising them, especially the general Fairfax, to preserve that seat of learning from ruin. Afterwards, though no man more lamented the murder of Charles I. he took the oath called “The Engagement;” and, January 1651-2, was one of those appointed to consider of the reformation of the law. Cromwell, who well knew the advantage it would be to have the countenance of such a man as Hale to his courts, never left importuning him, till he accepted the place of one of the justices of the common bench, as it was called; for which purpose he was by writ made serjeant at law January 25, 1653-4. In that station he acted with great integrity and courage. He had at first serious scruples concerning the authority under which he was to act and, after having gone two or three circuits, he refused to sit any more on the crown side that is, to try any more criminals*. He had indeed so carried himself in some trials, that the powers then in being were not unwilling he should withdraw himself from meddling any farther in them; of which Burnet gives the following instance. Soon after he was made a judge, a trial was brought before him, upon the circuit at Lincoln, concerning the murder of one of the townsmen who had been of the king’s army, and was killed by a soldier of the garrison there. He was in the field with a fowling-piece on his shoulder, which the soldier seeing, he came to him, and said, he was acting

, an English lawyer and historiographer, was the son of John Halle of Northall in Shropshire, by Catherine his wife, daughter and heir of Thomas Gedding, and was descended from sir Francis Van Halle, knight of the garter in the time of Edward III. who was the son of Frederic Van Halle, of the Tyrol, in Germany, natural son of Albert king of the Romans and archduke of Austria. He was born, probably about the last year of the fifteenth century, in the parish of St. Mildred’s, London. He was educated at Eton, whence in 1544 he was sent to King’s college, Cambridge, where he continued until he became a junior fellow. He afterwards studied at Gray’s-inn, and resided there until he was made a judge in the sheriffs’ court. Wood, however, says that he went to Oxford about 1518, when cardinal Wolsey founded certain lectures there; and adds that, that being the common mart of learning, no person of ingenuity or curiosity thought themselves complete until they had been there. But Mr. Baker of St. John’s, in a letter to Hearne, seems to think this doubtful, as he is not to be traced from Gray’s-inn to Oxford.

, a young lawyer of great promise, was born probably at Waltham Abbey, where his father resided, in 1664. He was educated at Westminster school, whence he was elected student of Christ church, Oxford, in 1683, and soon after was entered a member of the Inner Temple. In 1690 he proceeded M. A. and was admitted to the bar, where he acquired very extensive practice. Some months before his death, he removed to Lincoln’s-inn, where that event happened Nov. 23, 1693, in his twenty-ninth year. His body was conveyed to Oxford, and, according to Wood, buried under the north wall of the north transept joining to the body of the cathedral of Christ church, but we find no memorial of him in Wood’s account of the monumental inscriptions. His death, it is said, was much deplored by those that knew him, “be^ cause, 1. That he was a prodigy, considering his age, in his knowledge of the common law. 2. That he was a person of excellent parts; and 3. That he was very honest in his dealing, and of a good and generous nature.” His writings, enumerated by Wood, are principally cases and memorials respecting certain local disputes, the rights of visitations, &c. at Oxford. He contributed some Latin poems to the “Musae Anglicans,” and wrote the preface to the first volume of Wood’s “Athenae,” and the introduction to the second. He also edited the works of Dr. George Stradling, to which he added a preface and life.

, a statesman and lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was the third and youngest son, of William Hatton, of Holdenby in Northamptonshire, by Alice, daughterof Lawrence Saunders, of Horringworth, in the same county. He was entered a gentleman commoner of St. Mary Hall, Oxford, but removed, without taking a degree, to the society of the Inner Temple, not to study law, but that his mind might be enlarged by an intercourse with those who were at once men of business and of the world, for such was the character of the lawyers of that day. He came on one occasion to the court at a masque, where queen Elizabeth was struck by the elegance of his person, and his graceful dancing. It is not improbable also that his conversation corresponded with his outward appearance. He was from this time, however, in the way to preferment; from one of the queen’s pensioners he became successively a gentleman of the privy chamber, captain of the guard, vice-chamberlain, and privy-counsellor, and by these unusual gradations rose to the office of lord chancellor in 1587, when he was likewise elected a knight of the garter. His insufficiency is said at first to have created strong prejudices among the lawyers against him, founded, perhaps, on some degree of envy at his sudden advancement without the accustomed studies; but his good natural capacity supplied the place of experience and study; and his decisions were not found deficient either in point of equity or judgment. In all matters of great moment he is said to have consulted Dr. Swale, a civilian. “His station,” says one of his biographers, “was great, his dispatches were quick and weighty, his orders many, yet all consistent: being very seldom reversed ijii thartcery, and his advice opposed more seldom in council. He was so just, that his sentence was a law to the subject, and so wise, that his opinion was an oracle to the queen.” When, in 1586, queen Elizabeth sent a new deputation to queen Mary of Scotland, informing her that the plea of that unhappy princess, either from her royal dignity, or from her imprisonment, could not be admitted, sir Christopher Hatton was one of the number, along with Burleigh, and Bromley the chancellor; and it was by Hatton’s advice chiefly, that Mary was persuaded to answer before the court, and thereby give an appearance of legal procedure to the trial.

, a recent English writer, the son of a man, who, though descended from the preceding sir John Hawkins, followed at first the occupation of a house-carpenter, which he afterwards exchanged for the profession of a surveyor and huijder. He had married Elizabeth, daughter of Thomas Gwatkin of Tou nhope, co. Hereford, gentleman; and the issue of this marriage were several children. Of these the present object of this article was the youngest, and was born in the city of London, on the 30th day of March, 1719. After fcaving been sent first to one school, and afterwards to a second, where he acquired a tolerable knowledge of Latin, he was placed under the tuition of Mr. Hoppus, the author of a well-known and useful architectural compendium, published in 1733, 8vo, and entitled “Proportional Architecture, or the Five Orders regulated by equal Farts.” Under this person he went through a regular course of architecture and perspective, in order to fit him for his father’s profession of a surveyor, for which he was at first intended; but his first cousin, Mr. Thomas Gwatkin, being clerk to Mr. John Scott of Devonshire-street, Bishopsgate, an attorney and solicitor in full practice, persuaded him *to alter his resolution, and embrace that of the law, which he did, and was accordingly articled as a clerk to Mr. Scott. In this situation his time was too fully employed in the actual dispatch of business, to permit him without some extraordinary means to acquire the necessary knowledge of his profession by reading and study; besides that, his master is said to have been more artxious to render him a good copying-clerk, by scrupulous attention to his hand-writing, than to qualify him by instruction to conduct business. To remedy this inconvenience, therefore, he abridged himself of his rest, and rising at four in the morning, found opportunity of reading all the necessary and most eminent law-writers, and the works of our mos% celebrated authors. By these means, before the expiration of his clerkship, he had already rendered himself a very able lawyer, and had possessed himself of a taste for literature in general, but particularly for poetry and the polite arts; and the better to facilitate his improvement, he from time to time furnished to “The Universal Spectator,” “The Westminster Journal,” The Gentleman’s Magazine,“and other periodical publications of the time, essays and disquisitions on several subjects. The first of these is believed to have been an” Essay on Swearing;“but the exact time of its appearance, and the paper in which it was inserted, are both equally unknown. It was, however, re-published some years since (without his knowledge till he saw it in print) in one of the newspapers. His next production was an” Essay on Honesty," inserted in the Gentleman’s Magazine for March, 1739; and which occasioned a controversy, continued through the magazines for several succeeding months, between him and a Mr. Calamy, a descendant of the celebrated Dr. Edmund Calamy, then a fellow-clerk with him.

, an English lawyer, the son of Thomas Hawles, gent, was born at Salisbury in 1645, and educated at Winchester school, whence he entered as a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1662, but, like most men intended for the study of the law, left the university without taking a degree. He removed to Lincoln’s Inn, and after studying the usual period, was admitted to the bar, and, as Wood says, became “a person of note for his profession.” On the accession of king William, he more openly avowed revolution-principles, and published “Remarks upon the Trials of Edward Fitzharris, Stephen Coiledge, count Coningsmarke, the lord Russel, &c.” Lond. 1689, foho; and a shorter tract called “The Magistracy and Government of England vindicated; or a justification of the English method of proceedings against criminals, by way of answer to the Defence of the late lord Russel’s innocence,” ibid. 1689, fol. In 1691 he stood candidate for the recordership of London against sir Bartholomew Shower, but was unsuccessful. In 1695, however, he was appointed solicitor general, which office he held until 1702. He was one of the managers against Dr. Sacheverel in his memorable trial. He died Aug. 2, 1716.

, a lawyer of eminence of the last century, and recorder of Exeter, was a celebrated scholar and an author. He wrote, 1. “An Essay towards a demonstrative proof of the Divine Existence, Unity, and Attributes; to which is premised, a short defence of the argument commonly called a priori,” 17iO. This pamphlet was dedicated to Dr. Oliver of Bath, and is to be ranked amongst the ablest defences of Dr. Clarke’s, or rather Mr. Howe’s, hypothesis; for it appears to be taken from Howe’s “Living Temple.” 2. “The case of the county of Devon with respect to the consequences of the new Excise Duty on Cyder and Perry. Published by the direction of the committee appointed at a general meeting of that county to superintend the application for the repeal of that duty,” 1763, 4to. To this representation of the circumstances peculiar to Devonshire, the repeal of the act is greatly to be ascribed; and very honourable notice was taken of it at a general meeting or the county. 3. “Notre sive Lectiones ad Tragicorum Graecorum veterum, JEschyli, &c.” 1752, 4to a work which places the author’s learning and critical skill in a very conspicuous light a principal object of which was to restore the metre of the Greek tragic poets. It is highly valued by all sound critics of our own and foreign countries. He also furnished the notes on the Eton Greek tragedies. The same solidity of judgment distinguished the author’s last production, 4. “A Revisal of Shakspeare’s Text, wherein the alterations introduced into it by the more modern editors and critics are particularly considered,” 1765, 8vo. It appears from the list of Oxford graduates, that he was created D. C. L. by diploma, March 31, 1762. He died Sept. 13, 1766. The brother of this author, Mr. Thomas Heath, an alderman of Exeter, published “An Essay towards a new Version of Job,” &c. in 1755. This gentleman was father to John Heath, esq. one of the judges of the common pleas.

, a German lawyer, was born at Eisemberg in 1681, and trained in the study of philosophy and law. He became professor of philosophy at Hall, in 1710, and of law in. 1721, with the title of counsellor. In 1724 he was invited to Franeker; and three years after, the king of Prussia influenced him to accept the law-professorship at Franc fort upon the Oder. Here he continued till 1733, when the same prince almost forced him to resume the chair at Hall, where he remained till his death, in 1741, although he had strong invitations from Denmark, Holland, &c. His principal works (for they are numerous) are, 1. “Antiquitatum Romanorum Jurisprudentiam illustrantium syntagma;” the best edition of which is the fifth, published at Lewarden, in 1777. 2. “Elementa Juris Civilis secundum ordinem Institutionum & Pandectarum,” 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Elementa Philosophic Rationalis & Moralis, quibus pnemissa historia Philosophical' This is reckoned a good abridgment of logic and morality. 4.” Historia Juris Civilis, Romani ac Germanici.“5.” Elementa Juris Naturae & Gentium,“which was translated into English by Dr. Turnbull. 6, ”Fundamenta styli cultioris;“a work of his youth, but much approved, and often reprinted, with notes by Gesner and others, Also several academic dissertations upon various subjects. His works were published collectively at Geneva in 1744, and form 8 vols. in 4to. His brother, John Michael, deacon of the church of St. Peter and St. Paul at Goslar, who died in 1722, wrote many works of reputation in his country, among which is his” Account of the Antiquities of Goslar and the neighbouring places;" and his view of the ancient and modern Greek church.

, an eminent painter, was born in the parish of St. James, Garlickhithe, London, June 13, 1692, being the third son of Mr. Edward Hightnore , a coal-merchant in Thames-street. Having such an early and strong inclination to painting, that he could think of nothing else with pleasure', his father endeavoured to gratify him in a proposal to his uncle, who was serjeant-painter to king William, and with whom Mr. (afterward Sir James) Thorn hi 11 f had served his apprenticeship. But this was afterwards for good reasons declined, and he was articled as clerk to an attorney, July 18, 1707; but so much against his own declared inclination, that in about three years he began to form resolutions of indulging his natural disposition to his favourite art, having continually employed his leisure hours in designing, and in the study of geometry, perspective, architecture, and anatomy, but without any instructors except books. He had afterwards an opportunity of improving himself in anatomy, by attending the lectures of Mr. Cheselden, besides entering himself at the Painters’ Academy in Great Queen -street, where he drew ten years, and had the honour to be particularly noticed by sir Godfrey Kneller, who distinguished him by the name of “the Young Lawyer.” On June 13, 1714, his clerkship expired; and on March 26, 1715, he began painting as a profession, and settled in the city. In the same year Dr. Brook Taylor published his “Linear Perspective: or anew method of representing justly all manner of objects as they appear to the eye, in all situations.” On this complete and universal theory our artist grounded his subsequent practice; and it has been generally allowed, that few, if any, of the profession at that time, were so thoroughly masters of that excellent, but intricate system. In 1716, he married miss Susanna Killer, daughter and heiress of Mr. Anthony Hiller, of Em'ngliam, in Surrey; a young lady in every respect worthy of his choice. For Mr. Cheselden’s “Anatomy of the Human. Body,” published in 1722, he made drawings from the real subjects at the time of dissection, two of which were engraved for that work, and appear, but without his name, in tables xii. and xiii. In the same year, on the exhibition of “The Conscious Lovers,” written by sir Richard Stecle, Mr. Highmore addressed a letter to the author, (puhlished in 1760 in the Gentleman’s Magazine), on the limits of filial obedience, pointing out a material defect in the character of Bevil, with that clearness and precision for which, in conversation and writing, he was always remarkable, as the pencil by no means engrossed his whole attention. His reputation and business increasing, he took a more conspicuous station, by removing to a house in Lincoln’s-innfields, in March 1723-4; and an opportunity soon offered of introducing him advantageously to the nobility, &c. from his being desired, by Mr. Pine the engraver, to make the drawings for his prints of the Knights of the Bath, on the revival of that order in 1725. In consequence of this, several of the knights had their portraits also by the same hand, some of them whole lengths; and the duke of Kichmond, in particular, was attended by l.is three esquiies, with a perspective view of king Henry the Vilth’s chapel. This capital picture is now at Goodwood. The artist was also sent for to St. James’s, by George I. to paint the portrait of William duke of Cumberland, from which Smith scraped a mezzotinto.

The ingenious abbe du Bos has often complained, that no history-painter of his time went through a scries of actions, and thus, like an historian, painted the successive fortune of an hero, from the cradle to the grave. What Du Bos wished to see done, Hogarth performed. He launches out his young adventurer a simple girl upon the town, and conducts her through all the vicissitudes of wretchedness to a premature death. This was painting to the understanding and to the heart; none had ever before made the pencil subservient to the purposes of morality and instruction; a book like this is fitted to every soil and every observer, and he that runs may read. Nor was the success of Hogarth confined to his figures. One of his excellencies consisted in what may be termed the furniture of his pieces; for as in sublime and historical representations the seldomer trivial circumstances are permitted to divide the spectator’s attention from the principal figures, the greater is their force; so in scenes copied from familiar life, a proper variety of little domestic images contributes to throw a degree of verisimilitude on the whole. “The Rake’s levee-room,” says Mr. Walpole, “the nobleman’s dining-rootn, the apartments of the husband and wife in Marriage a la Mode, the alderman’s parlour, the bedchamber, and many others, are the history of the manners of the age.” The novelty and excellence of Hogarth’s performances soon tempted the needy artist and printdealer to avail themselves of his designs, and rob him of the advantages which he was entitled to derive from them. This was particularly the case with the “Midnight Conversation,” the “Harlot’s” and “Rake’s Progresses,” and Others of his early works. To put a stop to depredations Kke these on the property of himself and others, and to secure the emoluments resulting from his own labours, as Mr. Walpole observes, he applied to the legislature, and obtained an act of parliament, 8 Geo. II. cap. 38, to vest an exclusive right in designers and engravers, and to restrain the multiplying of copies of their works without the consent of the artist. This statute was drawn by his friend Mr. Huggins, who took for his model the eighth of queen Anne, in favour of literary property; but it was not so accurately executed as entirely to remedy the evil; for, in a cause founded on it, which came before lord Hardwicke in chancery, that excellent lawyer determined, that no assignee, claiming under an assignment from the original inventor, could take any benefit by it. Hogarth, immediately after the passing of the act, published a small print, with emblematical devices, and an inscription expressing his gratitude to the three branches of the legislature. Small copies of the “Rake’s Progress” were published by his permission. In 1745, finding that, however great the success of his prints might be, the public were not inclined to take his pictures off his hands, he was induced to offer some of them, and those of the best he had then produced, for disposal by way of auction; but after a plan of his own, viz. by keeping open a book to receive biddings from the first day of February to the last day of the same month, at 12 o'clock. The ticket of admission to the sale was his print of “The Battle of the Pictures,” a humourous production, in which he ingeniously upheld his assertions concerning the preference so unfairly given to old pictures, and the tricks of the dealers in them.

, a Danish historian, lawyer, and poet, was born at Bergen in Norway, in 1685. His family is said by some to have been low, by others noble; but it is agreed that he commenced life in very poor circumstances, and picked up his education in his travels through various parts of Europe, where he subsisted either by charity, or by his personal efforts of various kinds. On his return to Copenhagen, he found means to be appointed assessor of the consistory court, which place affording him a competent subsistence, he was able to indulge his genius, and produced several works, which gave him great celebrity. Among these are some comedies, a volume of which has been translated into French. He wrote also a History of Denmark, in 3 vols. 4to, which has been considered as the best that hitherto has been produced, though in some parts rather minute and uninteresting. Two volumes of “Moral Thoughts,” and a work entitled “The Danish Spectator,” were produced by him: and he is generally considered as the author of the “Iter subterraneum of Klimius,” a satirical romance, something in the style of Gulliver’s Travels. Most of these have been translated also into German, and are much esteemed in that country. His “Introduction to Universal History” was translated into English by Dr. Gregory Sharpe, with notes, 1755, 8vo. By his publications, and his place of assessor, he had osconomy enough to amass a considerable fortune, and even in his life gave 70,000 crowns to the university of Zealand, for the education of young noblesse; thinking it right that as his wealth had been acquired by literature, it should be employed in its support. This munificence obtained him the title of baron. At his death, which happened in 1754, he left also a fund of 16,000 crowns to portion out a certain number of young women, selected from the families of citizens in Copenhagen.

, a lawyer of considerable eminence, and law writer, flourished in the time of Charles I. but of his early history, we have no account. In 1640 he was chosen representative for St. Michael in Cornwall in the Long-parliament, and on one occasion argued for two hours in justification of the canons. In 1641 he was Lent reader of Lincoln’s-inn, but soon after quitted the parliament when he saw the extremities to which they were proceeding. He had formerly given his advice against ship-money, but was not prepared to overthrow the constitution entirely, and therefore went to Oxford, where, in 1643, he sat in the parliament assembled there by Charles I. [[he]] was made the prince’s attorney, one of the privy council, and received the honour of knighthood. In 1644 he was present at the treaty of Uxbridge, and afterwards at that of the Isle of Wight. Returning to London, after these ineffectual attempts to restore peace, he was forced to compound for his estate, and was not permitted to remain in any of the inns of court. He died in 1647, and was interred in the crypt under Lincoln’s-inn chapel. His “Readings on the Statute of Treasons, 25 Edward III. c. 2.” were published in 1642, 4to, and in 1681. He was the author also of “The Freeholder’s Grand Inquest touching our Sovereign Lord the King and his Parliament,” which hears the name of sir Robert Filmer, who reprinted it in 1679, and 1680, 8vo, with observations upon forms of government. He left also some Mss.

In 1700, when lord Somers parted with the great seal, king William pressed chief justice Holt to accept of it: but he replied, that he never had but one chancery cause in his life, which he lost; and consequently could not think himself fitly qualified for so great a trust. He continued in his post twenty-two years, and maintained it with great reputation for steadiness, integrity, and complete knowledge in his profession. He applied himself with great assiduity to the functions of his important office. He was perfect master of the common law; and, as his judgment was most solid, his capacity vast, and understanding most clear, so he had a firmness of mind, and such a degree of resolution, as never could be brought to swerve in the least from what he thought to be law and justice. Upon great occasions he shewed an intrepid zeal in asserting the authority of the law; for he ventured to incur the indignation of both houses of parliament, by turns, when he thought the law was with him. Several cases of the utmost importance, and highly affecting the lives, rights, liberties, and property of the people, came in judgment before him. There was a remarkable clearness and perspicuity of ideas in his definitions; a distinct arrangement of them in the analysis of his arguments; and the real and natural difference of things was made most perceptible and obvious, when he distinguished between matters which bore a false resemblance to each other. Having thus rightly formed his premises, he scarcely ever erred in his conclusions; his arguments were instructive and convincing, and his integrity would not suffer him to deviate from judgment and truth, in compliance to his prince, or, as observed before, to either house of parliament. They are most of them faithfully and judiciously reported by that eminent lawyer, chief justice Raymond. His integrity and uprightness as a judge are celebrated by the author of the “Tatler,” No. 14, under the noble character of Verus the magistrate. There happened in the time of this chief justice a riot in Hoi born, occasioned by an abominable practice then prevailing, of decoying young persons of both sexes to the Plantations. The persons so decoyed they kept prisoners in a house in Holborn, till they could find an opportunity of shipping them off; which being discovered, the enraged populace were going to pull down the house. Notice of this being sent to Whitehall, a party of the guards were commanded to march to the place; but they first sent an officer to the chief justice to acquaint him with the design, and to desire him to send some of his people to attend the soldiers, in order to give it the better countenance. The officer having delivered his message, Holt said to him, “Suppose the populace should not disperse at your appearance, what are you to do then?” “Sir,” answered the officer, “we have orders to fire upon them.” “Have you, Sir? (replied Holt) then take notice of what I say; if there be one man killed, and you are tried before me, I will take care that you, and every soldier of your party, shall be hanged. Sir, (added he) go back to those who sent you, and acquaint them, that no officer of mine shall attend soldiers; and let them know at the same time, that the laws of this kingdom are not to be executed by the sword: these matters belong to the civil power, and you have nothing to do with them.” Upon this, the chief justice, ordering his tipstaves with a few constables to attend him, went himself in person to the place where the tumult was; expostulated with the mob; assured them that justice should be done upon the persons who were the objects of their indignation: and thus they all dispersed quietly.

, usually called Lord Kames, an eminent Scotch lawyer, philosopher, and critic, the son of George Home of Kames, in the county of Berwick, was born at Kames in 1696. He was descended from an ancient and honourable family; being on his father’s side, the great grandson of sir John Home of Renton, whose ancestor was a cadet of the family of the earls of Home, who held the office of lord justice-clerk in the reign of king Charles II. His mother was a daughter of Mr. Walkinshaw of Barrowfield, and grand-daughter of Mr. Robert Baillie, principal of the university of Glasgow, of whom an account is given in our third volume. His father having lived beyond his income, and embarrassed his affairs, Henry, on entering the world, had nothing to trust to but his own abilities and exertions, a circumstance which although apparently unfavourable, was always most justly regarded by him as the primary cause of his success in life. The only education he had was from private instructions at home from a tutor of the name of Wingate, of whom he never spoke in commendation.

With no other stock of learning than what he had acquired from this Mr. Wingate, he was, about 1712, bound by indenture to attend the office of a writer of the signet in Edinburgh, as preparatory to the profession of a writer or solicitor before the supreme court; but circumstances inspired him with the ambition of becoming an advocate; and now being sensible of his defective education, he resumed the study of the Greek and Latin languages, to which he added French and Italian, and likewise applied himself to the study of mathematics, natural philosophy, logic, ethics, and metaphysics. These pursuits, which he followed at the same time with the study of the law, afforded, independently of their own value, a most agreeable variety of employment to his active mind. His attention appears to have been much turned to metaphysical investigation, for which he all his life entertained a strong predilection. About 1723, he carried on a correspondence with the celebrated Andrew Baxter, and Dr. Clarke, upon subjects of that kind. In January 1724, he was called to the bar, at a time when bath the bench and bar were filled by men of uncommon eminence. As he did not possess in any great degree the powers of an orator, he engaged for some time but a moderate share of practice as a barrister. In 1728, he published a folio volume of “Remarkable Decisions of the Court of Session,” executed with so much judgment, that he began to be regarded as a young man of talents, who had his profession at heart, and would spare no pains to acquit himself, with honour, in the most intricate causes in which he might be employed. His practice was quickly increased; and after 1732, when he published a small volume, entitled “Essays upon several subjects in Law,” he was justly considered as a profound and scientific lawyer. These essays afford an excellent example of the mode of reasoning which he afterwards pursued in most of his jurisprudential writings, and, in the opinion of his biographer, furnish an useful model for that species of investigation.

, a lawyer, philologer, and historian of Leipsic, was born in 1722. He published his first work in 1743, which was a tract in 4to. 1. “De Legum civilium et naturalium Natura.” 2. “Oblectamenta Juris Feudalis, sive Grammaticaj Observationes jus rei clientelaris, et antiquitates Germanicas, varie illustrantes,” 1755. This was also in quarto, and tends, as well as his other works, to prove the pleasing qualities and the acuteness of his mind. 3. “Literatura Juris,” 1761, 8vo. 4. “Jurisprudentia numismatibus illustrata, necnon sigillis, gemmis, aliisque picturis vetustis varie exornata,” 1763, 8vo. 5. “Corpus juris civilis, cum notis variorum,” 1768, 8vo. 6. “Palingenesia librorum juris veterum,” &c. 1768, 3 vols. 8vo. He published some smaller tracts, but these are the most important. Hommel died in 1781.

, a lawyer of Nuremberg, was born there in 1662. He became counsellor to the duke of Meinungen, and bailli of Cobourg,' at which place he died in 1747. His works are chiefly these: 1. “Iter Juridicum, per Belgium, Angliam, Galliam, Italiam.” 2. “Lexicon Topographicum Franconia3.” 3. “History of the Duchy of Saxe-Cobourg,” in German. 4. “Thoughts on the Suppression of Mendicity,” in the same language.

, a Scotch lawyer, was the son of Henry Hope, a merchant of Edinburgh, who had many commercial transactions with Holland, where he afterwards resided, and where he married Jacque or Jacqueline de Tott. His son Thomas soon distinguished himself at the bar; and was made king’s advocate in 1627, when he was also created a baronet by Charles I. He however attached himself to the covenanters, and was consulted by them in all difficult points. The king nevertheless, perhaps either to render him suspected to that party, or with a view to win him over, appointed sir Thomas commissioner to the general assembly in August 1643.

, an English lawyer and poet, was born in 1566, at Mownton, in the parish of Lanwarne, in Herefordshire, and was at first intended by his father for a trade, but his surprizing memory and capacity induced him to send him to Westminster, and afterwards to Winchester school, at both which he made great proficiency. From Winchester he was in 1584 elected probationer-felr low of New-college, Oxford, and two years afterwards admitted actual fellow. In 1591 he took his master’s degree; but being terra jiliu$ y in the act following, he was, says Wood, “so bitterly satirical,” as to be refused to complete his degree as regent master, and was also expelled the university. He then, for his maintenance, taught school for some time at Ilchester, in Somersetshire, where he compiled a Greek lexicon as far as the letter M. Marrying afterwards a lady of property, he entered himself as student in the Twiddle temple, and at the usual time was called to the bar. In 1614 he hid a seat in parliament, where some rash speeches occasioned his being imprisoned for a year. He was afterwards elected Lentreader of the Middle-temple, and four years after was made a serjeant at law, a justice itinerant for Wales, and one of the council of the Marches. He died at his house at Morehampton, in Herefordshire, Aug. 27, 1638.

, an English historian, who flourished in the reign of Henry II. was born in Yorkshire, most probably in the town of that name, was of a good family, and lived beyond the year 1204, but the exact periods of his birth and death are not known. He is said to have had some situation in the family of Henry II. and to have been employed by that monarch in confidential services, such as visiting monasteries. He was by profession a lawyer, but, like other lawyers of that time, in the church, and also a professor of theology at Oxford. After the death of Henry, he applied himself diligently to the writing of history, ancl composed annals, which he commenced at the year 731, the period where Bede left off, and continued to the third year of king John, 1202. These annals were first published by Savile among the Historic! Anglici, in 1595, and reprinted at Francfort in 1601, folio, in two books. Leland says of him, “If we consider his diligence, his knowledge of antiquity, and his religious strictness of veracity, he may be considered as having surpassed, not only the rude historians of the preceding ages, but even what could have been expected of himself. If to that fidelity, which is the first quality of a historian, he had joined a little more elegance of Latin style, he might have. stood the first among the authors of that class.” Vossius says that he wrote also a history of the Northumbrian kings, and a life of Thomas a Becket. Edward the Third caused a diligent search to be made for the works of Hoveden when he was endeavouring to ascertain his title to the crown of Scotland. Savile bears the same testimony to his fidelity that we have seen given by Leland.

