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

, a member of the French academy of sciences, was born at Paris, Sept. 14, 1713, of a good family, and after having studied humanities in the Mazarin college, and a course of philosophy in the college of Beauvais, applied himself more particularly to medicine and law, and the oriental languages in the royal college. The great progress which he made in the latter, occasioned his being invited to Rheims to teach these languages, and to fill a professor’s chair; but this he declined out of respect to his father, who wished him to appear at the bar. Neither this, however, nor languages, were to his own liking, and his parents, after some consideration, allowed him to pursue his inclination for medicine, and natural history, to which he added a taste for general literature and criticism. In 1737, he began to give extracts from the London Philosophical Transactions, and this with so much judgment and ability as to excite the attention of the literati of France, who after revolving the plan, conceived that a translation of the Transactions with notes would be more useful than these extracts, and agreed that M. de Bremond should be requested to undertake it. He accordingly began the work, and published four vols. 4to. including the years 1731—1736, withacomplete index, and notes pointing out where the subjects are treated in the memoirs of other learned bodies, or in separate publications: some of these notes are complete dissertations. The royal society, on this, honoured him with the title of secretary; and on March 18, 1739, he was admitted into the French royal academy of sciences. The same year he read a learned paper on respiration. He joined afterwards with M. Morand, a celebrated surgeon, in collecting and translating all the English publications respecting Mrs. Stephens’s remedy for the stone, which once was thought infallible. He translated likewise Dr. Halley’s experiments on sea water, and Hauksbee’s experiments, 2 vols. 12mo; and Murdoch’s new loxodromic tables, for the construction of marine charts. This industrious writer died March 21, 1742, aged only twenty-nine. His eloge was composed by M. cle Mairan, then secretary to the academy.

, a learned lawyer in the seventeenth century, was born at Little Wool ford, in Warwickshire, in 1573, being the son of Anchor Brent of that place, gent. In 1589, he became pordonist, or post-master, of Merton-college, in Oxford; and, on the 20th of June 1593, took the degree of bachelor of arts. The year following he was admitted probationer-fellow of the college. On the 3 1st of October 1598; he took the degree of master of arts and then entered upon law studies. In 1607, he was one of the proctors of the university. Some years after, in 1613, &c. he travelled into foreign parts, and became acquainted with several of the most learned men abroad. After his return, he married Martha daughter and heir of Dr. Robert Abbot, bishop of Salisbury, and niece to Dr. George Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, which was the cause of his succeeding great preferments. About the year 1618, he was sent to Venice by archbishop Abbot, on purpose to get a copy of the History of the Council of Trent, then newly composed by the most renowned Padre Paolo Sarpi; in procuring of which he exposed himself to very great dangers. In 1621, he Was elected warden of Merton-college, through the archbishop’s recommendation; who also made him his vicar-general, commissary of the diocese of Canterbury, master of the faculties, and at length judge of the prerogative. On the llth of October, 1623, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor of law. The 23d of August, 1629, he received the honour of knighthood from king Charles I. at Woodstock, being then supposed well-affected to the church and hierarchy. But in the great disputes that arose between archbishop Abbot and bishop Laud, he entirely sided with the first, and his adherents, the puritan party; and grew so inveterate against Laud, that he was a frequent witness against him at his trial. He likewise deserted Oxford when king Charles I. garrisoned that place, and took the covenant: for which reason he was deprived of his wardenship of Merton-college, by his majesty’s command; but restored again when Oxford garrison was surrendered for the parliament’s use, in 1646. In 1647 and 1648, he was appointed chief visitor of that university, and countenanced all the violent and arbitrary proceedings there used, not sparing his own college. When an order was made against pluralities, he was forced to leave Mertoncollege, on the 27th of November, 1651; at which time he refused also the oath called the Engagement. Upon this, retiring to his house in Little Britain, in London, he died there November 6, 1652, aged 79; and was buried, the seventeenth of the same month, with great solemnity, in the church of St. Bartholomew the Less.

The only service to the public which sir N. Brent did, appears to have been in procuring the history of the council of Trent. As father Paul and father Fulgentio, the two joint authors, composed it, they privately gave a copy to Brent, who sent it over weekly to the archbishop Abbot in the original Italian; and it came to his hands under five or six covers to other persons, for the greater security. When Mr. Brent had sent it all over, he came back himself, and translated it out of Italian into English and Latin. The original Italian was printed first at London in 1619, and dedicated to king James I. by D. Antonio de Dominis, archbishop of Spalatro, who had been instrumental in procuring that history. The English translation was published in 1619, folio. A new edition was printed in 1640; and another in 1676, with other pieces of father Paul at the end. His other publication would have done him equal credit, had he adhered to his principles. He reviewed Mr. Francis Mason’s “Vindication of the Church of England, concerning the Consecration and Ordination of the Bishops, &c.” examined the quotations, compared them with the originals, and printed that book from the author’s manuscript, in 1625, fol. in Latin. It is a complete refutation of the old story of the Nag’s head ordination.

, one of the supporters of the reformation, was born at Wile in Suabia, in 1499, a city of which his father had been mayor for many years. He was educated at Heidelberg school and university, and when only fifteen years old commenced bachelor. Such was his thirst for learning, that he usually rose at midnight to his studies, which became afterwards so much a habit, that he never slept longer than midnight. At eighteen he took his master’s degree in arts, and about the same time the perusal of some of Luther’s writings induced him to change his mind in many important points, which he endeavoured to communicate to his fellow-students by lecturing to them from the gospel of St. Matthew, and his auditors increasing, it was objected to him by those who were jealous of his talents, that he was not fit for such a work, not being in orders. To remove that, he entered into orders, and became a very popular preacher. He was then called to be pastor at Hall in Suabia, where he gave such satisfaction that the senate confirmed him in the office, although he was only twenty-three years old. When Muncer and his adherents rose in arms in Germany, and threatened to besiege Hall, he not only wrote against these enthusiasts, but encouraged the citizens to defend the place, which they did with great bravery. We find him aftersvards attending a conference of the reformed clergy for the purpose of reconciling the contention between Luther and Zuinglius, respecting the real presence; and in 1530 he was at the diet of Augsburgh, where the celebrated confession of faith was drawn up. When Ulric, prince of Wirtemberg, meditated the introduction of the reformed religion in his dominions, and particularly in the university of Tubingen, he employed Brentius in that seat of learning, who accomplished the purpose to his entire satisfaction. In 1547, when the emperor Charles V. and his army came to Hall, Brentius found it necessary to make his escape; and some letters of his being found, in which he justified the protestant princes for taking arms against the emperor, he became still in more danger; but on the emperor’s removing his army, he returned to Hall again. In 1548, however, when the emperor had published the Interim, Brentius declared himself so strongly against it, that the emperor sent a commissary to Hall, charging him to bring Brentius to him, alive or dead. The magistrates and citizens would have still protected him, but, as the emperor threatened to destroy their city if he were not given up, they connived at his escape, and presently after Ulric prince of Wirtemberg afforded him an asylum, until he got to Basil. He remained^ in this kind of banishment until 1550, when Christopher duke of Wirtemberg, in room of his father Ulric deceased, resolved to restore the ministers who were driven away by the Interim, and to complete the reformation; and therefore sent for Brentius to his castle at Stutg&rd, where he might have his advice and assistance. Here at his request, Brentius drew up a confession of faith, including the controverted points, which the duke intended to send to the council of Trent; and the year after the pastor of Stutgard dying, Brentius was chosen in his room, and held the situation for life. In 1557 he went to the conferences at Worms, which ended unsatisfactorily, as the popish representatives would not admit the authority of scripture in deciding their controversies. A more important service he performed in his old age. As there were many monasteries in Wirtemberg, from which the friars had been expelled, he persuaded his prince to convert them into schools, which was accordingly done, and Brentius visited them once in two years, directing and encouraging their studies. He died in 1570, and was buried with every mark of public respect. His works were printed together in 8 vols. fol. at Tubingen, 1576 i)0: most of them had been printed separately at various periods of his life. His opinions coincided in general with those of Luther, except on the subject of the real presence, in which he held some sentiments peculiar to himself, although perhaps essentially not very different from those of the Lutheran church.

, a learned member of the French academy, and of that of Inscriptions, was born in the country of Caux in 1715, and died at Paris in 1795, aged eighty. His youth was spent in the acquisition of the learned languages, and he afterwards came to Paris to enjoy the company of the literati of that metropolis. Being sent to England to search for materials respecting the French history, he published the result in a paper in the Memoirs of the Academy of inscriptions in 1767, by which we find that he collected in the British Museum, and the Tower of London, an invaluable treasure of letters and papers relative to the his-, tory, laws, and constitution of France, which papers had till then been unknown to the literary world. The same Memoir concludes with some anecdotes relative to the famous siege of Calais in 1346, which do little honour to the memory of Eustache de St. Pierre, and are, by no means, consistent with the encomiums that have been lavished on him, on account of his heroic patriotism. Brequigny was of a very communicative disposition, and loved to encourage young men of learning, by lending them his books and manuscripts, and imparting his ideas of any subject on which they might be employed. In his writings, his style is clear and simple, and he had the happy talent of extracting with judgment and accuracy, of which he left many proofs in his notices inserted in the Journal des Savans, and in the Memoirs of the Academy of inscriptions, to which he was a frequent contributor. The substance of a curious paper of his, on the life and character of Mahomet, may be seen in the Monthly Review, vol. XXXIV. (1768.) His principal works are, 1. “Histoire des Revolutions de Genes,” Paris, 1752, 3 vols. 12mo. 2. An edition of “Strabo,” vol. I. Gr. and Lat. 1763, 4to, containing the first three books, corrected according to some Mss. in the royal library, particularly one numbered 1393, which was brought from, Constantinople; the Latin version is Xylander’s. A short time after the first volume was published, Berquigny sent over all his materials for the further prqsecution of the work to the university of Oxford. 3. “Vies dfes anciens orateurs Grecs,” with a translation of many of their orations, 1752, 2 vols. 12mo, containing only Isocrates and Dio Chrysostom. 4. “Diplomata, Chartaj ad res Franciscas spectantia,” 4to. 5. “Table chronologique des diplomes, chartes, et titres relatifs a i'histoire de France,” 1783, 5 vols. fol. 6. “Ordonnances des rois de France de la troisieme race:” of this important collection Brequigny published the last six volumes, enriched with learned notes and curious dissertations on the ancient legislation of France. He also compiled and published in 1764, 8vo, the catalogue of the library of Clermont.

, perhaps worth mentioning here, as the assumed name of one James Anderton, of Lostock in Lancashire, in the seventeenth century, who published under it, 1. “The Protestant’s Apology for the Roman Church, 4to, 1604, 1608, 1615. 2.” The Liturgy of the Mass, &c.“in Latin, Cologn, 1620, 4to. 3.” St. Augustin’s Religion; giving an account of his opinion in matters of controversy between Catholics and Protestants,“1620, 8vo. Dr. Thomas Morton, the learned bishop of Durham, answered the” Protestant’s Apology“in a work entitle4” A Catholic Appeal for Protestants," 1606, 4to. Some farther particulars of Anderton’s works, although none of his life, may be seen in our authority.

, an English poetess, was the daughter of Mr. Thomas Hughes, of Bryn- Griffith near Mould in Flintshire, by Anne Jones, his wife, and was born in 1685. Being observed to be endowed by nature with a great capacity, her talents were assiduously cultivated by her father, who was himself a man of excellent parts. Mr. Hughes, however, dying when she was only sixteen, she soon lost these advantages; but early discovered a turn for poetry, which her acquaintance encouraged. In Jan, 1711 she married Mr. Thomas Brereton, at that time a commoner of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, only son of major Brereton, son and heir of William Brereton, esq. of Cheshire. Her husband soon spent his fortune, and went over to Paris; and some time after this, a separation, having taken place, she retired, 1721, to her native country, Wales, where she led a solitary life, seeing little company, except some intimate friends. About this time Mr. Brereton obtained from lord Sunderland a post Belonging to the customs at Park-gate near Chester; but in Feb. 1722, was unfortunately drowned in crossing the water of Saltney, when the tide was coming in. Mrs. Brereton then retired to Wrexham in Denbighshire, for the benefit of her children’s education, where she died Aug. 7, 1740, aged fifty -five, leaving two daughters, Lucy and Charlotte, the latter probably the author of <c The Rattle,“a song, in Fawkes and Woty’s” Poetical Calendar," vol. XI. p. 14.

Mrs. Brereton was amiable in every relation of life and possessed talents for versification, if not for poetry, which she displayed some years as a correspondent to the Gentleman’s Magazine, under the signature of Melissa, where she had a competitor who signed himself Fido, and who is supposed to have been Thomas Beach (See his article, vol. IV). After her death a volume was published of “Poems on several occasions; with letters to her friends; and an account of her life,” London, 1744, 8vo.

, the son of Thomas Brereton, esq. of the county Palatine of Chester, was born in 1715. He received his education partly at Westminster-school, on the foundation, and partly at Trinity college, Cambridge, and, on the death of his father, inherited the ancient family estates in the above-mentioned county, and in Flintshire. In 1738, Mr, Brereton was called to the bar, and in 1746 became recorder of Liverpool, which office he filled with great impartiality and dignity during fifty-two years. In 1796, on his proposing to resign, the corporation requested him to retain his situation, and appointed a person to discharge its active duties.

Mr. Breretort' became a member of the society of arts in 1762; and,by his assiduity, zeal, and order, filled the distinguished office of vice-president with great credit to himself and advantage to the society, from March 1765 till his last illness in 1798. He was also an early member of the royal society and the society of antiquaries. The Archaeologia of the latter contain his “Observations on Peter Collinson’s Account of the Round Towers in Ireland;” his “Tour through South Wales;” his “Extracts from the Household Book of Henry VIII;” his “Account of a painted Window in Brereton Church, Cheshire;” and that of “A non-descript Coin,” supposed to be Philip VI. of France. Mr. Pennant has also, in his Welch Tour, described and given an engraving of several Roman antiquities found at a Roman station on his estate in Flintshire. Mr. Brereton was a bencher of the hon. society of Lincol n’s-Inn; filled the office of treasurer, and was keeper of the Black Book. He also represented the borough of Ilchester in parliament. He took the name of Salusbury with an estate, and became constable of the castle of Flint, a valuable privilege to his adjacent possessions. His domestic happiness was manifest to his numerous and respectable acquaintance, among whom were some of the most learned men of the age. He died Sept. 8, 1798, in the eighty-fourth year of his age, and was interred in St. George’s chapel, Windsor. His wife was sister of sir Thomas Whitmore, K. B. and with her he lived happily for more tnan fifty years. They had five children, who all died young: he bequeathed the rents of his estates to her during her life, and after her decease, which happened in 1799, to his relations, the only son of the late general Trelawney, of Soho-square, and the second son of the rev. sir Henry Trelawney, bart. of Cornwall.