, a native of Dockum, in the Dutch territories, famous as a lawyer, an historian, and a philologer, was born in 1635, and became professor at Franeker, and afterwards at Lewarde. He published, 1. in 1662, seven dissertations, “De genuina aetate Assyriorum, et regno Medorum.” Also, 2. A treatise “De Jure civitatis.” 3. “Jurisprudentia Frisiaca.” 4. “Specimen Philosophise civilis.” 5. “Institutiones Historiae civilis;” and several other works. From 1688, he was engaged in violent controversy with Perizonius, on some points of jurisprudence, and on his work last-mentioned, the “Institutiones historic civilis.” He died in 1694. The dispute with Perizonius was carried on with sufficient scurrility on both sides.

In May 1750, by Warburton’s recommendation to Dr. Sherlock, bishop of London, Mr. Kurd was appointed one of the Whitehall preachers. At this period the university of Cambridge was disturbed by internal divisions, occasioned by an exercise of discipline against some of its members, who had been wanting in respect to those who were entrusted with its authority. A punishment having been inflicted on some delinquents, they refused to submit to it, and appealed from the vice-chancellor’s jurisdiction. The right of the university, and those to whom their power was delegated, becoming by this means the subject of debate, several pamphlets appeared, and among others who signalised themselves upon this occasion, Mr. Kurd was generally supposed to have written “The Academic, or, a disputation on the state of the university of Cambridge, and the propriety of the regulations made in it on the 1 Ith day of May and the 26th day of June 1750, 8vo” but this was, as we have already remarked, the production of Dr. Green: Mr. Hurd, however, wrote “The opinion of an eminent lawyer (the earl of Hardwicke) concerning the right of appeal from the vice-chancellor of Cambridge to the senate; supported by a short historical account of the jurisdiction of the university; in answer to a late pamphlet, intituled * An Inquiry into the right of appeal from the vice-chancellor, &c.' By a fellow of a college,” 1751, 8vo. This passed through three editions; and being answered, was defended in “A Letter to the Author of a Further Inquiry,” 1752, 8vo. It is also preserved in the bishop’s works.

, an English lawyer, distinguished for his learning and eminence in his profession, and for his loyalty to Charles I. was descended from an ancient and honourable family, and born at flensol, in Glamorganshire, about 1586. He became commoner of Edmundhall, Oxford, in 1597, and after taking the degree of B. A. removed to Gray’s-inn, studied the law, and when admitted to the bar, rose to a considerable share of practice. In the first of Charles I. being a bencher, he was elected summer reader, but, for what reason we are not told, refused to read. He was afterwards made one of the judges for South Wales, an office which he accepted purely out of respect to the king, who gave him the patent without his paying any fees for it, as it cost him twice the annual salary (So/.) in travelling expences. He continued, however, in this office until the rebellion broke our, at which time he either imprisoned or condemned to death several persons in his circuit, for being guilty of high treason in bearing arms against the king. At length, being taken prisoner at Hereford, when that city was surprized by the parliamentary forces, he was carried up to London, and sent to the Tower, whence, being brought to the bar in chancery, he denied the authority of that court, because their seal was counterfeited, and consequently the commissioners of such a seal were constituted against law. On this he was committed to Newgate, impeached of treason, and brought to the bar of the House of Commons. On this occasion he behaved with undaunted spirit, denying their authority, and refusing to kneel. “In your speech,” said he, “Mr. Speaker, you said the House was offeuded with my behaviour, in not making any obeisance to you upon my coming here; and this was the more wondered at, because I pretended to be knowing in the laws of the land (having made it my study for these five-and-forty years), and because I am so, that was the reason of such my behaviour: For as long as you had the king’s arms engraved on your mace, and acted under his authority, had 1 come here, I would have bowed my body in obedience to his authority, by which you were first called. But, Mr. Speaker, since you and this house have renounced all your iduty and allegiance to your sovereign and natural liegelord the king, and are become a den of thieves, should I bow myself in this house of llimmon, the Lord would not pardon me in this thing.”

, king’s counsellor at the Chatelet, and syndic of the annuitants of the H6tel de Ville at Paris, attached himself to cardinal de Retz, whom he attended a long time as secretary in his troubles and adventures, but quitted his eminence when he returned to Rome. There are some “Memoirs” by him, from 164-8 to 1665, designed as an explanation and supplement to those of cardinal de Retz, with which they were printed in 2 vols. 12mo. These memoirs contain some very curious particulars. He also left some tracts, written by order of the court, in defence of the queen’s rignts, against Peter Stockmans, an eminent lawyer; particularly “The Intrigues of the Peace,” and the “Negociations” made at court by the friends of M. the prince, after his retreat to Guienne, folio, with a sequel of the same “Intrigues,” 4to.

From his first entrance into the university, until Michaelmas 1768, when he took his bachelor’s degree, he had kept terms regularly, but from this period to 1773, only occasionally. During the Encaenia, in Easter-term 1773, he took his master’s degree, and composed an oration which he intended to have spoken in the theatre; but which was not published till about ten years after. In the beginning of 17T4, he published his “Commentaries on Asiatic poetry,” which have been already noticed as having been begun in 1766, and finished in 1769, when he was only in his twenty-third year. The same motives which induced him to keep back his poems, prevailed in the present instance; a diffidence in his own abilities, and a wish to profit by more mature examination, as well as by the opinions of his friends. By the preface to this work, it would appear that he was not perfectly satisfied with the profession in which he had engaged, and that had circumstances permitted, he would have been better pleased to have devoted his days to an uninterrupted course of study. But such was his fate, that he must now renounce polite literature; and having been admitted to the bar in 1774, he adhered to this determination inflexibly for some years, during which his books and manuscripts, except such as related to law and oratory, remained locked up at Oxford. He seems to have been seriously convinced that the new science he was about to enter upon was too extensive to admit of union with other studies; and he accordingly pursued it with his usual avidity, endeavouring to embrace the whole of jurisprudence in its fullest extent, and to make himself not only the technical but the philosophical lawyer. For some time he had but little practice, but it gradually came in, and with it a very considerable share of reputation. Towards the end of the year 1776, he was appointed a commissioner of bankrupts, a favour which he seems inclined to estimate beyond the value usually put upon it by professional men. Notwithstanding his determination to suspend the study of ancient literature, there was a gratification in it which he found it impossible to resign, while his practice continued so scanty as to afford him any disposable time. In the year last mentioned, we find him reading the Grecian orators again and again, and translating the most useful orations of Isaeus. Some part of his time, likewise, he devoted to philosophical experiments and discoveries, attended the meetings of the royal society, of which he had been elected a fellow in 1772, and kept up an extensive epistolary intercourse with many of the literati of Europe. In these letters, subjects of law seldom occur, unless as an apology for his barrenness on topics more congenial. From the commencement of the unhappy contest between Great Britain and America, he was decidedly against the measures adopted by the mother country.

Soon after his arrival “he determined to commence the study of the Sanscrit. His reflection had before suggested that a knowledge of this ancient tongue would be of the greatest utility, in enabling him to discharge with confidence and satisfaction to himself, the duties of a judge; and he soon discovered, what subsequent experience fully confirmed, that no reliance could be placed on the opinions or interpretations of the professors of the Hindoo law, unless he were qualified to examine their authorities and quotations, and detect their errors and misrepresentations. On the other hand, he knew that all attempts to explore the religion or literature of India through any other medium than a knowledge of the Sanscrit, must be imperfect and unsatisfactory; it was evident that the most erroneous and discordant opinions on these subjects had been circulated by the ignorance of those who had collected their information from oral communications only, and that the pictures exhibited in Europe, of the religion and literature of India, could only be compared to the maps constructed by the natives, in which every position is distorted, and all proportion violated. As a lawyer, he knew the value and importance of original documents and records, and as a scholar and man of science, he disdained the idea ofamusing the learned world with secondary information on subjects which had greatly interested their curiosity, when he had the means of access to the original sources. He was also aware, that much was expected by the literati of Europe, from his superior abilities and learning, and he felt the strongest inclination to gratify their expectations in the fullest possible extent.”

, one of the principal writers of the Centuries of Magdeburg, was born Sept. 21, 1528, at Tippolswald, in Misnia. His inclination to literature induced his father to send him to study at Dresden: but the college of Wittenberg being more to his mind, he removed thither, and afterwards was driven, by necessity, to Magdeburg. Here he supported himself by being tutor in the family of a lawyer, who sent him with his son to Wittenberg, in 1546. This gave him an opportunity of completing his own studies; and he obtained the degree of M. A. in this university, 1548. He then returned to Magdeburg, and taught the second form there for some years; and in 1554, was chosen minister of St. Ulric’s church.

The empire being now in the full enjoyment of profound peace and tranquillity, Justinian made the best use of it, by collecting the immense variety and number of the Roman laws into one body. To this end, he selected ten of the most able lawyers in the empire; who, revising the Gregorian, Theodosian, and Hermogenian codes, compiled out of them one body, called “The Code,” to which the emperorgave his own name. This may be called the statute law, as consisting of the rescripts of the emperors: but the compilation of the other part was a much more difficult task. It was made up of the decisions of the judges and other magistrates, together with the authoritative opinions of the most eminent lawyers; all which lay scattered, without any order, in above 2000 volumes. These, however, after the labour of ten years, chiefly by Tribonian, an eminent lawyer, were reduced to the number of 50; and the whole design was completed in the year 533, and the name of “Digests,” or “Pandects,” given to it. Besides these, for the use chiefly of young students in the law, Justinian ordered four books of “Institutes” to be drawn up, by Tribonian, Dorotheus, and Theophilus, containing an abstract or abridgement of the text of all the laws: and, lastly, the laws of modern date, posterior to that of the former, were thrown into one volume in the year 541, called the “Noveilx,” or “New Code.” This most important transaction in the state has rendered Justinian’s name immortal. His conduct in ecclesiastical affairs was rash and inconsiderate. On one occasion, when Theodotus, king of Italy, had obliged pope Agapetus to go to Constantinople, in order to submit and make peace with the emperor, Justinian received him very graciously, but enjoined him to communicate with Anthenius, patriarch of Constantinople. That patriarch being deemed a heretic at Rome, the pontiff refused to obey the command; and, when the emperor threatened to punish his disobedience with banishment, he answered, without any emotion, “I thought I was come before a Christian prince, but I find a Diocletian.” The result was, that the hardiness and resolution of the pope brought the emperor to a submission. Accordingly Anthenius was deprived, and an orthodox prelate put into his place.

, a very famous genealogist, born of a noble family at Nuremberg, in 1651, was a lawyer in that city, and one of its senators. He was considered as having a profound knowledge of the interests of princes, the revolutions of states, and the history of the principal families in Europe. He died in 1728. His works were, L “Genealogies excellentium in GaHia familiarum,” Norimb. 1687, folio. 2. “Genealogise familiarum Bellomaneriae,” &c. Norimb. 1638, folio. 3. “Historia Genealogica Regum Magnae Britanniae,” Norimb. 1690, folio. 4. “Notitia procerum 5. R. imperil,” Tubingen, 1693, folio. 5. “Historia Italiae et Hispaniae genealogica,” Norimb. 1701, folio. 6. “Corpus Historic genealogicae Italiae et Hispaniae,” Norimb. 1702, folio. 7. “Recherches Historiques et Genealogiques des Grands d'Espagne,” Amst. 1708, folio. 8. “Stemma regium Lusitanicum,” Amst. 1708, folio. 9. “Genealogiae 20 illustrium in Hispama famiharum,” Leipsic, 1720, folio.

, called also Wernerus, or Guarnerus, a celebrated German lawyer, was born at Bologna, about the middle of the eleventh century. After studying the law at Constantinople, he taught it at Ravenna, where a dispute arising between him and his colleagues about the word “al,” he sought for the meaning of it in the Roman law; and thence took a liking to it, applied to the study of it, and at last taught it publicly at Bologna in 1128. He had a great number of disciples, became the father of the Glossators, and had the title of “Lucerna Juris.” Thus he was the restorer of the Roman law, which had been destroyed by the invasion of the barbarians. He had great credit in Italy with the princess Matilda; and, having engaged the emperor Lotharius to order, by an edict, that Justinian’s law should resume its ancient authority at the bar, and that the code and digest should be read in the schools, he was the first who exercised that profession in Italy: his method was to reconcile the “responsa jurisprudentum” with the “leges,” when they seemed to clash.

, an English lawyer, was the son of a lawyer of eminence, during Cromwell’s usurpation, and born in London, 1632. After a proper preparation, he was sent to Jesus -college, Oxford; whence he shortly removed to All-souls, of which he was made fellow by the parliament visitors in 1648. He took the degree of LL. B. in 1644; and, not long after, was admitted student at Gray’s inn, London, and became a barrister about 1658. The following year he went to Paris. After the restoration, he attended the King’s bench bar with extraordinary assiduity, continuing there as long as the court sat, in all the terms from 1661 to 1710, but was hardly ever known to be retained in any cause, or even to make a motion. He died suddenly, under the gate-way of Gray’s-inn, Aug. 1710, just as he was going to take the air in a coach. He was a man of incredible industry, for besides having published several books in his life-time, he left above 100 large folios, and more than 50 thick 4tos in ms. twenty of which are in the library of Gray’s-inn. Writing must have been his delight as well as employment, and became so habitual, that he not only reported the law cases at the King’s-bench, Westminster, but all the sermons at Gray’sinn chapel, both forenoon and afternoon, which amounted at last to above 4000. This was the mode of the times when he was young; and there is a mechanism in some natures, which makes them fond of proceeding as they have set out. He appears to have been a man of a singular turn in other respects, yet regular in his conduct, and very benevolent. The first work he undertook for the public was a new table, with many new references, to the statute-book, in 1674. 2. “An Explanation of the Laws against Recusants, &c. abridged,” 1631, 8vo. 3. “An Assistance to Justices of the Peace, for the easier Performance of their Duty,” 1683, folio; licensed by all the judges. 4. “Reports taken at the King’s-bench at Westminster, from the 12th to the 30th year of the Reign of our late Sovereign Lord King Charles II.” 1685, 3 vols. folio. This work was also licensed by the judges; but not being digested in th'e ordinary method of such collections, and having no table of references, it was not so well received as was expected; and the credit of it being once sunk, could not be retrieved, though the table was added in 1696. Indeed, as a reporter he does not stand high in the opinion of the profession. 5. Two essays, one “On Human Nature, or the Creation of Mankind;” the other, “On Human Actions.” These were pamphlets.

From this time, however, our author found himself under a necessity of relinquishing pursuits of this kind, on account of the increasing and urgent business which his abilities as a lawyer brought into his hands; and in a fevr years his merit in the law was distinguished by the highest honours. July 1708, he was chosen recorder of London; and knighted by queen Anne September following. In 1709, he was appointed one of the managers of the House of Commons, at the trial of Sacheverell. Upon the accession of George I. he was appointed lord chief-justice of the court of common-pleas, and soon after sworn of the privy-council. He was created a peer May the 25th, 1725, by the title of lord King, baron of Ockharn, in Surrey; and the great seal being taken from lord Macclesfield, was delivered to him the 1st of June following. He did not, however, make that figure as chancellor, which was expected from the character that raised him to it; and it is said that more of his decrees were repealed by the House of Lords than of any other chancellor in the same space of time. Yet it is allowed that he took extraordinary pains in the discharge of his office, which, impairing his constitution by degrees, brought on atan a paralytic disorder and his distemper increasing, he resigned the seals the 26th Nov. 1733, and died July the 22d following, at his seat at Ockham, leaving behind him two sons and two daughters, and a widow, the daughter of Richard Seys, of Boverton, in Glamorganshire, esq. Lord King was a man of great integrity, knowledge, and diligence, although not of transcendant abilities. He was interred in Ockham church, Surrey, where a monument was erected to his memory.

, an eminent lawyer and antiquary, the eldest son of John Lambarde, alderman of London, by Juliana his wife, daughter of William Home or Herne, of London, was born Oct. 18, 1536. Nothing is recorded concerning the early part of his education, until he entered upon the study of the law, and was admitted into the society of Lincoln’s-inn, Aug. 15, 1556. Here he studied under Laurence Nowell (brother to the celebrated dean of St. Paul’s), a man famous for his knowledge of antiquities and of the Saxon tongue. Lambarde profited much by his instructions, considering an acquaintance with the customs and jurisprudence of the Saxon times as very useful in his profession. The first fruits of his studies appeared in a collection and translation of the Saxon laws, under the title of “A^awvo/iw, sive de priscis Anglorum legibus, libri,” 1568, 4to, republished afterwards, with Bede’s “Ecclesiastical History,” in 1644, by Abraham Wheelock, who commends highly the elegance of Lambarde’s interpretation.

, an English lawyer, was a native of Somersetshire, and educated at Oxford, in St. John’s college, as Wood was informed, where, he adds, he made considerable proficiency in literature. Afterwards he removed to the Middle Temple, but being of a delicate habit, does not appear to have practised as a barrister. Some years before his death, he had embraced the Roman catholic religion, influenced by the artifices of a priest or Jesuit who prevailed on him to leave his estate to the society of Jesuits. He died at Hayes in Middlesex, in August 1655. He was the reporter of certain “Cases in the first three years of K. Car. I.” which were published in French, by Edward Walpole, 1662, folio.

On Tuesday, March 12, 1643-4, the trial was opened in form; the original and additional articles of impeachment were read, and, after that, the archbishop’s answer, plea, and demurrer to them. He requested that the charge and evidence to all the articles might be given together; and the articles of misdemeanour separated from those of treason; to which the celebrated lawyer, Maynard, answered, that, in the earl of Strafford’s trial, he was put to answer every day the particular evidence given that day; that they were now only to try matters of fact, not of law, and that all the articles collectively, not any one separately, made up the charge of treason. Serjeant Wilde then made a long speech, upon the charge of high treason, insisting chiefly upon the archbishop’s attachment to popery, and his intention to introduce it into England; concluding with these words, that “Naaman was a great man, but he was a leper,” and that the archbishop’s leprosy had so infected all, “as there remained no other cure but the sword of justice.” The archbishop replied to the several charges, and mentioned various persons whom he had brought back from the Romish religion, particularly sir William Webbe, his kinsman, and two of his daughters; his son lui took from him; and, his father being utterly decayed, bred him at his own charge, and educated him in the protestant religion. The trial lasted above twenty days, and on Sept. 2, 1644, the archbishop made a recapitulation of the whole cause; but, as soon as he came into the House, he saw every lord present with a new thin book in folio, in a blue cover; which was his “Diary,” which Prynne, as already mentioned, had robbed him of, and printed with notes of his own, to disgrace the archbishop. On Sept. 11, Mr. Brown delivered, in the House of Lords, a summary of the whole charge, with a few observations on the archbishop’s answer. The queries of his counsel on the law of treason was referred to a committee which ordered his counsel to be heard on Oct. 11, when Mr. Herne delivered his argument with great firmness and resolution. The lord chancellor Finch told archbishop Sancroft that the argument was sir Matthew Hale’s, afterwards lord chief justice; and that being then a young lawyer, he, Mr. Finch, stood behind Mr. Herne, at the bar of the house, and took notes of it, which he intended to publish in his reports. With this argument, the substance of which may be seen in our authorities, the trial ended for that day; but, after this, a petition was sent about London, “for bringing delinquents to justice;” and many of the preachers exhorted the people to sign it; so that with a multitude of hands, it was delivered to the House of Commons, on Oct. 8. The archbishop was summoned on Nov. 2, to the House of Commons, to hear the whole charges, and to make his defence, which he did at large, Nov. 11. On the following Wednesday Mr. Brown replied and after the archbishop was dismissed, the House called for the ordinance, and without hearing his counsel, voted him guilty of high treason. After various delays, the Lords had a conference with the Commons, on Dec. 24, in which they declared, “that they had diligently weighed all things charged against the archbishop, but could not, by any one of them, or all, find him guilty of treason.” The judges had unanimously made the same declaration. At the second conference, on Jan. 2, 1644-5, the reasons of the Commons for the attainder of the archbishop were communicated to the Lords, who in a very thin house, passed the ordinance that he should suffer death by hanging, which was fixed for Friday the 10th. He pleaded the king’s pardon, under the great seal, which was over-ruled, and rejected, without being read, and the only favour granted, and that after delay and with reluctance, was, that his sentence should be changed to beheading.

, an able French lawyer, was born August 6, 1612, at Angers. He was received advocate at Paris 1638, became eminent afterwards at the bar, and was the first professor of French law at the college of Cambray, that chair being newly founded 1680. He died July 9, 1693, aged 81. His works are, “Commentaries on Anthony Loisel’s Instituts Couturaiers,” 1688, 8vo; “Traite 1 du Droit de Chasse,” 1681, 12mo “Rémarques sur l'Institution du Droit Romain, et du Droit François,” 1686, 4to, and other valuable works.

, a celebrated lawyer, and learned advocate of the parliament of Paris, was born July 31, 1659, and was the son of James de Lauriere, a surgeon. He attended but little to the bar, his life being almost wholly spent in study, in the course of which he explored, with indefatigable pains, every part of the French law, both ancient and modern, formed friendships with men of learning, and was esteemed by all the most able magistrates. He died at Paris, January 9, 1728, aged 69, leaving many valuable works, some of which he wrote ill conjunction with Claude Berroyer, another eminent advocate of Paris. The principal are, 1. “De l‘origine du Droit d’Amortissement,” 1692, 12mo; 2. “Texte des Coutumes de la Prévôté et Vicomté de Paris, avec des Notes,” 12mo; 3. “Bibltotheque des Coutumes,” 4to 4. M. Loisel’s “Instituts Coutumiers,” with notes, Paris, 1710, 2 vols. 12mo, a very valuable edition; 5. “Traite* des Institutions et des Substitutions contractuelles,” 2 vols. 12mo. 6. The first and second volumes of the collection of “Ordinances” of the French kings, which valuable and very interesting work has been continued by M. Secousse, a member of the academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, and M. de Villeraut, to 11 vols. fol. 7. “Le Glossaire du Droit François,” 1704, 4to, &c.

, an able lawyer, and celebrated advocate of the parliament of Paris, was born in that city in 1550, of a reputable family. When Henry IV. to whom he had remained faithful during the fury of the League, wanted to support the annuities charged on the H6tel de Ville, Leschassier had influence enough to dissuade him from his design by two very able petitions. He was consulted by the Venetian republic, in 1605, respecting their disputes with pope Paul V. and replied by his “Consultatio Parisini cujusdam,” printed in 1606, 4to, which proves him to have been a learned and judicious canonist. He died April 28, 1625, at Paris, aged seventyfive. The most complete edition of his works is that of Paris, 1652, 4to, which contains several curious and interesting particulars concerning the liberties of the Galilean church, and other affairs of great importance.

, an eminent lawyer in the early part of the seventeenth century, was the sixth and youngest son of Henry Ley, esq. of Tesfont Evias, in Wiltshire, and was born about 1552. In 1569 he entered of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, whence he removed to Lincoln’s-inn, studied the law, and was appointed Lent reader in 1601, after which his learning and abilities raised him to the highest rank of his profession. In 1603, he was made serjeant at law, and the year following chief justice of the king’s bench in Ireland; on the ancient history of which country he appears to have bestowed some attention, and collected with a view to publication, “The An.­nals of John Clynne, a Friar Minor of Kilkenny,” who lived in the reign of Edward III.; the “Annals of the Priory of St. John of Kilkenny,” and the “Annals of Multiferman, Rosse, and Clonmell.” All these he had caused to be transcribed, but his professional engagements prevented his preparing them for the press. They afterwards fell into the hands of Henry earl of Bath. Extracts from them are in Dublin college library.

, an ingenious and learned writer, and eminent lawyer of Scotland, was descended from an ancient and noble family, his father Simon Mackenzie being brother to the earl of Seaforth. He was born at Dundee, in the county of Angus, in 1636, and gave early proofs of an extraorJinary genius, having gone through the usual classic authors, at ten years of age. He was then sent to the universities of Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s, where he finished his studies in logic and philosophy before he had attained his sixteenth year. After this, he turned his thoughts to the civil law, and to increase his knowledge of it, travelled into France, and became a close student in the university of Bourges, for about three years. On his return home, he was called to the bar, became an advocate in 1656, and gained the character of an eminent pleader in a few years.

Besides the moral pieces mentioned above, he wrote several works to illustrate the laws and customs of his country, to vindicate the monarchy from the restless contrivances and attacks of those whom he esteemed its enemies, and to maintain the honour and glory of Scotland. To illustrate the laws and customs of his country, he published “A Discourse upon the laws and customs of Scotland in matters criminal,” 1674, 4to. “Idea eloquentiae tbrensis hodiernae, una cum actione forensi ex unaquaque juris parte,” 1681, 8vo. “Institutions of the laws of Scotland,” 1684, 8vo. “Observations upon the acts of parliament,” 1686, folio. Besides these, several other treatises of law are inserted in his works, printed at Edinburgh, 1716, in 2 vols. folio. In vindication of monarchy, he wrote his “Jus regium; or the just and solid foundations of monarchy in general, and more especially of the monarchy of Scotland; maintained against Buchanan, Naphthali, Doleman, Milton, &c.” Lond. 16S4, 8vo. This book being dedicated and presented by the author to the university of Oxford, he received a letter of thanks from the convocation. With the same view he published his * Discovery of the fanatic plot,“printed at Edinburgh, in 1684, folio; and his” Vindication of the government of Scotland during the reign of Charles II.“Also the” Method of Proceeding against Criminals and Fanatical Covenanters,“1691, 4to. The pieces which he published in honour of his nation, were as follow:” Observations on the Laws and Customs of Nations as to Precedency, with the science of heraldry, treated as a part of the civil law of nations; wherein reasons are given for its principles, and etymologies for its harder terms,“1680, folio.” A Defence of the Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland; with a true account when the Scots were governed by the kings in the Isle of Britain,“1685, 8vo. This was written in answer to” An historical Account of Church-Government as it was in Great Britain and Ireland, when they first received the Christian religion,“by Lloyd, bishop of St. Asaph. Sir George’s defence was published in June 1685; but before it came out it was animadverted upon by Dr. Stillingfleet, who had seen it in manuscript in the preface to his” Origines Britannicae.“Sir George replied the year following, in a piece entitled” The Antiquity of the Royal Line of Scotland farther cleared and defended against the exceptions lately offered by Dr. Stillingfleet, in his Vindication of the Bishop of St. Asaph;" and here the controversy appears to have ended. It is remarkable, however, that sir George’s books were translated into Latin, printed at Utrecht in 1689, and then presented to William-Henry prince of Orange, who wrote two very polite letters of thanks to him for his performance. Among the instances of this author’s zeal for his country, it is necessary to mention his founding of the lawyer’s library at Edinburgh, in 1689. This, which is now known by the name of the advocate’s library, was afterwards stored with variety of manuscripts, relating particularly to the antiquities of Scotland, and with a fine collection of books, in all sciences, classed in that excellent order, which he prescribed in an elegant Latin oration, pronounced upon the opening of it, and printed among his works.

Judging, says a late elegant and judicious writer, from the writings of sir George Mackenzie, his talents appear to have been rather splendid than solid. He certainly possessed uncommon assiduity and activity of mind, as the number and variety of his compositions testify; and perhaps the superficial manner in which he has treated many of those subjects foreign to his profession, is the less to be wondered at, in a man whose time was so occupied in professional duties. The obscurity and confusion that are discernible in some of his juridical discussions, may have arisen in a great measure from the rude, unmethodized, and almost chaotic state of the law of Scotland, both civil and criminal, in his days. On one account alone, although every other merit were forgotten, sir George Mackenzie is entitled to respect as a lawyer. He was the first who exploded from the practice of the criminal courts of Scotland that most absurd and iniquitous doctrine, that no defence was to be admitted in exculpation from a criminal indictment which was contrary to the libel (indictment); as, if John were accused of having murdered James, by giving him a mortal wound with a sword, it was not allowable for John to prove in his defence, that the wound was not given in any vital part, and that James died of a fever caught afterwards by contagion.

, a French lawyer, chiefly celebrated for his chronological abridgments after the manner of Henault, was born at Paris, Feb. 15, 1720, and educated at the university of that city. Here he gave the most promising hopes of success in any of the learned professions, and had in particular attached himself to the law; but weak lungs preventing him from entering into the active occupations of a pleader, he devoted himself to general literature, and produced the following works 1. “Abrege Chronologique de l'Histoire Ecclesiastique,” a chronological abridgment of Ecclesiastical History, in three volumes, octavo, written more drily and less elegantly than that of Henault, whom the author followed. 2. “Les Annales Romaines,” 1756, one volume octavo, in which the author has taken advantage of the most valuable remarks of St. Evremond, the abbe St. Real, Montesquieu, Mably, and several others, respecting the Romans; and the work is consequently not so dry as the former. In style, however, he is still inferior to his model. Of this we have an English translation by Nugent, 1759, 8vo. 3. “Abreg6 Chronologique de l‘Histoire d’Espagne et de Portugal,” 2 vols. 8vo, 1759 1765. This work, which was actually begun by Henault, is worthy of him in point of exactness; but neither affords such striking portraits, nor such profound remarks. Lacombe, another author celebrated for this kind of compilation, assisted also in this. Macquer had some share in writing the “Dictionaire des Arts et Metiers,” 2 vols. 8vo. He was industrious, gentle, modest, sincere, and a decided enemy to all quackery and ostentation. He had little imagination, but a sound judgment; and had collected a great abundance and variety of useful knowledge. He died the 27th of January, 1770.

, a gentleman of great literary research, and one of the ablest commentators on Shakspeare, was descended from an Irish family of the highest antiquity, an account of which may be found in the seventh volume of Archdall’s Peerage of Ireland, which, it is believed, was drawn up by Mr. Malone himself. All his immediate predecessors were distinguished men. His grandfather, while only a student at the Temple, was entrusted with a negotiation in Holland and so successfully acquitted himself, that he was honoured and rewarded by king William for his services. Having been called to the Irish bar about 1700, he became one of the most eminent barristers that have ever appeared in that country. His professional fame has only been eclipsed by that of his eldest son, the still more celebrated Anthony Malone, who as a lawyer, an orator, and an able and upright statesman, was confessedly one of the most illustrious men that his country has produced. Edmond, the second son of Richard, and the father of the late Mr. Malone, was born on the 16th of April, 1704. He was called to the English bar in 1730, where he continued for ten years to practise; and, in 1740, removed to the Irish bar. After having sat in several parliaments, and gone through the usual gradations of professional rank, he was raised, in 1766, to the dignity of one of the judges of the court of common pleas in Ireland, an office which he filled till his death in 1774. He married, in 1736, Catherine, only daughter and heir of Benjamin Collier, esq. of liuckholts, in the county of Essex, by whom he had four sons, Richard, now lord Sunderlin; Edmond, the subject of our present memoir Anthony and Benjamin, who died in their infancy and two daughters, Henrietta and Catherine.

, a once celebrated Italian poet, was born at Naples in 1569; and made so great a progress in his juvenile studies, that he was thought qualified for that of the civil law at thirteen. His father, who was a lawyer, intended him for that profession, as the properest means of advancing him; but Marini had already contracted a taste for poetry, and was so far from relishing the science to which he was put, that he sold his law-books, in order to purchase books of polite literature. This so much irritated his father, that he turned him out of doors, and obliged him to seek for protectors and supporters abroad. Having acquired a reputation for poetry, he happily found in Inico de Guevara, duke of Bovino, a friend who conceived an affection for him, and supported him for three years in his house. The prince of Conca, grand admiral of the kingdom of Naples, next took him into his service, in quality of secretary; and in this situation he continued five or six years; but having assisted a friend in a very delicate intrigue, he was thrown into prison, and very hardly escaped with his life. Thence he retired to Rome, where, after some time spent in suspense and poverty, he became known to Melchior Crescendo, a prelate of great distinction, who patronized him, and provided him with every thing he wanted.

Objections.—" First, my mind and inclinations are wholly to Cambridge, having already found by experience that I can never settle to my present employment. 2. I was always designed for Cambridge by my father, and I believe am the only instance in the world that ever went to school so long to be a lawyer’s clerk. 3. 1 always wished that I might lead a private retired life, which can never happen if I be an attorney but on the contrary, I must have the care and concern of several people’s business besides mine own, &c. 4. If I be a lawyer, the will of the dead can never be fulfilled, viz. of my sister Elizabeth, who left 10l. to enter me at college; and aunt Burrough, to whom I have promised (at her earnest request) that I never would be a lawyer; nay, my brother himself had promised her I never should. 5. It was always counted ruination for young persons to be brought up at home, and I'm sure there’s no worse town under the sun for breeding or conversation than this. 6. Though I should serve my time out with my brother, I should never fancy the study of the law, having got a taste of a more noble and pleasant study. Questions. But perhaps these questions may be asked me, to which I shall answer as follows: Why I came to my brother at all? and have absented myself thus long from school? Or why I have not spoke my mind before this time? Answers. 1. Though I am with my brother, it was none of my desire (having always confessed an aversion to his employment), but was almost forced to it by the persuasion of a great many, ringing it in my ears that this was the gainfullest employment, &c. 2. Though I have lost some time in school learning, I have read a great deal of history, poetry, &c. which might have taken up. as much time at Cambridge had 1 kept at school. 3. I have staid thus long, thinking continual use might have made it easy to me; but the longer I stay, the worse I like it.

, recorder of Exeter, was born in that city in 1562, and educated in the grammar school, whence he was sent to Broadgates-hall, now Pembroke college, Oxford, in 1579. Here he is supposed to have taken one degree in arts, and then removed to some of the inns of court in London to study law. In 1605, he was elected reeofder of his native city, where he died April 12, 1617. He is noticed here as the author of a history or chronicle of the kings of England, entitled “The History and Lives of the Kings of England, from William the Conqueror to King Henry VIII.” Lond. 1616, folio, reprinted in 1618, an amusing, and not ill-written work, taken principally from the Chronicles. An appendix was published in 1638, by B. R M. A. including the history of Edward VI., Mary, and Elizabeth. It is said that king James took offence at some passages in Mr. Martyn’s work respecting his own family or the Scottish nation, and that the author was brought into some trouble. Of what kind this trouble was we are not told, but that it preyed on his mind, and hastened his death. Mr. Martyn also published a book for the use of one of his sons, entitled “Youth’s Instruction,” Lond. 1612, 'Jto, which Wood saysj shows a great deal of reading. His family appears to have been somewhat poetical, as his history was preluded by copies (if verses by his three sons, and his son-in-law. 1 Ma&Tyr, Justin, see Justin. Martyr, Peter. See Anghiera. Martyr (Peter), a very distinguished divine, was born at Florence, Sept. 8, 1500. His family name was VermiliUs; but his parents gave him that of Marty*, from one Peter a martyr, whose church happened to stand near their house. The first rudiments of literature he received from his mother, who was a very ingenious lady; and used, as it is said, to read Terence and other classics to him in the original. When he was grown up, he became a regular Augustine in the monastery of Fiesoli; and, after three years’ stay there, was sent to the university of Padua, to study philosophy and the Greek language. At twenty-six, in 1526, he was made a public preacher, and preached first at Brixia, in the church of Afra, then at Rome, Venice, Mantua, and other cities of Italy. He read lectures of philosophy and divinity in his college, and applied himself to the study of the Hebrew tongue, the knowledge of which he attained by the assistance of one Isaac, a Jewish physician. Such was his fame at this time, that he was made abbot of Spoletto, in the duchy of Umbria, where he continued three years. Afterwards, he was made go1 Prince’s Worthies 6f Devon. Fuller’s Worthies. Ath. Ox. vol I. vernor of the monastery of St. Peter ad aram in Naples. Here he first became acquainted with the writings of Zuinglius and Bucer, which led him to entertain a good opinion of protestantism: and afterwards his conversation with Valdes, a Spanish lawyer, so confirmed him in it, that he made no scruple to preach it at Rome privately to many persons of quality, and sometimes even publicly. Thus when he came to I Cor. iii. 13, he boldly affirmed, that place not to be meant of purgatory “because,” said he, “the fire there spoken of is such a fire, as both good and bad must pass through and the fire shall try every man’s work of what sort it is.” “And this,” says Fuller, in his quaint manner, “seeming to shake a main pillar of purgatory, the pope’s furnace, the fire whereof, like the philosopher’s stone, melteth all his leaden bulls into pure gold; some of his under-chemists, like Demetrius and the craftsmen, began to bestir themselves, and caused him to be silenced.”

By this lady he had three sons, Tobias, John, and Samuel; of whom he once said to lord Fairfax, who inquired why he appeared so pensive: “My lord,” said the archbishop, “I have great reason of sorrow with respect to my sons. One of them has wit and no grace, the other grace but no wit, and the third neither grace nor wit.” Lord Fairfax replied, “Your grace’s case is sad, but not singular: I am also disappointed in my sons. One I sent into the Netherlands, to train him up as a soldier, and he makes a tolerable country-justice, but is a mere coward at fighting: my next I sent to Cambridge; and he proves a good lawyer, but is a mere dunce at divinity; and my youngest I sent to the inns of court; and he’s good at divinity, but nobody in the law.”

, a learned English lawyer, the eldest son of Alexander Maynard, esq. of Tavistock, in Devonshire, was born thereabout 1602. In 1618 he entered as a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, where, as we have often seen in the case of gentlemen of the law, he took only one degree in arts, and then went to the Middle Temple. After the usual routine of study he was called to the bar, and in 1640 obtained a seat in parliament for Totness. The part he took in the political contests of the day, procured him to be appointed one of the managers of the evidence against the earl of Strafford, and that against archbishop Laud. Yet in 1644 he was appointed, with Bulstrodte Whitlocke, at the particular desire of the lord chancellor of Scotland, and other commissioners from that kingdom, to consult with them and general Fairfax concerning the best method of proceeding against Cromwell as an incendiary between the two kingdoms. He was also one of the laymen nominated in the ordinance of the Lords and Commons to sit with the assembly of Divines, whose object was to establish the presbyterian form of church government in England. Notwithstanding this, we find him in 1647 opposing the violence of the parliament-army, for which he and serjeant Glynn were sent to the Tower; and when the parliament voted that no more addresses should be sent to the king, he told them that by such a vote they dissolved themselves. He even went farther, and after being secluded from his seat in the House of Commons for two months, he broke in among them, and pleaded for the life of the king with such strength of reasoning, that Cromwell several times demanded that he should be brought to the bar of the House.

Serjeant Maynard was esteemed a very able advocate, and has been called the best old book lawyer of his time. All parties, says Mr. Lysons, seem to have been willing to employ him, and he seems to have been equally willing to be employed by all. Some of his reports and speeches have been printed. There is also a report of his of a very singular case of murder, in “The Works of the Learned,” for August 1739, communicated by Dr. Rawlinson. Bishop Warburton has not inaptly characterised serjeant Maynard by a comparison with Whitlocke. They were both lawyers of family, and in the long parliament; both of the presbyterian faction; both learned and eminent in their profession; moderate, sage, and steady. So far they agreed. In this they differed: Maynard had strong parts with a serious modesty; Whitlocke was weak and vain: and by these defects only, more self-interested. A sense of honour made Maynard stick to the presbyterian faction, and to fall with them; but, as he had much phlegm and caution, not, like Hollis and Stapleton, to fall for them. So that he was never marked out by the independents for their first sacrifices. On the contrary, Whitlocke forsook his party in distress but as he had the other’s moderation, it was by slow and gentle degrees and so, as it happened, decently. Maynard, by adhering steadily, but not violently, to the party he set out with, was reverenced by all and had he not been more intent on the affairs of his profession, than on public business, might have become considerable by station. “He went,” adds Warburton, “through the whole reign of Charles and James II. with the same steady pace, and the same adherence to his party; but by his party, 1 rather mean presbytery for the sake of civil liberty, than to civil liberty for the sake of presbytery.”

, a very learned lawyer and pensionary of Rotterdam was born at Leyden in 1722; of his early history, pursuits, &c. our authorities give no account, nor have the bibliographers of this country, to whom he is so well known, supplied this deficiency. All we know is, that he died December 15, 1771, in the forty-ninth year of his age, after a life spent in learned research and labour, which produced the following works: 1. “De rebus mancipi et nee mancipi.” Leyden, 1741, 4to. 2. “Specimen calculi fluxionalis,” ibid. 1742, 4to. 3. “Specimen animadversionum in Cazi institutiones,” Mantuae Carpetunorum (i. e. Madrid), reprinted with additions by the author, at Paris, 1747, 8vo. 4. “Conspectus novi thesauri juris civilis et canonici,” Hague, 1751, 8vo. This conspectus was immediately followed by the work itself. 5. “Novus Thesaurus juris civilis,” &c. 1751—1753, 7 vols. folio; a book of high reputation, to which his son John added an eighth volume, in 1780. 6. “Conspectus OriginumTypographicarum proxime in lucem edendarum,” 1761, 8vo. This prospectus is very scarce, as the author printed but a very few copies: it is however in demand with collectors, as containing some things which he did not insert in the work itself. The abbé Gouget published a French translation, with some additions, in 1762. The entire work appeared in 1765, under the title of, 7. “Origines Typographic^,” Hague, 2 vols. 4to. An analysis of this valuable work was dratvn up by Mr.Bowyer, and printed in “The Origin of Printing, in tsvo Essays, 1. The substance of Dr. Middleton’s Dissertation on the origin of printing in England. 2. Mr. Meerman’s account of the first invention of the art,” 1774, 8vo. This volume was the joint composition of Messrs. Bowyer and Nichols. Meerman’s partiality to Haerlem, as the origin of printing, was attacked with much severity by Heinecken, who being a German, betrayed as much partiality to Mentz and Strasburgh. It seems, however, now to be agreed among t) pographical antiquaries, that Heinecken paid too little attention to the claims of Haerlem, and Meerman infinitely too much. The dissertation of the latter, however, has very recently been reprinted in France, by Mons. Jansen, with useful notes, and a catalogue of all the books published in the Low Countries during the fifteenth century.

, a counsellor in the presidial court at Nismes, was born at Tarascon, in 1706, and died in 1767. He lived chiefly at Paris, and employed himself in the study of history and antiquities, and in writing books, which, though approved for their learning, did not rescue him from the inconveniences of poverty. They are these: 1. “The civil, ecclesiastical, and literary History of the city of Nismes,” 7 vols. 4to, published in 1750, and the following years. This work has no fault but that of prolixity. 2. “Mceurs et Usages cles Grecs,” 1743, 12mo, a small and useful compilation. 3. “The Amours of Calisthenes and Aristoclea,” 1766, 12mo, a novel, in which the author has skilfully painted the manners of Greece. 4. “A collection of fugitive pieces, illustrative of French history,” 3 vols. 4to, published in 1748. The materials were communicated to him by the marquis d'Aubais. There was also a chronologer, named Peter Menard, who died the first year of the last century a James Menard, a lawyer of the sixteenth century and one or two more of interior note.

According to Mr. Denne (Custumale Roffense, p. 193), he occurs prebendary of Kentish town, and afterwards had the stall of Finsbury, both of them in the church of St. Paul’s, London. He held in 1259 a prebend in Exeter cathedral; and, according to Browne Willis, was vicar of Potton in Bedfordshire at the time of his promotion to the see of Rochester. Other accounts say, that he was first canon of Salisbury, and afterwards rector of Stratton. He became eminent in the court of Chancery, first as king’s clerk, then as prothonotary, and lastly rose to be chancellor of England in 1258. Of this office he was deprived in the same year by the barons, but restored in 1261, with a yearly salary of four hundred marks; and held it again in 1274, in which year he was consecrated bishop of Rochester. He appears to have been of high credit in affairs of state, and consulted on all matters of importance, as a divine, a lawyer, and a financier. His death was occasioned by a fall from his horse, in fording a river in his diocese; soon after which accident he died, Oct. 27th, 1277. Notwithstanding his liberality, at his death he was possessed of goods valued by inventory at 5110l. of which he left legacies to the amount of 2126l. His debts amounted to 746l., and he had owing to him about 622l. He was interred on the north side of St. William’s chapel, at the north end of the cross aile in Rochester cathedral, with a marble monument, which had probably been injured or decayed, as in 1598, the present beautiful alabaster monument was erected by the society of Merton college, at the suggestion of the celebrated sir Henry Savile, then warden of the college.

At the age of twenty he lost his excellent preceptor and patron, Gravina, who died in 1718. Metastasio, whose writings evince him to have been all tenderness, bewailed his death in the celebrated elegy called “La strada della Gloria,” and found when the will was examined, that he was made heir to all his fortune. Being now become a patron, instead of a dependant, he kept a handsome table, at which, as may be supposed, he easily obtained guests he abandoned the law, and cultivated poetry and in about two years found himself nearly at the end of his 15,000 crowns, which had been the bequest of his patron. He now went to Naples, with a serious intention to return to the study of the law; but his instructor Paglietti was harsh, the admirers of his poetry were numerous, and, in 1721, we find him addressing an epithalamium to the marquis Pignatelli, at the desire of the countess of Althan. His drama of Endymion, the first that he produced expressly for music, was written about the same time. He went on, though partly by stealth, on account of the inexorable lawyer under whom he was studying; till the acquaintance of the Romanina, the greatest singer and actress of the time, finally determined him to quit both his preceptor and that profession which he had ever studied so unwillingly. The effect of his first opera, “The Garden of the Hesperides,” upon the audience, is described as singular in the extreme. By the beauties of the verse, the excellence of the sentiments, and every species of merit, the audience, usually noisy, was charmed into profound attention, and the whole was heard with a silence then perfectly uncommon in the Italian theatres.

, professor of law in the university of Glasgow, was born in 1735, in the parish of Shotts, in Lanerkshire. He received his grammar-education at the school of Hamilton, whence he was removed, at the age of eleven, to the university of Glasgow. He was designed for the church, but having early conceived a dislike to that profession, and turned his attention to the study of the law, he was invited by lord Kames to reside in his family, and to superintend, in the quality of preceptor, the education of his son, Mr. George Drummond Home. Lord Kames found in young Millar a congenial ardour of intellect, a mind turned to philosophical speculation, a considerable fund of reading, and what above all things he delighted in, a talent for supporting a metaphysical argument in conversation, with much ingenuity and vivacity. The tutor of the son, therefore, became the companion of the father: and the two years before Millar was called to the bar, were spent, with great improvement on his part, in acquiring those enlarged views of the union of law with philosophy, which he afterwards displayed with uncommon ability in his academical lectures on jurisprudence. At this period he contracted an acquaintance with David Hume, to whose metaphysical opinions he became a convert, though he materially differed from him upon political topics. In 1760 Mr. Millar began to practise at the bar, and was regarded as a rising young lawyer, when he thought proper to become a candidate for the vacant professorship of law at Glasgow, and supported by the recommendation of lord Kames and Dr. Adam Smith, he was appointed in 1761, and immediately began to execute its duties. The reputation of the university, as a school of jurisprudence, rose from that acquisition, and although, says lord Woodhouselee, the republican prejudices of Mr. Millar gave his lectures on politics and government a character justly considered as repugnant to the well-attempered frame and equal balance of our improved constitution; there were few who attended those lectures without at least an increase of knowledge. He lectured in English, and spoke fluently with the assistance of mere notes only. By this method his lectures were rendered full of variety and animation, and at the conclusion of each he was accustomed to explain the difficulties and objections that had presented themselves to his pupils, in a free and familiar conversation. In 1771, he published a treatise on “The Origin of the Distinction of Ranks, 17 in which he shews himself a disciple of the school of Montesquieu, and deals much in that sort of speculation which Mr. Dugald Stewart, in his Life of Smith, called theoretical or conjectural history. This work however was well received by the public, and has gone through several editions. His inquiries into the English government, which made an important part of his lectures, together with a zealous attachment to what he thought the genuine principles of liberty, produced in 1787 the first volume of an” Historical View of the English Government," in which he traces the progressive changes in the property, the state of the people, and the government of England, from the settlement of the Saxons to the accession of the house of Stuart. In this work we observe the same spirit of system, and the same partiality to hypothetical reasoning, as in the former: though resting, as may be supposed, on a more solid foundation of facts: and the less dangerous in its tendency, as being every where capable of scrutiny from actual history. It is impossible, however, to peruse this, or his other works, without meeting with much valuable information, and facts placed in those new lights which excite inquiry, and ultimately promote truth. Mr. Millar’s researches were by no means confined to politics, law, or metaphysics. His acquaintance with the works of imagination, both ancient and modern, was also very extensive, and his criticisms were at once ingenious and solid, resulting from an acute understanding and a correct taste. He died May 30, 1801, at the age of sixty-nine, leaving behind him several manuscripts, from which, in 1803, were printed, in two volumes, his posthumous works, consisting of an historical view of the English government from the accession of the house of Stuart, and some separate dissertations connected with the subject.

, a father of the primitive church, flourished in the third century. He is said to have been an African by birth, but little is known of his history, except tiiat he was a proselyte to Christianity, resided at Rome, and followed the profession of a lawyer. He is now known by his excellent dialogue, entitled “Octavius.” At what time he wrote it is a contested point, but as he appears to have imitated Tertullian, and to have been copied by Cyprian in his treatise “De idolornm vanitate,” it may probably be referred to the reign of the emperor Caracalla. The speakers in this dialogue are Caecilius, a heathen, and Octavius, a Christian; and Minucins, as their common friend, is chosen to moderate between the two disputants. Octavius is made to encounter the arguments of Caecilius, and maintains the unity of God, asserts his providence, vindicates the manners of Christians, and partly attempts to explain their tenets, and partly refers a more ample consideration of them to some future opportunity of discourse. It is a learned, elegant, and ingenious performance, although critical objections may be made to the form of the dialogue, and to some of the sentiments. This work was, for a considerable time, attributed to Arnobius; but in 1560, Francis Baldwin, a learned lawyer, published it at Heidelberg, in 8vo, and made the discovery in a preliminary dissertation, that Minucius was its true author. It has, since that time, gone through many editions, of which the best is that printed at Cambridge in 1712, with the dissertation of Baldwin prefixed, and w Commodiani Instructiones adversus Gentium Deos," added in the way of appendix. We have likewise an excellent translation of it, with notes and illustrations, published by sir D. Dalrymple, lord Hailes, in 1781, from the preface to which part of the above account is taken.

, a distinguished lawyer, whose pleadings before the parliament of Paris in favour of the reformers, bear genuine marks of eloquence and ability, retired into England after the repeal of the edict of Nantes, where he became a strenuous assertor of the protestant religion. In 1687 and 1688, he went on his travels into Italy, in quality of governor to an English nobleman. An account of the country, and of the occurrences of the time in which he remained in it, was published at the Hague, in 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of “A New Voyage to Italy.” L'abbe du Fresnoy, speaking of this performance, observes, “that it is well written but that the author has shewn himself too credulous, and as ready to believe every insinuation to the disadvantage of the Roman catholics, as they generally are to adopt whatever can reflect disgrace upon the protestants.” The translation of this work into the English language has been enlarged with many additions: the original has been several times reprinted. Addison, in his preface to his remarks on the different parts of Italy, says, that “Mons. Misson has written a more correct account of it, in general, than any before him, as he particularly excelled in the plan of the country, which he has given us in true and lively colours.” He published, after his arrival in England, “The Sacred Theatre at Cevennes, or an account of Prophecies and Miracles performed in that part of Languedoc:” this was- printed at London in 1707 and, according to the Roman catholic writers, is full of fanaticism and ridiculous stories, He also left behind him “The Observations and Remarks of a Traveller,” in 12mo, published at the Hague, by Vanderburen. He died at London, Jan. 16, 1721.

Harris, in his edition of Ware’s “Writers of Ireland,” mentions another Charles Molloy, a native of the King’s County, and a lawyer pf the Inner Temple, who wrote “De Jure Maritime et Naval i, or a Treatise of Affairs Maritime, and of Commerce,” first published at London in 1676, and still known by many republications, the last of which was in 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. He died under fifty years of age, in 1690, at his house in Cranes-court, Fleet-street. Harris gives some account also of a Francis Molloy, of King’s County, professor of divinity in the college of St. Isidore at Home, who wrote “Sacra Theologia,” Rome, 1666, 8vo “Grammatica Latino-Hibernica compendiata,” ibid. 1677, 12mo. Edward Lluyd, who has made an abn stract of this in his “Archeeologia Britannica,” says that it was the most complete Irish grammar then extant, although imperfect as to syntax, &c. He says also, what is less credible, that Molloy was not the author of it; although the latter puts his name to it, and speaks of it in the preface as his own work. Molloy’s other work is entitled “Lucerna Fidelium,” Rome, 1676, 8vo, which although the title is in Latin, is written in Irish, and contains an explanation of the Christian religion according to the faith of the church of Rome.

Before he left Chester, he lost his lady, who died soon after she had brought him a son. Illness had deprived her of her eye-sight twelve years before, that is, soon after she was married; from which time she had been very sickly, and afflicted with extreme pains of the head. As soon as the public tranquillity was settled in his native country, he returned home; and, upon the convening of a new parliament in 1692, was chosen one of the representatives for the city of Dublin. In the next parliament, in 1695, he was chosen to represent the university there, and continued to do so to the end of his life; that learned body having, before the end of the first session of the former, conferred on him the degree of doctor of laws. He was likewise nominated, by the lord-lieutenant, one of the commissioners for the forfeited estates, to which employment was annexed a salary of five hundred pounds a-year; but looking upon it as an invidious office, and not being a lover of money, he declined it. In 1698, he published “The Case of Ireland stated, in relation to its being bound by Acts of Parliament made imEngland” in which he is supposed to have delivered all, or most, that can be said upon this subject, with great clearness and strength of reasoning. This piece (a second edition of which, with additions and emendations, was printed in 1720, 8vo,) was answered by John Gary, merchant of Bristol, in a book called, “A Vindication of the Parliament of England, &c.” dedicated to the lord-chancellor Somers, and by Atwood, a lawyer. Of these Nicolson remarks that “the merchant argues like a counsellor at law, and the barrister strings his small wares together like a shop-keeper.” What occasioned Molyneux to write the above tract, was his conceiving the Irish woollen manufactory to be oppressed by the English government; on which account he could not forbear asserting his country’s independency. He had given Mr. Locke a hint of his thoughts upon this subject, before it was quite ready for the press, and desired his sentiments upon the fundamental principle on which his argument was grounded; in answer to which that gentleman, intimating that the business was of too large an extent for the subject of a letter, proposed to talk the matter over with him in England. This, together with a purpose which Molyneux had long formed, of paying that great man , whom he had never yet seen, a visit, prevailed with him to cross the water once more, although he was in a very infirm state of health, in July this year, 1698; and he remained in England till the middle of September. But the pleasure of this long-wished-for interview, which he intended to have repeated the following spring, seems to have been purchased at the expence of his life; for, shortly after, he was seized with a severe fit of his constitutional distemper, the stone, which occasioned such retchings as broke a blood-vessel, and two days after put a period to his life. He died October 11, 1698, and was buried at Sr. Audoen’s church, Dublin, where there is a monument and Latin inscription to his memory. Besides the “Sciotbericum telescopicum,” and the “Dioptrica nova,” already mentioned, he published the following pieces in the “Philosophical Transactions.” 1. “Why four convexglasses in a telescope shew objects erect,” No. 53. 2. “Description of Lough Neagh, in Ireland,” No. 158. 3. “On the Connaught worm,” No. 168. -4. “Description of a new hygrometer,” No. 172. 5. “On the cause of winds and the change of weather, c.” No. 177. 6. “Why bodies dissolved swim in menstrua specifically lighter than themselves,” No. 181. 7. “On the Tides,” No. 184. 8. “Observations of Eclipses.” No. 164 185. 9. “Why celestial objects appear greatest near the horizon.” No. 187. 10. “On the errors of Surveyors, arising from the variation of the Magnetic-needle,” No. 230.

, in Latin Molinæus, a celebrated lawyer, was born at Paris in 1500. His family was noble, and Papyrius mentions “that those of the family of Moulin were related to Elizabeth queen of England;” which she acknowledged herself in 1572, when conversing with Francis duke of Montmorency, marshal of France and ambassador to England. This relation probably came by Thomas Bullen, or Boleyn, viscount of Rochefort, the queen’s grandfather by the mother’s side; for Sanderus and others say, “that this Rochefort being ambassador to France, gave his daughter Anne of Bulloigne to a gentleman of Brie, a friend and relation of his, to take care of her education; and this gentleman is supposed to be the lord of Fontenay in Brie, of the family of du Moulin.” This branch came from Denys du Moulin, lord of Fontenay in Brie, archbishop of Thoulouse, patriarch of Antioch, and bishop of Paris, where he died in 1447. The subject of our memoir was at first educated at the university of Paris, and afterwards studied law at Poitiers and Orleans, at the latter of which cities he gave lectures on the subject in 1521. In the following year he was received as an advocate of parliament; but, owing to a defect in his speech, was obliged to give up pleading, and confine himself to chamber practice, and the composition of those works which gained him so much reputation. He was an indefatigable student, and set such a value on time, that, contrary to the custom of his age, he had his beard close shaven, that he might not lose any precious moments in dressing it; but in his latter days he permitted it again to grow. From the same love of study, he refused some valuable employments, and even took the resolution never to marry; and that he might be equally free from every other incumbrance, he gave the whole of his property to <rn elder brother, reserving only for his maintenance the profits of his studies. It was not long, however, before he had cause to repent of this uncommon liberality, as his brother behaved to him in a brutal and unnatural way. To revenge himself, he had recourse to an expedient suggested by his professional knowledge. He married, and having children, he resumed, according to the law, the possession of that property with which he had parted so freely when a bachelor. It was in 1538 that he married Louise de Beldon, daughter of the king’s secretary, a lady of a most amiable and affectionate temper, who, instead of being an incumbrance, as he once foolishly thought, proved the great comfort of his life, and in some respect, the promoter of his studies, by her prudent care of those domestic affairs of which literary men are generally very bad managers. She was also his consolation in the many difficulties in which he soon became embroiled. He was a man of an ardent mind and warm temper, totally incapable of concealing his sentiments, particularly in the cause of truth and justice, or regard to his country. Like many other eminent men of that age, he embraced the principles of the reformed religion, first according to the system of Calvin, but afterwards he adopted that of Luther, as contained in the Augsburgh confession. On this account it is said that the Calvinists endeavoured to make him feel their resentment, and even suspended their animosity against the Roman catholics, that they might join with the latter in attacking Du Moulin.