, a learned mathematician and antiquary, was the son of Robert Brerewood, a reputable tradesman, who was three times mayor of Chester. Our author was born in that city in 1565, where he was educated in grammar learning at the free school; and was afterwards admitted, in 1581, of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, where he soon acquired the character of a hard student; as he has shewn by the commentaries he wrote upon Aristotle’s Ethics, when no more than twenty-one years of age. In 1596 he was chosen the first professor of astronomy in Gresham college, being one of the two who, at the desire of the electors, were recommended to them by the university of Oxford. He loved retirement, and wholly devoted himself to the pursuit of knowledge. And though he never published any thing himself, yet he was very communicative, and ready to impart what he knew to others, either in conversation or in writing. His retired situation at Gresham college being agreeable, it did not appear that he had any other views, but continued there the remainder of his life, which was terminated by a fever the 4th of November 1613, at forty-eight years of age, in the midst of his pursuits, and before he had taken proper care to collect and digest his learned labours; which, however, were not lost; being reduced to order, and published after his death, in the following order: 1. “De ponderibus et pretiis veterum nummorum, eorumque cum recentioribus collatione,” 1614, 4to. This was published by his nephew, Robert Brerewood of Chester, who was commoner of Brazen-nose college in 1605, aged seventeen; and who succeeded our author in his estate and fortunes. It was afterwards reprinted in the eighth volume of the Critici Sacri, and in the apparatus before the first volume of the polyglot bible. 2. “Enquiries touching the diversity of Languages and Religion, through the chief parts of the world,” 1614, 4to, published also by Robert Brerewood, who has written a large and learned preface to it. 3. “Elementa Logicae in gratiam studiosae juventutis in acad. Oxon.” 1614, 8vo. 4. “Tractatus quidam logici de praedicabilibus et proedicamentis,” 1628, 8vo. 5. “Treatise of the Sabbath,” 1630, 4to. “6.” A second treatise of the Sabbath,“1632, 4to. 7,” Tractatus duo, quorum primus est de meteoris, secundus de oculo,“1631. 8.” Commentarii in Ethica Aristotelis,“1640,. 4to. Mr. Wood tells us, that the original manuscript of this, written with his own hand, is in the smallest and neatest character that his eyes ever beheld; and that it was finished by him Oct. 27, 1586. 9.” The patriarchal government of the ancient Church," 1641, 4to.

, bishop of Hereford in the thirteenth century, was born in England, and educated there, and after he had made himself master of the Latin tongue, he applied himself to the study of the law, in which he made so great a progress, that he was created doctor of civil and canon law. He distinguished himself in this profession by his admirable talents in the decision of the most difficult causes; and by this means procured himself very considerable interest af the court of king Henry III. who raised him on account of his merit to the bishopric of Hereford. Bale acknowledges his eminent abilities in the law, but expresses himself in very severe terms against him on that account, as neglecting his episcopal duties. He made a large collection of the laws of England from various authors, digested into one volume, which Leland tells us was of great advantage to king Edward I. the son and successor of Henry III. and to the whole nation. He died in 1275, and was succeeded in his see by Thomas Cantilupe.

, “a writer,” says Phillips, “of pastorals, sonnets, canzons and madrigals, in which kind of writing he keeps company with several other contemporary emulators of Spenser and sir Philip Sidney,” flourished in the reign of queen Elizabeth, but very little is known of his personal history. Sir Egerton Brydges produces very probable evidence that he was of a Staffordshire family. He was a writer, says Dr. Percy, of some fame in the above reign, and published an interlude entitled “An Old Man’s Lesson, and a Young Man’s Love,” 4to, and many other little pieces in prose and verse, the titles of which may be seen in Winstanley, Ames’s Typography, and Osborn’s Harleian Catalogue. He is mentioned with great respect by Meres in his second part of Wit’s Commonwealth, 1598, p. 283, and is alluded to in Beaumont and Fletcher’s Scornful Lady, act 2, and again in Wit without money, act 3, The ballad of Phillida and Corydon, reprinted by Percy, is a delicious little poem; and if we may judge from this and other specimens given in our references, his poetical powers were distinguished by a simplicity at once easy and elegant.

, born at Tours in 1660, became Jesuit in 1675, and died at Paris in 1741, at the age of eighty-one. He was revisor and editor of the sermons of his brethren Bourdaloue, Cheminais, and Giroust, Paris, 18 vols. 8vo, and 12mo. Pere la Rue applied to him on this occasion the epithet made for St. Martin: “Trium mortuorum suscitator magnificus.” He published likewise an edition of the “GEuvres spirituelles” of le Vallois, with a life of the author. Bretonneau was a preacher himself. His sermons, in 7 volumes 12mo, published in 1743 by Berruyer, are composed with eloquence. He was deficient in the graces of action; but he had all the other parts of a good orator. His private virtues gave considerable weight to his sermons. Bretonneau also wrote, 1. “Reflections pour les jeunes-gens qui entrent dans le monde,” 12mo. 2. “Abrege” de la vie de Jacques II." 12mo, taken from the papers of his confessor. It is a panegyric from which historians cannot extract much.

, advocate of the parliament of Paris, and an eminent law writer and pleader, was born at Montrotier, about four leagues from Lyons, Feb. 24, 1656. After studying languages and philosophy at Lyons, he came to Paris in 1677 to apply himself to law, and in 1680 was appointed an advocate. Having conceived a preference to the written over the common law, -he made the former his particular study, and traced its origin with the true spirit of an antiquary. This course of study produced a very much improved edition of the works of Claude Henrys, 1708, 2 vols. fol. and afterwards a work of great utility in the French law, which he undertook at the request of the chancellor D'Aguesseau, entitled “Recueil des principals questions de droit qui se jugent diversement dans differens tribunaux du royaume,” 1718, 12mo, reprinted with additions in 1756, 2 vols. and in 1785, 4to, both with additions by Boucher d'Argis. He died April 21, 1727.

, a naval officer, of whose family we have no account, was, soon after the rupture had taken place with Spain, appointed commander of the Grampus sloop of war. From this vessel he was, March 25, 1741, promoted to be captain of the Roebuck, a fifth rate of 40 guns, and immediately afterwards ordered to the Mediterranean from which he returned in May 1742, and in. November following was removed into the Anglesea, of the same rate as the former. In April 1744 he received the command of the Sunderland of 60 guns, and next year was on a cruise off the French coast, and in February captured a small French frigate richly laden, and with 24,000 pieces of eight in specie. Soon after his return into port he was ordered ta Louisburgh, with some other ships of war, for the purpose of reinforcing commodore Warren, who was then engaged in the attack of that important place. Capt. Brett arrived early enough before it surrendered to distinguish himself by his spirit and activity in the service. He afterwards commanded the St. George of 90 guns for a short time, but having been unwarrantably omitted in the promotion of flag-officers, which took place in 1756, he very spiritedly resolved to quit the service for ever, though on his remonstrance, previous to his actual declaration of this resolution, the admiralty-board, ashamed of having, even for a moment, set aside a brave and deserving man, offered him the rank of rear-admiral of the white, the same which he would have been entitled to in the ordinary course of service, if the partiality in favour of others had not been exerted. His answer to this palliating proposal was, “No rank or station can be, with honour, received by a person who has been once thought undeserving or unentitled to it.” From this time he retired into private life, and survived two long wars, in neither of which he waa engaged. He died in London in 1785. He translated two volumes of father Feyjoo’s Discourses, the one published in 1777, and the other in 1779; and in 1730, “Essays, or Discourses, selected from the works of Feyjoo.” The late Charles Brett, esq. one of the lords of the admiralty, who died in 1799, and Timothy Brett, clerk of the cheque at Portsmouth, who died in 1790, were brothers of capt. Brett.

, admiral of the blue, an elder brother of the Trinity-house, and one of the directors of Greenwich hospital, born in 1709, was the son of Piercy Brett, many years a master in the royal navy, and afterwards master attendant of his majesty’s yards at Sheerness and Chatham, at which last place he died June 4$ 1752. Of Piercy’s early years we have no exact account; but he served either as midshipman, or as some say, as lieutenant in the Gloucester, of 50 guns, one of the small squadron ordered into the South Sea under Mr. (afterwards lord) Anson. He was afterwards appointed by Anson, who had a high opinion of him, to be second lieutenant in, his own ship, the Centurion, and he confided to him the attack on the town of Paita, a service which he executed with the greatest skill, promptitude, and exactness. After the capture of the Manilla galleon, and the arrival of the Centurion at Macao, Mr. Brett was promoted by commodore Anson to the command of that ship, under him, as captain, he being, as he supposed, authorised by his instructions, to issue such a commission. The lords of the admiralty, however, having refused to confirm it, Mr. Anson retired from the service, and would not return until Mr. Brett’s rank was allowed, with which another board of admiralty thought proper to comply, and Mr. Brett ranked as captain from Sept. 30, 1743.

In April 1745, he was appointed captain of the Lion, of 60 guns. After capturing the Mediator sloop of war, and a privateer which had long infested the channel, on Tuesday, July 9, he gave a more distinguished proof of his courage, in engaging a French man of war of 64 guns, and another ship of 16, both which, after a most desperate battle, he obliged to sheer off: the 64 gun ship got into Brest, quite disabled, having the captain and sixty-four men killed, and one hundred and thirty-six dangerously wounded. Of the Lion’s men, forty-five were killed, and one hundred and seven wounded; among the latter was capt. Brett, his master, and all his lieutenants. The bravery manifested by him on this occasion was the more important to his country, from the circumstance of the ship which he engaged being convoy to the frigate in which the son of the Pretender, then on his passage to Scotland, had embarked; and thus the money and arms intended for Scotland did not reach it in time to be of any service.

In 1747 he commanded the Yarmouth, of 64 guns, one of the squadron under Mr. Anson, which, in the month of May, defeated and captured that of France, commanded by De la Jonquiere. He was one of the captains sent after the conclusion of the action in pursuit of the convoy, of which, Dr. Campbell and other historians assert, two only were captured, but we find it peremptorily asserted in the periodical publications of the time, that five more French ships were brought into Portsmouth, and three into Plymouth. On Jan. 3, 1753, he received the honour of knighthood from his majesty, in consequence of his having carried him to Holland; and towards the end of the year he was appointed captain of the Caroline yacht, as successor to Sir C. Molloy. In 1758, he was commodore in the Downs, having his pendant on board the Norfolk, and was in the same year appointed first captain to lord Anson, in the Royal George, who commanded in the channel, the covering-fleet to the squadron employed under lord Howe on the coast of France. On the conclusion of this expedition he returned to his command in the Downs. In March 1760 he was appointed colonel of the Portsmouth division of marines. In 1761, still continuing to hold the Downs command, we find him frequently and actively employed in reconnoitering the opposite coast and ports of France. In December, having hoisted his pendant on board the Newark, he was ordered for the Mediterranean with seven ships of war, as second in command to sir Charles Saunders, and shared, as a flag, in the rich Spanish prize, the Hermione. In the course of the same year he was advanced to the rank of rear-admiral of the red. From this time he appears never to have accepted any command, but Dec. 13, 1766, was appointed one of the lords of the admiralty, an office which he held until Feb. 24, 1770. In October of that year he was promoted to be vice-admiral of the blue, and on the 28th of the same month, to be vice-admiral of the white; March 1775, was admiral of the red, and finally, in Jan. 1778, admiral of the blue. He died Oct. 12, 1781, and was buried at Beckenham church, in Kent. His biographer adds, that “whether living or dead, the vice of slander and malevolence was abashed at his manifold virtues, ever silent, not only at his approach, but even at the bare mention of his name.” In the last parliament of George II. and the first of George III. he sat as member for Queenborough, in Kent. In 1745, after his return from the South Seas with Anson, he married Henrietta, daughter of Thomas Colby, esq. clerk of the cheque at Chatham; by whom he had two sons, who died young, and a daughter who survived him.

, a learned English divine, the son of Robert Brett, of Whitstanton, in Somersetshire, was born in London, in 1561, and entered a commoner of Hart-hall, Oxford, in 1582, where he took one degree in arts, and was then elected fellow of Lincoln-college, and was distinguished for his progress in the learned languages. About 1595 he was made rector of Quainton, near Aylesbury, and was admitted B. D. in 1597. In 1604 he was appointed one of the seven Oxford divines who were to translate the Bible by king James’s order; and was afterwards made one of the first fellows of Chelsea college, a foundation which, we have already had occasion to remark^ was never completed. Wood represents him as a pious and learned man, and critically skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, and the Oriental languages, a vigilant pastor, a liberal benefactor, and a faithful friend. He died April la, 1637, and was buried in the chancel of his church at Quainton, under a monument with his effigies, and those of his widow and four children kneeling. He published, 1. “Vitae Sanctorum Evangelist. Johannis et Lucae a Simeone Metaphraste concinnatae,” Oxon, 1597, 8vo. 2. “Agatharchidis et Memnonis Historicorum quae supersunt omuia,” ibid. 1597, 8vo. 3. “Iconum sacraruni decas, in qua e subjectis Typis compluscula sanae doctrinse capita eruuntur,” ibid. 1603, 4to.

an eminent English divine and controversial writer, the son of Thomas Brett, gent. of Spring-grove, in the parish of Wye, in Kent, by Letitia, his wife, the daughter and heir of John Boys, esq. of Bettishanger, near Sandwich, in that county, was born at the seat of the latter, 3d Sept. 1667. His father disliking the situation of the old house at Wye, where his ancestors had lived for many generations, rebuilt it in a more commodious place, near a small grove of trees and a pleasant spring of water in the same parish, from whence he gave it the name of Spring-grove. He came and settled there in 1674, and sent his son to its grammar-school; the master of which was then John Paris, A. M. but he dying about three years after, was succeeded by Samuel Pratt, under whose instruction the youth remained until 1684.

His father was for some time undetermined whether he should send him to the university, but at length placed him in Queen’s-college, Cambridge, where he was admitted March 1684. Here he continued till he became soph, when some irregularities in money-matters, and improper company, induced his father to recal him, and he remained at home until he had missed the time of taking the degree of A. B. Upon his return to Cambridge some time after, finding his books embezzled by an idle scholar who had been put into his chamber, he determined to leave that college, and was admitted into Corpus Christ! Jan. 17, 1689, where he proceeded LL. B. on St. Barnabas day following, and made no scruple of taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy to king William and queen Mary; his father, and other relations, who were accounted whigs, having taught him whig principles. He saw also that the tories of his acquaintance took these oaths without any scruple, although they had formerly sworn allegiance to king James, which he had never done: even his schoolmaster, Mr. Pratt, complied, who had early instilled such principles into his mind as he could never thoroughly reconcile with the revolution. The bishop of Winchester ordained him deacon at Chelsea, Dec. 21, 1690, when he undertook the service of the cure of Folkstone> for a twelvemonth; after which he came up to London, entered into priests’ orders, and was chosen lecturer of Islington, Oct. 4, 1691; where, from his frequent conversation with Mr. Gery, the vicar, who was a tory, he became entirely of the same principles.

Upon his father’s decease, at the earnest solicitation of his mother, he left Islington with some reluctance in May, 1696, came to his house at Spring-grove, and took upon him the cure of Great- Chart where he soon became acquainted with the family of sir Nicholas Toke, and married his youngest daughter Bridget before the expiration of that year. In the following year he took the degree of LL. D. as a member of Queen’s, and soon after entered upon the cure of Wye, as lying more conveniently for him, but had no benefice of his own before April 12, 1703, when upon the death of his uncle, Thomas Boys, rector of Bettishanger, he was instituted to that rectory, on the presentation of Jeffery Boys, the eldest brother of Thomas. Archbishop Tenison made him an offer of the vicarage of Chistlet, of about 70l. per ann. soon after, and, as he acquainted him at the same time that he designed something better for him, indulged him in holding it by sequestration; and it was not long before he had an opportunity of making good his promise, by collating him to the rectory of Rucking, April 12, 1705.