, an English lawyer, and classical editor, the son of Richard Mounteney of Putney in Surrey, was born there in 1707, and educated at Eton school, whence he went, in 1725, to King’s college, Cambridge, and took his degrees of A. B. in 1729, and A. M. 1735, and obtained a fellowship. He then studied law in the Inner Temple, and became, in 1737, one of the barons of the exchequer in Ireland. In 1743 he distinguished himself in the famous trial between James Annesley, esq. and Richard earl of Anglesey. In 1759 he married the countess dowager of Mount Alexander, and died in 1768. To these scanty memoirs, we have only to add that, in 1731, he published the first edition of his “Select Orations” of Demosthenes, which has been often reprinted, but seldom with accuracy. The best part of the work is the critical observations upon the Ulpian commentary by Dr. Chapman, fellow of King’s college, Cambridge; and perhaps the most curious is his dedication to the deceased sir Robert Walpole, in the edition of 1748. It was to the Walpoles he owed his promotions. In 1748 he also published “Observations on the probable issue of the Congress,” 8vo, printed by Mr. Bowyer. Mounteney’s Demosthenes was long a favourite book with the university students to give up, as it is called, on their examinations, but at Oxford it has of late been rejected by the examiners, as an insufficient proof of classical proficiency.

, an eminent English lawyer, was fourth son of David, earl of Stormont, and was born March 2, 1705, at Perth, in Scotland. He was brought to England at the age of three years, for his education, which accounts for his always being free from the accent so peculiar in the natives of that country. He was educated at Westminster-school, being admitted a king’s scholar at the age of fourteen years. During the time of his being at school, he afforded proofs of his ability, not so much in poetry, as in declamation, and other exercises, which gave promise of the eloquence that grew up to such perfection when at the bar, and in parliament. At the election in May 1723, he stood first on the list of those scholars who were to go to Oxford, and was entered of Christ church June 18 of that year, where in 1727, he appears to have taken the degree of bachelor of arts; and, on the death of king George I. he was amongst those who contributed their poetical compositions, in Latin, on that event.

On June 26, 1730, he took the degree of master of ar,ts, and soon after made a tour on the continent. On his return, he became a member of Lincoln’s-inn; and, in due time, was called to the bar. Mr. Murray is among those rare instances of persons who very 'early attained to reputation and practice in the profession. His talent was for public speaking, which gave him a superiority that enabled him to rival and excel those who were far beyond him in knowledge and experience. A reputation early attained gives a character which it is very difficult for time to change or eradicate. Mr. Murray’s premature success created an early impression that he was more of a speaker than a lawyer; and, while he was readily acknowledged to excel both old and young, in the one qualification, the world were long unwilling to allow him an ascendancy in the other. His attachment to the belles lettres, and society with Mr. Pope and other wits of his time, gave countenance to the idea, that little time was left for Coke, Plowden, and the Year-hooks. But time and experience, as they improved Mr. Murray, gradually convinced the world, that his mind was equally made for jurisprudence or oratory.

A life of this eminent lawyer is still a desideratum, but with the lapse of time, the means of procuring materials are placed farther and farther beyond the reach of modern, inquiry. Mr. Holliday, in his lately published “Life,” has done much, perhaps as much as can be done; but curiosity requires a knowledge of lord Mansfield in the more early and brilliant periods of his career, and that, perhaps, it may be impossible now to acquire. We shall, however, conclude our article with Dr. Kurd’s well-drawn statement of a part of his character, which first appeared in that prelate’s preface to Warburton’s works.

, a learned divine and antiquary, was born in 1740, at Norwich, of reputable parents. His father, who was of a Scotch family, had his son’s grammatical education completed at Amsterdam. Thence he was removed to Bene't college, Cambridge, where his ingenuous and open temper gained him the love and esteem of the whole society, who elected him a fellow, after he had taken his degree of B. A. in 1764. In 1767 he took the degree of M. A. and was frequently honoured for his application and proficiency in every branch of academic studies. Having entered into holy orders, he served the sequestration of Hinxton in Cambridgeshire for some years, to which he was presented by bishop Mavvson, and was junior proctor of the university in 1771. He was afterwards elected a fellow of the Society of Antiquaries, and became one of his majesty’s justices of peace for the county of Cambridge. In this situation he was eminently conspicuous for his correct knowledge and mild administration of the laws; and he filled the office of chairman at the sessions of Cambridge and Ely with moderation, justice, and impartiality, at once distinguishing himself as the gentleman, the lawyer, and the divine.

, an Italian lawyer, who flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century, was born of a noble family, at Asti, and studied law at Pavia. He made so great progress in literature, as to receive the academical honours of his profession before he had reached his twenty-fourth year, and was at the same time advanced to be senator at Casal. Pavia offered him the professorship of civil law, but he preferred his studious retirement at Genoa, where he probably died. His principal works are “De Pulchro” “De Deo,” in fifteen books“”De immortalitateAnimi“”De Passione Domini." Each of these makes a folio, printed 1553 1587.

, one of the contributors to the restoration of classical learning, was a native of Novara, a lawyer, and of the Minorite order. He flourished in the fifteenth century, but no particulars of his life are upon record. He dedicated his lexicon, or vocabulary of the Latin tongue, in a copy of verses addressed to the duke Ludovicus Sforza, which are printed by Mr. Roscoe in the Appendix, No. XX. to his Life of Leo X. This work was first printed under the title of “Onomasticon,” at Milan, in 1483, fol. an edition of great rarity and price; but such was its importance to the study of the Latin language in that age, that it was reprinted four times, in 1488, 1496, 1502, and 1507. This last, printed at Strasburgh, contains some pieces by the author, “de octo partibus orationis,” “de compositione eleganti,” and “de syllabarum quantitate.” He quotes as authorities a great many of his learned contemporaries and predecessors.

, lord Guilford, lord keeper of the great seal in the reigns of Charles II. and James II. was the second son of the preceding, and was born about 1640. He had his grammar learning, in which he was a great proficient, at Bury-school, whence he was admitted a fellowcommoner of St. John’s college, in Cambridge, in 1653. His conversation is said to have been remarkably agreeable and facetious, while his diligent advancement in his studies afforded him more solid claims on the esteem of the society. But, as he was originally designed for the law, after two or three years spent at the university, he was removed to the Middle Temple. Here he applied with great diligence to the main object, yet continued to improve himself in history, classics, and languages. He acquired French, Italian, Spanish, and Dutch, and became not only a good lawyer, but was esteemed very accomplished in mathematics, philosophy, and music. He used to say, that, if he had not diverted his attention by these studies, and by the practice of music particularly, he should never have been a lawyer. He used to spend much of his early vacations with his grandfather, who loved to hear him talk of philosophy, and the news of London. The biographer of the Norths informs us that he made him “play at backgammon, and fid lie, whenever he thought fit; and the course of life altogether was not displeasing to a young person, for here was fishing, billiards, hunting, visiting, and all the country amusements.”

The king is said to have been much affected with attorney-general Noy’s death, and Laud paid him this compliment in his. “Diary:” “I have lost a near friend of him, and the Church the greatest she had of his condition, since she needed any such.” But the commons in general rejoiced; and the vintners, says Wood, or rather Howell, drank carouses, in hopes to dress meat again, and sell tobacco, beer, &c. which by a sullen capricio Noy restrained them from. The players too, for whom he had done no kindness, introduced him on the stage, and made him the subject of ridicule, in a comedy entitled, “A Projector lately dead, &c.” He was allowed, however, to have been a very profound lawyer . This character of him appears justifiable from the writings he left behind, and from the following books afterwards published, mostly during the common-wealth, when their merit only could have recommended them. 1. “A Treatise of the principal Grounds and Maxims of the Laws of England,” 1641, 4to, afterwards 8vo, and 12mo. 2. “Perfect Conveyancer; or, several select and choice Precedents,” 1655, 4to. “Reports of Cases in the time of Queen Elizabeth, K. James, and K. Charles the First; containing the most excellent Exceptions for all manner of Declarations, Pleadings, and Demurs, exactly examined and laid down,” 1656, fol. and reprinted in 1669. 4. “Complete Lawyer or, a Treatise concerning Tenures and Estates in Lands of Inheritance for Life, and other Hereditaments and Chattels real and personal,” c. 1661, 8vo. 5. “Arguments of Law and Speeches.”

, an eminent lawyer and philosopher, called Pacius de Beriga, from the name of a country seat belonging to his father’s family, near Vicenza, was born at the latter city in 1550. His parents bestowed every pains on his education, and he is said to have made such progress in his first studies as to have composed a treatise on arithmetic at the age of thirteen. For farther proficiency he was sent to Padua, with his brother Fabius, who afterwards became a physician of eminence, and is mentioned with great honour by the medical biographers. Julius, after taking his degree of doctor in law, returned to his own country, where, in the course of his extensive reading, he became acquainted with the sentiments of the reformers, and concealed his attachment to them with so little care, that he was menaced by the horrors of the inquisition, from which he escaped to Geneva. This step being attended with the Joss of his property, he gained a livelihood for some lime by teaching youth, until his character becoming known, he was encouraged to give lectures on civil Jaw, which he did for ten years with great success and reputation. At Geneva also he married a lady whose family had fled from Lncca for the cause of religion, and had a family of ten children by her.

Dr. Page was thought well versed in the Greek fathers, an able disputant, and a good preacher. He wrote “A Treatise of justification of Bowing at the name of Jesus, by way of answer to an appendix against it,” Oxford, 1631, 4to; and an “Examination of such considerable reasons as are made by Mr. Prynne in a reply to Mr. Widdowes concerning the same argument,” printed with the former. The fate of this publication was somewhat singular. The point in dispute was at this time eagerly contested. Archbishop Abbot did not think it of sufficient importance to be allowed to disturb the peace of the church, and, by his secretary, advised Dr. Page to withdraw his work from the press, if already in it. Laud, on the contrary, who was then bishop of London, ordered it to be printed, viewing the question as,a matter of importance, it being a defence of a canon of the church; and it accordingly appeared. Dr. Page was also the author of “Certain animadversions upon some passages in a Tract concerning Schism and Schismatics,” by Mr. Hales of Eton, Oxon. 1642, 4to; “The Peace Maker, or a brief motive to unity and charity in Religion,' 1 Loud. 1652, I6mo; a single sermon, and a translation of Thomas a Kempis, 1639, 12mo, with a large epistle to the reader. Wood mentions” Jus Fratrum, or the Law of Brethren," but is doubtful whether this belongs to our Dr. Page, or to Dr. Samuel Page, vicar of Deptford, who died in 1630, and was the author of some pious tracts. It belongs, however, to neither, but to a John Page, probably a lawyer, as the subject is the power 6f parents in disposing of their estates to their children.

, the son of Albert Pancirolus, a famous lawyer in his time, and descended from an illustrious family at Reggio, was born there April 17, 1523. He learned Latin and Greek under Sebastian Corrado and Bassiano Lando, and made so speedy a proficiency in them, that his father, thinking him fit for the study of the law at fourteen, taught him the first elements of that faculty himself; and Guy studied them incessantly under his father for three years, but without neglecting the belles lettres. He was afterwards sent into Italy, in order to complete his law-studies under the professors of that country. He went first to Ferrara; and, having there heard the lectures of Pasceto and Hyppolitus Riminaldi, passed thence to Pavia, where he had for his master the famous Alciat, and to Bologna and Padua, where he completed a course of seven years study, during which he had distinguished himself in public disputations on several occasions: and the fame of his abilities having drawn the attention of the republic of Venice, he was nominated by them in 1547, while only a student, second professor of the Institutes in the university of Padua. This nomination obliged him to take a doctor’s degree, which he received from the hands of Marcus Mantua. After he had filled this chair for seven years, he was advanced to the first of the Institutes in 1554; and two years after, on the retirement of Matthew Gribaldi, who was second professor of the Roman law, Pancirolus succeeded him, and held this post for fifteen years. At length, having some reason to be dissatisfied with his situation, he resigned it in 1571, when Emanuel Philibert duke of Savoy offered him the professorship of civil law, with a salary of a thousand pieces of gold. Here his patron the prince shewed him all imaginable respect, as did also his son Charles Emanuel, who augmented his appointments with a hundred pieces. The republic of Venice soon became sensible of the loss sustained by his departure, and were desirous of recalling him to a vacant professorship in 1580. This Pancirolus at first refused, and would indeed have been content to remain at Turin, but the air of the place proved so noxious to him, that he lost one eye almost entirely, and was in danger of losing the other; the dread of which induced him to hearken to proposals that were made afresh to him in 1582; and having a salary of a thousand ducats offered to him, with the chair he had so much wished for, he returned to Padua. The city of Turin, willing to give him some marks of their esteem, at his departure, presented him with his freedom, accompanied with some pieces of silver plate. He then remained at Padua, where his stipend was raised to the sum of twelve hundred ducats. Here he died in June 1599, and was interred in the church of St. Justin, after funeral service had been performed for him in the church of St. Anthony; where Francis Vidua of that university pronounced his funeral oration. He was author of a number of learned works, of which the principal are: 1. “Commentarii in Notitiam utriusque Imperii et de Magistratibus,” Venice, 1593, fol. often reprinted, and inserted in the Roman Antiquities of Gracvius; 2. “De Numismatibus antiquis;” 3. “De quatuordecim Regionibus Urbis Romae,” printed in the Leyden edition of the Notitia, 1608; 4. “Rerum Memorabiliuui jam olim deperditarum, et contra recens atque ingeniose inventarum,” 1599, 2 vols. 8vo, often reprinted and translated. He wrote also a valuable treatise, which was not published till 1637, entitled “De Claris Legum Interpretibus.”!

, a celebrated Roman lawyer, born in the year 175, was advocate of the treasury or exchequer, and afterwards pretorian prefect under the emperor Severus, about the year 194. This emperor had so high an opinion of his worth, that at his death he recommended his sons Caracalla and Geta to his care: but the first, having murdered his brother, enjoined Papinian to compose a discourse, to excuse that barbarity to the senate and people. Papinian could not be prevailed on to comply with this: but on the contrary answered boldly, that it was easier to commit a parricide than to excuse it; and to accuse an innocent person, after taking away his life, was a second parricide. Caracalla was so much enraged at this answer, that he ordered Papinian to be beheaded, which sentence was executed in the year 212, when he was in his thirtyseventh year, and his body was dragged through the streets of Rome. He had a great number of disciples, and composed several works among those, twenty-seven books of “Questions in the Law” nineteen books of “Responses or Opinions” two of “Definitions” two others upon “Adultery” and a single book upon the “Laws of Ediles.” His reputation was so great, that he is called “the honour of jurisprudence, and the treasure of the laws.”

His works show considerable knowledge of ancient history, especially that of France; and he raised no little reputation by his attacks on the Jesuits in his “Les Recherches,” which was answered by father Garasse. His animosity to that order laid him in some measure open to this antagonist, for he very readily adopted any story, ever so improbable, which he heard of them from their bitterest enemies. All his works, however, are written with elegance and humour, and he appears to have been formed by nature equally for a poet and a lawyer. His works were first printed together at Trevoux, and passed through many editions, the last in 1665. They were afterwards printed along with those of his son Nicholas, at Amsterdam, in 1723, 2 vols. fol. Of his “Letters,” the best edition is that at Paris, in 1619, in 5 vols. 8vo. His “Poe.ns” consist of one book “Of Portraits;” six books of “Epigrams;” and a book of “Epitaphs.” But in this collection is wanting his “Catechism of the Jesuits” instead of which are inserted the letters of his son Nicolas. Among his pieces in verse, “La Pure” had at one time a fashidnable reputation. It is entitled “La, Puce des grands touii de and contains several poems upon a flea which Paquier spied on the breast of the learned Catharine de Roches, in a visit to her on the extraordinary sessions at Poitiers in 1569. Such are the trifles by which a. nation is sometimes amused. He left three sons, of whom the eldest, Theodore, was advocate-general in the chamber of accounts; Nicolas, master of requests, whose” Letters" were printed in 1623, at Paris, containing several discourses upon the occurrences in France in the time of Henry IV. and Louis XIII. and Guy, who was auditor of the accounts.

, a French minor poet, was born at Caen in 1585, and being the son of a lawyer, was designed by his father for the same profession. This destination, which seldom suits a poetical imagination, was accordingly rejected by Patrix, who addicted himself entirely to poetry. About the age of forty, he attached himself to the court of Gaston, duke of Orleans, 'to whom, and to his widow, Margaret ofLorraine, he faithfully devoted his services. A Norman accent, and a certain affectation of rustic simplicity, did not prevent him from being in high favour at that little court: his wit, liveliness, and social talent, making amends for such imperfections. Towards the latter end of life, he became strongly touched with sentiments of religion, and suppressed, as far as he could, the licentious poems which he had written in his youth. He lived to the great age of eighty-eight, and died at Paris in 1672. At eighty, he had a violent illness, and when he recovered from it, his friends advised him to leave his bed; “Alas!” said he, “at my time of life, it is hardly worth while to take the trouble of dressing myself again.” He proved however mistaken, as to the shortness of his subsequent life. Of his works there are extant, 1. A collection of verses entitled “La miv-ricorde de Dieu sur un pecheur pénitent,” Blois, 1660, 4to. These were written in his age, yet possess some fire. 2. “Plaints des Consonnes qui n‘ont pas Thonneur d’entrer dans le noiu de Neufgermain,” preserved in the works of Voiture 3. Miscellaneous poems, in the collection of Barbin. The greater part of them are feeble, with the exception of a few original passages. The poem most known was made a few days before his death. It is called the Dream; and, though it is of a serious cast, a translation of it, oddly enough, possesses a place in all our English jest bokks, beginning, “I dreamt that buried in my fellow-clay,” &c. It asserts a moral and religious axiom, which is undeniable, that death levels all conditions. The original is little known; it is this:

He was a man of great acuteness, imagination, judgment, and learning, and thought equal to the production of any work; yet we have no original pieces of his, excepting the “Preface” above mentioned, “A Discourse upon the Tmjnortality of the Soul,” and a few letters to Patru. But he made French translations of many ancient writers, which were once admired for their elegance, purity, and chasteness of style. Among these are Tacitus, Lucian, Caesar, Thucydides, and Arrian; but he took too great liberties with the sense of his author, for the sake of imitating his manner, and producing something like an original. He is said to have succeeded best while he profited by the advice of Patru, Conrart, and Chapelain; and it is certain that those translations written in his latter days, vv^ien he had not that advantage, are inferior to the others. When he was asked, why he chose to be a translator, rather than an author, he answered, that “he was neither a divine nor lawyer, and consequently not qualified to compose pleadings or sermons that the world was filled withtreatises on politics that all discourses on morality were only so many repetitions of Plutarch and Seneca; and that, to serve one’s country, a man ought rather to translate valuable authors, than to write new books, which seldom contain any thing new.” The minister Colbert, judging him very capable of writing the “History of Louis XIV.” recommended him to that monarch; who however, upon being informed that Perrot was a protestant, said, that “he would not have an historian of a religion different from his own.” Perrot was a man of great talents in conversation, and said so many good things that Pelisson regretted there was not some one present to write down all he spoke.

In 1680, 1681, Mr. Petty t published his “Miscellanea Parliamentaria,” 12mo; and other collections were left by him upon the subject of the law of parliament, which, after his death, were published under the title of “Jus Parliamentarium, or the ancient power, jurisdiction, rights, and liberties of the most high court of Parliament, revived and asserted,” 1739, fol. He also left a summary or table of the records kept in the Tower; some Mss. containing copies of records and law matters, relating chiefly to naval concerns; and other Mss. containing a great number of collections from records and other authentic materials, chiefly relating to the law and constitution of England, which are preserved in the Inner Temple library, and are much recommended to the notice of the English lawyer and historian, by Mr. Justice Barrington in his “Observations on the Statutes.”

, an ancient ecclesiastical historian, was born in Cappadocia, about the year 388, or as some say 368. He pursued his studies principally at Constantinople; but we have few particulars of his life, and no account of his death. He wrote an ecclesiastical history in twelve books, which begins with the controversy between Arius and Alexander, and ends about the year 425. As he was brought up in Arian principles, his history is not free from partiality; but there are many useful things in his writings relating to the antiquities of the church. We have only extant an abridgment of it in Photius, and some extracts taken out of Suidas and other authors. Jac. Gothofredus, a learned lawyer, first published them at Geneva, in 1643, 4to, with a Latin translation and large notes. Valesius, having reviewed this abridgment by the manuscripts, and corrected the text in several places, caused it to be printed with the other ecclesiastical historians, at Paris, in 1673, folio. It was afterwards reprinted at London, in 1720, when Reading republished Valesius’s edition, in three volumes, folio.

, a celebrated lawyer, was born in 1573, of a good family at Angers. He attended the bar with a degree of reputation superior to his age; and going afterwards to Paris, distinguished himself both in the parliament and grand council, by his eloquent pleadings. In 1600 he married Frances Ladvocat, daughter of Amauri Ladvocat, seigneur de Fougeres, and counsellor to the presidial of Angers, and at his return to his native place, was appointed counsellor to the same presidial. Mary de Medicis becoming acquainted with him in 1619, conceived the highest esteem for his merit, created him master of the requests in her palace, and endeavoured to support herself in her disgrace by his credit and advice; but M. du Pineau’s whole aim was to inspire her with resignation, in which he at last succeeded. Louis XIII. in return appointed him mayor and captain-general of the city of AngerSj June 2, 1632, in which situation he gained the flattering title of “Father of the People.” His house became also a kind of academy, in which every one freely proposed his difficulties on the most intricate points of law or history, and when du Pineau had spoken, the point in dispute was considered as decided. He died Oct. 15, 1644, aged 71. His works are, Notes in Latin, against those of du Moulin on the canon law, printed under the inspection of Francis Pinsson, with du Moulin' s works; “Comm. des observations et consultations surlaContume d'Anjou,” reprinted, 1725, 2 vols. fol. by the care of M. de Livoniere, who has enriched them with very useful observations. Menage relates that when his father William Menage, and du Pineau, agreed in their opinions on the same question, the people of Angers used to say, “This must certainly be right, for Pineau has confirmed the opinion of Menage.” His house was so much frequented, that the street in which he lived was called “Rue Pineau.”

, a celebrated lawyer, the son of Humphrey Plowden, of Plowden, in Shropshire, of an ancient and genteel family, was born in that county, in 1517, and fjrst studied philosophy and medicine for three years at Cambridge but removed after a time to Oxford, where he continued his former studies for four years more, and in 1552, according to Wood, was admitted to the practice of physic and surgery. Tanner says, that when he left Cambridge, he entered himself of the Middle Temple, and resuming the study of physic, went then to Oxford. It appears, however, that he finally determined on the law as a profession, and entered the Middle Temple, where he soon became reader. His first reading was in autumn, 4 and 5 of Philip and Mary; and his second was in Lent, 3 Eliz. In queen Mary’s time he was called to the degree of serjeant; but, being zealously attached to the Romish persuasion, lost all further hopes of preferment, on the accession of Elizabeth. He continued to be much consulted in private as a counsellor. He died Feb. 6, 1584-5, and was buried in the Middle Ternple church. By a ms note on a copy of his Reports once in the possession of Dr. Ducarel, it appears that he was treasurer of the Middle Temple in 1572, the year in which the hall was built. It is added that “he was a man of great gravity, knowledge, and integrity; in his youth excessively studious, so that (we have it by tradition) in three years space he went not once out of the Temple.”

, an English lawyer and judge, was descended from a good family in Devonshire, where he probably was educated, as Prince intimates that he was of no university. He studied the law, however, at one of the inns of court, and acquired very considerable practice in the reign of Charles II. He was counsel for the earl of Danby in 1679, whom he advised to plead his pardon and the corporation of London afterwards engaged him to plead, with Treby, in behalf of their charter. Iti 1688 he sat as one of the members for the city of Exeter, and he was retained as one of the counsel for the bishops. After the revolution he was knighted, called a serjeant April 11, 1689, and appointed chief justice of the common pleas on May 5 following but he held this office a very short time, dying in 1692. Burnet calls him “an honest and learned, but perplexed lawyer.” In 1702 was published his “Arguments; and Reports in some special cases in the King’s Bench from 22 to 36 Car. II. with some cases in the Common Pleas and Exchequer, together with divers decrees in the High Court of Chancery, upon Limitations of Trusts of Terms for years,” fol. with two tables. The copies of these reports, Mr. Bridgman informs us, are very incorrect, varying in the pages, and in the dates. In the pages there is a chasm from 173 to 176, and from 181 to 184, with other errors.

"Curll’s account was, that one evening a man in a clergyman’s gown, but with a lawyer’s band, brought and offered to sale a number of printed volumes, which he found to be Pope’s epistolary correspondence that he asked no name, and was told none, but gave the price demanded, and thought himself authorized to use his purchase to his own advantage. That Curll gave a true account of the transaction it is reasonable to believe, because no' falsehood was ever yet detected; and when, some years afterwards, I mentioned it to Lintot, the son of Bernard, he declared his opinion to be, that Pope knew better than any body else how Curll obtained the copies, because another parcel was at the same time sent to himself, for which no price had ever been demanded, as he made known his resolution not to pay a porter, and consequently not to deal with a nameless agent.

Thomas was educated at the school of Banbury, kept by Thomas Stanbridge, of Magdalen college, an eminent tutor, and was thence removed to Eton college, from which he is supposed to have gone to Gray’s Inn, where ie studied the law. Of his progress at the bar we have no account; but his talents must have discovered themselves at an early period, and have recommended him to the notice of his sovereign, as in October I 533, when he was only twenty-seven years old, he was constituted by letters-patent of Henry VIII. clerk of the briefs of the star-chamber at Westminster, and the same month received a reversionary grant of the office of clerk of the crown in Chancery. Of this last he soon after became possessed, with an annual fee of twenty pounds from the hanaper, and also a robe with fur at the feast of Christmas and Pentecost, from the king’s great wardrobe. Two years after, in November 1535, he was constituted warden of the mint, exchange, and coinage, in the Tower of London, which his biographer thinks he quitted about eight years after for some more valuable preferment. The same year he received a patent for a new coat of arms to be borne by him and his posterity, which are those of Trinity college. In October 1536, he received the honour of knighthood, at the same time with Henry Howard, afterwards the gallant and unfortunate earl of Surrey. In December, he was appointed to exercise, jointly with William Smythe, the office of clerk of all the briefs in the star-chamber at Westminster. In Feb. 1538, he obtained at his own instance, a new royal licence for exercising the office of clerk of the crown in conjunction with John Lucas, afterwards an eminent crown, lawyer in, the reign of Edward VI.

, an English lawyer of eminence, was the eldest son of Edward Popham, esq. of Huntworth in Somersetshire, and born in 1531. He was some time a student at Baliol college in Oxford, being then, as Wood says, given at leisure hours to manly sports and exercises. When he removed to the Middle Temple, he is said at first to have led a dissipated life, but applying diligently afterwards to the study of the law, he rose to some of its highest honours. He was made serjeant at law about 1570, solicitor-general in 1579, and attorney-general in 1581, when he also bore the office of treasurer of the Middle Temple. In 1592, he was promoted to the rank of chief justice of the court of king’s-bench; not of the common pleas, as, from some expressions of his own, has been erroneously supposed, and at the same time he was knighted. In 1601 he was one of the lawyers detained by the unfortunate earl of Essex, when he formed the absurd project of defending himself in his house; and on the earl’s trial gave evidence against him relative to their detention. He died in 1607, at the age of seventy-six, and was buried at Wellington in his native country, where he had always resided as much as his avocations would permit. He was esteemed a severe judge in the case of robbers; but his severity was welltimed, as it reduced the number of highwaymen, who before had greatly infested the country. If Aubrey may be credited, his general character was liable to many serious exceptions. His works are, 1. “Reports and Cases, adjudged in the time of queen Elizabeth,” London, 1656, fol. 2. “Resolutions and Judgements upon Cases and Matters agitated in all the Courts at Westminster in the latter end of queen Elizabeth,” London, 4to. Both lord Holt and chief justice Hyde considered the Reports as of no authority.

, an eminent lawyer, and an upright judge, was a native of Gloucester, which city he represented in parliament in 1685. He was called to the coif April 24, 1686, appointed a justice of the common pleas April 21, 1687, at which time he received the honour of knighthood, and was removed to the court of king’s bench April 26 in the following year. He sat hi that court at the memorable trial of the seven bishops, and having declared against the king’s dispensing power, James II. deprived him of his office in July 1688; but William III. placed him again in the common pleas, Oct. 28, 1695, and queen Anne advanced him to the queen’s bench June 18, 1702, where he sat until his death, at Gloucester, on his return from Bath, June 14, 1713, far advanced in life. He was reckoned a sound lawyer, and in private was to the last a man of a cheerful, facetious disposition. Swift, in one of his letters, mentions his meeting with him at Lord Oxford’s, and calls him “an old fellow with grey hairs, who was the merriest old gentleman I ever saw, spoke pleasing things, and chuckled till he cried again.” In his time the laws against witchcraft being unrepealed, one Jane Wenman was tried before him, and her adversaries swore that she could fly “Prisoner,” said our judge, “can you fly?” “Yes, my lord.” “Well then you may; there is no law against flying.”

, an eminent English lawyer, was the son of sir John Pratt. This sir John Pratt was a student at Oxford, and fellow of Wadham college, in the hall of which is his portrait, among other distinguished members and benefactors of the society. Applying himself to the study of the law, he was called to the bar about the end of king Charles II.‘s reign and. after various gradations in the dignities of his profession, was in 1718 constituted lord chief justice of the court of King’s Bench. He died in 1724, when the subject of the present article was ’a child, one of the sons of his second wife, Elizabeth Wilson. He was born in 1713 and, after being educated in school-learning at Eton, entered of King’s college, Cambridge, on the election in 1731, and became a fellow of that society. In 1735 he took the degree of B. A. and in 1739 that of M. A. after which he became a member of Lincoln’s Inn; and having regularly gone through his law studies, was called to the bar. For many years, however, he had so little practice, that at one time he had resolved to relinquish his attendance at Westminster Hall; but, by degrees he became noticed; and, in 1752, we find him supporting the rights of juries, in opposition to Mr. Murray, afterwards lord Mansfield, in a case of libel, the King y. Owen, when his client was acquitted.

, an eminent lawyer and judge, was the son of Thomas Price, esq of Geeler in Denbighshire, and born in the parish of Kerigy Druidion, Jan. 14, 1653. After an education at the grammar-school of Wrexham, he was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge; but, as usual with gentlemen destined for his profession, left the university without taking a degree, and entered himself a student of Lincoln’s Inn about 1673. In 1677 he made what was called the grand tour, in company with the earl of Lexington, and lady and sir John Meers. When at Florence, we are told that he was apprehended, and some law-books taken from him; and his copy of “Coke upon Littleton” being supposed, by some ignorant officer, to be an English heretical Bible, Mr. Price was carried before the pope where he not only satisfied his holiness as to this work, but made "him a present of it, and the pope ordered it to be deposited in the Vatican library. In 1679 he returned, and married a lady of fortune; from whom, after some years’ cohabitation, he found it necessary to be separated, on account of the violence of her temper. In 1682 he was chosen member of parliament for Weobly in Herefordshire, and gave nis hote against the bill of exclusion. The same year he was made attorney-general for South Wales, elected an alderman for the city of Hereford, and the year following was chosen recorder of Radnor. His high reputation for knowledge and integrity procured him the office of steward to the queen dowager (relict of Charles II.) in 1684; he was also chosen townclerk of the city of Gloucester; and, in 1686, king’s counsel at Ludlow. Being supposed to have a leaning towards the exiled family, he was, after the revolution, removed from tn*e offices of attorney-general for South Wales and town-clerk of Gloucester. In resentment for this affront, as his biographer insinuates, or from a more patriotic motive, he opposed king William’s grant of certain lands in Wales to his favourite, earl of Portland, and made a memorable speech on this occasion in the House of Commons; the consequence of which was, that the grant was rejected.

Although it might have been expected that king William would have, in his turn, resented this conduct of Mr. Price, yet he appears not only to have acquiesced in the decision of parliament, but knowing Mr. Price’s abilities as a lawyer, made him, in 1700, a judge of Brecknock circuit. After sitting in parliament for Weobly from 1682 to 1702, he resigned his seat in favour of his son Thomas, and was made serjeant-at-law, and one of the barons of the exchequer. In this character he distinguished himself in the memorable case of the Coventry election, in 1706, defending the conduct of the magistrates who had called in the aid of the military, not to influence the election, but to suppress a riot which tended to destroy its freedom. In 1710, as his fortune was considerably increased by his preferment, he built an alms-house at the place of his birth for six poor people, and amply endowed it.

, an ancient Christian poet, was born in Spain in the year 348 but in what part is uncertain. He was brought up a lawyer and, being called to the bar, was afterwards made a judge in two considerable towns. He was then promoted by the emperor Honorius to a very high office; but not to the consulate, as some have imagined. He was fifty-seven before he employed his mind on religion, and then wrote his poems on pious subjects, which are neither deficient in the true poetic spirit, nor much imbued with it. He often uses harsh expressions, not reconcileable to pure Latinity, and is even jjuilty of false quantity. These effusions, to which he chiefly gave Greek titles, are, “Psychoniachia, or The Combat of the Soul” “Cathemerinon, or Poems concerning each day’s duty” “Tlegi rspavuv, or Hymns in Praise of Martyrs” “Apotheosis, or Treatises upon divine subjects, against Jews, Infidels, and Heretics;” “Hamartigena, or concerning Original Sin, against Marcion” “Two Books against Symmachus” “Diptichon, or some Histories of the Old and New Testament in distichs.” In the two books against Symmachus, he shews the original of false deities, gives an account of the conversion of the city of Rome and answers the petition, which Symmachns presented to the emperors, to obtain the reestablishment of the Altar of Victory, and other ceremonies of the pagan religion. These books were written before the victory gained over Radagaisus in the year 405, and after that which Stilicho won over Alaric near Pollentia in the year 402 for he mentions the latter, and say* nothing of the former, though his subject required it.

, an English lawyer, who was much distinguished by the number rather than excellence of his publications, during the reign of Charles I. was born in 1600, at Swanswick in Somersetshire, and educated at a grammar-school in the city of Bath. He became a commoner of Oriel college, Oxford, in 1616; and, after taking a bachelor of arts’ degree, in 1620, removed to Lincoln’s-­inn, where he studied the law, and was made successively barrister, bencher, and reader. At his first coming to that inn, he was a great admirer and follower of Dr. Preston, preacher to the inn (see Preston), and published several books against what he thought the enormities of the age, and the doctrine and discipline of the church. His “Histriornastix,” which came out in 1632, giving great offence to the court, he was committed prisoner to the Tower of London and, in 1633, sentenced by the Starchamber, to be fined 5000l. to the king, expelled the university of Oxford and Lincoln’s-inn, degraded and disenabled from his profession of the law, to stand in the pillory and lose his ears, to have his book publicly burnt before his face, and to remain prisoner during lite. Prynne was certainly here treated with very unjust severity; for Whitelocke observes, that the book was licensed by archbishop Abbot’s chaplain, and was merely an invective against plays and players; but there being “a reference in the table of this book to this effect, women-actors notorious whores, relating to some women-actors mentioned in his book, as he affirmeth, it happened, that about six weeks after this the queen acted a part in a pastoral at Somerset-house; and then archbishop Laud and other prelates, whom Prynne had angered by some books of his against Arminianism, and against the jurisdiction of bishops, and by some prohibitions which he had moved, and got to the high commission-court these prelates, and their instruments, the next day after the queen had acted her pastoral, shewed Prynne’s book against plays to the king, and that place in it, women-actors notorious whores; and they informed the king and queen, that Prynne had purposely written this book against the queen and her pastoral whereas it was published six weeks before that pastoral was acted.”

, a learned French historian, was the younger son of Claude Du Puy, an eminent French lawyer, who died in 1594, aijd who was celebrated by all the learned of his time in eloges, published collectively under the title of “Amplissimi viri Claudii Puteani Tumulus,” Paris, 1607, 4to. His son was born at Agen, Nov. 27, 1582, and was in early life distinguished for his proficiency in the languages, but principally for his knowledge of civil law and history. His talents produced Trim the esteem and friendship of the president De Thou, who was his relation, and of Nicholas Rigault and he was concerned in the publication of those editions of De Thou, which appeared in 1620 and 1626. When that great work met with opponents, he wrote, in concert with Rigault, a defence of it, entitled “Memoires et Instructions pour servir a justifier Pinnocence de messire Franc.ois-Auguste de Thou,” which was reprinted in 1734, at the end of the 15th volume of the French edition of the history. Our author was appointed successively counsellor to the king, and librarykeeper. Having accompanied Thumeri de Boissise, whom the king had sent on a political mission to the Netherlands and to Holland, he became acquainted, through his father’s reputation, with the learned men of those countries. On his return he was employed in researches respecting the king’s rights, and in making a catalogue of the charters. These scarce and valuable papers gave him so extensive an insight into every thing relative to the French history, that few persons have made such curious discoveries on the subject. He was also employed with Messrs. Lebret and Delorme, to defend his majesty’s rights over the three bishoprics of Metz, Toul, and Verdun, and produced a great number of titles and memoirs in proof of those rights. His obliging disposition made him feel interested in the labours of all the literati, and willing to communicate to them whatever was most valuable, in a vast collection of memorandums and observations, which he had been gathering together during fifty years. He died at Paris, December 14, 1651, aged 69. Among his numerous works, the French critics select the following as the most important 1. “Traité des Droits et des Libertes l'Eglise Gallicane, avec les Preuves,” 1639, 3 vols. folio. In this, as in all his works, he was an able defender of the rights of the Gajlican church, in opposition to the encroachments of the see of Rome. In 1651 he published an edition of the “Proofs,” in 2 vok. folio. 2. “Traités concernant l‘histoire de France, savoir la condemnation des Templiers, l’histoire du schisme d'Avignon, et quelques proces criminels,” Paris, 1654, 4to. 3. “Traité de la Majorite de nos rois et du regences du royaume, avec les preuves,” Paris, 1655, 4to. 4. “Histoire des plus illustres Favoris anciens et modernes,” Leaden, 1659, 4to and 12mo. In this curious list of favourites, Jbe has recorded only five French. He published also separate treatises on the rights of the king to the provinces of Burgundy, Artois, Bretagne, the three bishoprics before mentioned, Flanders, &c. &c. the titles of which it would be uninteresting to repeat. His life was published by Nicholas Rigault, Paris, 1652, 4to, and is inserted in that very useful volume, Bates’s “Vitae Selectorum aliquot virorum.”

Such is Warburton’s account, heightened a little, unqaestionnbly, by his regard for Pope, but, except where he calls him illiterate, not much beyond the truth for Ralph’s pen was completely venal, and both his principles and his distresses prevented any consideration on the moral part of his conduct. He had by this time produced on the stage, “The Fashionable Lady,” an opera, “The Fall of the Earl of Essex,” a tragedy and afterwards, “The Lawyer’s Feast,” a farce, and “The Astrologer,” a comedy, none of which had much success. He was a writer, iff 1739, in the “Universal Spectator,” a periodical paper; but from his letters to Dr. Birch* in the British Museum, it appears that he was no great gainer hy any of his performances. There is an excellent pamphlet, however* attributed tp him, which was published about 1731, a “Review of the Public Buildings of London” but from the style and subject, we should suppose his name borrowed. In 1735 he commenced a managing partner with Fielding- in the Haymarket theatre but, as Davies says, “he had no other share in the management than viewing and repining at his partner’s success.”

, a valuable collector of voyages and travels, the son of Paul Ramusio, a lawyer, was born at Venice in 1486. He made great proficiency in his classical and philosophical studies, but had a particular turn for politics, and was thought so accomplished in the knowledge of public affairs, that he was frequently deputed by the state to Switzerland, Rome, and France. He was also made secretary of the council of ten at Venice, and was for forty-three years more or less employed in that post, or in embassies. When old and infirm, he retired to Padua, where he died in July 1557, in the seventy- second year of his age. His principal work was entitled “Raccolta delleNavigazioni e de Viaggi,” and was published at different periods in three volumes folio. Of this valuable work complete copies are not easily to be met with. Brunei recommends the following selection as forming the best copy: vol. I. of the edition 1563 or 1588; vol. II. of 1583, and vol.111, of 1565. To this last volume should be added the supplement to the edition of 1606, p. 386—430, which contains “Viaggio di M. Cesare de Fredrici nelP Inclia-Orientale.”

Rastall is sometimes called a lawyer, and besides being printer, certainly had a considerable hand in composing or compiling some law books. In 1517, he printed and published his “Tables to Fitzherbert’s Abridgment,” in folio, which in 1565 were reprinted by R. Tottel. According to Herbert, he also had some concern in first printing Fitzherbert’s Abridgment, and he composed a table to the “Book of Assizes,” which is printed with the latter editions of the work. In 1527, we find “An Exposition of Law Terms and the Nature of Writs, with divers cases and rules of the Law, collected as well from books of Master Littleton, as other Law Books,” printed in small octavo by J. Rastall, and again by him in French and English, folio, without date. This appears to have been originally composed as well as printed by Rastall, both in French and English, notwithstanding the conjecture that has been formed in favour of his son William, by lord Coke and others, as author or translator of it. John RastalPs other publications appear to have been, “Tables of the Years of our Lord God, and of the Kings, in opposite columns,” printed by Walley in 1558, and again in 1563, by William Rastail in 1563, and often reprinted by others; and in 1566 “Entries of Declarations, Bars, Replications,” &c. folio, commonly called “RastalPs Entries,” and sometimes quoted as the “New Book of Entries.” The author, in his preface, tells the reader that his collection is chiefly compiled from l.The old Book of Entries: 2. A Book of Precedents written by Master Edward Stubbes, one of the Prothonotaries in the Common Pleas: 3. A Book of Precedents gathered by John Lucas, secondary to Master William Roper, prothonotarie of the King’s Bench: 4. A Book of good Precedents of his grandfather sir John More (father of sir Thomas More), one of the justices of the King’s Bench, but not of his collection; all which he had incorporated in this volume.

, a German lawyer and mathematician, was born April 19, 1635, at Schleusingen in the county of Henneberg, and was educated at Leipsic and Leyden. He was afterwards appointed preceptor to the young prince of Gotha, then professor of mathematics at Kiel, 1655, and some years after professor of law in the same place, where he died Nov. 22, 1714, being then counsellor to the duke of Saxe Gotha, and member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Berlin. Reyher translated Euclid’s works into German with algebraical demonstrations, and wrote several works in Latin, among which, that entitled “Mathesis Biblica,” and a very curious Dissertation on the Inscriptions upon our Saviour’s cross and the hour of his crucifixion, are particularly esteemed.

In 1791, his health began apparently to decline, and on this he retired to, and for some time was enabled to enjoy, the placid comforts of a country residence, where, however, his disorder terminated in his death on the llth of June, 1793, in the seventy -first year of his age. He left a widow, three sons (the eldest an eminent lawyer at the Scotch bar, and the two younger embraced a military life), and two daughters, one married to Mr. Brydone, the traveller, and the other is the widow of John Russell, esq. clerk to the signet.

, the most ferocious of those tyrants which the French revolution produced, was born at Arras in 1759, where his father was a lawyer, a man of character and knowledge in his profession, but so improvident as to die insolvent, and leave his two sons, of whom Maximilian was the eldest, in poverty. They soon, however, found a generous patron in De Conzie, bishop of Arras, who in a manner adopted them, but honoured Maximilian with his particular care, and after providing him with school education, sent him to Paris, and procured him an exhibition in the college of Louis Le Grand. The manner in which Robespierre conducted himself here, answered the expectation of his protector. He was assiduous and successful in his studies, and obtained many of the yearly prizes. There was nothing, however, about him, which indicated his future destiny. Being an apt scholar, it might be thought that he would make a figure in the world; but we are told that even this was not the case, and that his instructors discovered neither in his conversation nor his actions any trace of that propensity, which could lead them to conjecture that his glory would exceed the bounds of the college. When he had, however, attained the age of sixteen or seventeen, he was advised to study the law; and this he pursued, under the auspices of a Mons. Ferrieres, but displayed no extraordinary enthusiasm for the profession. He had neither perseverance, address, nor eloquence, and, according to one of his biographers, his consciousness of inferiority to those who were making a great figure at the bar, gave him an air of gloominess and dissatisfaction. It was at first determined, that he should practise before the parliament of Paris, but this scheme was never carried into execution, for he returned to his native province, and was admitted an advocate in the supreme council of Artois. About this time he is said to have published, in 1783, a treatise on electricity, in order to remove the vulgar prejudices against conductors. In this piece he introduced a laboured eloge on the character of Louis XVI.; but the subject of his next literary performance was yet more remarkable; it was against death as a punishment, and in this he reproaches all modern governments for permitting such a punishment to remain on their codes, and even doubts the right claimed by society to cut off the life of an individual!

, a learned and upright judge, was the second son of Robert Rolle of Heanton in Devonshire, where he was born in 1589. In 1606 he entered Exeter college, Oxford, and resided there about two years, after which he was admitted a member of the Inner Temple, Feb. 6, 1608, and studied the law with great perseverance and success. His contemporaries Here were Littleton, Herbert, Gardiner, and Selden, with all whom he formed a lasting friendship. Being admitted to the bar, he practised in the court of King’s Bench, and raised a very high reputation as a sound lawyer. His reading and practice were equally extensive; and he seems to have been formed by nature for patient study, deep penetration, and clearness and solidity of judgment. He soon discovered the hinge upon which every cause turned, and when he was convinced himself, had the art of easily convincing others. In the latter end of the reign of James I. and beginning of that of Charles I. he sat as member of parliament for Kellington in Cornwall; and in 1638 was elected summer reader of the Inner Temple,but the plague raging then in London, he did not read until Lent following, and in 1640 he was made serjeant at law. On the breaking out of the rebellion, he took the covenant, and, in 1645, was made one of the judges; and in 1648 was promoted to be lord chief justice of the King’s Bench, in which office his integrity was acknowledged by the generality of the loyalists themselves. He was, of all the judges, the most averse from trying any of the king’s party for treason, thinking indeed that their defence, in which they insisted upon the illegality of the government, was too well founded. He resigned his office some time before his death, which happened July 30, 1656. He was buried in the chinch of Shapwicke near Glastonbury in Somersetshire, the manor of which he had purchased some years before, and had his residence there. In Tawstock church near Barnstaple in Devonshire, is a monument to Alexander Rolle, a lawyer, who died in 1660, aged forty-eight, and was probably son to our judge.

Mr. Rose married in 1791, a. daughter of Dr. Farr, physician to the Royal-hospital, near Plymouth, a lady, who with a moderate portion, brought him the more valuable dower of an elevated understanding. By this lady he had four sons. An ardent love of literature had ever been a characteristic of Mr. Rose, and he gave a signal proof of it in the closing scene of his life. He had been requested to revise the collected works and life of Goldsmith, published in 1801. In the course of his three weeks confinement to the bed of death, he corrected some inaccuracies in that interesting publication, and sent his corrections with the expressive farewell of a dying man to the publishers. In 1792 he produced an improved edition of lord chief baron Corny n’s “Reports,” and in 1800, in a quarto edition, "The Digest of the Laws of England/' by the same eminent lawyer, corrected and continued inscribing the first to lord Thurlow, and the second to lord Lpughborough.

, son of John Ryves of Damery Court, or, as Fuller says, of Little Langton, in Dorsetshire, was born in the latter end of the XVIth century, ' and was educated at Winchester-school, whence he was admitted of New college, Oxford, in 1596, became fellow in 1598, and applying himself to the study of the civil law, commenced doctor in that faculty in 1610. He was a celebrated, civilian in doctors’ commons and the court of admiralty, and when he had established his fame in England, was, in 1618, preferred to be one of the masters in chancery, and judge of the faculties and prerogative court in Ireland, where he was held in equal esteem for his knowledge in the laws. Upon king Charles I. coming to the crown, he was made his advocate, and knighted: and, when the rebellion broke out, he was very firm to the royal cause, and although advanced in life, engaged in several battles, and received several wounds in his majesty’s service. He was one of the assistants to the king at the treaty of peace in the Isle of Wight. Sir Thomas Ryves was not only a very eminent civilian, and a good common lawyer, but likewise very accomplished in polite learning; and, particularly, wrote in Latin with unusual delicacy and correctness. He died in 1651, and was buried in St. Clement Danes, near Temple Bar, London. His works are, 1. “The Vicar’s Plea; or, a competency of Means due to Vicars out of the several parishes, notwithstanding their impropriations.” This book is written with a great deal of learning and strength of argument. 2. “iiegiminis Anglicani in Hibernia Defensio, adversus Analecien, lib. 3,” London, 1624, 4to. This was the answer to a book called “Analecta Sacra,” supposed to be written by David Roth, titular bishop of Ossory, a good antiquary, according to Usher, but a bigoted Roman catholic, if the author of this work. Sir Thomas Ryves’s object is, to vindicate the conduct of the Irish government as far as respects the Roman catholics, and his book includes much curious information respecting the state of opinions at that time. 3. “Jmperatoris Justiniani defensio adversus Alemannum,” Lond. 1626, 12mo. Alemanni had taken great liberties with the character of Justinian in his edition of Procopius, which our civilian thought it his duty to censure. 4. “Historia Navalis,” Lond. 162!), 12mo, enlarged afterwards into two publications, “Historiae Navalis antiquae libri quatuor,” ibid. 1633, 8vo, and “Historian Navalis mediae libri tres,” ibid. 1640, 8vo.

, an English lawyer and law-writer of the sixteenth century, is supposed to have been born at Skilton, near Coventry, in Warwickshire, and educated for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to the Inner Temple for the study of the law. After being admitted to the bar, he became an eminent counsellor, and we should suppose a very popular one, as he frequently refused or returned his fees. What he got by honourable practice and some paternal estate, he expended in the purchase of books, and gathered a very fine library, which was all the property he left to his heirs. Besides his legal knowledge, he was conversant in philosophy and the divinity of the times, and wrote on the latter subject with so much freedom as to render his sentiments suspected, for which reason Bale has given him a very advantageous character. He is commended too for his piety, and pious ordering of his family, to whom he read every night a chapter in the Bible, and expounded it. He died Sept. 28, 1540, and not 1539, as Bale states. He was buried in the church of St. Alphage, within CrL'pp legate, London. It appears by his will that he was a considerable benefactor to Skiiton church, where his father sir Henry St. German, knt. and his mother lie buried, and to that of Laleford. St. German has immortalized his name by his valuable and well-known work, which bears the title of “The Doctor and Student, or Dialogues between a doctor of divinity, and a student in the laws of England, concerning the grounds of those laws,” first printed by Rastell, in Latin, 1523, 12mo, and reprinted in 1528. Mr. Bridgman enumerates above twenty editions which followed, the last in 1787, 8vo, with questions and cases concerning the equity of the law, corrected and improved by William Muchall, or Murchall. On the subject of this celebrated work, Mr. Hargrave (in his Law Tracts, 32 I), has published from a ms. in the Cotton library, “A Replication of a Serjaunte at the Laws of England, to certayne pointes alleaged by a student of the said lawes of England, in a Dialogue in Englishe, between a doctor of divinity and the said student;” and a little “Treatise concerning writs of Subpoena.” Two other tracts are attributed by Ames to St. German, though they bear the name of Thomas Godfrey, viz. “A Treatise concerning the power of the Clergy and of the lawes of the Realme,” 12mo, no date and “A Treatise concernynge divers of the Constitucyons provyncyall and legantines,” 12mo, no date. Tanner attributes to him “A Treatise concerning the division between the Spiritualitie and the Temporaltie,” printed by Redman without date; and this seems to be the same work as “The Pacyfyer of the division between the Spiritualitie aod Temporaltie,” printed by Berthelet, which being remarkable for impartiality and temperate language, was pointed out to sir Thomas More, as an example for him to follow in his controversial writings. This incited sir Thomas to publish “An Apologye made by him, anno 1533, after he had gevhi over th' office of lord chancellor of Englande,” printed by Rastell, 1533, 12mo. St. German was also probably the author of “Newe addicions treating most specially of the power of the Parlyament concernynge the Spiritualitie and the Spiritual Jurisdiction,” 1531, 12mo, now reprinted in all the modern editions of the “Doctor and Student.” He had a controversy with sir Thomas More, which produced “Salem and Bizance, being a dialogue between two Englishmen, one called Salem, and the other Bizance,” 1533, 8vo. This was written in answer to More’s “Apologye” above mentioned and sir Thomas replied in the “Debellation of Salem and Bizance,” by Rastell, in 1533, 8vo.

, in Latin Sammartbanus, is the name of a family in France, which produced many men of letters. The first, Gaucher de Sainte-Marthe, had a son Charles, born in 1512, who became physician to Francis II. and was remarkable for his eloquence. Queen Margaret of Navarre and the duchess of Vendome honoured him with their particular esteem; and when they died in 1550, he testified his grief by a funeral oration upon each, published the same year. That upon the queen was in Latin, the o.ther in French. There is also some Latin and French poetry of his in being. He died in 1555. Scevole, or Sclevola, the nephew of Charles, was born at Lou dun in 1536, and became very distinguished both in learning and business. He loved letters from his infancy, attained an intimate acquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues and became an orator, a lawyer, a poet, and an historian he is also represented as a good friend, zealous for his country, and of inviolable fidelity to his prince. He had, in the reigns of Henry III. and Henry IV. several considerable employments, which he filled with great reputation. In 1579, he was governor of Poitiers, and afterwards treasurer of France for this district. In 1593 and 1594, he exercised the office of intendant of the finances, in the army of Breta^ne, commanded by the duke de Montpensier: and, in the latter of these years, he reduced Poitiers to the subjection of Henry IV, Some time after, he conceived thoughts of retiring to his own country, and devoting the remainder of his life to contemplation: but was again made governor of Poitiers, in so honourable a manner that he could not decline it. Upon the expiration of this office, he went to Paris, and thence to Loudun, where he passed the rest of his days “in otio cum dignitate.” This town had been often protected from ruin in the civil wars merely by his credit, and therefore regarded hiui as its protector. He died there in 1623, universally regretted; and his funeral oration was pronounced by the famous Urban Graudier. He was the author of “La louange de la ville de Poitiers,” 1573; “Opera Poetica,” consisting of odes, elegies, epigrams, and sacred poems, in French and Luiin, 1575; “Gallorum doctrina illustrium elogia,” 1598:“hut ins chief work, and that which keeps his lame still alive in the republic of letters, is his work called” Paedotrophia, seu de puerorum eciucatione,“printed in 1584, and dedicated to Henry III. This poem^vent through ten editions in the author’s life time, and hath gone through, as many since. It was neatly printed at London in 1708, in 12mo, together with the” Calliurfdia“of Quillet. It is also printed with a complete edition of his and his son Abel’s works, under the title” Sammarthanorum patris et lilii opera Latina et Gallica, turn soluta oratione, turn versa scnpta,“Paris, 16:33, 4to. Scevole left several sons; of whom Abel, the eldest, born at Loudun in 1570, applied himself, like his father, to literature. He cultivated French and Latin poetry; the latter were printed with those of his father in the edition just mentioned, but are inferior to them. Lewis XIII. settled on him a pension, for the services he had -lone him, and made him a counsellor of state. In 1627, he was made librarian to the king at Fontainebleau; and had after that other commissions of importance. He died at Poitiers in 1652, where his” Opuscula Varia“were printed in 1645, 8vo. This Abe) had a son of his own name, born in 1630, and afterwards distinguished by his learning. He succeeded his father as librarian at Fontainebleau, and in that quality presented to Lewis XIV. in 1668,” Un Discours pour le r6tablissement de cette Bibliorheque." He died in 1706.

, one of the most learned men of the seventeenth century, and whom Baillet has with great propriety classed among his “Enfant celebres par les etudes,” was born at Semur-en-Auxois, in Burgundy. His family was ancient and noble, and his father, an eminent lawyer, and a member of the parliament of Burgundy, wasa man of worth and learning. Respecting the time of his birth, all his biographers differ. Peter Burman, who has compared their differences, justly thinks it very strange that so many persons who were his contemporaries and knew him intimately, should not have ascertained the exact dates either of his birth or death. The former, however, we presume may be fixed either in 1593 or 1594. He was educated at first solely by his father, who taught him Latin and Greek with astonishing success. At the age of ten he was able to translate Pindar very correctly, and wrote Greek and Latin verses. At the age of eleven, his father wished to send him for farther education to the Jesuits’ college at Dijon, not to board there, but to attend lessons twice a day, and improve them at his lodgings. In this scheme, however, he was disappointed. His mother, who was a protestant, had not only inspired Claude with a hatred of the Jesuits, but encouraged him to write satires against the order, which he did both in Greek and Latin, and entertained indeed throughout life the same aversion to them. Having refused therefore to comply with his father’s request m this respect, his mothef proposed to send him to Paris, where her secret wish was that he should be confirmed in her religion. This being complied with, he soon formed an acquaintance with Casaubon and some other learned men in that metropolis, who were astonished to find such talents and erudition in a mere boy. During his residence here he conversed much with the clergy of the reformed church, and being at length determined to make an open avowal of his attachment to protestantism, he asked leave of his father to go to Heidelberg, partly that he might apply to the study of the law, but principally that he might be more at his freedom in religious matters. Baillet calls this a trick of his new preceptors, who wished to persuade Salmasius’s father that Paris, with respect to the study of the law, was not equal to Heidelberg, where was the celebrated Denis Godefroi, and an excellent library.