At each of these institutions he took the oath of abjuration, and without scruple, until by frequent discourse on the subject of parties, with his near relation the lord chief baron Gilbert, who endeavoured to bring him over to the whigs, that he might have the better opportunity of recommending him to higher preferment, he unwittingly opened his eyes, as he terms it, and rivetted him the firmer in his former opinions; and, upon reading the trial of Dr. Sacheverel, published soon after, he began in earnest to believe he had taken oaths which he ought not to have taken, and resolved never to repeat them. In this dilemma, however, he had no scruple about the schism in the church, nor about continuing to pray for a prince in possession of the throne, until upon the accession of a new one, an act of parliament was made obliging all persons to take the oaths afresh. But this, in the present state of his conscience, he could not comply with, and wrote to his patron the archbishop, in April 1715, desiring he would give him leave to resign his livings, to which his grace answered very kindly, that he would advise him to consider farther of it, and not to do that rashly of which he might afterwards repent. Dr. Brett accordingly took his advice, and made no resignation, considering that his non-compliance with the act of parliament would' in a short time vacate them of course. He left off, however, to officiate in either of them, but still went to his own parish church as a lay communicant, until Mr. Campbell wrote to him, by order of bishop Hickes, (who had got some information of his resolution) pressing him earnestly to refrain entirely from all communion with the parish churches, urging the point of schism. On this he had recourse to ?.lr. Dodwell’s tracts on that subject, whose arguments not satisfying his mind, he resolved to surrender himself up to bishop Hickes, and upon a penitential confession, was received into his communion July 1, 1715, who from this time appears to have had a great influence over him.

He now usually officiated in his own house every Sunday, where a few of the same persuasion assembled with his family, until he was presented at the assizes the year following, for keeping a conventicle, but the act of indemnity soon after cleared him from this. To avoid, however, any prosecution of the like sort for the future, it was thought adviseable to vary the place of their meeting, and he went accordingly, sometimes to Canterbury, and sometimes to Feversham, where part of his congregation lived, without any interruption, until upon intruding into the duties of the parochial minister of Feversham, by visiting a sick person of his communion, this minister complained of him to the archbishop in 1718, who sent him word that if he heard any more such complaints, he should be obliged to lay them before the king and council. He continued to officiate on Sundays, as usual, and no farther notice was taken of it, until in 1729 he obtained leave of Mr. Simpson, the minister of Norton, to perform the burial office in his church. Lord Townsend hearing of this, and communicating it to the archbishop, he ordered his archdeacon to reprove the vicar for granting him permission. So that it appears from his own confession (for most of the foregoing particulars are extracted from the account he gives of/ himself in a letter to a friend) both the archbishops Tenison and Wake, shewed great wisdom and charity, candour and generosity, in their conduct towards him, although they could not influence him so far as to be even ^a lay-communicant with them; and that he lived under a mild government, having no other disturbance given him, than a reproof, upon a complaint.

He appears now to have lived in obscurity and with caution, until his death, which happened at his house at Spring-grove, March 5, 1743, when his remains were placed among those of his ancestors in the family vault at Wye. Mr. Masters, from whose history of C. C. college we have taken this account of Dr. Brett, represents him, upon the authority of one who knew him well, as a “learned, pious, and indefatigable author, a worthy, orthodox member of the church of England, and no small honour to her; whose works are a clear indication of his writing in the search of truth, which, if at any time he found himself deviating from, he always took the first opportunity of f<?­tracting it in, the most public manner. In private life he was a dutiful son, an affectionate husband, a kind parent, and a true friend. His conversation was ever facetious, good-natured, and easy, tempered with a becoming gravity, without moroseness, and so well adapted to those he happened to be in company with, that it rendered him agreeable to, as well as esteemed by persons of all ranks, who had the pleasure of his acquaintance.” His widow survived him some time, and one son, Nicholas, who was chaplain to sir Robert Cotton, of Steeple-Gedding, in Huntingdonshire, bart. and afterwards settled in Kent.

His works were: 1. “An account of Church-government and governors, wherein is shewed that the government of the church of England is most agreeable to that of the primitive church; for the instruction of a near relation, who had been brought up among the Dissenters,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. Some reflections were made upon this in “The beautiful Pattern,” written by Mr. Nokes, pastor of an independent congregation, who afterwards conformed to the church of England. A second edition of this tract was published in 1710, with large additions and amendments, and a chapter on “Provincial Synods,” which was animadverted upon in a pamphlet entitled “Presbytery not always an authoritative part of Provincial Synods,” written by Mr. Lewis, of Margate, 1711. 2. “The Authority of Presbyters vindicated, in answer thereto.” In a letter to a friend, however, he afterwards acknowledges he was convinced of being mistaken, for although Presbyters were often connected with, yet they had no authoritative votes in the ancient church. 3. “Two letters on the times wherein Marriage is said to be prohibited,” Lond. 1708, 4to. 4. “A letter to the author of LayBaptism invalid, wherein the doctrine of Lay-Baptism, taught in a sermon said to have been preached by the B of S 7 Nov. 1710, is censured and condemned by all reformed churches,” Lond. 1711. 5. “A sermon on Remission of Sins, Joh. xx. 21—23,” Lond. 1712, which Dr. Cannon made two motions in the house of convocation to have censured, but not succeeding, he published an account of them, which was answered the same year, in 6. “The doctrine of Remission, &c. explained and vindicated.” He afterwards owned he went too far, and that Dr. Marshall, in his “Doctrine of the primitive church,” had set this matter right. With this sermon he also published in 1715, five others, on “The honour of the Christian priesthood. The extent of Christ’s commission to baptise. The Christian Altar and Sacrifice. The Dangers of a Relapse. And, True Moderation.” The “Extent of Christ’s commission to baptise,” with “the Letter to the author of Lay-Baptism invalid,” was answered by Mr. Bingham in his “Scholastic History of Lay-Baptism,” and being reflected upon by the bishop of Oxford in a charge, he wrote 7. an “Enquiry into the judgment and practice of the primitive church, &c. in answer thereto,” Lond. 1713; and upon Mr. Bingham’s reply, he published, 8. “A farther Enquiry, &c.” 1714. 9. “A review of the Lutheran principles,” shewing how they differ from the church of England, &c.“In the same year, Mr. Lewis, in answer to this, undertook to show their agreement, with which Dr. Brett was very angry, and threatened him with a reply, from which his friends dissuaded him. In a second edition, however, he nvule some transient remarks upon, two letters to the lord viscount Townsend, by Robert Watts, in answer thereto. 10.” A vindication of himself from the calumnies cast upon him in some news-papers, falsely charging him with turning papist; in a letter to the hon. Arch. Campbell, esq.“Lond. 1715. 11.” Dr. Bennet’s concessions to the Non-jurors proved destructive to the cause he endeavours to defend,“1717. 12.” The Independency of the Church upon the State, as to its pure spiritual powers, &c.“1717. 13.” The Divine right of Episcopacy, &c.“1718; and in the same year, 14.” Tradition necessary to explain and interpret the Holy Scriptures,“with a postscript in answer to” No sufficient reason, &c.“and a preface, with remarks on” Toland’s Nazarenus,“and” a further proof of the necessity of Tradition, &c.“15.” A Vindication of the postscript in answer to No just grounds, &c.“1720. 16.” A discourse concerning the necessity of discerning Christ’s body in the Holy Communion,“Lond. 1720. 17.” A dissertation on the principal liturgies used by the Christian church in the celebration of the Holy Eucharist,“1720. He is also supposed to have written, 18.” Some discourses on the ever-blessed Trinity,“in the same year. 19.” Of degrees in the university,“a dissertation in the Biblioth. Liter. N”. 1. “An essay on the various English translations of the Bible,” N. 4. “An historical essay concerning arithmetical figures,” N. 8, with an appendix to it, N. 10, 1722, 3, 4, in 4to. 20. “An instruction to a person newly confirmed, &c.” 1725. 21. “A Chronological essay on the Sacred History, &c.” in defence of the computation of the Septuagint, with an “Essay on the confusion of languages,” 1729. 22. “A general history of the World, &c.” 1732. There is a letter of his to Dr. William Warren, fellow of Trinity-hall, in Peck’s Desiderata, lib. VII. p. 13, containing an account of Richard Plantagenet (a natural son of king Richard III.) dated from Spring-grove, 1 Sept. 1733, which is said to be a forgery, invented to impose upon the doctor’s credulity, and to ridicule modern antiquaries. 23. “An answer to the plain account of the Sacrament,” in 1735 or 6. 24. “Some remarks on Dr. Waterland’s Review of the doctrine of the Eucharist,” &c. with an Appendix in answer to his charges,“1741. 25.” A letter to a clergyman, shewing why the Hebrew Bibles differ from the Septuagint,“1743. 26.” Four letters between a Gentleman and a Clergyman, concerning the necessity of Episcopal communion for the valid administration of Gospel ordinances,“1743. 27.” The life of Mr. John Johnson, A.M.“ prefixed to his posthumous tracts in 1748, with several prefaces to the works of others, particularly a very long one to Hart’s” Bulwark stormed,“&c. In 1760 was published” A dissertation on the antient versions of the Bible,“a second edition prepared for the press by the author, and” now first published," 8vo.

Sir John Hawkins informs us that Dr. Johnson derived his opinion of the lawfulness of praying for the dead, from the controversy on the subject about the year 1715, agitated between certain divines of the non-juring persuasion, and particularly from the opinions of Dr. Brett.

, son of Francis Durant de Breval, D. D. prebendary of Westminster, was educated at Westminster-school, to which he was admitted 1693, and removed thence to Trinity-college, Cambridge, in 1697. He was elected fellow of it about the year 1702; but, upon some disagreement between him and Dr. Bentley, the master, he quitted his fellowship, and went into the army, then in Flanders, as an ensign. The ease with which he acquired the Flemish and German languages, his great knowledge, his exquisite pencil, and genteel behaviour, were soon noticed by the duke of Marlborough; who promoted him to the rank of captain, and also employed him in jdivers negotiations with several German princes. He began his travels about 1720, published the two first volumes of them in 1723 and 1725, and the third and fourth in 1738, all in folio. It may be matter of surprise to see Mr. Breval’s name among the gentlemen of the Dunciad; but, soon after the unsuccessful exhibition of the “Three hours after marriage,” which, though with only Gay’s name to it, was certainly the joint production of Gay, Pope, and Arbuthnot, Breval, under the assumed name of Joseph Gay, produced a farce called “The Confederates,” and this exposed him to Pope’s resentment. He published also in 1734: 1. “The History of the house of Nassau,” 8vo. 2. “The Hoop-petticoat, a poem,” 1716. 3. “The Art of Dress, an heroi-eomical poem,” 1717. 4. “Mac Dermot, or the Irish Fortune-hunter,” 1717. 5. “Calpe, or Gibraltar,” apoem, 1717; and io, the following year produced a comedy called “The Play is the Plot,” which not succeeding in that shape, he reduced it to a farce called “The Strollers,” which met with more favour. In 1737 he brought out at Coventgarden, a musical opera called “The Rape of Helen.” As to what is said above, of his quitting his fellowship, the fact is, that he and a Mr. Miller were expelled. Breval, speaking of the conduct of Dr. Bentley on this occasion, used the remarkable expression of “Tantum non jugulavit.”

, a French antiquary, was born Sept. 17, 1528, and entered the society of the Benedictines of St. Germain -des-Pres in 1549. He published in 1601 an edition of Isidorus, fol.; and 1. “Le Theatre des Antiquity’s de Paris,” 1639, 4to. 2. “Supplementum antiquitatum Parisiensium,” 1614, 4to. Of these two Malingre availed himself in his “Antiquities of Paris,” published in 1640, fol. 3. “Les Pastes de Paris,” by Bonfons, improved by our author, 1605, and 1608, 8vo. 4. “La Vie du cardinal Charles de Bourbon,” uncle of Henry IV. 1612, 4to. 5. “Chronicon Abbatum regalis monast S. Germani a Pratis,” 1603, fol. He died in 1614, leaving some of the above works ready for the press.

, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born in the Isle of Jersey, in the reign of king James I. and probably educated in grammar-learning in that place. From thence he went and studied logic and philosophy in the Protestant university of Saumur, where he took the degree of master of arts, on September 12, 1634. Coming to Oxford, he was, October 12, 1638, incorporated M. A. as he stood at Saumur. About this time king Charles I. having through archbishop Laud’s persuasion founded three fellowships in the colleges of Pembroke, Exeter, and Jesus, for the islands of Jersey and Guernsey, alternately, Mr. Brevint was nominated the first fellow at Jesus-college upon this foundation, in 1638. Here he continued till he was ejected from his fellowship by the parliament- visitors, for refusing to take the solemn league and covenant, and withdrew to his native country, but upon the reduction of that place by the parliament’s forces, he fled into France, and became minister of a Protestant congregation in Normandy. Not long after, he had the honour of being made chaplain to the viscount de Turenne, afterwards marshal of France, whose lady was one of the most pious women of her time. Whilst he was in that station, he was one of the persons “employed about the great design then in hand, of reconciling the Protestant and Popish religions; which gave him an access into, and made him acquainted with every corner of that church,” as he says himself. At the restoration of king Charles II. he returned to England, and was presented by that prince (wjio had known him abroad) to the tenth prebend in the church of Durham, vacant by the promotion of Dr. J. Cosin to that see, and was installed March 15, 1660-61. By bishop Cosiu, who had been his fellow-sufferer, he was also collated to a living in the diocese of Durham. On the 27th of February, 1661-62, he took his degree of D. D. at Oxford. Having during his exile seen Popery in its native deformity, and observed all the mean and dishonest arts that are used to support it, he in 1672 published “Missale Romanum; or, the depth and mystery of the Roman Mass laid open and explained, for the use of both reformed and unreformed Christians,” and the next year, “The Christian Sacramenc and Sacrifice, by way of discourse, meditation, and prayer, upon the nature, parts, and blessings of the holy communipn,” reprinted on the recommendation of Dr. Waterland, in 1739. And in 1674, “Saul and Samuel at Endor, or the new waies of salvation and service, which usually tempt men to Rome, and detain them there, truly represented and refuted,” reprinted 1688. At the end of which is, “A brief account of R. F. his Missale Vindicaturo, or vindication of the Roman mass,” being an answer to “The depth and mystery of the Roman Mass,” above-mentioned. The learning and other eminent qualifications of the author having recommended him to the esteem of the world, and to the favour of his sovereign, he was promoted to the deanery of Lincoln, and was installed January 3, 1681-82, and had the prebend of WeltonPayns-hall annexed thereto, January 7th following. He died May 5, 1695, and was buried in the cathedral church of Lincoln, behind the high altar; where, on a gravestone, is an inscription to his memory. He was a person of extensive reading, especially in the controversy between the Protestants and Papists; zealous for the church of England; and for his life and learning, truly praise-worthy. Besides the above works, he published in Latin: 1. “Ecclesiae primitives Sacramentum & Sacrificium, a pontificiis corruptelis, & exinde natis controversiis liberum,” written at the desire of the princesses of Turenne and Bouillon. 2. “Eucharistiae Christianse prsesentia realis, & pontificia ficta, luculentissimis non testimoniis modo, sed etiam fundamentis, quibus fere tota S. S. Patrum Theologia nititur, hsec explosa, ilia suffulta & asserta.” 3. “Pro Serenissima Principe Weimariensi ad Theses Jenenses accurata Responsio.” 4. “Ducentue plus minus Praelectiones in Matthaei xxv capita, et aliorum Evangelistarum locos passim parallelos.” He also translated into Frenck “The judgment of the university of Oxford concerning the solemn League and Covenant.”

, a dramatic writer of the reign of king James I. appears to have been held in high estimation by the wits of that time, but there are many disputes as to his works, and no information concerning his life. The various dramatic annalists assign him from one to six plays. The controversy seems of little consequence, unless that it gave rise to a storyof Oliver Cromwell’s having acted a part in one of his supposed plays, entitled “Lingua,” the part of one ambitious for a crown and that his ambition was first excited by personating this character. The story, however, seems as doubtful as the author of the play.