, a learned English divine, was the eldest son of Dr. Samuel Salter, prebendary of Norwich, and archdeacon of Norfolk, by Anne-Penelope, the daughter of Dr. John Jeffery, archdeacon of Norwich. He was educated for some time in the free-school of that city, whence he removed to that of the Charter-house, and was admitted of Bene't-college, Cambridge, June 30, 1730, under the tuition of Mr. Charles Skottowe. Soon after his taking the degree of B. A. in 1733, he was chosen into a fellowship, and took his master’s degree in 1737. His natural and acquired abilities recommended him to sir Philip Yorke, then lord-chief-jqstice of the King’s-bench, and afterwards earl of Hardwicke, for the instruction of his eldest son the second earl, who, with three of his brothers, in compliment to abp. Herring, was educated at that college. As soon as that eminent lawyer was made Jordehancellor, he appointed Mr. Salter his domestic chaplain, and gave him a prebend in the church of Gloucester, which he afterwards exchanged for one in that of Norwich. About the time of his quitting Cambridge, he was one of the writers in the “Athenian Letters.” Soon after the chancellor gave Mr. Salter the rectory of Burton Goggles, in the county of Lincoln, in 1740; where he went to reside soon after, and, marrying Miss Seeker, a relation of the then bishop of Oxford, continued there till 1750, when he was nominated minister of Great Yarmouth by the dean and chapter of Norwich. Here he performed the duties of that large parish with great diligence, till his promotion to the preachership at the Charter-house in January 1754, some time before which (in July, 1751), abp. Herring had honoured him with the degree of D. D. at Lambeth. In 1756, he was presented by the lord-chancellor to the rectory of St. Bartholomew near the Royal Exchange, which was the last ecclesiastical preferment he obtained; but in Nov. 1761, he succeeded Dr. Bearcroft as master of the Charter-house, who had been his predecessor in the preachership. While he was a member of Bene't college, he printed Greek Pindaric odes on the nuptials of the princes of Orange and Wales, and a copy of Latin verses on the death of queen Caroline. Besides a sermon preached on occasion of a music-meeting at Gloucester, another before the lord-mayor, Sept. 2, 1740, on the anniversary of the fire of London, a third before the sons of the clergy, 1755, which was much noticed at the time, and underwent several alterations before it was printed; and one before the House of Commons, Jan. 30, 1762; he published “A complete Collection of Sermons and Tracts” of his grandfather Dr. Jeffery, 1751, in 2 vols. 8vo, with his life prefixed, and a new edition of “Moral and Religious Aphorisms,” by Dr. Whichcote, with large additions of some letters that passed between him and Dr. Tuckney, “concerning the Use of Reason in Religion,” &c. and a biograpiiical preface, 1751, 8vo. To these may be added, “Some Queries relative to the Jews, occasioned by a late sermon,” with some other papers occasioned by the “Queries,” published the same year. In 1773 jmd 1774, he revised through the press seven of the celebrated “Letters of Ben Mordecai;” written by the rev. Henry Taylor, of Crawley in Hants. In 1776, Dr. Salter printed for private use, “The first 106 lines of the First Book of the Iliad; nearly as written in Homer’s Time and Country;” and printed also in that year, “Extract from the Statutes of the House, and Orders of the Governors, respecting the Pensioners or poor Brethren” (of the Charterhouse), a large single sheet in folio; in 1777, he corrected the proof-sheets of Bentley’s “Dissertation on Phalaris;” and not long before his death, which happened May 2, 1773, he printed also an inscription to the memory of his parents, an account of all which may be seen in the “Anecdotes of Bowyer.” Dr. Salter was buried, by his own express direction, in the most private manner, in the common burial-ground belonging to the brethren of the Charter-house.

, in Latin Sarravius, a learned French lawyer, was born towards the close of the sixteenth century, of a noble family, and educated by his father, who was a man of letters, with the greatest care. To the study of the law, he joined a taste for polite literature, philosophy, and criticism, wrote elegantly in Latin, and was an excellent Greek scholar. He had perused the classics with great attention; and some Latin and French verses which he wrote, show that he had formed his taste on the best models. He practised at the bar at Rouen, but was an enemy to litigious suits, and always endeavoured to prevent his clients from corning into court, while reconciliation was possible. He lived in intimacy and correspondence with the most learned men of his time, particularly Salmasius, Grotius, and our archbishop Usher. It is not much praise to add after this, that he had Christina queen of Sweden for a correspondent. He was of the protestant religion, and appears to have been displeased with some symptoms of what he thought lukewarm ness in his friend Grotius, and wished him to be more decided. Sarrau died May 30, 1651, advanced in years, and was lamented in poems and eloges by many learned contemporaries. He published the collection of Grotius’s correspondence entitled “Grotii epistolsc ad Gallos,” and his own Latin letters were published in 1654, 8vo, and reprinted at Utrecht with the letters of Marquard Gudius, in 1697, 4to, and again at Leyden by Peter Burman in 1711, who has inserted some of them in his valuable “Sylloge.” They contain many particulars of the literary history of the times. He appears to have been an exceeding admirer of Salmasius.

, a very celebrated preacher, was the son of an eminent protestant lawyer, and was born at Nismes in 1677. His father retired, after the repeal of the edict of Nantz, to Geneva, at which place he died. Saurin made no small progress in his studies, but abandoned them for some time, that he might follow arms. In 1694, he made a campaign as a cadet in lord Galloway’s company, and soon afterwards procured a pair of colours. But as soon as the duke of Savoy had concluded a peace with France, Saurin quitted a profession for which he never was designed; and, on his return to Geneva again, applied himself to philosophy and divinity, under Turretin and other professors. In 1700, he visited both Holland and England. In this last country he remained five years, and preached among the French refugees in London. Here also he married in 1703, and returned to the Hague in 1705. Soon after he became pastor to the church of French refugees, who were permitted to assemble in the chapel belonging to the palace of the princes of Orange at the Hague, in which he officiated during the remainder of his life. When the princess of Wales, afterwards queen Caroline, passed through Holland on her way to England, Saurin had the honour of paying his respects to her, and she, upon her return, desired Dr. Boulter, the preceptor to prince Frederic, the father of the present king, to write to Saurin, to draw up a treatise “on the education of princes.” The work was done, but never printed, and the author received a handsome present from the princess, and afterwards a pension from George II. to whom he dedicated a volume of his sermons. Saurin died Dec. 30, 1730. He possessed great talents, with a fine address, and a strong, clear, and harmonious voice, while his style was pure, unaffected, and eloquent. His principles were what are called moderate Calvinism. Five volumes of his sermons have made their appearance at different times; the first in 1708, the second in 1712, the third some years after, the fourth in 1722, and the fifth in 1725. Since his death, the sermons relating to the passion of Jesus Christ, and other subjects, were published in two volumes. In 1727 he published “The State of Christianity in France.”

, an eminent lawyer in the seventeenth century, was a member of Magdalen college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M.A. in 1655,. and was the same year admitted ad eundem at Oxford. He was afterwards a benefactor to the library of his college. After studying law at the Inner Temple, he was admitted to the bar, and had a large share of practice fit London, and on the Oxford circuit. In 1661 he was knighted, and in Feb. 1680, was appointedattorney-general, As a lawyer he formed himself after the lord chief justice Hale, under whom he practised, and of whom he was a just admirer. Like that excellent person, he was a man of general learning, and, according to Granger, of an integrity that nothing could corrupt; but bishop Burnet represents him as a dull hot man, and forward to serve all the designs of the court. Had this been always the case, however, king James would not have dismissed him from the office of attorney general, which he did in 1687, because he perceived that sir Robert could not have been prevailed upon to njould the laws to such purposes as were never intended by the legislatureOn the other hand, Granger allows that he was justly censured for his harsh treatment of lord Russel on his trial, and it is certain that he supported some of king James’s arbitrary measures, being the manager in depriving the city of London of its charter. At the time of the revolution, he sat as member of parliament for the university of Cambridge, and was expelled the house for being concerned, as attorney-general, in the prosecution of sir Thomas Armstrong, who was executed for being one of the conspirators in the Rye-house plot. In the next sessions he was re-chosen, and appears to have sat quietly for the remainder of his life. He died in 1692, at Highclear in Hampshire, where he had an estate, and rebuilt the parish church. His only daughter married the earl of Pembroke, and died in 1706. Under his name, and those of Heneage Finch, sir George Treby, and Henry Pollexfen, were published in 1690, folio, “Pleadings and arguments with other proceedings in the court of king’s bench upon the Quo Warranto, touching the charter of the city of London, with the judgment entered thereupon.”

* Francis Spira was a lawyer of great plied. Shortly after he fell into * reputation at Cittadella in the Venetian deep melancholy, lost his health, and State, at the beginning of the sixteenth was removed to Padua for the adcentury. He had imbibed the prin- vice of physicians and divines but ciples of 'he Reformation, and was ac- his disorders augmented. The recused before John de la Casa, arch- cantation, which he said he had made bishop of Benevento, the pope’s nun- from cowardice and interest, filled his cio at Venice. He made some con- mind with continual horror and remorse, cessions, and asked pardon of the pa- and no means being found to restore pal minister for hi* errors. But the either his health or peace of mind, be nuncio insisted upon a public recanta- fell a victim to his miserable situation tion. Spira was exceedingly averse to in 1548. Collier’s Diet. art. Spira. this measure but at the pressing in- There have been many editions of a stances of his wife and his friends, who “Life of Spira” published in England represented to him, that tie must lose and Scotland, as a “warning to aposhis practice and ruin his affairs by tales.” persisting against it, he at last comchair; but after he had taught for some time at Geneva, a fire broke out in his neighbourhood, by. which his house was consumed, and he himself reduced to great distress. At this time flourished at Augsburg that famous mercantile family, the. Fuggers. Ulric Fugger, its then representative, a man possessed of prodigious wealth, and a munificent patron of learned men, having heard of the misfortune which had befallen Mr. Scrimzeor, immediately sent him a pressing invitation to accept an asylum beneath his roof till his affairs could be re-established. Mr. Scrimzeor, gladly availing himself of such a hospitable kindness, lost no time in going to Germany.

, a celebrated lawyer in France, who flourished at the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth centuries, was descended of a good family in the Vendomois. In 1589 he was appointed advocate -general to the parliament of Paris, and distinguished himself in that station by his zealous support of the liberties of the Galiican church, and his opposition to the pretensions of the court of Rome. In 1590 he published a work in favour of Henry IV. who had succeeded to the crown, entitled “Vindicire secundum Libertatem Ecclesiue Gallicanse, et Defensio Regii Status Gallj-Francorum sub Henrico IV. Rege.” In 1598, being joined in a commission for the reformation of the university of Paris, he delivered “a remonstrance” on the subject, which was printed. To him also is attributed a work in favour of the republic of Venice in the affairs of the interdict. In the reign of Lewis XIII. at a bed of justice holden in 1620, he made strong and animated remonstrances in favour of the right of parliament to register royal edicts. On another similar occasion, in 1626, for the purpose of compelling the registry of some financial edicts, as he was firmly but respectfully making fresh remonstrances to his majesty, he suddenly fell and expired at the king’s feet.

Mr. Sharp died July 6, 1813, and like Cato, though advanced to the age of 79, he pursued his studies with all the ardour of youth. He was an able linguist, deeply read in theology, and was well acquainted with the scriptures in the original tongues. He was pious and devout, without gloom, strictly moral and temperate, a great lover of music, and cheerful in conversation. His services to humanity were very distinguished, and few persons in private life have deserved a higher or more honourable commemoration. He possessed a very extensive library, in which the theologian, lawyer, classical scholar, politician, antiquary, and orientalist, might find almost every thing of which they could stand in need; and his collection of bibles was esteemed the best in the kingdom; some of these last he gave to the library of the British and Foreign Bible society, of which he was a zealous promoter. The rest, and remaining part of his library, were sold by auction by Messrs. Leigh and Sotheby.

, a clergyman’s son, born at Adstock, in Buckinghamshire, in the seventeenth century, was sent from Winchester school to New college, Oxford, where he was admitted perpetual fellow in 1649. In 1660 he took the degree of doctor of civil law, was prebendary and archdeacon of Winchester, and rector of Bishop’s Waltham, in Hampshire. He died July 11, 1684, having the character of a good divine, civilian, and lawyer,and well skilled in the nature and philosophy of plants. His works are: “The History of the Propagating and Improvement of Vegetables, by the concurrence of Art and Nature, &c.” Oxon. 1666, and 1672, 8vo. “Hypothesis de Officiis secundum Humanae Rationis Dictata, seu Naturae jus, unde Casus omnes Conscientitc quatenus Notiones a Natura supersunt dijudicari possint,” &c. ibid. 1660, 8vo, and 1682. This book was written against Hobbes. “Judicia (seu Legum Censurae) de variis Incontinentioe speciebus.” ibid. 1662, 8vo. “De finibus virtutis Christians,” or the ends of the Christian religion, in ten sermons, 4to.

, an eminent lawyer, was brother to the preceding, but few particulars of his early life are on record. We should suppose him of very different sentiments from his brother. By the appointment of James II. he became recorder of London during the time that the city was deprived of its charter, but when that monarch’s fears compelled him to restore it, sir Bartholomew and the new aldermen were obliged to give place to the old recorder Treby and the legal aldermen. As a pleader he distinguished himself both before the House of Commons and at the bar. He opposed vehemently the Kentish petitioners, and pleaded strenuously as counsel for sir John Fenwick, that his conviction might not be made a pretence for ruining innocence. He died Dec. 1701, and was buried on the 12th of that month at Harrowon-tue-Hill, near to which he had resided, at Pinner-hill.

, an eminent English lawyer, was born at Worcester, March 4, 1650, but no register of his baptism can be found. A house called White Ladies is shown on the east side of the cathedral, and very near St. MichaePs church, where he is said to have been born. His father, John Somers, was an attorney of considerable eminence, and had an estate of about 300l. per ann. at Clifton. During the rebellion he commanded a troop of horse, part of Cromwell’s army, but resigned his commission after the battle of Worcester, and returned to his profession, and, among other business, had the superintendance of the finances and estates of the Talbots, earls of Shrewsbury, which eventually produced a lasting friendship and cordiality between the duke of Shrewsbury and his son, the subject of this article. Of old Mr. Somers the following anecdote has been recorded: “He used to frequent the terms in London, and in his way from Worcester was wont to leave his horse at the George, at Acton, where he often made mention of the hopeful son he had at the Temple. Cobbet, who kept the inn, hearing him enlarge so much in praise of his son, to compliment the old gentleman, cried, ` Why wont you let us see him, Sir?‘ The father, to oblige his merry landlord, desired the young gentleman to accompany him so far on his way home; and being come to the George, took his landlord aside, and said, ’ I have brought him, Cobbet, but you must not talk to him as you do to me; he will not sutler such fellows as you in his company'.” After the restoration Mr. Somers obtained a pardon for what he might have committed while in the republican army, which pardon is still in the possession of the family. He died Jan. 1681, and was buried at Severnstoke, in the county of Worcester; where an elegant Latin inscription, engraved on a marble monument, and written by his son, is still to be seen.

fora g'iceque. Nor did any ri:aii-ever exactness in his family.“ Many are the encomiums which have been bestowed upon this noble and illustrious person. Burnet tells us that” he was very learned in his own profession, with a great deal more learning in other professions; in divinity, philosophy, and history. He had a great capacity for business, with an extraordinary temper; for he was fair and gentle, perhaps to a fault, considering his post: so that he ru:d all the patience and softness, as well as the justice and equity, becoming a great magistrate.“Lord Orford calls him” one of those divine men, who, like a chapel in a palace, remain unprofaned, while all the rest i tyranny, corruption, and folly. All the traditional accounts of him, the historians of the last age, and its best authors, represent him as the most incorrupt lawyer, and the honestest statesman, as a master-orator, a genius of the finest taste, and as a patriot of the noblest and most extensive views; as a man who dispensed blessings by his life, and planned them for posterity.“He was a very great patron of men of parts and learning, and particularly of Mr. Addison, who has drawn his character at large in one of his” Freeholders,“in that of May 4, 1716, where he has chosen -his lordship’s motto for that of his paper,” Prodesse quam conspici.“Lord Somers was one of those who first redeemed Milton’s” Paradise Lost“from that obscurity in which party-prejudice and hatred had suffered it long to lie neglected, and who pointed out the merits of that noble poem. The most unfavourable character of lord Somers is that drawn by Swift, once his friend, as appears by the dedication of the” Tale of a Tub,“if that be Swift’s; and here we may notice that lord Somers’s biographer, Mr. Cooksey, offers some arguments, and combines some facts, to prove that this satire was the production of his lordship, and of his gay young friend lord Shrewsbury. The characters of Peter, Jack, and Martin, are said to have been sketched from living persons, and these sketches of character, after many years remaining in ms. and passing through the hands of lord Shaftesbury and sir William Temple, are said to have been published by dean Swift. That this work was the sportive production of Mr. Somers,” I have no doubt,“says Mr. Cooksey,” from the private tradition of the family, and drawn by him from real life, and originals within his own observation.“Blurton, the uncle of Mr. Somers, a good and pious man, furnished, it is said, the portrait of the church of England man. The character of Jack, the Calvinist, exhibited that of his grandfather, Somers, who was so devoted an admirer of Richard Baxter, of presbyterian memory, as to be induced to spend most of his latter days with him at Kidderminster, and to direct his remains to be deposited under a cross in the church-yard there, as he supposed the ground hallowed by die sanctity of Baxter. Peter had his lineaments from father Petre, the Jesuit. Lord Somers’s later biographer, Mr. Maddock, after examining the probability of this story, discredits it, and leaves the” Tale of a Tub" the property of its generally reputed author, dean Swift; and most readers, we apprehend, will be more inclined to acquiesce in the opinion of Mr. Maddock than in that of Mr. Cooksey.

The other works attributed to lord Somers, with more or less authority, are, 1. “Dryden’s Satire to his Muse;” but this has been disputed. Mr. Malone says, the author of this severe attack on Dryden has never been discovered. Pope assures us that lord Somers “was wholly ignorant of it;” but, says Mr. Maione, “if Somers had written any part of this libel (we cannot suppose him to have written the scandalous part of it) thirty years before he was acquainted with Pope, is it probable that he would have made a young author of four-and-twenty the depositary of his secret? Two years before this satire was published, he had appeared as a poet; and near two hundred lines of it, that is, nearly two parts out of three, are a political encomium and vindication of the whigs, without any offensive personality, couched in such moderate poetry as is found in Somers’s acknowledged poetical productions.” Lord Somers’s other and acknowledged poems were, 2. “Translation of the Epistle of Dido to Æneas.” 3. “Translation of Ariadne to Theseus.” Of the prose kind were, 4. “Translation of Plutarch’s life of Alcibiades.” 5. “A just and modest Vindication of the proceedings of the two last Parliaments,” 1681, 4to, first written by Algernon Sidney, but ncic-draivn by Somers, published in Baldwin’s collection of pamphlets in the reign of Charles II. The two following are doubtful: 6. “The Security of Englishmen’s Lives, or the trust, power, and duty of the Grand Juries of England explained according to the fundamentals of the English government, &c.”1682, and 1700. 7. “Lord Somers’s Judgment of whole kingdoms in the power, &c. of Kings,” 1710, 8vo, but bearing no resemblance to his style or manner. With more certainty we may add, 8. “A Speech at the conference on the word Abdicated,'” in the General Dictionary, and probably published separately. 9. “Another on the same occasion.” 10. “Speeches at the trial of lord Preston.” 11. “His letter to king William on the Partition-treaty.” 12. “His answer to his Impeachment.” 13. “Extracts from two of his Letters to lord Wharton.” 14. “Addresses of the Lords in answer to Addresses of the Commons.” 15. “The Argument of the lord keeper Somers on his giving judgment in the Banker’s Case, delivered in the exchequer chamber, July 23, 1696.” He is supposed likewise to have written “The preface to Dr. Tindal’s Rights of the Christian Church,” a “Brief History of the Succession, collected out of the records, written for the satisfaction of the E. of H.” This was in favour of the attempt to exclude the duke of York, and was re-printed in 1714. The Mss. of this able statesman and lawyer filled above sixty folio volumes, which were destroyed by fire in Lincoln’s Inn, in 1752. Some remains, which the fire had spared, were published by lord Hardwicke in 1778, 4to, entitled “State Papers, from 1501 to 1726.” This noble editor informs us that the treatise on Grand Jurors, the Vindication of the last Parliament of Charles II. above-mentioned, and the famous last Speech of king William, were all found in the hand-writing of lord Somers. The “Somers Tracts,” so frequently referred to, are a collection of scarce pieces in four sets of four volumes each, 4to, published by Cogan from pamphlets chiefly collected by lord Somers. His lordship left a large and well-chosen library of books, and many curious Mss. Of this collection Whiston, the bookseller, gives the following account " Sir Joseph Jekyll, master of the rolls, married one of his sisters the other was married to

Just before the Restoration, he was imprisoned in the castle of Deal, for endeavouring to procure hands to petition for a free parliament. In 1660, he was made master of St. John’s hospital, in the suburbs of Canterbury; and about the same time auditor of Christ-church, in that city. The same year he published, in quarto, “A treatise of Gnvel-kind, both name and thing, shewing the true etymology and derivation of the one; the nature, antiquity, and original, of the other; with sundry emergent observations, both pleasant and profitable to be known of Kentishtnen and others, especially such as are studious either of the ancient custom, or the common law of this kingdom.” In this work he shewed himself an absolute civilian, and a complete common lawyer, as well as a profound antiquary. This was his last publication: he left behind him many observations in manuscript, and some treatises, one of which, “of the Roman ports and forts in Kent,” was published at Oxford, 1693, 8vo, by James Brome, M. A. rector of Cheriton, and chaplain to the Cinque-ports and “Julii Caesaris Portus Iccius illustratus a Somnero, Du Fresne, et Gibson,” was printed at the same place, 1624, 8vo. To the former is prefixed his life by White Kennet, afterwards bishop of Peterborough. These works were parts of an intended history of the antiquities of Kent.

, an historian, poet, and divine of the sixteenth century, was born in Dublii^ probably about 1545 or 1546. His father James Stanyhurst was a lawyer, recorder of Dublin, and speaker of the House of Commons in several parliaments. He published; in Latin, “Piae Orationes” “Ad Corsagiensem Decanum Epistoke,” and three speeches, in English, which he delivered as speaker, at the beginning of the parliaments of the 3d and 4th Philip and Mary, and the 2d and llth of Elizabeth. He died Dec. 27, 1573, leaving two sons, Walter and Richard. Of Walter our only information is, that he translated “Innocentins de contemptu Mundi.”

, an eminent lawyer in the sixteenth century, was the son of William Staunford, of London, mercer, and the grandson of Richard Staunford of Rowley in Staffordshire. He was born in 1509, at Hadley in Middlesex, where his father had purchased some property, and had married a London lady of the name of Gedney. After studying for some time at Oxford, he applied to municipal law in Gray’s Inn, and soon acquired reputation for knowledge of his profession. In 1545, he was chosen autumn-reader to this society, but did not read until Lent following, owing, as Wood says, to the plague: the year after he was appointed attorney-general. In 1551 he was double Lent reader at Gray’s-inn, made serjeant at law the next year, and queen’s serjeant in 1553, when Mary came to the throne, as he was a zealous adherent to her religion. In 1554 he became a judge of the common-pleas, and the same year received the honour of knighthood. He died Aug. 28, 1553, and was buried in Hadley church. While both at the bar and on the bench, he was much esteemed, and obtained no small fame by his writings, which still perpetuate his name. They are 1. “Placita coronac,” in French, 4to, 1557, and often reprinted from that time to 1607. 2. “Exposition of the King’s prerogative,” printed with the former. He left also many Mss. His “Placita corona;” were published in an epitomized form, by Walter Young, Lond. 1660, 8vo. and 1663.

, an eminent painter, was born at Leyden, in 1636, and was successively the disciple of Knufter, Brower, and Van Goyen, who had such a high opinion of him, that he thought he disposed of his daughter prudently when he gave her in marriage to Jan Steen. Jan Steen, however, was not prudent, for, although he had many opportunities of enriching himself, by other occupations as well as by his profession, he frequently was reduced, by an idle, intemperate, and dissipated course of life, to work for the subsistence of himself and his family. He had a strong manly style of painting, which might become even the design of Raphael, and he showed the greatest skill in composition, and management of light and shadow, as well as great truth in the expression and character of his figures. One of his capital pictures is a mountebank attended by a number of spectators, in which the countenances are wonderfully striking, full of humour, and uncommon variety. Houbraken mentions another remarkable picture painted by this master, representing a wedding, consisting of the old parents, the bride, the bridegroom, and a lawyer or notary. The notary is described as thoroughly engaged in attending to the words which he was to write down; the bridegroom appears in a violent agitation, as if dissatisfied with the match; and the bride seems to be in tears every character evidencing the ready and humorous invention of the artist. Houbraken also mentions a third picture, equally excellent, representing the funeral of a quaker; in which each face is distinguished by a peculiarly humorous cast of features, and the whole has a wonderful air of nature and probability. In designing his figures he preserved a proper distinction of the ranks and conditions of the persons introduced in his subject, by their forms, their attitudes, their air of expression; and in this respect appears worthy of being studied by other painters. His works did not bear an extraordinary price during his life, as he painted only when he was necessitous, and sold his pictures to answer his immediate demands. But after his death they rose amazingly in their value, and are rarely to be purchased, few paintings bearing a higher price, as well on account of their excellence as of their scarcity. He died in 1689, aged fifty-three, but Houbraken fixes his death in 1678, aged forty-two, eleven years earlier than other writers.

, an able lawyer, was born in London in 1696, according to the English inscription in Leyton church, where he was buried; but the Latin one says that he was only forty-nine years old at his death in 1754, and consequently must have been born in 1705. We are rather inclined to think the first date the correct one. Having chosen the law as a profession, he arrived, by great natural abilities, and unwearied application, at such eminence, that, in 1735, he was appointed one of his majesty’s counsel learned in the law; and in the following year, solicitor-general. While in this office, he was so highly esteemed by the citizens of London, that, in 1739, they chose him their recorder. In 1742 he resigned these offices, and his majesty, as a peculiar mark of his regard, honoured him with a patent, to take place for life next to the attorney-general; and on Jan. 11, 1749, advanced him to the office of master of the Rolls; the revenue of which, soon after his promotion, received from parliament, unsought by him, a very considerable and honourable augmentation. He die:i May Is, 17'54, leaving behind him the character of an able and upright lawyer, and a man of great personal virtues in private life.

, a learned lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born about 1541, and is said by Mr. Strype to have been a member of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. He removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn for the study of the law, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned and ingenious men of that society. He became a puritan in consequence, as some suppose, of his connection with the celebrated Thomas Cartu right, who had married his sister. About 1579, when the report of the queen’s intended marriage with the duke of Anjou, brother to the king of France, had created an extraordinary alarm, lest such a match should eventually be injurious to the Protestant establishment, Mr. Stubbs published a satirical work against it, entitled “The Discovery of a gaping gulph wherein England is like to be swallowed up by another French marriage,” &c. This highly incensed the queen, whose passions ha -I always much -way over her actions, and too much over htr ministers, and she immediately issued out a proclamation against it; and the autuor and printer, or bookseller, being discovered, they were soon apprehended, and sentence given against them, that their right hands should be cut off, according to an act of Philip and Mary, “against the authors and publishers of seditious writings.” When Stubbs came to receive his punishment, which was inflicted with great barbarity, with a butcher’s knife and mallet, he immediately took off his hat with his left hand, and cried “God save the queen!”