, a botanist, whose connection with Dillenius entitles him to some notice, was originally of Trowbridge, in Wiltshire, in which county he had a small estate. He was engaged at one time in the woollen manufactory of that place, but it is thought was unsuccessful. He attended Dillenius into Wales, Anglesey, and the Isle of Man, in the summer of 1726, and afterwards remained the winter, and the greater part of the next year, in that country; making his residence at Bangor, and taking his excursions to Snowdon and elsewhere. While in Wales, it was intended that he should have gone over to Ireland to make a botanical tour through that kingdom; but that expedition never took place. So long a residence gave him an opportunity, not only of seeing the beauties of summer plants, but of collecting the Cryptogamia in winter, when they flourish most. Here he received instructions from Dillenius, collected specimens of every thing rare, or unknown to him before, and sent them to Dillenius to determine the species, and fix the names. This journey appears to have been designed to promote Dillenius’ s “Appendix to the Synopsis.” In 1728, Mr. Brewer went into Yorkshire, and resided the remainder of his days at Bradford, in the neighbourhood of Dr. Richardson, by whose beneficence he was assisted in various ways. After his retirement into Yorkshire, he meditated, and nearly finished a work which was to have borne the title of “The Botanical Guide,” but it never appeared. The time of his decease has not been determined, but he is said to have been living in 1742. His passion for English botany, and his skill and assiduity, enabled him to afford singular assistance to Dillenius, especially in the subjects for his “History of Mosses.”

, called Cavalier, a painter of landscapes, was born at Antsverp in 1677, and remained under the instruction of old Rysbrack, the landscape painter, for three years, after which period he became, in consequence of his close application, competent to commence the practice of his art. Having been diverted from his purpose of visiting Italy by the encouraging reception which he met with at Francfort and Nuremberg, he spent two years with his brother, Francis Breydel, at the court of Hesse-Cassel; and afterwards went to Amsterdam, where he copied several views of the Rhine, from the designs of Griffier, and thus improved his colouring, pencilling, and taste of design, so that the works of this artist may be regarded as his second and best school. At length he settled at Ghent, where his performances were much admired; but he was reduced by extravagance to the necessity of earning money expeditiously, and to multiply pictures much inferior in design and execution to others which had been produced by his pencil. His health declined towards the close of his life; and his performances during the intervals of ease which he enjoyed, amidst recurring paroxysms of the gout, wanted the spirit, delicate finishing, and firmness of touch, of his better days. Whilst the ideas and style of Griftier were his models, his pictures, principally views of the Rhine, were well designed, neatly executed, and excellently coloured. But he changed this manner, in order to imitate Velvet Breughel, whose works were universally admired, and selected for his subjects battles, sieges, and encampments. He often copied the prints of Vandermeulen; but afterwards composed very readily in this style, without borrowing from any other artist. His best pictures are full of spirit, his touch is firm, and well adapted to his style, and his design is correct. Some of them appear too laboured, but others are full of harmony. He died in 1744.

, brother of the above, was born at Antwerp, in 1679, and it is generally supposed that he was a disciple of old Rysbrack, as well as his brother Charles; but he chose very different subjects; for, at an early time of life he painted portraits with so great success, that he was appointed painter to the court of Hesse-Cassel, where his works were very much esteemed. He also painted conversations, feasts, assemblies, and carnivals, subjects very pleasing to the lovers of the art, and on that account he was induced to paint a great many in that style. However, from a levity of temper, he quitted the court of Hesse, where he was exceedingly caressed, and went to England, where, probably, he found sufficient encouragement, as he continued there for several years along with his friend Vandermyn. His conversations and other compositions are finely executed, agreeably coloured, and well disposed; and those pictures of his band are most preferred where he has endeavoured to give a proper variety to his figures. In those the dresses are usually in the mode of the time; the persons represented are of different ranks and occupations, mixed with some of the military order; and through the whole there is an appearance of nature, truth, and a great deal of spirit. He died in 17 So.

, one of the most eminent nonconformists of the seventeenth century, was born in 1600, and educated at Emmanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree, in 1626, and was several years a fellow. After preaching in Essex for five years, he was called to Norwich, where he preached in the parish of St. George’s Tombland, until 1636, when he was silenced by bishop Wren for nonconformity in some points, and remaining obstinate, he was excommunicated, and the writ de ca> pitndo issued against him. On this he quitted Norwich, where he had a lecture and two cures, and went into Holland. At Rotterdam he was chosen pastor to a congregational church, but returned to England in 1642, frequently preached before the long parliament, and was chosen one of the assembly of divines, although he agreed with them only in doctrinal matters. At length he fixed at Yarmouth, where he preached until the Bartholomew act took place, when he was ejected. He died March 12, 1670. He was a man of considerable learning, and possessing a library well furnished with the fathers, schoolmen, and critics, was a very close student, rising every morning, both in winter and summer, at four o'clock, and continuing in his library until eleven. He was inflexibly attached to the independent party, but too charitable towards men of opposite sentiments to follow their example in all respects. His principal works are collected in 2 vols. 4to, 1657, besides which he published many single sermons before the parliament, and some tracts enumerated by Calamy. In Peck’s Desiderata are two letters from him to Scobell, the clerk of the council, by which we learn that he was a leading man among the independents.

, a lawyer of considerable eminence, was the son of Dr. John Bridgeman, bishop of Chester, and educated to the profession of the law, in which, as he disapproved of the usurpation, he made no figure until the restoration, when on May 13, 1660, he was called to be a serjeant by the king’s special writ, and on June 1, was advanced to be lord chief baron of the exchequer, from which, Oct. 22, he was removed to be lord chief justice of the common pleas. While he presided in this’ court, his reputation was at its height for equity and moderation. In 1667, when the great seal was taken from lord Clarendon, the king delivered it, August 13, to sir Orlando, with the title of Keeper. After this, his good name began to decline: he was timid and irresolute, and his timidity still increased with his years: nor was his judgment equal to all the difficulties of his office. His Jady, a woman of cunning and intrigue, was too apt to interfere in chancery suits; and his sons, who practised under him, did not bear the fairest characters. He was desirous of an union with Scotland, and a comprehepsion with the dissenters: but was against tolerating the papists. He is said to have been removed from his office for refusing to affix the seal to the king’s declaration for liberty of conscience, Nov. 17, 1672. The time of his death we have not been able to ascertain, but a singular account of his son sir Orlando, may be seen in the Biog. Brit. vol. VI. p. 3740. The lord-keeper is known as a law writer, by his “Conveyances, being select precedents of deeds and instruments concerning the most considerable estates in England,” 1682, 1699, 1710, 1725, 2 parts, folio.

, translator of the duke de Rohan’s Memoirs, was the younger brother of sir Thomas Bridges, of Keinsham abbey in Somersetshire, and son of Edward Bridges, esq. of the same place, by Philippa, daughter of sir George Speke, K. B. He died Jan. 1, 1677, and was buried in Keinsham church. His translation was entitled “The Memoirs of the Duke of Rohan or a faithful relation of the most remarkable occurrences iij France, especially those concerning the reformed churches there; from the death of Henry the Great until the peace made with them, in June 1629. Together with divers politic discourses upon several occasions. Written originally in French, by the duke of Rohan, and now Englished by George Bridges, of Lincoln’s-inn, esq.” London, 1660, 8vo. The translation is dedicated to James, marquis of Onnond, lord lieutenant of Ireland. The translator says he was principally induced to publish it in our language, by some passages tending to the vindication of Charles I. in the matter of relieving the inhabitants of Rochelle, during the memorable siege of that place. A very interesting account of the family of Mr. Bridges may be seen in our authority.

, esq. of Barton- Seagrave, in Northamptonshire, a celebrated antiquary and topographer, was son and heir of John Bridges, esq. who purchased that estate, by Elizabeth, sister of sir William Trumbull, secretary of state, and was born at Binfield in Berkshire, about 1666. His grandfather was col. John Bridges of Alcester in Warwickshire; not related to the Chandos family, nor bearing arms of any similitude to them, but said to be descended from Ireland. He was bred to the law, and a member of Lincoln’s-inn, of which he at last became bencher. His practical attention to his profession was probably prevented by his prospect of a private fortune, and the lucrative places which he enjoyed. In 1695 he was appointed solicitor of the customs; in 1711, commissioner of the same; and iii 1715, cashier of excise. He was also one of the governors of Bethlehem hospital, and a fellow of the royal society.

In the latter end of his life, about 1719, he began to form collections towards a history of Northamptonshire; and employed several persons of abilities and skill to make drawings, collect information, and transcribe such monuments and records as were essential to his purpose. In this manner, it is said, he expended several thousand pounds. The transcripts thus collected extend to upwards of thirty volumes in folio; besides five volumes, quarto, containing accounts of churches, &c. and four smaller volumes, in his own hand-writing. But Mr. Bridges never proceeded to compose any part of the work himself. He was a man in the highest degree qualified to direct such an xmdertaking. His judgment was sound, and his learning various and extensive. As an investigator of antiquities, his skill and diligence procured him great respect from many who were most eminent in that study; some of whom, and particularly Hearne, the celebrated Oxford antiquary, have borne very honourable testimony to his knowledge, and professed themselves indebted to his friendly communications. His collection of books was so judicious, that the catalogues of his library, printed after his decease, were long, and are still, retained as valuable by every curious collector. He died July 30, 1724, at his chambers in Lincolu’s-inn. His Mss. came into the hands of his brother and heir, William Bridges, esq. secretary to the stamp office and after many attempts and delays (of which an interesting, but, to county-historians, not a very encouraging account, may be seen in Mr. Nichols’s Life of Bowyer), formed the basis of the “History of Northamptonshire,” published in 2 vols. fol. by the late Rev. Peter Whalley, grammar-school master of Christ’s hospital; the first vol. in 1762, and the second in 1791. It is a very valuable book, but might have been greatly improved, if a parochial visitation had previously taken place.

, rector of Lincoln college, Oxford, and who in his writings called himself Aqua Pontanus, was born in Yorkshire, but of a Somersetshire family. He was entered a student at Hart-hall, Oxford, and thence removed to Brazen-nose college, where he was M. A* 1556, and about the same time took orders. Although he outwardly complied with the reformed religion in queen Elizabeth’s days, he lay under the suspicions, which he afterwards confirmed, of being more seriously attached to popery. While he preserved the disguise, however, he was, May 1, 1562, made rector of Wooton-Courtney in the diocese of Wells; and April 14, 1563, was chosen rector of Lincoln college. On Nov. 28, 1570, he was made master of Catherine’s hospital, near Bedminster, canon of Wells, and archdeacon of Rochester. In 1574, however, being no longer able to conceal his zeal for popery, he quitted the rectorship of Lincoln, which Wood thinks he could no longer have retained, without the danger of expulsion, and after resigning his other preferments, went to the English college at Doway, along with several students whom he had instructed in the principles of popery. Afterwards he travelled to Rome, and thence to Germany. He was at Triers in 1594, but no farther traces can be discovered of his progress, nor when he died. It is supposed that in his latter days he became a Jesuit, but neither Pits or Alegambe notice this circumstance. He published, 1. “Concertatio Ecclesiae Catholicse in Anglia,” first published by Fenn, and Gibbons, at Triers, 1583, 8vo, and enlarged by Dr. Bridgewater, ibid. 1594, 4to. It contains an account of the sufferings and deaths of several priests, &c. 2. “Confutatio virulentae disputationis Theologies, in qua Georgius Sohn, Prof. Acad. Heidelberg, conatus est docere, Pontificem Romanum esse Antichristum, &c.” ibid. 1589, 4to. 3. “An account of the Six Articles, usually proposed to the Missionaries that suffered in England.”

, an able French geographer, was born at Abbeville in 1601, and entered the society of Jesuits in 1619. He taught humanities seven years, rhetoric seventeen, and was some time prefect of the classes, and lectured on the holy scriptures. His private character corresponded with his learning. He was appointed joint librarian with father Cossart of the library of the Jesuits’ college in Paris, where he died Dec. 9, 1668. He published, 1 “Xenia Delphino oblata nomine collegii Rothomagensis,” Rouen, 1639, 4to. 2. “Parallela geographies veteris et novae,” 1648 and 1649, three volumes, 4to, a very exact and methodical work, and ornamented with plates well designed. These volumes, however, contain, only Europe; and it can never be enough regretted, says Niceron, that he did not publish the Parallels of Asia and Africa, which were assuredly finished and ready, but somehow or other lost. He published also, 3. “Annales mundi,” in 7 vols. 12mo, from the beginning of the world to the year of Christ 1663, often reprinted and enlarged; and “Theatrum geographicum Europae veteris,” 1653, in folio. He was farther concerned in a chronological work, joined with father Labbe; but he is supposed not to have succeeded so well here as in geography. 4. “Elogium patris Jacobi Sirmundi,” Paris, 1651, 4to, with an accurate catalogue of father Sirmond’s works. 5. “Acute dicta omnium veterum poetarum Latinorum,” Paris, 1684, 12mo. His chronological work was entitled “Philippi Labbe et P. Brietii concordia chronologica,” Paris, 1670, 5 vols. folio. The fifth volume only belongs to Briet.

, one of the greatest mathematicians in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, was born at Daisy Bank adjoining to Warleywood, near Halifax, in Yorkshire, in 1556, but according to the Halifax register probably sooner, as it is there recorded that he was baptised Feb. 23, 1560. From a grammar-school 'in that country he was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, 1579; where, after taking both degrees in arts, he was chosen fellow of his college in 1588. He applied himself chiefly to the study of the mathematics, in which he greatly excelled; in consequence in 1592 he was made examiner and lecturer in that faculty; and soon after, reader of the physic lecture, founded by Dr. Linacer.

Upon the settlement of Gresham college, in London, he was chosen the first professor of geometry there, in 1596. Soon after this, he constructed a table, for finding the latitude, from the variation of the magnetic needle being given. In 1609 he contracted an acquaintance with the learned Mr. James Usher, afterwards archbishop of Armagh, which continued many years after by letters, two of Mr. Briggs’s being still extant in the collection of Usher’s letters that were published: in the former of these, dated August 1610, he writes among other things, that he was engaged in the subject of eclipses; and in the latter, dated the 10th of March 1615, that he was wholly taken up and employed about the noble invention of logarithms, which had come out the year before, and in the improvement of which he had afterwards so great a concern. For Briggs immediately set himself to the study and improvement of them; expounding them also to his auditors in his lecturesat Gresham college. In these lectures he proposed the alteration of the scale of logarithms, from the hyperbolic form which Napier had given them, to that in which 1 should be the logarithm of the ratio of 10 to 1; and soon after he wrote to Napier to make the same proposal to himself. In 1616 Briggs made a visit to Na.pier at Edinburgh, to confer with him upon this change; and the next year he did the same also. In these conferences, the alteration was agreed upon accordingly, and upon Briggs’ s return from his second visit, in 1617, he published the first chiliad, or 1000 of his logarithms.

In 1619 he was made the first Savilian professor of geometry; and resigned the professorship of Gresham college the 25th of July, 1620*. At Oxford he settled himself at Merton college, where he continued a most laborious and studious life, employed partly in the duties of his office as geometry lecturer, and partly in the computation of the logarithms, and in other useful works. In 1622 he published, a small tract on the “North-west passage to the South Seas, through the continent of Virginia and Hudson’s Bay;” the reason of which was probably, that he was then a member of the company trading to Virginia. His next performance was his great and elaborate work, the “Arithmetica Logarithmica,” in folio, printed at London in 1624- a stupendous work for so short a time containing the logarithms of 30 thousand natural numbers, to 14 places of figures beside the index. Briggs lived also to complete a table of logarithmic sines and tangents for the 100th part of every degree, to 14 places of figures beside the index; with a table of natural sines for the same 100th parts to 15 places, and the tangents and secants for the

pext Monday and Wednesday, begin- of his abode in Oxford a commoaer

ning from the ninth proposition of the there. Wood’s Oxford, first of the Elements of Euclid, same to ten places; with the construction of the whole. These tables were printed at Gouda in 1631, under th care of Adrian Vlacq, and published in 1633, with the title of “Trioonometria Britannica.” In the construction of these two works, on the logarithms of numbers, and of sine’s and tangents, our author, beside extreme labour and application, manifests the highest powers of genius and invention; as we here for the first time meet with several of the most important discoveries in the mathematics, and what have hitherto been considered as of much later invention; such as the binomial theorem; the differential method and construction of tables by differences; the interpolation by differences; with angular sections, and several other ingenious compositions: a particular account of which may be seen in the Introduction to Dr. Mutton’s Mathematical Tables. This truly great man terminated his useful life the 26th of January, 1630, and was buried in the choir of the chapel of Merton college, near to the high altar, and under the monument of sir Henry Savile, on which occasion, a sermon, by Mr. William Sellar, and an oration by Mr. Hugh Cressy, fellows of that college, were delivered before the principal members of the university. As to his character, he was not less esteemed for his great probity and other eminent virtues, than for his excellent skill in mathematics. Dr. Smith gives him the character of a man of great probity; easy of access to all; free from arrogance, moroseness, envy, ambition, and avarice; a contemner of riches, and contented in his own situation; preferring a studious retirement to all the splendid circumstances of life. The learned Mr. Thomas Gataker, who attended his lectures when he was reader of mathematics at Cambridge, represents him as highly esteemed by all persons skilled in mathematics, both at home and abroad; and says, that desiring him once to give his judgment concerning judicial astrology, his answer was, “that he conceived it to be a mere system of groundless conceits.” Oughtred calls him the mirror of the age, for his excellent skill in geometry. And one of his successors at Gresham college, the learned Dr. Isaac Barrow, in his oration there upon his admission, has drawn his character more fully; celebrating his great abilities, skill, and industry, particularly in perfecting the invention of logarithms, which, without his care and pains, might have continued an imperfect and useless design. His writings were more important than numerous some of them were published by other persons the list of the principal part of them as follows. 1. “A Table tft find the Height of the Pole the magnetical declination being given.” This was published in Mr. Thomas Blundevile’s Theoriques of the Seven Planets, London, 1602, 4to. 2. “Tables for the improvement of Navigation.” These consist of a table of declination of every minute of the ecliptic, in degrees, minutes, and seconds; a table of the sun’s prosthaphaereses; a table of equations of the sun’s ephemerides; a table of the sun’s declination; tables to find the height of the pole in any latitude, from the height of the pole star. These tables are printed in the second edition of Edward Wright’s treatise, entitled Certain Errors in Navigation detected and corrected, London^ 1610, 4to. 3. “A description of an Instrumental Table to find the part proportional, devised by Mr. Edward Wright.” This is subjoined to Napier’s table of logarithms, translated into English by Mr. Wright, and after his death published by Briggs, with a preface of his own, London, 1616 and 1618, 12mo. 4. “Logarithmorum chilias prima,” London, 1617, 8vo. 5. “Lucubrationes & Annotationes in opera posthuma J. Neperi,” Edinb. 1619, 4to. 6. “Euclidis Elementorum VI libri priores, &c.” London, 1620, folio. This was printed without his name to it. 7. “A treatise of the North-west passage to the South Sea, &c.” By H. B. Lond. 1622, 4to. This was reprinted in Purchas’s Pilgrims, vol. III. p. 852.

10. “Two letters to archbishop Usher.” 11. “* Mathematica ab antiquis minus cognita.” This is a summary account of the most observable inventions of modern mathematicians, conrtnunicated by Mr. Briggs to Dr. George Hakewill, and published by him in his Apologie, London, folio. Besides these publications, Briggs wrote some other pieces that have not been printed: as, 1. “Commentaries on the Geometry of Peter Ramus.”. 2. “Duae Epistolae ad celeberrimum virutn Chr. Sever. Longomontanuiii.” One of these letters contained some remarks on a treatise of Longomontanus, about squaring the circle; ani the other a defence of arithmetical geometry, 3. “Animadversiones Geometricas, 4to. 4.” De eodem Argumento,“4to. These two were in the possession of the late Mr. Jones. They both contain a great variety of geometrical propositions, concerning the properties of many figures, with several arithmetical computations relating to the circle, angular sections, &c. Mr. Jones also had, 5.” A treatise of common arithmetic,“folio; and 6.” A letter to Mr. Clarke of Gravesend," dated Feb. 25, 1606, containing the description of a ruler, called Bedwell’s ruler.

, an eminent physician, was son of Augustine Briggs, esq. who was descended of an ancient family in Norfolk, and had been four times member of parliament for the city of Norwich, where this son was born about the year 1650, although his biographers differ very widely on this point. At thirteen years of age he was sent to Bene't-college in Cambridge, and placed under the care of Dr. Thomas Tenison, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, whom he succeeded in his fellowship. He took both his degrees in arts, and was chosen fellow of his college, Nov. 1668. His genius leading him to the study of physic, he travelled into France, where he attended the lectures of the famous anatomist Mons. Vieussens at Montpelier; and, after his return, published his “Ophthalmographia” in 1676. The year following he was created M. D. at Cambridge, and soon after made fellow of the college of physicians of London. In 1682 he quitted his fellowship to his brother; and the same year his “Theory of Vision” was published by Hooke. In 1683 he sent to the royal society a continuation of that discourse, which was published in their Transactions; and the same year was by Charles II. appointed physician to St. Thomas’s hospital. In 1684 he communicated to the royal society two remarkable cases relating to vision, which were likewise printed in their Transactions; and in 1685 published a Latin version of his “Theory of Vision,” at the desire of Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, with a recommendatory epistle from him prefixed to it. And for completing this curious and useful subject relating to the eye, he promised, in the preface, two other treatises, one “De usu partium oculi;” and the other “De ejusdem affectibus;” neither of which', however, appears to have been ever published: but, in 1687, came out a second edition of his “Ophthalmographia.” He was afterwards made physician in ordinary to king William, and continued in great esteem for his skill in his profession till he died at Town-Malling in Kent, Sept. 4, 1704, and was there buried, although a cenotaph is erected to his memory in the church of Holt in Norfolk. He married Hannah, sole daughter and heiress of Edmund Hobart, grandson to sir Henry Hobart, lord chief justice of the common pleas in the reign of James I. by whom he left three children, Mary, Henry, and Hannah. Henry died in 1748, rector of Hoit.

Dr. Briggs’s chief patron, during his foreign travels, was the right hon. Ralph Montagu, esq. ambassador of France, and afterwards duke of Montagu. It was through this gentleman’s protection that Dr. Briggs went and studied at Montpelier, under Vieussens, to whom he acknowledged himself chiefly indebted for what skill he had in that science. The doctor was a benefactor to the college in which he had been educated. In order to render the kitchen of it more cleanly and wholesome, he caused it ta be paved with square stones; and gave besides, twenty pounds, for the augmentation of the stock for commons. He made presents, likewise, of books to the library. Dr. Briggs had a brother, Robert Briggs, who was educated in the same college, and succeeded him in his fellowship. He became successively A. B. A. M. and LL. D. was made a fellow of the royal society; and was chosen, on the 7th of February, 1686, professor of law in Gresham college, which office he held to his death, on the 22d of December, 1718.

, who appears to have had a taste for poetry and biography in the infancy of those studies, was born at or near to Caversham in Oxfordshire, but descended from the Brighams of Yorkshire. He was educated at Hart-hall, Oxford, as Wood conjectures, and afterwards studied at one of the inns of court. Having a turn for poetry, he passed his hours in the perusal of the best poets, and his admiration of Chaucer led him to be at the expence of beautifying the monument of that eminent poet in 1556, removing it to a more conspicuous place in Westminster abbey, where we now find it. He died in his prime, Dec. 1559, leaving, l.“De venationibus rerum rnemorabilium,” a collection of notices of characters and events, of which Bale has made much use. 2. “Memoirs,” by way of Diary, in 12 bocks. 3. Miscellaneous Poems. But none of these are probably now m existence.

, a physician and divine of eminence of the sixteenth century, took his degree of doctor in medicine at Cambridge, and, as we learn from Wood, he was made rector of Methley, in Yorkshire, in 1591. He appears by his writings to have had a good share of practice, and to have been well versed in the doctrines of the early Greek writers. The work by which he is principally known is his “Treatise of Melancholy,” containing the causes thereof, and reasons of the strange effects it worketh in our minds, with the physical cure, and spiritual consolation for such as have thereto adjoined an afflicted conscience,“London, 1586, 12mo. He excuses his writing this treatise, contrary to his usual custom, ia the English language, from its being a practical work, and to be read-by persons out of the pale of physic. It was also done, he observes, by the Greek and Roman writers. He entertained, however, very lofty ideas of the dignity of the medical character.” No one,“he says,.” sho'uid touch so holy a thing that hath not passed the whole discipline of liberal sciences, and washed himself pure and clean in the waters of wisdome and understanding.“The cure of melancholy, in his opinion, depends on bleeding, by purges and vomits. He had before, viz. in 1583, published” De Dyscrasia Corporis Humani,“London, 8vo. He was also author of” Hygieine, sen de Sanitate tuenda, Medicinae Pars prirna,“1588, -8vo.” Therajjeutica, hoc est de Sanitate restituenda, Medicinre pars altera,“1589,' 8vo, which were reprinted in 1598, in ICto r and” An Abridgment of Fox’s Acts and Monuments," 1589, 4to. He died in 1615.

, an English divine, attached to the principles of the puritans, was born at Nottingham in 1557, and was educated in Queen’s college, Cambridge, and long maintained a controversy on the discipline and ceremonies of the church, which seems to have led 'him to write his Commentaries in Latin on the Song of Solomon and the Revelations. This last was afterwards translated under the title of “The Revelation of St. John illustrated,” 1644, 4to. In this, when treating on chap. xiv. ver. 18, he discovers archbishop Cranmer to be the angel that had power over the fire; and in chap. xvi. ver. 5, he makes the lord treasurer Cecil the angel of the waters, justifying the pouring forth of the third vial. He accuses the church of England of being lukewarm, like the Laodiceans, and gives the preference to the foreign protestant communions. He prophesied also that the episcopal government would soon be overthrown, but he does not appear to have foreseen that it would also be restored. He was presented by sir John Osbourneto the rectory of Hannes in Bedfordshire, which he held until his death, Aug. 24, 1607. Fuller gives him a most exalted character for piety, learning, and sweetness of temper, in which he says all his opponents agreed. He informs us also, that it was his custom to read over the Greek testament regularly once a fortnight. In 1647 was published, “Brightman Redivivus, or the posthumian offspring of Thomas Brightman, in four Sermons,” 4to.

, or Bridget, and by contraction Bride, (St.) a saint of the Romish church, and the patroness of Ireland, flourished in the beginning of the sixth century, and is named in the martyrology of Bede, and in all others since that age. She was born at Fochard in Ulster, soon after Ireland was converted, and took the veil in her youth from the hands of St. Mel, nephew and disciple of St. Patrick. She built herself a cell under a large oak, thence called Kill-dare, or the cell of the oak, and being joined soon after by several of her own sex, they formed themselves into a religious community, which branched out into several other nunneries throughout Ireland, all which acknowledge her for their mother and foundress. Her biographers give no particulars of her life, but what are too much of the miraculous kind for modern readers. Several churches in England and Scotland are dedicated to her, and some in Germany and France, by which we may guess at her past reputation. According to Giraltfus Cambrensis, her body was found, with those of St. Patrick and St. Columba, in a triple vault at Down-Patrick in 1185, and were all three translated to the cathedral of the same city, but their monument was destroyed in the reign of Henry VIII. She is commemorated in the Roman martyrology on the first of February. This Brigit was a virgin; but in the Roman calendar we find another Bridgit, a widow, the foundress of the monasteries of the Brigittines, who died July 23, 1373.

, an artist of whom very few particulars are mentioned; the most material are, that he was born at Antwerp, in 1550, and learned the rudiments of his art in that city; that he went to study at Rome, and in a very few years manifested so much merit in landscape and history, that Pope Gregory XIII. employed him to work in the Vatican, and allowed him an honourable pension as long as he lived. He died in 1584, aged thirtyfive.

, an excellent artist, brother to Matthew Brill, was born at Antwerp, in 1554, but bred to the profession of painting under Daniel Voltelmans. From the time of his quitting that master till he went to Italy, his manner was rather stiff, his pictures had a predominant brown and yellow tinge, and his design and colouring were equally indifferent. But when he visited his brother Matthew at Rome, and saw the works of Titian and Caracci, he altered his Flemish manner entirely, and fixed upon a style that was abundantly pleasing, with a charming tone of colour. The pension and employment which his brother possessed at the Vatican were conferred upon Paul; and he so far surpassed him, that he daily rose in his reputation, till he was considered as the first in his profession. Annibal Caracci generally painted the figures in his landscapes, and by that means increased their value to a very high degree. His manner of painting is true, sweet, and tender; the touchings of his trees are firm, and yet delicate; his scenery, his situations, and distances, are admirable, most of them being taken from nature; and the masses of his light and shadow are strong, and very judicious; though, in some of his small easel-pictures, he may be sometimes accounted rather too green, or at least more greenish than could be wished. It is remarked of him, that, in the latter part of his life, his landscapes were always of a small size; but they are beautiful and exquisitely finished, and frequently he painted them on copper. The genuine works of this eminent master are now rarely to be met with, especially those of the larger size, and they afford prices that are extremely high in every part of Europe. Sandrart observes, that in his time the pictures of Paul Brill were eagerly coveted in all countries where the polite arts are encouraged; that abundance of purchasers appeared at the public sales, ambitious to possess them; and that very large sums of money were given for them whenever they could be procured. And it seems that their intrinsic value is not diminished, since, a very few years ago, one of the landscapes of this master sold in Holland for 160l. and another, at an auction in London, for 120 guineas or upwards, and yet they were deemed to be cheaply purchased. He died in 1626, aged seventytwo.

, a man of a most uncommon genius for mechanical inventions, and who particularly excelled in planning and conducting inland navigations, was born at Tunsted, in the parish of Wormhill, and county of Derby, in 1716. His parents were possessed of a little freehold, the small income of which his father dissipated by a fondness for shooting and other field-diversions, and by keeping company with people above his rank. The consequence of this was, that his son was so totally neglected, that he did not receive the ordinary rudiments of education. The necessities of the family were so pressing, that young Brindley was obliged, as early as possible, to contribute towards its support; and, till he was nearly seventeen years of age, he was employed in those kinds of light labour which are usually assigned, in country places, to the children of the poor. At this period of his life, he bound himself apprentice to one Bennet, a mill-wright, near Macclesfield, in Cheshire, and soon became expert in the business; besides which, he quickly discovered a strong attachment to the mechanic arts in general, and a genius for extending them much farther than they had hitherto been carried. In the early part of his apprenticeship, he was frequently left by himself, for whole weeks together, to execute works concerning which his master had given him n previous instructions. These works, therefore, he finished in his own way; and Mr. Bennet was often astonished at the improvements his apprentice, from time to time, introduced into the mill-wright business, and earnestly questioned him from whence he had gained his knowledge. He had not been long at the trade, before the millers, wherever he had been employed, always chose him again, in preference to the master, or any other workman; and, before the expiration of his servitude, at which time Mr. Bennet, who was advanced in years, grew unable to work, Mr. Brindley, by his ingenuity and application, kept up the business with credit, and supported the old man and his family in a comfortable manner.

It may not be amiss to mention a singular instance of our young mechanic’s active and earnest attention to the improvement of mill-work. His master having been employed to build an engine paper-mill, which was the first of the kind that had been attempted in those parts, went to see one of them at work, as a model to copy after. But, notwithstanding this, when he had begun to build the mill, and prepare the wheels, the people of the neighbourhood were informed by a mill-wright, who happened to travel that road, that Mr. Bennet was throwing his employers’ money away, and would never be able to complete, to any effectual purpose, the work he had undertaken. Mr. Brindley, hearing of the report, and being sensible that he could not depend upon his master for proper instructions, determined to see, with his own eyes, the mill intended to be copied. Accordingly, without mentioning his design to a single person, he set out, on a Saturday evening, after he had finished the business of the day; travelled fifty miles on foot; took a view of the mill; returned back, in time for his work, on Monday morning; informed Mr. Bennet wherein he had been deficient; and completed the engine, to the entire satisfaction of the proprietors. Besides this, he made a considerable improvement in the press-paper.