As he lived much in solitude, he frequently amused himself with writing; and it is very remarkable, that although his mind was greatly depressed, and his principal enjoyment was at an end when Mrs. Johnson died, yet there is aji air of levity and trifling in some of the pieces he wrote afterwards, that is not to be found in any other: such in particular are his “Directions to Servants,” and several of his letters to his friend Dr. Sheridan. In 1733, when the attempt was made to repeal the test act in Ireland, the Dissenters often affected to call themselves brother-protestants, and fellow-christians, with the members of the established church. Upon this occasion the dean wrote a short copy of verses, which so provoked one Bettesworth, a lawyer, and member of the Irish parliament, that he swore, in the hearing of many persons, to revenge himself either by murdering or maiming the author; and, for this purpose, he engaged his footman, with two ruffians, to secure the dean wherever he could be found. This being known, thirty of the nobility and gentry within the liberty of St. Patrick’s waited upon the dean in form, and presented a paper subscribed with their names, in which they solemnly engaged, in behalf of themselves and the rest of the liberty, to defend his person and fortune, as the friend and benefactor of his country. When this paper was delivered, Swift was in bed, deaf and giddy, yet made a shift to dictate a proper answer. These fits of deafness and giddiness, which were the effects of his surfeit before he was twenty years old, became more frequent and violent in proportion as he grew into years: and in 1736, while he was writing a satire on the Irish parliament, which he called “The Legion Club,” he was seized with one of these fits, the effect of which was so dreadful, that he left the poem unfinished, and never afterwards attempted a composition, either in verse or prose, that required a course of thinking, or perhaps more than one sitting to finish.

, an English lawyer and antiquary, the son of Bartholomew Tate, of Delapre, in Northamptonshire, was born in that county in 1560, and entered of Magdalen college, Oxford, in 1577. After some application to study he left the university without taking a degree, went to the Middle Temple, and after his admission to the bar, acquired great reputation as a counsellor, not only learned in the law, but as a good antiquary, and Saxon scholar. He had a seat in parliament about the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, and in the 5th James I. was Lent-reader of the Middle Temple, and about that time became one of the justices itinerant for Wales. He died Nov. 16, 1616, leaving various manuscripts on legal antiquities, the fate of which seems unknown, but the following have been printed in Gutch’s “Collectanea Curiosa:” 1. “The antiquity, use, and privileges of Cities, Boroughs, and Towns.” 2. “The antiquity, use, and ceremonies of lawful Combats in England.” And in Hearne’s “Curious Discourses” are, 3. “Of Knights made by Abbots. 4.” Questions about the ancient Britons.“5.” Of the antiquity of Arms in England.“6.” Of the antiquity, variety and ceremonies of Funerals in England“and 7.” The antiquity, authority, and succession of the High Steward of England."

, the first of a literary family of considerable note in France, was the eldest of the four sons of Peter Terrasson, a lawyer of Lyons, and became a priest of the oratory, preacher to the king, and afterwards preacher to the court of Lorrain. His pulpit services were much applauded, and attended by the most crowded congregations. His exertions during Lent in the metropolitan church at Paris threw him into an illness of which he died April 25, 1723. His “Sermons” were printed in 1726, 4 vols. 12mo, and reprinted in 1736.

, Lord Thurlow, a distinguished statesman and lawyer, was the second son of the rev. Thomas Thurlow, rector of Ashfield in Suffolk, and was born about 1732. He was entered of, and continued for some time at Caiut college, Cambridge, whery vulgar report has made him idle and dissipated. Of this we have no proof, nor of his having been equally careless of his studies after he entered the society of the Middle Temple. Lord Thurlow may have been indebted to what are called lucky coincidences for some of his promotions, but as he was always found amply qualified for the high stations he held, he could not have much neglected the cultivation of his natural abilities, or been remiss in accumulating that knowledge by which alone he could rival his contemporaries. He appears to have been called to the bar in 1758, and must have rapidly attained distinction in his profession, for, in three years after, chiefly owing to the talent he displayed in the Douglas cause, he was advanced to the rank of king’s counsel. His voice, person, and manner, were not ill calculated to give his efforts an air of consequence at the bar, and his practice became extensive. In March 1770 he was appointed solicitor-general, and in. June 1771 attorney-general. He now sat in parliament for the borough of Tamworth, where he had many opportunities of justifying the choice of his patrons, and of creating that species of character and interest which generally leads to the highest legal appointments. As a politician, he uniformly, and with commanding vigour, suppotted the measures adopted with respect to America, Sec. during lord North’s administration. In June 1778, he was appointed to succeed lord Apsley, as lord high chancellor of Great Britain, and the same day was raised to the peerage by the title of Lord Thurlow of Ashfield in Suffolk. This office he resigned in April 1783, when the seals were put into commission, but was re-appointed when Mr. Pitt was nominated prime minister in December following. He again resigned them in June 1792, and on the 12th of that month was created Lord Thurlow of Thurlow in Suffolk, with a collateral remainder of this honour to the issue male of his late two brothers, the bishop of Durham, and John Thurlow of Norwich. After this retirement, till a short period before his death, he took an active part, and had great weight, in the House of Lords.; and having retained complete possession of his faculties, with accumulated wisdom and experience, his latter speeches were often more the subject of admiration, than any that had been remembered in his earlier days. He died in the seventy-fourth year of his age, Sept. 12, 1806, without male issue.

, or Tiraquellus, a learned French lawyer of the sixteenth century, was a native of Poitou, and became a counsellor in the parliament of Bour­*Jeaux, and afterwards in that of Paris. He laboured very diligently to drive chicanery from the bar, and being employed by Francis I. and Henry II. in many affairs of consequence, approved himself in all things a man of strict and singular integrity. Though he must have been much employed in public business, he was so diligent with his pen that his works amount to seven volumes in folio. Frank. 1597. Tiraqueau died, at a very advanced age, in 1574. Among his numerous works, those particularly noticed are, 1. “Commentaries on Alexander ab Alexandro,” published separately, in two volumes folio, Leyden, 1673. 2. “Commentarius de Nobilitate et jure primogenitorum,” Leyden, 1617, folio. He was a married man, and it is said that he produced a book and a child every year, till there were twenty of each, or as some say thirty. This, with the circumstance of his being a water-drinker, occasioned the following jocular epitaph: “Hie jacet, qui aquam bibendo viginti liberos suscepit, viginti libros edidit. Si merum bibisset, totum orbem implevisset.”

, an Italian prelate and biographer, was born at Padua, Nov. 17, 1597, of a noble family, originally of Lucca. He was instructed in Greek, Latin, and logic, by the learned divine and lawyer, Benedetti, of Legnano, and afterwards entered the congregation of the regular canons of St. George, in Alga, where he studied philosophy and theology, and received the degree of doctor in the latter faculty at Padua, in 1619. He would then have made profession, but the rules of the congregation not permitting it, he employed himself in the composition of his various works. At length his merit advanced him to the first situations in his order; and when he went to Rome, as visitor, he was very favourably received by many persons of eminence, and especially by pope Urban VIII. who would have appointed him to a bishopric in the island of Candy, but at his own request this was exchanged for the see of Citta Nuova, in Istria, to which he was consecrated in 1642. Study and the care of his diocese occupied the whole of his time until his death in 1654, in the fifty-seventh year of his age.

When released from imprisonment, he attempted to be called to the bar, but was rejected. His friends are willing to impute his rejection to jealousy, but for this there seems no foundation. His general character, and his clerical orders, of which he could not divest himself, afford a more reasonable excuse for the conduct of the benchers. It may be supposed, however, that this event would exasperate his antipathies. “He could not be a lawyer, and therefore he resisted the law, and reviled those who administered it.” A habit of hatred, if we may so speak, had grown up with Mr. Tooke, and was undoubtedly strengthened by his numerous disappointments, and that mediocrity of rank, to which with all his talents and all his bustle, he was confined in the political world. The same temper rendered him unjust to almost every species of excellence in his contemporaries. “He hated Dr. Johnson, he hated Mr. Burke, he hated lord Mansfield, he hated Mr. Pitt, he hated Mr. Fox, and he spoke of them without any of that respect or forbearance which great talents and high station, and the esteem of the greatest part of the world, generally extort from less resolute or less acrimonious adventurers. The Ishmael of literature and politics, his hand was against every man, and every man’s hand against his.”

, a learned judge, was born, as Wood thinks, at or near Plympton in Devonshire in 1644, and was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, in 1660. After studying some time here, he left college without taking a degree, as, we have repeatedly had occasion te observe, was usual with young gentlemen intended for the law; and went to the Inner Temple. After being admitted to the bar, he had much practice, and was accounted a good common lawyer. In 1678 and 1679, he sat in parliament as representative for Plympton, and in the lastmentioned year was appointed chairman of the committee of secrecy for the investigation of the popish plot, and was in 1680 one of the managers in the impeachment of lord Stafford. In December of the same year, when sir George Jeffries was dismissed from the recordership of London, Mr. Treby was elected in his room, and in January 1681 the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood: but when the quo warranto issued, and the city charter, for which he pleaded along with Pollexfen, was withheld, he was deprived of the recordership in Oct. 1685. On the revolution, king William restored him to this office, and he had the honour of addressing his majesty, in the absence of the lord mayor, sir John Chapman, who was confined by sickness. His very able speech on this occasion was published in the “Fourth collection of papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” 1683, 4to, and in Bohun*s “History of the Desertion,” 1689, 4to, In March 1688 he was made solicitor -general, and the following year attorney-general. In April 1692 he was called to the rank of serjeant, and in May following was promoted to be chief justice of the Common Pleas, on which he resigned the office of recorder. This learned and upright lawyer died in March 1701-2, aged fifty-six. His son and grandson, of the same names, represented Plympton and Dartmouth, and the latter was master of the household to George II. and a lord of the treasury.

, an eminent Roman lawyer, and the object of equal praise and censure, was a native of Side in Pamphylia, and esteemed a man of extensive learning. He is said to have written, both in prose and verse, on many subjects of philosophy, politics, astronomy, &c. but none of his writings nave descended to us. From the bar of the praetorian praefects, he raised himself to the honours of questor, consul, and master of the offices. His knowledge of the Roman law induced Justinian the emperor to place him at the head of a committee of seventeen lawyers, who were to exercise an absolute jurisdiction over the works of their predecessors, from which they compiled the Digest or Pandects, which go by that emperor’s name. Tribonianus has been represented by some writers as an infidel, and by others as extremely avaricious, and tampering with the laws to gratify this propensity. The former of these charges Mr. Gibbon very naturally wishes to impute to bigotry, but the latter is generally admitted. His oppressions were at one time so much the subject of complaint as to procure a sentence of banishment, but he was soon recalled, and remained in favour with Justinian for above twenty years. Tribonianus is supposed to have died about the year 546.

, a very learned, and in many respects a very excellent prelate of the church of Rome, was born at Hatchford, near Richmond, Yorkshire, about 1474. He was a natural son of a gentleman named Tunstall or Tonstal, by a lady of the Conyers family. He became a student at Baliol college, Oxford, about 1491, but, on the plague breaking out, went to Cambridge, where he became a fellow of King’s hall, now part of Trinity college. After having for some time prosecuted his studies there, he went to the university of Padua, which was then in high reputation, studied along with Latimer, and took the degree of doctor of laws. According to Godwin, he was by this time a man of extensive learning, a good Hebrew and Greek scholar, an able lawyer and divine, a good rhetorician, and skilled in various branches of the mathematics. These accomplishments, on his return, recommended him to the patronage of archbishop Warham, who constituted him vicar-general or chancellor, in August 1511. The archbishop also recommended him to Henry VIII. and in December of the same year, collated him to the rectory of Harrow-on-the hill, Middlesex; which he held till 1522.

, an Italian historian, poet, and critic, was born at- Florence in 1502. His father, a lawyer, placed him with a master, who reported that he was not fit for literature, and advised him to breed the boy up to merchandise. He was accordingly sent to a counting-­house, and there his masters discovered that he never was without a book, and minded nothing but reading. His father then, after examining him, found that he had been deceived by the school-master, and determined to give his son a learned education, and for that purpose sent him to Padua and Pisa. Unfortunately, however, he prescribed the study of the law, which Varchi relished as little as commerce; and although, out of filial respect, he went through the usual courses, he immediately, on his father’s death, relinquished both the study and practice of the law, and determined to devote all his attention to polite literature. In this he acquired great reputation; but when Florence became distracted by civil commotions, he joined the party in opposition to the Medici family, and was banished. During his exile he resided at Venice, Padua, and Bologna, where his talents procured him many friends; and his works having diffused his reputation more widely, Cosmo de Medicis had the generosity to forgive the hostility he had shewn to his family, and, respecting him as a man of letters, recalled him home, and appointed him his historiographer. In this capacity he recommended him to write the history of the late revolutions in Florence. All this kindness, accompanied with a handsome pension, produced a great change in the mind of the republican Varchi, who became now the equally zealous advocate of monarchy. As soon as he had finished a part of it, he submitted it to the inspection of his patron, and some copies were taken of it. These being seen by soma persons who suspected that he would make free with their characters, or the characters of their friends, they conspired to assassinate the apostate author, as they thought him; and having one night attacked him, left him weltering in his blood, but his wounds were not mortal; and although it is said he knew who the assassins were, he declined appearing against them. He was, however, so much affected by the affair, that he embraced the ecclesiastical profession, and obtained some preferment. He died at Florence in 1565. His history, which extends from 1527 to 1538, was not published until 1721, at Cologne, and reprinted at Leydeu 1723; but both these places are wrong, as both editions were published in Italy. There is a recent edition, Milan, 1803, 5 vols. 8vo. The style, like that of all his works, is pure and elegant, though a little too much elaborated. The facts, of course, are strongly tinctured with an attachment to the house of Medici.

, a learned lawyer, of whom our accounts are very imperfect, was the son and heir of Richard Vernon, esq. of Henbury-hall, Worcestershire, and made a considerable figure in the reigns of queen Anne and George I. representing the borough of Whitechurch, Hampshire, in the parliaments called in 1710, 1713, 1714, and 1722. He had been secretary to the unfortunate duke of Monmouth. He died at Twickenham-park, August 22, 1726. His “Law Reports” were printed by order of the court of chancery, in 2 vols. fol. 1726, 1728, under the title of the “Reports” of Thomas Vernon, esq. “of Cases argued and adjusted in the high court of chancery, from 33 Car. II. to 5 Geo. I.” Among other eminent authorities, the late lord Kenyon took occasion to observe, that it had been an hundred and an hundred times lamented that Vernon’s Reports were published in a very inaccurate manner; there were some private reasons, said his lordship, assigned for that, which he would not mention. Mr. Vernon’s notes were taken for his own use, and never intended for publication. He was, added lord Kenyon, the ablest man in his profession. There being a dispute after Mr. Vernon’s death, whether his Mss. should go to his heir-at-law, or pass under the residuary clause in his will to his legal personal representatives, the court of chancery made an order for the publication of them, under the direction of Mr. Melmoth and Mr. Peere Williams, but as many of the cases have been found inaccurate, and to consist of loose notes only, John Raithby, esq. has lately edited and republished them with great labour, and as he has taken pains to examine all the cases with the register’s book, they cannot fail to be an acceptable offering to the profession. Mr. Raithby 's elaborate edition appeared in 1806 and 1807, 2 vols. 8vo.

This work, on which, Blackstone informs us, he employed above half a century, is styled by Mr. Hargrave an immense body of law and equity, and that learned gentleman recommends it, notwithstanding all its defects and inaccuracies, as a necessary part of every lawyer’s library. He further says, it is indeed a most useful compilation, and would have been infinitely more so, if the author had been less singular and more nice in his arrangement and method, and more studious to avoid repetition; faults which proceeded in a great measure from the author’s error in judgment, in attempting to engraft his own very extensive judgment on that of Mr. Sergeant Rolle. This stupendous work vras reprinted in 1792 and 1794, 24 vols. royal 8vo; it was followed by six supplemental volumes, undertaken by James Edward Watson, Samuel Corny n, James Sedgwick, Henry Alcock, John Wyatt, James Humphreys, Alexander Anstruther, and Michael Nolan, esqrs. who laid them before the public in 1799, 1800, 1801, 1805, and 1806, each gentleman having taken up his own apportioned burthen of the task.

, the greatest literary character which France produced in the last century, was born at Paris, February 20, 1694. His father, Francis Arouet, was “ancien notaire du Chatelet,” and treasurer of the chamber of accounts; his mother, MaryMargaret Daumart. At the birth of this extraordinary man, who lived to the age of eighty-five years and some months, there was little probability of his being ‘reared, and for a considerable time he continued remarkably feeble. In his earliest years he displayed a ready wit and a sprightly imagination: and, as he said of himself, made verses before he was out of his cradle. He was educated under Father Por6, in the college of Louis the Great; and such was his proficiency, that many of his essays are now existing, which, though written when he was between twelve and fourteen, shew no marks of infancy. The famous Ninon de l’Enclos, to whom this ingenious boy was introduced, left him a legacy of 2000 livres to buy him a library. Having been sent to the equity-schools on his quitting college, he was so disgusted with the dryness of the law, that he devoted himself entirely to the Muses. He was admitted into the company of the abb< Chaulieu, the marquis de la Fare, the duke de Sully, the grand prior of Vendo;ne, marshal Villars, and the chevalier du Bouillon; and caught from them that easy taste and delicate humour which distinguished the court of Louis XIV. Voltaire had early imbibed a turn for satire; and, for some philippics against the government, was imprisoned almost a year in the Bastile. He had before this period produced the tragedy of “Oedipus,” which was represented in 1718 with great success; and the duke of Orleans, happening to see it performed, was so delighted, that he obtained his release from prison. The poet waiting on the duke to return thanks: “Be wise,” said the duke, “and I will take care of you.” “I am infinitely obliged,” replied the young man; “but I intreat your royal highness not to trouble yourself any farther about my lodging or board.” His father, whose ardent wish it was that the son should have been an advocate, was present at one of the representations of the new tragedy: he was affected, even to tears, embraced his son amidst the felicitations of the ladies of the court, and never more, from that time, expressed a wish that he should become a lawyer. About 1720, he went to Brussels with Madam de Rupelmonde. The celebrated Rousseau being then in that city, the two poets met, and soon conceived an unconquerable aversion for each other. Voltaire said one day to Rousseau, who was shewing him “An Ode to Posterity,” “This is a letter which will never reach the place of its address.” Another time, Voltaire, having read a satire which Rousseau thought very indifferent, was advised to suppress it, lest it should be imagined that he “had lost his abilities, and preserved only his virulence.” Such mutual reproaches soon inflamed two hearts already sufficiently estranged. Voltaire, on his return to Paris, produced, in 1722, his tragedy of “Mariamne,” without success. His “Artemira” had experienced the same fate in 1720, though it had charmed the discerning by the excellence of the poetry. These mortifications, joined to those which were occasioned by his principles of imprudence, his sentiments on religion, and the warmth of his temper, induced him to visit England, where he printed his “Henriade.” King George I. and particularly the princess of Wales (afterwards queen Caroline) distinguished him by their protection, and obtained for him a great number of subscriptions. This laid the foundation of a fortune, which was afterwards considerably increased by the sale of his writings, by the munificence of princes, by commerce, by a habit of regularity, and by an ceconomy bordering on avarice, which he did not shake off till near the end of his life. On his return to France, in 1728, he placed the money he carried with him from England into a lottery established by M. Desforts, comptroller-general of the finances; he engaged deeply, and was successful. The speculations of finance, however, did not check his attachment to the belles lettres, his darling passion. In 1730, he published “Brutus,” the most nervous of all his tragedies, which was more applauded by the judges of good writing than by the spectators. The first wits of the time, Fontenelle, La Motte, and others, advised him to give up the drama, as not being his proper forte. He answered them by publishing “Zara,” the most affecting, perhaps, of all his tragedies. His “Lettres Philosophiques,” abounding in bold expressions and indecent witticisms against religion, having been burnt by a decree of the parliament of Paris, and a warrant being issued for apprehending the author in 1733, Voltaire very prudently withdrew; and was sheltered by the marchioness du Chatelet, in her castle of Cirey, on the borders of Champagne and Lorraine, who entered with him on the study of the “System” of Leibnitz, and the “Principia” of Newton. A gallery was built, in which Voltaire formed a good collection of natural history, and made a great many experiments on light and electricity. He laboured in the mean time on his “Elements of the Newtonian Philosophy,” then totally unknown in France, and which the numerous admirers of Des Cartes were very little desirous should be known. In the midst of these philosophic pursuits, he produced the tragedy of “Alzira.” He was now in the meridian of his age and genius, as was evident from the tragedy of “Mahomet,” first acted in, 174-1 but it was represented to the “procureur general” as a performance offensive to religion and the author, by order of cardinal Fleury, withdrew it from the stage. “Merope,” played two years after, 1743, gave an idea of a species of tragedy, of which few models have existed. It was at the representation of this tragedy that the pit and boxes were clamorous for a sight of the author; yet it was severely criticised when it came from the press. He now became a favourite at court, through the interest of madam d'Etoile, afterwards marchioness of Pompadour. Being employed in preparing the festivities that were celebrated on the marriage of the dauphin, he attained additional honours by composing “The Princess of Navarre.” He was appointed a gentleman of the bed-chamber in ordinary, and historiographer of France. The latter office had, till his time, been almost a sinecure; but Voltaire, who had written, under the direction of the count d'Argenson, the “History of the War of 1741,” was employed by that minister in many important negociations from 1745 to 1747; the project of invading England in 1746 was attributed to him and he drew up the king ofFrance’s manifesto in favour of the pretender. He had frequently attempted to gain admittance into the academy of sciences, but could not obtain his wish till 1746 , when he was the first who broke through the absurd custom of filling an inaugural speech with the fulsome adulation of Richelieu; an example soon followed by other academicians. From, the satires occasioned by this innovation he felt so much uneasiness, that he was glad to retire with the marchioness du Chateletto Luneville, in the neighbourhood of king Stanislaus. The marchioness dying in 1749, Voltaire returned to Paris, where his stay was but short* Though he had many admirers, he was perpetually complaining of a cabal combined to filch from him that glory of which he was insatiable. “The jealousy and manoeuvres of a court,” he would say, “are the subject of conversation; there is more of them among the literati.” His friends and relations endeavoured in vain to relieve his anxiety, by lavishing commendations on him, and by exaggerating his success. He imagined he should find in a foreign country a greater degree of applause, tranquillity, and reward, and augment at the same time both his fortune and reputation, which were already very considerable. The king of Prussia, who had repeatedly invited him to his court, and who would have given any thing to have got him away from Silesia, attached him at last to his person by a pension of 22,000 livres, and the hope of farther favour . From the particular respect that was paid to him, his time was now spent in the most agreeable manner; his apartments were under those of the king, whom he was allowed to visit at stated hours, to read with him the best works of either ancient or modern authors, and to assist his majesty in the literary productions by which he relieved the cares of government. But this happiness was soon at an end; and Voltaire saw, to his mortification, when it was too late, that, where a man is sufficiently rich to be master of himself, neither his liberty, his family, nor his country, should be sacrificed for a pension. A dispute which our poet had with Manpertuis, the president of the academy at Berlin, was followed by disgrace . It has been said that the king of Prussia dismissed him with this reproof: “I do not drive you away, because I called you hither; I do not take away your pension, because I have given it to you; I only forbid you my presence.” Not a word of this is true; the fact is, that he sent to the king the key of his office as chamberlain, and the cross of the order of merit, with these verses:

The last affair in which Dr. Wallis appears to have been consulted was on the scheme for altering the style, which he opposed on various reasons, and it was accordingly laid aside; but has since been established without any of the inconveniences either in astronomical'calculations, or otherwise, of which he was afraid. Towards the end of his life the curators of the university-press made a collection of his mathematical works, which were printed at Oxford 1699, in three -volumes in folio, with this title, “Johannis Wallis S. T. P. Gedmetriae Professoris Saviliani in celeberrima Academia Oxoniensi, Opera Mathematica, tribus Voluminibus -contenta.” This edition was dedicated to king William III. Dr. Wallis died at the Savilian professor’s house in New" college lane, Oxford, Oct. 28, 1703, in his eighty-eighth year, and was interred in St. Mary’s, where a monument was erected by his son, John Wallis, esq. a barrister. This son was born December the 26th, 1650, and placed by his father in Trinity college, in Oxford, and afterwards admitted of the Inner Temple, London, where he proceeded barrister-at-law February 1, 1681-2. He married Elizabeth daughter of John and Mary Harris, of Soundels, or Soundess, by Nettlebed, in Oxfordshire, afterwards heiress to her brother Taverner Harris, whose mother descended from Richard Taverner, a learned lawyer in king Henry VlII/s time, and high sheriff of the county of Oxford. By this match Mr. Wallis became possessed of a good estate called Soundess. His wife died August the 8th, 1693, leaving three children surviving her, viz. John, Mary, and Elizabeth.

, an English prelate of great abilities and eminence, was born at Newark-upon-Trent, in the county of Nottingham, Dec. 24, 1698. His father was George Warburton, an attorney and town-clerk of the place in which this his eldest son received his birth and education. His mother was Elizabeth, the daughter of William Hobman, an alderman of the same town; and his parents were married about 1696. The family of Dr. Warburton came originally from the county of Chester, where his great-grandfather resided. His grandfather, William Warburton, a royalist during the rebellion, was the first that settled at Newark, where he practised the law, and was coroner of the county of Nottingham. George Warburton, the father, died about 1706, leaving his widow and five children, two sons and three daughters, of which the second son, George, died young; but, of the daughters, one- survived her brother. The bishop received the early part of his education under Mr. Twells, whose son afterwards married his sister Elizabeth; but he was principally trained under Mr. Wright, then master of Okehamschool in Rutlandshire, and afterwards vicar of Campden in Gloucestershire. Here he continued till the beginning of 1714, when his cousin Mr. William Warburton being made head -master of Newark-school, he returned to his native place, and was for a short time under the care of that learned gentleman. During his stay at school, he did not distinguish himself by any extraordinary efforts of genius or application, yet is supposed to have acquired a competent knowledge of Greek and Latin. His original designation was to the same profession as that of his father and grandfather; and he was accordingly placed clerk to Mr. Kirke, an attorney at East Markham in Nottinghamshire, with whom he continued till April 1719, when he was qualified to engage in business upon his own account. He was then admitted to one of the courts at Westminster, and for some years continued the employment of an attorney and solicitor at the place of his birth. The success he met with as a man of business was probably not great. It was certainly insufficient to induce him to devote the rest of his life to it: and it is probable, that his want of encouragement might tempt him to turn his thoughts towards a profession in which his literary acquisitions would be more valuable, and in which he might more easily pursue the bent of his inclination. He appears to have brought from school more learning than was requisite for a practising lawyer. This might rather impede than forward his progress; as it has been generally observed, that an attention to literary concerns, and the bustle of an attorney’s office, with only a moderate share of business, are wholly incompatible. It is therefore no wonder that he preferred retirement to noise, and relinquished what advantages he might expect from continuing to follow the law. It has been suggested by an ingenious writer, that he was for some time usher to a school, but this probably was founded on his giving some assistance to his relation at Newark, who in his turn assisted him in those private studies to which he was now attached; and his love of letters continually growing stronger, the seriousness of his temper, and purity of his morals, concurring, determined him to quit his profession for the church. In 1723 he received deacon’s orders from archbishop Dawes and his first printed work then appeared, consisting of translations from Cæsar, Pliny, Claudian, and others, under the title of “Miscellaneous Translations in Prose and Verse, from Roman Poets, Orators, and Historians,” 12mo. It is dedicated to hig early patron, sir Robert Sutton, who, in 1726, when Mr. Warburton had received priest’s orders from bishop Gibson, employed his interest to procure him the small vicarage of Gryesly in Nottinghamshire. About Christmas, 1726, he came to London, and, while there, was introduced to Theobald, Concanen, and other of Mr. Pope’s enemies, the novelty of whose conversation had at this time many charms for him, and he entered too eagerly into their cabals and prejudices. It was at this time that he wrote a letter to Concanen, dated Jan. 2, 1726, very disrespectful to Pope, which, by accident, falling into the hands of the late Dr. Akenside, was produced to most of that gentleman’s friends, and became the subject of much speculation. About this time he also communicated to Theobald some notes on Shakspeare, which afterwards appeared in that critic’s edition of our great dramatic poet. In 1727, his second work, entitled “A Critical and Philosophical Enquiry into the Causes of Prodigies and Miracles, as related by Historians,” &c. was published in 12mo, and was also dedicated to sir Robert Sutton in a prolix article of twenty pages. In 1727 he published a treatise, under the title of “The Legal Judicature in Chancery stated,” which he undertook at the particular request of Samuel Burroughs, esq. afterwards a master in Chancery, who put the materials into his hands, and spent some time in the country with him during the compilation of the work. On April 25, 1728, by the interest of sir Robert Sutton, he had the honour to be in the king’s list of masters of arts, created at Cambridge on his majesty’s visit to that university. In June, the same year, he was presented by sir Robert Sutton to the rectory of Burnt or Brand Broughton, in the diocese of Lincoln, and neighbourhood of Newark, where he fixed himself accompanied by his mother and sisters, to whom he was ever a most affectionate relative. Here he spent a considerable part of the prime of life in a studious retirement, devoted entirely to letters, and there planned, and in part executed, some of his most important works. They, says his biographer, who are unacquainted with the enthusiasm which true genius inspires, will hardly conceive the possibility of that intense application, with which Mr. Warburton pursued his studies in this retirement. Impatient of any interruptions, he spent the whole of his time that could be spared from the duties of his parish, in reading and writing. His constitution was strong, and his temperance extreme; so that he needed no exercise but that of walking; and a change of reading, or study, was his only amusement.