Mr. Brindley afterwards engaged in the mill-wright business on his own account, and, by many useful inventions and contrivances, advanced it to a higher degree of perfection than it had formerly attained; so that he rendered himself greatly valued in his neighbourhood, as a most ingenious mechanic. By degrees, his fame began to spread itself wider in the country, and his genius was no longer confined to the particular branch in which he had hitherto been employed. In 1752, he erected a very extraordinary water-engine at Clifton, in Lancashire, for the purpose of draining some coal-mines, which before were worked at an enormous expence. The water for the use of this engine was brought out of the river Irwell, by a subterraneous tunnel, nearly six hundred yards in length, carried through a rock; and the wheel was fixed thirty feet below the surface of the ground. Mr. Brindley’s superiority to the mechanics in that part of the kingdom where he resided, being now well ascertained, and his reputation having reached the metropolis, he was employed by N. Pattison, esq. of London, and some other gentlemen, in 1755, to execute the larger wheels for a new silk-mill, at Congleton, in Cheshire. The execution of the smaller wheels, and of the more complex part of the machinery, was committed to another person, and that person had the superintendancy of the whole. He was not, however, equal to the undertaking; for he was obliged, after various efforts, to confess his inability to complete it. The proprietors, upon this, being greatly alarmed, thought fit to call in the assistance of Mr. Brindley; but still left the general management of the construction of the silk-mill to the former engineer, who refused to let him see the whole model, and, by giving him his work to perform in detached pieces, without acquainting him with the result which was wanted, affected to treat him as a common mechanic. Mr. Brindley, who, in the consciousness of genius, felt his own superiority to the man who thus assumed an ascendancy over him, would not submit to such unworthy treatment. He told the proprietors, that if they would let him know what was the effect they wished to have produced, and would permit him to perform the business in his own way, he would finish the mill to their satisfaction. This assurance, joined with the knowledge they had of his ability and integrity, induced them to trust the completion of the mill solely to his care; and he accomplished that very curious and complex piece of machinery in a manner far superior to the expectations of his employers. They had not solely the pleasure of seeing it established, with a most masterly skill, according to the plan originally proposed, but of having it constructed with the addition of many new and useful improvements. There was one contrivance in particular, for winding the silk upon the bobbins equally, and not in wreaths; and another for stopping, in an instant, not only the whole of this extensive system throughout its various and ^numerous apartments, but any part of it individually. He invented, likewise, machines for making all the tooth and pinion wheels of the different engines. These wheels had hitherto been cut by hand, with, great labour, but by means of Mr. Brindley 's machines, as much work could be performed in one day as had heretofore required fourteen. The potteries of Staffordshire were also, about this time, indebted to him for several valuable additions in the mills used by them for grinding flint stones, by which that process was greatly facilitated.

In the year 1756, Mr. Brindley undertook to erect a steam-engine, near Newcastle-under-Line, upon a newplan. The boiler of it was made with brick and stone, instead of iron plates; and the water was heated by fire-flues of a peculiar construction; by which contrivances the consumption of fuel, necessary for working a steam-engine, was reduced one half. He introduced, likewise, in this engine, cylinders of wood, made in the manner of coopers ware, instead of iron ones; the former being not only cheaper, but more easily managed in the shafts; and he substituted wood too for iron in the chains which worked at the end of the beam. His inventive genius displayed itself in various other useful contrivances, which would probably have brought the steam-engine to a great degree of perfection, if a number of obstacles had not been thrown in his way by some interested engineers, who strenuously opposed any improvements which they could not call their own.

The disappointment of Mr. Brindley’s good designs in this respect must have made the less impression upon him, as his attention was soon after called off to another object, which, in its consequences, hath proved to be of the highest national importance; namely, the projecting and executing of Inland Navigations, from whence the greatest benefits arise to trade and commerce. By these navigations the expence of carriage is lessened; a communication is opened from one part of the kingdom to another, and from each of those parts to the sea; and hence the products and manufactures of the country are afforded at a moderate price. In this period of our great mechanic’s life, we shall see the powers given him by the God of Nature, displayed in the production of events, which, in any age less pregnant with admirable works of ingenuity than the present, would have constituted a national aera. We shall see him triumphing over all the suggestions of envy or prejudice, though aided by the weight of established customs; and giving full scope to the operations of a strong and comprehensive mind, which was equal to the most arduous undertakings. This he did under the protection of a noble duke, who had the discernment to single him out, and the steadiness and generosity to "support him, against the opinions of those who treated Mr. Brindley’s plans as chimeras, and laughed at his patron as an idle projector.

His grace the late duke of Bridgevvater had, at Worsley, about seven miles from Manchester, a large estate, rich with mines of coal, which had hitherto lain useless in the bowels of the earth, because the expence of carriage by ]and was too great to find a market for consumption. The duke, wishing. to work these mines, perceived the necessity of a canal from Worsley to Manchester; upon which occasion, Mr. Brindley, who was now become famous in the country, was consulted. Having surveyed the ground, he declared the scheme to be practicable. In consequence of this, an act was obtained, in 1758 and 1759, for enabling his grace to cut a canal from Worsley to Salford, near Manchester, and to carry the same to or near Hollin Ferry, in the county of Lancaster. It being, however, afterwards discovered, that the navigation would be more beneficial, b*th to the duke of Bridgewater and the public, if carried over the river Irwell, near Barton bridge, to Manchester, his grace applied again to parliament, and procured an act, which enabled him to vary the course of his canal agreeably to this new plan, and likewise to extend a side branch to Longford bridge in Stretford. Mr. Brindley, in the mean time, had begun these great undertakings, being the first of the kind ever attempted, in England, with navigable subterraneous tunnels aird elevated aqueducts. The principle laid down at the commencement of this business reflects much honour on the noble undertaker, as well as upon his engineer. It was resolved that the canal should be perfect in its kind, and that, in order to preserve the level of the water, it should be free from the usual obstructions of locks. But, in accomplishing this end, many difficulties occurred, which were deemed unsurmountable. It was necessary that the canal should be carried over rivers, and many large and deep vallies, where it was evident that such stupendous mounds of earth must be raised, as could scarcely, it was thought, be completed by the labour of ages: and, above all, it was not known from what source so large a supply of water could be drawn, as, even upon this improved plan, would be requisite for the navigation. But Mr. Brindley, with a strength of mind peculiar to himself, and being possessed of the confidence of his great patron, who spared no expence to accomplish his favourite design, conquered all the embarrassments thrown in his way, not only from the nature of the undertaking itself, but by the passions and prejudices of interested individuals: and the admirable machines he contrived, and the methods he took, to facilitate the progress of the work, brought on such a rapid execution of it, that the world began to wonder how it could have been esteemed so difficult. Thus ready are men to find out pretences for lessening the merit of others, and for hiding, if possible, from themselves, the unpleasant idea of their own inferiority.

When the canal was completed as far as Barton, where the Irwell is navigable for large vessels, Mr. Brindley proposed to carry it over that river, by an aqueduct of thirty -nine feet above the surface of the water. This, however, being generally considered as a wild and extravagant project, he desired, in order to justify his conduct towards his noble employer, that the opinion of another engineer might be taken; believing that he* could easily convince an intelligent person of the practicability of his design. A gentleman of eminence was accordingly called in; who, being conducted to the place where it was intended that the aqueduct should be made, ridiculed the attempt; and when the height and dimensions were communicated to him, he exclaimed, “I have often heard of castles in the air, but never before was shewn where any of them were to be erected.” This unfavourable verdict did not deter the duke of Bridgewater from following the opinion of his own engineer. The aqueduct was immediately begun; and it was carried on with such rapidity and success, as astonished all those who but a little before condemned it as a chimerical scheme. This work commenced in September, 1760, and the first boat sailed over it on the 17th of July, 1761. From that time, it was not uncommon to see a boat loaded with forty tons drawn over the aqueduct, with great ease, by one or two mules; while below, against the stream of the Irwell, persons had the pain of beholding ten or twelve men tugging at an equal draught: a striking instance of the superiority of a canalnavigation over that of a river not in the tideway. The works were then extended to Manchester, at which place the curious machine for landing coals upon the top of the bill, gives a pleasing idea of Mr, Brindley’s address in diminishing labour by mechanical contrivances. It may here be observed^ that the bason, in particular, for conveying the superfluous water into the Irwell, below the canal, is an instance of what an attentive survey of this ingenious man’s works will abundantly evince, that, where occasion offered, he well knew how to-unite elegance with utility.

The duke of Bridgewater perceiving, more and more, the importance of these inland navigations, extended his ideas to Liverpool; and though he had every difficulty to encounter, that could arise from the novelty of his undertakings, or the fears and prejudices of those whose interests were likely to be effected by them, his grace happily overcame all opposition, and obtained, in 1762, an act of parliament for branching his canal to the tideway hi the Mersey. This part of the canal is carried over the rivers Mersey and Bollan, and over many wide and deep vallies. Over the yaliies it is conducted without the assistance of a single lock; the level of the water being preserved by raising a mound of earth, and forming therein a mould, as it may be called, for the water. Across the valley at Stretford, through which the Mersey runs, this kind of work extends nearly a mile. A person might naturally have been led to conclude, that the conveyance of such a mass of earth must have employed all the horses and carriages in the country, and that the completion of it would be the business of an age. But our excellent mechanic made his canal subservient to this part of his design, and brought the soil in boats of a peculiar construction, which were conducted into caissoons or cisterns. On opening the bottoms of the boats, the earth was deposited where it was wanted; and thus, in the easiest and simplest manner, the valley was elevated to a proper level for continuing the canal. The ground across the Bollan was raised by temporary locks, which were formed of the timber used in the caissoons just mentioned. In the execution of every part of the navigation, Mr. Brindley displayed singular skill and ingenuity; and, in order to facilitate his purpose, he produced many valuable machines, which ought never to be forgotten in this kingdom. Neither ought the oeconomy and forecast which are apparent through the whole work to be omitted. His ceconomy and forecast are peculiarly discernible in the stops, or floodgates, fixed in the canal, where it is above the level of the land. These stops are so constructed, that, should any of the banks give way, and thereby occasion a current, the adjoining gates will rise by that motion only, and prevent any other part of the water from escaping than what is near the breach between the two gates.

The success with which the duke of Bridgewater’s undertakings were crowned, encouraged a number of gentlemen and manufacturers, in Staffordshire, to revive the idea of a canal navigation through that county, for the advancement of the landed interest and the benefit of trade, in conveying to market, at a cheaper rate, the products and manufactures of the interior parts of the kingdom. This plan was patronized, and generously supported, by lord Gower and Mr. Anson; and it met with the concurrence of many persons of rank, fortune, and influence in the neighbouring counties. Mr. Brindley was, therefore, engaged to make a survey from the Trent to the Mersey; and, upon his reporting that it was practicable to construct a canal, from one of these rivers to the other, and thereby to unite the ports of Liverpool and Hull, a subscription for carrying it into execution was set on foot in 1765, and an act of parliament was obtained in the same year. In 1766, this canal, - called, by the proprietors, “The Canal from the Trent to the Mersey,” but more emphatically, by the engineer, the Grand Trunk Navigation, on account of the numerous branches which, he justly supposed, would be extended every way from it, was begun; and, under his direction, it was conducted, with great spirit and success, as long as he lived. Mr. Brindley’s life not being continued to the completion of this important and arduous undertaking, he left it to be finished by his brother-in-law, Mr. Henshall, who put the last hand to it, in May 1777, being somewhat less than eleven years after its commencement. We need riot say, that the final execution of the Grand Trunk Navigation gave the highest satisfaction to the proprietors, and excited a general joy in a populous country, the inhabitants of which already receive every advantage they could wish from so truly noble an enterprize. This canal is ninety-three miles in length; and, besides a large number of bridges over it, has seventy-six locks and five tunnels. The most remarkable of the tunnels is the subterraneous passage of Harecastle, being 2880 yards in length, and more then seventy yards below the surface of the earth. The scheme of this inland navigation had employed the thoughts of the Ingenious part of the kingdom for upwards of twenty years before, and some surveys had beeo made. But Harecastle hill, through which the tunnel is constructed, could neither be avoided nor overcome by any expedient the ablest engineers could devise. It was Mr. Brindley alone who surmounted this and other difficulties, arising from the variety of measures, strata, and quick-sands, which none but himself would have attempted.

Soon after the navigation from the Trent to the Mersey was undertaken, application was made to parliament, by the gentlemen of Staffordshire and Worcestershire, for leave to construct a canal from the Grand Trunk, near Haywood in Staffordshire, to the river Severn, near Bewdley. The act being obtained, the design was executed by our great engineer, and hereby the port of Bristol was added to the two before united ports of Liverpool and Hull. This canal, which is about forty-six miles in length, was completed in 1772. Mr. Brindley’s next undertaking was the survey and execution of a canal from Birmingham, to unite with the Staffordshire and Worcestershire canal near Wolverhampton. This navigation, which was finished in about three years, is twenty-six miles in length. As, by the means of it, vast quantities of coals are conveyed to the river Severn, as well as to Birmingham, where there must be a peculiar demand for them, extraordinary advantages have hence accrued to manufactures and commerce. Our engineer advised the proprietors of the last mentioned navigation, in order to avoid the inconvenience of locks, and to supply the canal more effectually with water, to have a tunnel at Smethwick. This would have rendered it a complete work. But his advice was rejected, and, to supply the deficiency, the managers have lately erected two of Messrs. Watts and Boulton’s steam-engines. The canal from Droitwich to the river Severn, for the conveyance of salt and coals, was likewise executed by Mr. Brindley. By him, also, the Coventry navigation was planned, and it was a short time under his direction. But a dispute arising concerning the mode of execution, he resigned his office; which, it is imagined, the proprietors of that undertaking have since had cause to lament. Some little time before his death, Mr. Brindley began the Oxfordshire canal. This unites with the Coventry canal, and forms a continuation of the Grand Trunk Navigation to Oxford, and thence by the Thames to London. The canal from Chesterfield to the river Trent at Stockwith, was the last public undertaking in which Mr. Brindley engaged. He surveyed and planned the whole, and executed some miles of the navigation, which was succesfully finished by Mr. Henshall, in 1777. There were few works of this nature projected, in any part of the kingdom, in which our engineer was not consulted. He was employed, in particular, by the City of London, to survey a course for a canal from Sunning, near Reading in Berkshire, to Monkey island, near Maidenhead. But when application was made to parliament, for leave to effect the design, the bill met with such a violent opposition from the land-owners, that it was defeated.

Mr. Brindley had, for some time, the direction of the Calder navigation; but he declined a farther inspection of it, on account of a difference in opinion among the commissioners. In the year 1766, he laid out a canal from the river Calder, at Cooper’s bridge, to Huddersfield in Yorkshire, which hath since been carried into execution. In 1768, he revised the plan for the inland navigation from Leeds to Liverpool. He was, likewise, at the first general meeting of the proprietors after the act of parliament had been obtained, appointed the engineer for conducting the work: but the multiplicity of his other engagements obliged him to decline this employment. In the same year, he planned a canal from Stockton, by Darlington, to Winston in the bishopric of Durham. Three plans, of the like kind, were formed by him in 1769; one from Leeds to Selby; another from the Bristol channel, near Uphill in Somersetshire, to Glastonbury, Taunton, Wellington, Tiverton, and Exeter; and a third from Langport, in the county of Somerset, by way of Ilminster, Chard, and Axminster, to the South channel, at Axmouth, in the county of Devon. In 1770, he surveyed the country, for a canal from Andover, by way. of Stockb'ridge and Rumsey, to Redbridge, near Southampton; and, in 1771, from Salisbury, by -Fordingbridge and Ringwood, to Christchurch. He performed the like office, in 1772, for a navigation of the same kind, proposed to be carried on from Preston to Lancaster, and from thence to Kendal, in Westmoreland. He surveyed, likewise, and planned out a canal, to join that of the duke of Bridgewater’s at Runcorn, from Liverpool. If this scheme had been executed, it was Mr. Brindley’s intention to have constructed the work, by an aqueduct over the river Mersey, at a place where the tide flows fourteen feet in height. He also surveyed the county of Chester, for a canal from the Grand Trunk to the city-of Chester. The plan for joining the Forth and the Clyde was revised by him; and he proposed some considerable alterations, particularly with regard to the deepening of the Clyde, which have been attended to by the managers. He was consulted upon several improvements with respect to the draining of the low lands, in different parts of Lincolnshire and the Isle of Ely. A canal was, likewise, laid out by him, for uniting that of Chesterfield, by the way of Derby, with the Grand Trunk at Swarkstone. To the corporation of Liverpool, he gave a>*plan for cleansing their docks of mud. This hath been put into execution with the desired effect: and he pointed out, also, -the method, which has been attended with equal success, of building walls against the sea without mortar. The last of our great mechanic’s ingenious and uncommon contrivances, that we shall mention, is his improvement of the machine for drawing water out of mines, by a losing and a gaining bucket: This he afterwards employed, to advantage, in raising up coals from the mines.

When "any extraordinary difficulty occurred to Mr. Brindley, in the execution of his works, having little or no assistance from books, or the labours of other men, his resources lay within himself. In order, therefore, to be quiet and uninterrupted, whilst he was in search of the necessary expedients, he generally retired to his bed; and he has been known to lie there one, two, or three days, till he had attained the object in view. He then would get up, and execute his design without any drawing or model. Indeed, it never was his custom to make either, unless he was obliged to do it to satisfy his employers. His memory was so remarkable, that he has often declared that he could remember, and execute, all the parts of the most complex machine, provided he had time, in his survey of it, to settle in his mind the several departments, and their relations to each other. His method of calculating the powers of any machine invented by him, was peculiar to himself. He worked the question for some time in his head, and then put down the results in figures. After this, taking it up again in that stage, he worked it farther in his mind, for a certain time, and set down the results as before. In the same way he still proceeded, making use of figures only at stated periods of the question. Yet the ultimate result was generally true, though the road he travelled in search of it was unknown to all but himself;. and, perhaps, it would not have been in his power to have shewn it to another.

The attention which was paid by Mr. Brindley to objects of peculiar magnitude did not permit him to indulge himself in the common diversions of life. Indeed, he had not the least relish for the amusements to which mankind, in general, are so much devoted. He never seemed in his element, if he was not either planning or executing some great work, or conversing with his friends upon subjects of importance. He was once, prevailed upon, when in London, to see a play. Having never been at an entertainment of this kind before, it had a powerful effect upon him, and he complained, for several days afterward, that it had disturbed his ideas, and rendered him unfit for business. He declared, therefore, that he would not go to another play upon any account. It might, however, have contributed to the longer duration of Mr. Brindley’s life, and consequently to the farther benefit of the public, if he could have occasionally relaxed the tone of his mind. His not being able to do so, might not solely arise from the vigour of his genius, always bent upon capital designs; but be, in part, the result of that total want of education, which, while it might add strength to his powers in the particular way in which they were exerted, precluded him, at the same time, from those agreeable reliefs that are administered by miscellaneous reading, and a taste in the polite and elegant arts. The only fault he was observed to fall into, was his suffering himself to be prevailed upon to engage in more concerns than could be completely attended to by any single man, how eminent soever might be his abilities and diligence. It is apprehended that, by this means, Mr. Brindley shortened his days, and, in a certain degree, abridged his usefulness. There is, at least, the utmost reason to believe, that his intense application, in general, to the important undertakings he had in hand, brought on a hectic fever, which continued upon him, with little or no intermission, for some years, and at length terminated his life. He died, at Turnhurst, in Staffordshire, on the 30th of September, 1772, in the 56th year of his age, and was buried at New chapel in the same county, where an altar-tomb has been erected to his tnemory. The vast works Mr. Brindley was engaged in at the time of his death, he left to be carried on and completed by his brother-in-law, Mr. Henshall, for whom he had a peculiar regard, and of whose integrity and abilities in conducting these works, he had the highest opinion.

“Of mother wit, and wise without the schools,”

who very soon gave indications of uncommon talents, and extensive views, in the application of mechanical principles; and who, by a happy concurrence of circumstances, the chief of which was the patronage of his grace the duke of Bridgewater, was favoured with an opportunity of unfolding and displaying his wonderful powers, in the execution of works new to this country, and such as will ex*-. tend his fame, and endear his memory, to future times. The public could only recognize the merit of this extraordinary man in the stupendous undertakings which he carried to perfection, and exhibited to general view. But those who had the advantage of conversing with him familiarly, and of knowing him well in his private character, respected him still more for the uniform and unshaken integrity of his conduct; for his steady attachment to the interest of the community; for the vast compass of his understanding, which seemed to have a natural affinity with all grand objects; and, likewise, for many noble and beneficent designs, constantly generating in his mind, and which the multiplicity of his engagements, and the shortness of his life, prevented him from bringing to maturity.

, a non-conformist divine, was born at Ashby-de-la-Zouch, in Leicestershire, in 1600. His father was also a divine of the puritan kind, and master of the school at Ashby. The noted astrologer William Lilly, was at his school in 1613. His mother was sister to bishop Hall. After being educated by his father, he was admitted of Emanuel college, Cambridge, at the age of thirteen and a half. Having resided there three or four years, he attended his uncle Hall, then dean of Worcester, as his amanuensis, to the synod of Dort, and after his return, resumed his studies at Cambridge, and being elected schoJar of the house, resided there until he took his degrees. When ordained he preached first at Preston, near Chelmsford, then at Somerieyton in Suffolk, and lastly was called to Yarmouth, on the election of the township, but his principles being objected to by Dr. Harsnet, bishop of Norwich, he could only preach on the week days at a country village adjoining, whither the people of Yarmouth followed him, until the township applied to the king for his licence for Mr. Brinsley to preach in Yarmouth. This being granted by his majesty, he remained there until the restoration, when he was ejected with his numerous brethren, who refused the terms of conformity. Although a man of moderate sentiments, he appears to have been inflexible in the points which divided so large a tody of clergymen from the church, and is said to have refused considerable preferment to induce him to remain in it. He is praised by his biographer for piety, and extensive learning in theology. He died Jan. 22, 1665. He wrote several treatises enumerated by Calamy, none of which, we believe, are now much known. He had a son, Robert, who was ejected from the university, and afterwards studied and took his degree of M. D. at Leyden, and practised at Yarmouth.

, president of the parliament of Paris, and an eminent lawyer, was born at Fontenay in Poictou, about the middle of the sixteenth century. He appeared at first with great eclat at the bar of the parliament; and, by his knowledge and skill in the law, recommended himself so powerfully to Henry III. of France, that this prince first made him his advocate general, then counsellor of state, and in 1580, honoured him with the dignity of president of the parliament. Scsevola Sammarthanus relates, that Henry III. declared in his hearing, that there was not a prince in Christendom, who could boast of so learned a man as Barnaby Brisson. The king employed him in several negociations, and sent him ambassador into England. At his return, he employed him to make a collection of his own ordinances, and of those of his predecessors; which he performed with wonderful expedition. He wrote some works in law: “De verbormxi, qua) ad jus pertinent, significatione.” “De formulis et solemnibus populi Romani verbis,” Paris, 1583, fol. “De regip Persarum principatu,” &c. 1580, 1590, 1599, 8voj 1606, 4to; but the best edition is that of Strasburgh, 1710, 8vo, with Sylburgius’ notes. H gave an expectation of more considerable performances; but his life was shortened by a very unfortunate accident. Living at Paris when that rebellious city was besieged by Henry IV. he remonstrated against the treasonable practices of the leaguers, who, under pretence of the holy union, contemned the royal authority, which was much more sacred. These religious traitors, being dissatisfied with his loyalty, fell violently upon him, dragged him to prison, and cruelly strangled him the 15th of Nov. 1591.

, an eminent French physician, was born at Fontenai-le-Comte, in Poitou, 147s, and about 1495 was sent to Paris, where he went through a course of philosophy under Villemar, a famous professor of those times. By his advice, Brissot resolved to be a physician, and studied physic there for four years. Then he began to teach philosophy in the university of Paris; and, after he had done this for ten years, prepared himself for the examinations necessary to his doctor of physic’s degree, which he took in May 1514, Being one of those men who are not contented with custom and tradition, but choose to examine for themselves, he made an exact comparison between the practice of his own times and the doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen and he found that the Arabians had introduced many things into physic that were contrary to the doctrine of those two great masters, and to reason and experience. He set himself therefore to reform physic; and for this purpose undertook publicly to explain Galen’s books, instead of those of Avicenna, Rhasis, and Mesu'i, which were commonly explained in the schools of physic; but, finding himself obstructed in the work of reformation by his ignorance of botany, he resolved to travel, in order to acquire the knowledge of plants, and put himself into a capacity of correcting pharmacy. Before, however, he left Paris, he undertook to convince the public of what he deemed an inveterate error; but which now is considered as a matter of little consequence. The constant practice of physicians, in the pleurisy, Was to bleed from the arm, not on the side where the distemper was, but the opposite side. Brissot disputed about it in the physic-schools, confuted that practice, and shewed, chat it was falsely pretended to be agreeable to the doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen. He then left Paris in 1518, and went to Portugal, stopping there at Ebora, where he practised physic; but his new way of bleeding in the pleurisy, notwithstanding his great success, did not please every body, He received a long and rude letter about it from Denys, physician to the king of Portugal; which he answered, and would have published if death had not prevented him in 1522. It was printed, however, three years after at Paris, and reprinted at Basil in 1529. Renatus Moreau published a new edition of it at Paris in 1622, with a treatise of his own, “De missione sanguinis in pleuritide,” and the life of Brissot; out of which this account is taken. He never would marry, being of opinion that matrimony did not well agree with study. One thing is related of him, which his biographer, rather uncharitably, says, deserves to be taken notice of, because it is singular in the men of his profession; and it is, that he did not love gain. He cared so little for it, that when he was called to a sick person, he looked into his purse; and, if he found but two pieces of gold in it, refused to go. This, however, it is acknowledged, was owing to his great love of study, from which it was very difficult to take him. The dispute between Denys and Brissot raised a kind of civil war among the Portuguese physicians. The business was brought before the tribunal of the university of Salamanca, Where it was thoroughly discussed by the faculty of physic; but in the mean time, the partisans of Denys had recourse to the authority of the secular power, and obtained a decree, forbidding physicians to bleed on the same side in which the pleurisy was. At last the university of Salamanca gave their judgment; importing, that the opinion of Brissot was the true doctrine of Hippocrates and Galen. The followers of Denys appealed to the emperor about 1529, thinking themselves superior both in authority and number; and the matter was brought before Charles V. They were not contented to call the doctrine of their adversaries false; they added that it was impious, mortal, and as pernicious to the body as Luther’s schism to the souL They not only blackened the reputation of their adversaries by private arts, but also openly accused them of ignorance and rashness, of attempts on religion, and of being downright Lutherans in physic. It fell out Unluckily for them, that Charles III. duke of Savoy, happened to die of a pleurisy, after he had been bled according to the practice which Brissot opposed. Had it not been for this, the emperor, it is thought, would have granted every thing that Erissot’s adversaries desired of him; but this accident induced him to leave the cause undecided. “Two things,” says Bayle, in his usual prattling way, “occur in this relation, which all wise men must needs condemn; namely, the base, the disingenuous, the unphilosophic custom of interesting religion in disputes about science, and the folly and absurdity of magistrates to be concerned in such disputes. A magistrate is for the most part a very incompetent judge of such matters; and, as he Jiiiows nothing of them, so he ought to imitate Gallio in this at least, that is, not to care for them; but to leave those whose business it is, to fight it out among themselves. Besides, authority has nothing to do with philosophy and the sciences; it should be kept at a great distance from them, for the same reason that armed forces are removed from a borough at the time of a % general assize; namely, that reason and equity may have their full play.”

, a very active agent in the French revolution, and a victim to the tyranny he had created, was the son of the master of an eating-house, and boru in 1754 at Chartres in the Orleanuois. After receiving a good education, he was intended for the bar, but having served a clerkship for five years, he relinquished the further prosecution of the law, in order to study literature and the sciences; and an accidental acquaintance with some Englishmen, and the perusal of some English books, seem to have confirmed this determination. About this time he changed the appellation of “de Otiarville” to that of Warville, agreeable to the English pronunciation. Having by relinquishing the law incurred his father’s displeasure, he was indebted to the bounty of some friends, who enabled him to prosecute his studies at Paris for two years; after which he became editor of the “Courier de PEurope,” a paper printed at Boulogne; but this being discontinued on account of some articles inimical to government, he returned to Paris, and in imitation of Voltaire, Diderot, and D'Alembert, who, as he imagined, had destroyed religious tyranny, began to attempt the destruction of political tyranny, which he fancied was reserved for his irresistible pen. To develope the whole of his plan, however, was not his aim at first: and he began, therefore, with attacking such abuses as might have been removed without any injury to an established constitution, but which, as they could not be wholly denied, he endeavoured to trace from the very nature of monarchy. With this view he published some works on criminal jurisprudence, as, in 1780, his “Theory of Criminal laws,” 2 vols. 8vo, and two papers arising out of the subject, which gained the prize in 1782, at the academy of Chalons-surMarne. He also began a work which was afterwards completed in 10 vols. 8vo, <c A philosophical library of the criminal law,“and a volume concerning” Truth“and” Thoughts on the means of attaining Truth in all the branches of human knowledge," which he intended merely as an introduction to a work on a more enlarged and comprehensive plan. To all these he annexed ideas of singular importance and utility, although his notions are crude, and his knowledge superficial.