, a learned English lawyer, and one of the judges of the supreme court of judicature at Bengal, was born November 25,1746, in the parish of Great Chishill, in the county of Essex. He was the eldest son. of the Rev. James Watson, D. D. an eminent presbyteriau minister, then pastor of a dissenting congregation in that place, as well as of Melbourne, in the county of Cambridge, fey Anne his wife, the daughter of John Hanchet, esq. of Crissel Grange, in the county of Essex. Though the retired situation in which this family lived, and the talents of the father, were very favourable to a domestic education, yet the son was very judiciously placed under the care of the Rev. Mr. Banks, a clergyman in that neighbourhood, under whose tuition he was prepared for the peculiar advantages of a public school. Accordingly, Dr. Watson having discovered the progress that his beloved child had made in the elements of language, sent him to the metropolis, and placed him under the care of a person with whom he could confide, that he might be admitted into St. Paul’s school.

, a distinguished antiquary, born in 1700, was regularly bred to the profession of the law: and was admitted an attorney before Mr. Justice Price, June 20, 1724: he lived then in the Old Jewry, but afterwards removed to Budge-row, and thence to Great Queen-street, Lincoln’s-Inn fields. He was peculiarly learned in the records of this kingdom, and particularly able as a parliamentary and constitutional lawyer. In 1747, he published “Observations on the Course of Proceedings in (he Admiralty-courts,” 8vo. In 1751. he assisted materially in obtaining the charter of incorporation for the Society of Antiquaries, remitting in that business the customary fees which were due to him as a solicitor; and on many other occasions proved himself a very useful member of that learned body. Purchasing a house and estate at Busbridge, Surrey, where he resided in the summer, it ga?e him 'an influence in the borough of Haslemere, for which he was chosen member in 1754, and again in 1761. He became, under the patronage of lord chancellor Hardwicke, secretary of bankrupts in the Court of Chancery, and was appointed one of the joint solicitors of the treasury in 1756. In July 1758, he obtained a silver medal from the Society of Arts for having planted a large quantity of acorns for timber. In 1760 he had the honour of presenting the famous Heraclean table to the king of Spain, by the hands of the Neapolitan minister, from whom he received in return (in November that year) a diamond-ring, worth 300l. In April 17G3, the period of Mr. Wilkes’ s being apprehended for writing “The North Briton,” No. 45, Mr. Webb became officially a principal actor in that memorable prosecution, but did not altogether approve of the severity with which it was carried on; and printed, on that occasion, “A Collection of Records about General Warrants;” and also “Observations upon discharging Mr. Wilkes from the Tower.” He held the office of solicitor to the Treasury till June 1765, and continued secretary of bankrupts till lord Northington quitted the seals in 1766. He died at Busbridge, June 22, 1770, aged seventy; and his Library (including that of John Godfrey *, esq. which he had purchased entire) was sold, with his Mss. on vellum, Feb. 25, and the sixteen following days, 1771. A little before his death he sold to the House of Peers thirty ms volumes of the rolls of parliament. His ms& on paper were sold, by his widow and executrix, to the late marquis of Lansdowne, and are now in the British Museum, The coins and medals were sold by auction the same year, three days sale; in which were all the coins and medals found in his collection at the time of his decease; but he had disposed of the most valuable part to different persons. The series of large brass had been picked by a nobleman. The noble series of Roman gold (among which were Pompey, Lepidus, &c.) and the collection of Greek kings and towns, had been sold to Mr. Duane, and afterwards formed part of the valuable museum collected by the late Dr. Hunter. The ancient marble busts, bronzes, Roman earthen-ware, gems, seals, &c. of which there were 96 lots, were sold in the above year. On the death of the late Mrs. Webb, the remainder of the curiosities was sold by Mr. Langford, Mr. Webb’s publications were, 1. “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. William Warburton, M. A. occasioned by some passages in his book, entitled ‘The Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated.’ By a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn,” 1742, 8vo. 2. “Remarks on the Pretender’s Declaration and Commission,” 1745, 8vo. 3. “Remarks on the Pretender’s eldest Son’s second Declaration, dated the 10th of October 1745, by the author of the Remarks on his first Declaration,” 1745, 8vo. Of these

He appears to have soon acquired a name at the bar, and to have formed valuable connections, particularly with lord Bute and lord Mansfield, for in 1763 he was made king’s counsel, and at the same time became a bencher of Lincoin’s Inn. He also obtained a seat in parliament, and soon had an opportunity of greatly improving his finances as well as his fame, by being the successful advocate for lord Clive. During his first years of sitting in parliament, he supported some of the measures of what were then termed the popular party; but had either seen his error, or his interest in another point of view, for in January 1771 he accepted the office of solicitor general, and from that time became a strenuous advocate for the administration who conducted the American war. In July 1778 he was appointed attorney-general, art office which even his enemies allow that he held with great mildness and moderation. It often happened to this distinguished lawyer, that his single advice had great influence with the party to which he belonged, and it is said that his opinion only was the means of saving the metropolis from total destruction by the mob of 1780. When his majesty held a privycouncil to determine on the means of putting a stop to these outrages, Mr. Wedderburn was ordered by the king to deliver his official opinion. He stated in the. most precise terms, that any such assemblage of depredators might be dispersed by military force, without waiting for forms, or reading the riot act. tf Is that yCur declaration of the Jaw, as attorney-general?“said the king; Mr. Wedderburn answering distinctly in the affirmative;” Then let it so be done," rejoined the king; and the attorney-general drew up the order immediately, by which the riots were suppressed in a few hours, and the metropolis saved.

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

In 1715, 1716, 1717, a society for promoting primitive Christianity met weekly at his house in Cross-street, Hatton-garden, composed of about ten or twelve persons; to which society Christians of all persuasions were equally admitted. Sir Peter King, Dr. Hare, Dr. Hoadly, and Dr. Clarke, were particularly invited; but none of them, he says, ever came. In 1719, he published “A Letter of Thanks to Robinson, bishop of London, for his late Letter to his Clergy against the use of new Forms of Doxology.” The common forms having been changed by Whiston, and indeed by Dr. Clarke, was the occasion of Robinson’s admonitory letter to his clergy: and this admonitory letter tempted Whiston to do a thing, he says, which he never did before or since; that is, to expose him in the way of banter or ridicule, and to cut him with great sharpness. Upon the publication of this a Letter of Thanks“to the bishop of London, Dr. Sacheverell attempted to shut him out of St. Andrew’s, Holborn, which was then his parish* church; and Whiston published an account of it. He relates, that Mr. Wilson, a lawyer, who did not love Sacheverell, would willingly have prosecuted him for the insult) and promised to do it without any costs to him; but Whiston replied,” if I should give my consent, I should shew myself to be as foolish and as passionate as Sacheverell himself/ 7 In the same year, 1719, he published a letter to the earl of Nottingham, “concerning the eternity of the Son of God, and his Holy Spirit;” and, in the second and following editions, a defence of it; for lord Nottingham had published “an Answer” in 1721, for which he wa highly complimented by addresses from both the universities, and from the London clergy. In 1720 he was proposed by sir Hans Sloane and Dr. Halley to the royal society as a member, for he was publishing something or other in the' way of philosophy; but was refused admittance by sir Isaac Newton, the president. He tells us he had enjoyed a large portion of sir Isaac’s favour for twenty years together; but lost it at last by contradicting him when he was old. “Sir Isaac,” adds he, “was of the most fearful, cautious, and suspicious temper, that I ever knew; and, had he been alive when I wrote against his Chronology, and so thoroughly confuted it that nobody has ever since ventured to vindicate it, I should not have thought proper to publish my confutation; because I knew his temper so well, that I should have expected it would have killed him,: as Dr. Bentiey, bishop Stillingfleet’s chaplain, told me that he believed Mr. Locke’s thorough confutation of the bishop’s metaphysics about the Trinity hastened his end also.”

At a very early age, indeed soon after he was taken from school, he was ambitious of being admitted a member of a literary society then existing at Nottingham, but was objected to on account of his youth. After repeated attempts, and repeated failures, he succeeded in his wish, through the exertions of some of his friends; and in a very short time, to the great surprise of the society, proposed to give them a lecture, and the society, probably from curiosity, acceded to the proposal. The next evening they assembled, when he lectured upon genius, and spoke extempore for above two hours, in such a manner, that he received the unanimous thanks of the society, and they elected him their professor of literature. There are certain courts at Nottingham in which it is necessary for an attorney to plead and he wished to qualify himself for an eloquent speaker, as well as a sound lawyer.

, a nonconformist lawyer, and commonly called, from his principal publication, Century White, was the son of Henry White of Heylan in Pembrokeshire, where he was born June 29, 1590. He was educated in grammar learning at home, and about 1607 entered of Jesus college, Oxford, and after studying there between three and four years, went to the Middle Temple, and in due time was admitted to the bar, was summer reader 17 Car. I. and at length a bencher of that society. While a barrister he was much employed by the puritans in the purchase of impropriations, which were to be given to those of their own party; for which he received such a censure in the starchamber, as served to confirm the aversion he had already conceived against the hierarchy. In 1640, he was chosen member of parliament for the borough of Southwark, joined in all the proceedings which led to the overthrow of the church, was appointed chairman of the committee for religion, and a member of the assembly of divines. He did not however live to see the consequences of all those measures, but, as Wood says, “very unwillingly submitted to the stroke of death,” Jan. 29, 1644-5, and was buried in the Temple church. A marble stone was afterwards placed over his grave, with these lines,

, an English philosopher, and Roman catholic priest, who obtained considerable celebrity abroad, where he was usually called Thomas Anglus, or Thomas Albius, was the son of Richard White, esq. of Hatton, in the county of Essex, by Mary, his wife, daughter of Edmund Plowden, the celebrated lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign. His parents being Roman catholics, he was educated, probably abroad, in the strictest principles of that profession, and at length became a secular priest, in which character he resided very much abroad. He was principal of the college at Lisbon, and sub-principal of that at Douay; but his longest stay was at Rome and Paris. For a considerable time he lived in the house of sir Kenelm Digby; and he shewed his attachment to that gentleman’s philosophy by various publications. His first work of this kind was printed at Lyons, in 1646. It is entitled “Institutionum Peripateticarum ad mentem summi clarissimique Philosophi Kenelmi Equitis Digbaei.” “Institutions of the Peripatetic Philosophy, according to the hypothesis of the great and celebrated philosopher sir Kenelm Digby.” Mr. White was not contented with paying homage to sir Kenelm on account of his philosophical opinions, but raised him also to the character of a divine. A proof of this is afforded in a book published by him, the title of which is “Quaestio Theologica, quomodo secundum principia Peripatetices DigbsEanae, sive secundum rationem, et abstrahendo, quantum materia patitur, ab authoritate, human! Arbitrii Libertas sit explicanda, et cum Gratia efficaci concilianda.” “A Theological question, in what manner, according to the principles of sir Kenelm Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy, or according to reason, abstracting, as much as the subject will admit, from authority, the freedom of a man’s will is to be explained and reconciled with efficacious grace.” Another publication to the same purpose, which appeared in 1652, was entitled “Institutiones Theologicae super fundamentis in Peripatetica Digbacana jactis exstructae.” “Institutions of Divinity, built upon the foundations laid down in sir K. Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy.” By his friend sir Kenelm Mr. White was introduced, with large commendations, to the acquaintance of Des Cartes, who hoped to make a proselyte of him, but without success. White was too much devoted to Aristotle’s philosophy to admit of the truth of any other system. In his application of that philosophy to theological doctrines, he embarrassed himself in so many nice distinctions, and gave such a free scope to his own thoughts, that he pleased neither the Molinists nor the Jansenists. Indeed, though he had a genius very penetrating and extensive, he had no talent at distinguishing the ideas which should have served as the rule and foundation of his reasonings, nor at clearing the points which he was engaged to defend. His answer to those who accused him of obscurity may serve to display the peculiarity of his disposition. “I value myself,” says he, “upon such a brevity and conciseness, as is suitable for the teachers of the sciences. The Divines are the causg that my writings continue obscure; for they refuse to give me any occasion of explaining myself. In short, either the learned understand me, or they do not. If they do understand me, and find me in an error, it is easy for them to refute me; if they do not understand me, it is very unreasonable for them to exclaim against my doctrines.” This, observes Bayle, shews the temper of a man who seeks only to be talked of, and is vexed at not having antagonists enough to draw the regard and attention of the public upon him. Considering the speculative turn of Mr. White’s mind, it is not surprising that some of his books’ were condemned at Rome by the congregation of the “Index Expurgatorius,” and that they were disapproved of by certain universities. The treatises which found their way into the “Index Expurgatorius” were, “Institutiones Peripatetica?;” “Appendix Theologica de Origine Mundi” “Tabula suffragialis de terminandis Fidei Litibus ab Ecclesia Catholica Fixa;” and “Tessera3 Romanae Evulgatio.” In opposition to the doctors of Douay, who had censured two-and-twenty propositions extracted from his “Sacred Institutions,” he published a pieoe entitled “Supplicatio postulativa Justitiae,” in which he complains that they had given a vague uncertain censure of him, attended only with a respective, without taxing any proposiiion in particular; and he shews them that this is acting like prevaricating divines. Another of his works was the “Sonitus Buccina?,” in which he maintained that the church had no power to determine, but only to give her testimony to tradition. This likewise was censured. Mr. White had a very particular notion concerning the state of souls separated from the body, which involved him in a dispute with the bishop of Chalcedon. Two tracts were written by him upon this subject, of which a large and elaborate account is given in archdeacon Blackburne’s Historical View of the controversy 'concerning an intermediate state. The conclusion drawn by the archdeacon is, that Mr. White entered into the questibn with more precision and greater abilities than any man of his time; and that it is very clear, from the inconsistencies he ran into to save the reputation of his orthodoxy, that if the word purgatory had been out of his way, he would have found no difficulty to dispose of the separate soul in a state of absolute unconscious rest.

, a learned English lawyer, was descended of a good family near Oakingham, in Berkshire, and born in London, November the 28th, 1570. He was educated in Merchant Taylors’ school, elected scholar of St. John’s college, in Oxford, in 1588, and July 1, 1594, took the degree of bachelor of civil law. He afterwards settled in the Middle Temple, became summer-reader of that house in the 17th year of king James I. a knight, member of parliament for Woodstock in 1620, chief justice of Chester, and at length one of the justices of the king’s bench. Kitig Charles I. said of him, that he was “a stout, wise, and learned man, and one who knew what belongs to uphold magistrates and magistracy in their dignity.” In Trinity term 1632, he fell ill of a cold, which so increased upon him that he was advised to go in the country; on which he took leave of his brethren the judges and serjeants, saying, “God be with you, I shall never see you again;” and this without the least disturbance or trouble of his thoughts; and soen after he came into the country he died, June 22. “On his death,” says his son, “the king lost as good a subject, his country as good a patriot, the people as just a 'judge, as ever lived. Ail honest men lamented the loss ui huri: no man in his age left behind him a more honoured memory. His reason was clear and strong, and his learning deep and general. He had the Latin tongue so perfect, that sitting judge of assize at Oxford, when some foreigners, persons of quality, being there, and coming to the court to see the manner of our proceedings in matters of justice, this judge caused them to sit down, and briefly repeated the heads of his charge to the grand jury in good and elegant Latin, and thereby informed the strangers and the scholars of the ability of our judges, and the course of our proceedings in matters of law and justice. He understood the Greek very well, and the Hebrew, and was versed in the Jewish histories, and exactly knowing in the history of his own country, and in the pedigrees of most persons of honour and quality in the kingdom, and was much conversant in the studies of antiquity and heraldry. He was not excelled by, any in the knowledge of his own profession of the common law of England^ wherein his knowledge of the civil law (whereof he was a graduate in Oxford) was a help to him. His learned arguments both at the bar and bench will confirm ­this truth.” He was interred at Fawley near High Wyr comb in Bucks, where a monument was erected to him by his son. There are extant of his: 1. Several speeches in parliament, particularly one in a book entitled “The Sovereign’s Prerogative and the Subject’s Privileges discussed, &c. in the 3d and 4th year of king Charles I. London, 1657, in fol. 2. Lectures or readings in the Middle Temple hall, August the 2d, 1619, and on the statute on 21 Henry VIII. c. 13. in the Ashmolean library at Oxford. 3. Of the antiquity, use, and ceremony of lawful combats in England, formerly in the library of Ralph Sheldon, of Beoly, esq. and since printed with other pieces by him, among Hearne’s” Curious Discourses."

, an eminent lawyer, and speaker of the House of Commons, during the usurpation, was of an ancient family in Northumberland, and was educated partly at Oxford and partly at Cambridge. He afterwards entered pf Qray’s-inn, to study the law, in which he advanced with considerable rapidity, and was chosen recorder, first of Berwick-upon-Tweed, and secondly of York. He was knighted by Charles I. in 1639 at York, and, as recorder, congratulated his majesty both at York and Berwick, when he was on his way to be crowned king of Scotland. Both his addresses on this occasion are said to have been perfectly courtly and even fulsome, but he was soon to change his style as well as his opinions. Being returned member of parliament for Berwick, he became a warm advocate for the liberty then contested; avowed himself in religion, one of the independent sect, and took the covenant. In June 1647, he was so much a favourite with the parliament that they appointed him one of the commissioners of the great seal, which office he was to retain for one year, but held it till the king’s death. The parliament also named him, in Oct. 1648, one in their call of Serjeants, and soon after declared him king’s s’erjeant. But far as he had gone with the usurping powers, he was by no means pleased with the commonwealth form of government, and immediately after the king’s death, surrendered his office of keeper of the great seal, first upon the plea of bad health, and when that was not allowed, he set up some scruples of conscience. The parliament, however, as he continued to allow their authority, in requital of his former services, ordered that he should practice within the bar, and gave him a quarter’s salary more than was due. His merit also recommended him to Cromwell, who heaped honours and great employments upon him. In April 1654, he was appointed a commissioner of the great seal and a commissioner of the treasury, for which he received a saJary of 100Q/.; and all his conscientious scruples seemed now at an end. In August of the same year, he was elected member of parliament for the city of York; and in the following year, became a committee-man for ejecting scandalous ministers in the north riding of that county.

, a lawyer, and a very prominent character during the usurpation, was the eldest son of a lawyer, as his father is said to have been serjeant George Wilde of Droitwich, in Worcestershire. He was of Baliol college, Oxford, and in 1610, when he took his degree of M. A. was a student in the Inner Temple. Of this society he became Lent reader 6 Car. I. afterwards a serjeant at law, one of the commissioners of the great seal in 1643, and in Oct. 1648, chief baron of the exchequer, and one of the council of state. In 1641 he drew up the impeachment against the bishops, and presented it to the House of Lords, and was prime manager not only in that, but on the trial of archbishop Laud. “He was the same also,” says Wood, “who, upon the command, or rather desire, of the great men sitting at Westminster, did condemn to death at Winchester one captain John Bucley, for causing a drum to be beat uf) for God and king Charles, at Newport, in the Isle of Wight, in order to rescue his captive king in 1647.” Wood adds, that after the execution of Burley, Wilde was rewarded with 1000l. out of the privy purse at Derby-house, and had the same sum for saving the life of major Edmund Rolph, who had a design to have murdered the king. When Oliver became protector “he retired and acted not,” but after Richard Cromwell had been deposed he was restored to the exchequer. On the restoration he was of course obliged to resign again, and lived in retirement at Hampstead, where he died about 1669, and was buried at VVherwill, in Hampshire, the seat of Charles lord Delawar, who had married his daughter. Wilde married Anne, daughter of sir Thomas Harry, of Tonge castle, serjeant at law and baronet, who died in. 1624, aged only sixteen, “being newly delivered of her first born.” She lies buried in Tonge church, in Staffordshire.

Such are the particulars Wood has given of this lawyer, and they are in general supported by Clarendon and other contemporary authorities, and attempted to be contradicted only by Oldmixou and Neal. Oldmixon’s evidence will not be thought to weigh much against Clarendon’s. Neal calls him "A great lawyer, and of unblemished morals; and after the restoration of king Charles II. was made lord chief baron, and esteemed a grave and venerable judge.' 7 But it is grossly improbable that such a man should have been thus promoted, and it is besides expressly contrary to fact, for sir Orlando Bridgeman was chief baron at the trial of the regicides, and was succeeded by judge Hale. It was the rump parliament only who bestowed the honour on Wilde.

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

, a learned lawyer, and lord chief justice of the court of common pleas, was the second son of Robert Wilmot, of Osmaston in the county of Derby, esq. and of Ursula, one of the daughters and coheiresses of sir Samuel Marow, of Berkswell, in the county of Warwick, bart.He was born Aug. 16, 1709, at Derby, where his father then lived, and after having acquired the rudiments of learning at the free-school in that town, under the Ker, Mr. Blackwell, was placed with the Rev. Mr. Hunter at Lichfield, where he was contemporary with Johnson and Garrick. At an after period of his life it could be remarked that there were then five judges upon the bench who had been 'educated at Lichfield school, viz. Willes, Parker, Noel, Lloyd, and Wilmot. In Jan. 1724, he was removed to Westminster-school, and placed under Dr. Freind; and here, and at Trinity-hall, Cambridge, where he resided until Jan. 1728, he laid the foundation of many friendships, which he preserved through a long life. At the university he contracted a passion for study and retirement that never quitted him, and he was often heard to say, that at this time the height of his ambition was to become a fellow of Trinity- hall, and to pass his life in that learned society. His natural disposition had induced him to give the preference to the church; but his father, who was a man of sagacity as well as of reading, had destined him to the study of the law, which he accordingly prosecuted with much diligence at the Inner Temple, and was called to the fear in June 1732. In 1743 he married Sarah, daughter of Thomas Rivett, of Derby, esq.

whereas the information contained in all the other histories of Scotland preceding the middle of the seventeenth century, if we except the brief chronicle subjoined to some manuscripts of Wyntown, and the translations of Ballenden and Read, was effectually concealed from the unlearned part of mankind under the veil of a dead or a foreign language. In Wyntbwn’s Chronicle the historian may find what, for want of more ancient records, which have long ago perished, we must now consider as the original accounts of many transactions, and also many events related from his own knowledge or the reports of eye-witnesses. His faithful adherence to his authorities appears from comparing his accounts with unquestionable vouchers, such as the Fcedera Anglise, and the existing remains of the Register of the priory of St. Andrew’s, that venerable monument of ancient Scottish history and antiquities, generally coaeval with the facts recorded in it, whence he has given large extracts, almost literally translated. All these we have hitherto been obliged to take at second or third hand in copies by Bower and others, with such additions and embellishments as they were pleased to make to Wyntown’s simple and genuine narrative. An ecclesiastical historian of Scotland can no where find so good an account of the bishops of St. Andrew’s, with occasional notices concerning the other sees, as from Wyntown, who in describing the churches, their buildings and paraphernalia, shews himself quite at home. The compiler of a Scottish peerage may obtain from Wyntown more true information concerning the ancient noble families of Scotland, than is to be found in any work extant, except the accurate and elaborate research made by the late lord Hailes in the celebrated Sutherland case, wherein he has repeatedly had recourse to our author for proofs of the laws and customs of succession. In this view the lawyer will also find the Chronicle of Wyntown an useful addition to his library, and may consult it with advantage, when called upon to adjust a disputed inheritance in an ancient family. Mr. Ellis, who allows that Wynton is highly valuable as a historian, adds that his versification is easy, his language pure, and his style often animated.

, a distinguished lawyer, is said to have been born at Easton Mauduit, in Northamptonshire, June 29, 1566, but as the register of his baptism, July 5, of that year, occurs at Islington, it is more likely that he was born there, where his father, sir Christopher (then Mr. Yelverton, and a student at Gray’s Inn) had, it is probable, country lodgings. He was educated for some time at Oxford, but removed afterwards to Gray’s Inn for the study of the law. In 1606 he was elected Lent-reader, being then, Wood says, “accounted a religious gentleman, and a person well read in the municipal laws.” In 1613 he wasappointed solicitor-general, and received the honour of knighthood by the interest of Carr, earl of Somerset, and on March 17, 1616, was advanced to the higher office of attorney general; but having given offence, as it is said, to the favourite Buckingham, he was accused in the star-chamber of illegal proceedings in his office, and by a sentence of that court deprived of his place, imprisoned in the Tower, and heavily fined. Being afterwards brought before the lords, he made a speech which was so offensive to the king and his favourite, that he was fined 10.000 marks for the reflections which he had cast on his majesty, and 5000 for the insult offered to Buckingham. But by one of those unaccountable changes which occur among politicians of all ages, he became soon afterwards in great favour with the very man whose enmity had cost him so dear, and was, through his interest, made one of the justices of the king’s bench, and afterwards of the common pleas, which last place he retained till his death; and had not the duke been untimely cut off, he would in all probability have been made lord-keeper of the great seal, as he was esteemed one of the first lawyers of his time. He died Jan. 24, 1630, at his house in Aldersgate-street, and was interred in the parish church of Easton Mauduit.

, an eminent lawyer, was the son of Philip Yorke, an attorney, and was born at Dover, in Kent, December 1, 1690; and educated under Mr. Samuel Morland, of Bethnal Green, in classical and general learning, which he ever cultivated amidst his highest employments. He studied the law in the Middle Temple under the instruction of an eminent conveyancer of the name of Salkeld; and, being called to the bar in 1714, he soon became very eminent in his profession. In 1718 he sat in parliament as member for Lewes, in Sussex; and, in the two successive parliaments, for Seaford. In March 1719-20, he was promoted to the office of solicitorgeneral by the recommendation of the lord-chancellor Parker; an obligation he never forgot, returning it by every possible mark of personal regard and affection. He received also about the same time the honour of knighthood. The trial of Mr. Layer at the king’s bench for high. treason, gave him, in Nov. 1722, an opportunity of shewiug his abilities; his reply, in which he summed up late at night the evidence against the prisoner, and answered all the topics of defence, being justly admired as one of the ablest performances of that kind extant. About the same time, he gained much reputation in parliament by opening the bill against Kelly, who had been principally concerned in bishop Atterbury’s plot, as his secretary. la February 1723-4, he was appointed attorney-general, in the execution of which important office he was remarkable for his candour and lenity. As an advocate for the crown, he spoke with the veracity of a witness and a judge; and, though his zeal for justice and the due course of law was strong, yet his tenderness to the subject,- in the court of exchequer, was so distinguished, that upon a particular occasion in 1733, the House of Commons assented to it with a general applause. He was unmoved by fear or favour in what he thought right and legal; and often debated and voted against the court in matters relating to the South-Sea company, when he was solicitor; and,‘ in the affair of lord Derwentwater’s estate, when he was attorneygeneral. Upon the resignation of the great seal by Peter lord King, in October 1733, sir Philip Yorke was appointed lord chief-justice of the king^s bench. He was soon after raised to the dignity of a baron of this kingdom, with the title of lord Hardwicke, baron of Hardwicke, in the county of Gloucester, and called to the cabinet council. The salary of chief-justice of the king’s bench being thought not adequate to the weight and dignity of that high office, was raised on the advancement of lord Hardwicke to it, from 2000l. to 4000l. per ann. to the chiefjustice and his successors; but his lordship refused to accept the augmentation of it; and the adjustment of the two vacancies of the chancery and king’s bench (which happened at the same time) between his lordship and lord Talbot, upon terms honourable and satisfactory to both, was thought to do as much credit to the wisdom of the crown in those days, as the harmony and friendship, with which they co-operated in’the public service, did honour to themselves. In the midst of the general approbation with which he discharged his office there, he was called to that of lord high chancellor, on the decease of lord Talbot, February 17, 1736-7.

, an eminently learned Italian Jesuit, was born in Venice, March 27, 1714, the son of an eminent Tuscan lawyer, settled in the Venetian states. He received his education in the schools of the Jesuits in that metropolis, and, as early as the age of fifteen, evinced such uncommon powers and attainments as to be introduce'd into that society, already proverbial for its sagacity and conduct in discovering juvenile talents of every kind. In October 1731, he took the habit, went through his noviciate in Vienna, and became soon after professor of belles lettres in the college of his order at Govitz. It was not long before he was called by his superiors to Rome, ordained a priest in 1740, attached to the Roman province, and sent on a mission to the Marche of Ancona. He exercised similar functions also in Tuscany, Lombardy, and almost the whole of northern Italy, with extraordinary success and fame, and without the least diversion from his favourite pursuit the study of ecclesiastical, civil, and literary history. He availed himself of these peregrinations through the several capitals of Italy, in cultivating the friendship of all the eminent literary characters he met with, and in making every where those deep researches in literature, antiquities, -bibliography, and history, which have supplied him with a great part of his literary history of Italy, his annals of literature, and his several historical and diplomatic collections.