Brissot, at the period of his residence at Boulogne, had been introduced to mademoiselle Dupont, who was employed under mad. de Genlis as reader to the daughter of the duke of Orleans, and whose mother kept a lodginghouse in that place: and having married this lady, he found it necessary to exert his literary talents for gaining a subsistence. But as France did not afford that liberty, which he wished to indulge, he formed a design of printing, in Swisserland or Germany, a series of works in a kind of periodical publication, under the title of “An universal Correspondence on points interesting to the welfare of Man and of Society,” which he proposed to smuggle into France. With this view, he visited Geneva and Neuchatel, in order to establish correspondences; and he also made a journey to London, which was to be the central point of the establishment, and the fixed residence of the writers. His intentions, however, were divulged by the treachery of some of his confidential associates; and the scheme totally failed. During his abode in London, he concerted the plan of a periodical work or journal, on the literature, arts, and politics of England, which, being published in London, was allowed to be reprinted at Paris, and first appeared in 1784. The avowed object of this publication, as he himself declares, was “the universal emancipation of men.” In London, he was arrested for debt; but, being liberated by the generosity of a friend, he returned to Paris, where he was committed to the Bastille in July 1784, on the charge of being concerned in a very obnoxious publication. But by the interest of the duke of Orleans, he was released, on condition of never residing in England, and discontinuing his political correspondence. In 1785, he published two letters to the emperor Joseph II. “Concerning the Right of Emigration, and the Right of the People to revolt,” which he applied particularly to the case of the Waiachsans: and in the following year appeared his “Philosophical Letters on the History of England,” in 2 vols. and “A critical Examination of the Travels of the marq is de Chatelleux in North America.” With a view of promoting a close, political, and commercial union between France and the United States, he wrote in 1787, with the assistance of Claviere, a tract, entitled “De la France et des Etats Unis, &c.” “On France and the United States or on the Importance of the American Revolution to the kingdom of France, and the reciprocal advantages which will accrue from a commercial Intercourse between the two nations.” Of this work, an English translation was published, both in England and America. At this time he was in the service of the duke of Orleans, as secretary to his chancery, with a handsome salary, and apartments in the palais royal; and, without doubt, employed in aiding that monster in his schemes of ambition. In this situation, he wro:e a pamphlet against the administration of the archbishop of Sens, entitled “No Bankruptcy, &c.” which occasioned the issuing of a lettre de cachet against him. But to avoid its effect, he went to Holland, England, and the Low Countries; and at Mechlin, he edited a newspaper, called “Le Courier Beigique.” For the purpose of promoting the views of a society at Paris, denominated “Les Amis des Noirs,” and established for the purpose of abolishing negro slavery, he embarked for America in 1788; and, during his residence in that country, he sought for a convenient situation, in which a colony of Frenchmen might be organized into a republic, according to his ideas of political liberty. But his return was hastened in 1789 by the intelligence he received of the progress of the French revolution. After his arrival, he published his “Travels in America;” (Nouveau Voyage dans les Etats Unis, &. Paris, 1791, 3 vols. 8vo), and as he found the attention of the public directed to the approaching assembly of the states-general, he wrote his “Plan of Conduct for the Deputies of the People.” At this time, he had withdrawn from the partisans of the duke of Orleans; and he took an active part in the plans that were then projected for the organization of the people, with a view to their union and energy in accomplishing the revolution. To the lodgings of Brissot, as a person who was held in estimation at this period, the keys of the Bastille, when it was taken, were conveyed; he also became president of the Jacobin club; and he distinguished himself in various ways as a zealous promoter of those revolutionary principles, which afterwards gave occasion to a great jiumber of atrocious excesses. After the king’s flight to Varennes, Brissot openly supported the republican cause; but, as some form of monarchy was still the object of the national wish, he was obliged to restrain his impetuosity. The popularity acquired by his writings and conduct was such, as to induce the Parisians to return him as one of their members in the “Legislative national assembly,” which succeeded the “Constituent assembly,” in October 1791, of which assembly he was appointed secretary; and he became afterwards a member of the committee of public instruction. Although inferior to many others in talents and knowledge, his activity raised him to the rank of head or chief, in the party denominated “Girondists” or “La Gironde,” the name of the department to which several of its members belonged, and also from his own name “Brissotins.” In his career of ambition, he does not seem to have been influenced by pecuniary cc nsiderations; power, more than wealth, being the object of his aim; for, at this time, he and his family lodged in an apartment up four pair of stairs, and subsisted on his stipend as deputy, and the inconsiderable gains accruing from a newspaper. As a determined enemy to monarchy, he was unremitting in his efforts to engage the nation in a war, with the avowed purpose of involving the king and his ministers in difficulties which would terminate in their ruin, and this part of his political conduct must ever be lamented and execrated by the friends of freedom and of mankind. In the impeachment of M. Delessart, the minister for foreign affairs, Brissot took a principal lead; and alleged against him several articles of accusation, in consequence of which, he was apprehended, tried by the high national court at Orleans, and condemned to die, without being h'rst heard in his own defence, so that he became the first victim to that desperate faction, which afterwards deluged France with blood. His colleagues were so complex ly terrified by this event, that they requested leave to resign, and the ministry was at once completely dissolved. Their successors, appointed by the king, under the direction and inriuence of Brissot, were Dumourier, Roland, and Ciaviere. This appointment was followed bya declaration of war, decreed by the national assembly, against the king of Hungary and Bohemia; and Brissot, during the existence of this administration, which terminated soon, was considered as the most powerful person in France. About this time, Brissot began to entertain secret jealousy and suspicion of La Fayette, and concurred with other members of the assembly, in signing an accusation against him, which, however, he was not able to substantiate. He and his republican party were likewise industrious in their endeavours to throw an odium on the court, by alleging, that a private correspondence was carried on between the king and queen and the emperor; and they even averred, that an “Austrian Committee,” and a conspiracy in favour of the enemies of the country, existed among the friends of the court. The charge seemed to be unsupported by sufficient evidence; the king publicly contradicted these accusations as calumnies; nevertheless, they made no small impression on the minds of the public. To the writings and conduct of Brissot, the horrid massacres at the Tuiileries, on the 10th of August, 1792, have been principally ascribed; and it is a poor excuse that he is said to have preserved the lives of several of the Swiss guards on that fatal day. He was employed to draw up the declaration to the neutral powers concerning the suspension of the king’s authority; but he is said to have regarded with horror the sanguinary spirit that was now predominant among the leaders of the jacobins. Whilst, indeed, he was ascending to the pinnacle of power, he seems to have been the ardent advocate of insurrection and the revolutionary power: but as he found himself raised to that station, he began to inculcate “order and the constitution,” the usual cant of all demagogues who think they have attained their object. In the shocking massacre of the prisoners at Paris in September, he had probably no other concern, than the inwhich his irritating speeches and writings had created on the minds of the more active agents. When the “National convention,” the idea of which is said to have been suggested by him, assumed the direction of the state, and assembled on the 20th of September, 1792, he was returned as member for the department of Eure and Loire, his native country. In this assembly, he openly avowed himself an advocate for a republican government, in opposition both to the Jacobins and Orleanists; and was expelled the Jacobin club. On this occasion, he wrote a vindication of his public conduct, under the title of “An Address to all the Republicans.” He is said to have been so far shocked by the prospect of the fatal issue of the king’s trial, as to have attempted the preservation of his life, by deferring his execution till the constitution should be perfected; a proposition of which the absurdity and cruelty are nearly equal. The war with England, which soon followed the death of Louis, is ascribed to his ardour find credulity; for he was led to imagine, that the consequence of it would be a civil war in this country; and it is said, that this, as well as the war with Holland, was decreed in the national convention, Feb. 1, 1793, at his motion. This charge, however, he retorts on his accusers, and says, that the anarchists, by voting the death of the king, were themselves the authors of the war,

Brissot’s influence now gradually declined; and his party was at length overpowered by a more violent and sanguinary faction, denominated the “Mountain,” so called from its members usually sitting in the convention, on the upper seats of the hall, at the head of which was Robespierre, of execrable memory. The treachery and desertion of Dumourier likewise contributed to hasten the downfal of this party. To their imbecility or perfidy, the public calamities that threatened the country, were generally ascribed; and, after the establishment of the “Revolutionary tribunal,” for the purpose of trying crimes committed agains: the state, in March 1793, a petition was presented in the following month by the communes of the 48 sections of Paris, requiring that the chiefs of the Girondists, or Brissotins, denounced in it, should be impeached, and expelled the convention. In May and June decrees of arrest were issued against them; and against Brissot among the rest, who attempted to make his escape into Swisseriand, but was stopped and imprisoned; and in the following October, be and 21 of his associates were brought before the revolutionary tribunal. Brissot, who was elevated in the midst of them, maintained a firm and tranquil mind; but, though their accusers could support their charges by little more than mere surmises, the whole party was immediately condemned to the scaffold; and next morning were led to execution. There Brissot, after seeing the blood of 16 associates stream from the scaffold, submitted to the stroke with the ut.nost composure. In the relations of private life, Ins character stands without reproach; but these afford no counterpoise to his public conduct* and although his sentence was unjust as coming from men as guilty as himself, it was the natural consequence of a tyranny to the establishment of which he had contributed more largely than most of his countrymen.

, an eminent Roman catholic priest and writer in the reign of queen Elizabeth, was born at Worcester, in 1538. In 1555 he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, according to Pits, which Wood doubts; but he took his degree of B. A. in I 559, and M. A. in 1562, at which last time he was a member of Christ church. He and the celebrated Campian were so esteemed for their talents, as to be selected to entertain queen Elizabeth with a public disputation in 1566. Bristow was afterwards, in July 1567, made a fellow of Exeter college, by the interest of sir William Petre, who had founded some fellowships in that college, and who would have promoted him further, had he not laid himself open to the suspicion of holding popish tenets; and this appeared more plainly by his quitting the university on carvlinal Alan’s invitation. He went then to Doway, and after prosecuting his theological studies in that academy, was admitted to his doctor’s degree in 1579, and, says his biographer, was Alan’s “right hand upon all occasions.” He was made prefect of studies, lectured on the scriptures, and in the absence of Alan acted as regent of the college. His intense studies, however, injured a constitution originally very weak, and after a journey to Spa, which had very little effect, he was recommended to try his native air. On his return to England, he resided for a very short time with a Mr. Bellamy, a gentleman of fortune, at Harrow on the Hill, where he died Oct. 18, 1581. The popish historians concur in expressing the loss their cause suffered by his death, he being teemed “an Alan in prudence, a Stapleton in acuteness, a Campian in eloquence, a Wright in theology, and a Martin in languages.” He wrote, 1. “Dr. Bristow’s motives,” Antwerp, 1574, 1599, 8vo, translated afterwards into Latin, by Dr. Worthington, Doway, 1608, 4to. 2. “A Reply to William Fulk (his ablest antagonist), in defence of Dr. Allen (Alan’s) articles, and book of purgatory,” Louvain, 1580, 4to. 3. “Fifty-one demands, to be proposed by catholics to heretics,” London, 1592, 4to. 4. “Veritates Aurese S. R. Ecclesiae,” 1616. 5. “Tabula in summam theologicam S. Thomse Aquinatis,” 1579. He wrote also “An Apology in defence of Alan and himself,” and notes upon the Rheims Testament.

, an eminent Italian scholar of the fifteenth century, was born in the Brescian territory, of a family originally from Great Britain; and having studied at Padua about the year 1470, kept school at Brescia, and distinguished himself by several learned annotations on various classic authors, particularly Juvenal, Lucan, Horace, Persius, and Statius in his Achiileid. He also wrote grammatical and other tracts, and an eulogy on Bartholomew Cajetan. He is supposed not to have long survived the year 1518, and did not live to publish his notes upon Pliny’s Natural History. His Statius was published in 1485, fol. and his Juvenal in 1512, Venice, fol.

, a Portuguese historian, was born at Almeida, Aug. 20, 1569, and entered young into the order of the Cistercians, by whom he was sent to Italy to be educated. During his studies he betrayed much more fondness for history than for philosophy or divinity, yet did not neglect the latter so far as to be unable to teach both, which he did with reputation on his return home. His abilities in investigating the affairs of Portugal procured him the office of first historiographer of Portugal, and he was the first who endeavoured to give a regular form to its history, two folio volumes of which he published in 1597, at Alcobasa, and 1609, at. Lisbon, under the title of “Monarchia Lusitana.” It is written with elegance; and was brought down to Alfonsus III. by Antony and Francis Brandano, monks of the same order, making in all 7 vols. He published also, 2. Panegyrics of the kings of Portugal, with their portraits. 3. Ancient Geography of Portugal. 4. Chronicle of the Cistercian order. The ' Guerra Brasilica," Lisbon, 1675, 2 vols. folio, is by Francis de Brito, a different person from Bernard, who died in 1617.

, a very singular personage, known by the name of the Musical Small-coal Man, was born at or near Hignam Ferrers, in Northamptonshire, about the middle of the seventeenth century, and went from thence to London, where he bound himself apprentice to a smallcoal man. He served seven years, and returned to Northamptonshire, his master giving him a sum of money not to set up: but, after this money was spent, he returned again to London, and set up the trade of small-coal, which he continued to the end of his life. Some time after he had been settled in business here, he became acquainted with Dr. Garaniere, his neighbour, an eminent chemist, who, admitting him into his laboratory, Tom, with the doctor’s consent, and his own observation, soon became a notable chemist; contrived and built himself a moving laboratory, in which, according to Hearne, “he performed with little expence and trouble such things as had never been done before.” Besides his great skill in chemistry, he became a practical, and, as was thought, a theoretical musician. Tradition only informs us that he was very fond of music, and taat he was able to perform on the viol da gamba at his own concerts, which he at first established gratis in his miserable house, which was an old mean building, the ground-floor of which was a repository for his small-coal; over this was his concert-room, long, low, and narrow, to which there was no other ascent than by a pair of stairs on the outside, so perpendicular and narrow, as scarcely to be mounted without crawling.

Hearne allows him to have been a very diligent collector of old books of all kinds, which, in his courses through the town crying his small-coal, he had a good opportunity of doing at stalls, where he used to stop and select for purchase whatever was ancient, particularly on his two favourite subjects of chemistry and music. On the former, it has naturally been suggested that he had picked up books on Rosicrucian mysteries, and not impossible but that he may have wasted some of his small-coals in the great secrets of alchemy in the transmutation of metals. With respect to music, he collected all the elementary books in English that were then extant; such as Morley’s. introduction, Simpson’s division violist, Playford, Butler, Bath, and Mace; nine books of instruction for the psalmody, flute, and mock trumpet. But besides his vast collection of printed music, the catalogue of which fills eigat pages in 4to, of sir J. Hawkins’s Hist, of Music, he seems to have been such an indefatigable copyist, that he is said to have transcribed with his own hand, very neatly and accurately, a collection of music which sold after his decease for near 100l.

Mr. Walpole, in his Anecdotes, says, that “Woolaston the painter, who was a good performer on the violin and flute, had played at the concert held at the house of that extraordinary person, Thomas Britton the small-coal man, whose picture he twice drew, one of which was purchased ]by sir Hans Sloane, and is now in the British museum: there is a mezzotinto from it. T. Britton, who made much noise in his time, considering his low station and trade, was a collector of all sorts of curiosities, particularly drawings, prints, books, manuscripts on uncommon subjects, as mystic divinity, the philosopher’s stone, judicial astrology, and magic; and musical instruments, both in and out of vogue. Various were the opinions concerning him; some thought his musical assembly only a cover for seditious meetings; others, for magical purposes. He was taken for an atheist, a presbyterian, a Jesuit But Woolaston the painter, and the son of a gentleman who had likewise been a member of that club, averred it as their opinions, that Britton was a plain, simple, honest man, who only meant to amuse himself. The subscription was but ten shillings a year; Britton found the instruments, and they had coffee at a penny a dish. Sir Hans Sloane bought many of his books and Mss. now in the Museum, when they were sold by auction at Tom’s coffeehouse, near Ludgate.”

Dr. Burney in early life conversed with members of this concert, who spoke of him in the same manner. So late as the middle of the last century, mezzotinto prints of him were in all the print-shops, particularly an excellent one by Smith, under which, and almost all the prints of Britton, were the following verses, by Hughes, who frequently performed on the violin at the concerts of this ingenious small-coal man:

Did gentle peace, and arts, unpurchased, dwell;

And music warbled in her sweetest strain.

Cyllenius so, as fables tell, and Jove,

Let useless pomp behold, and blush to find,

In most of the prints, he was represented with his sack of small-coal on his shoulder, and his measure of retail in his hand. In the Guardian, No, 144, Steele, speaking of the variety of original and odd characters, which our free government produces, says: “We have a small-coal man, who beginning with two plain notes, which made up his daily cry, has made himself master of the whole compass of the gammut, and has frequent concerts of music at his own house, for the entertainment of himself and friends.”

But the assertion of sir John Hawkins, that Britton was the first who had a meeting that corresponded with the idea of a concert, is not correct: in the time of Charles I. and during the usurpation, at Oxford, meetings for the performance of Fancies in six and seven parts, which preceded sonatas and concerts, were very common. And in Charles the Second’s time, Banister, father and son, had concerts, first at taverns and public-houses, and afterwards at York-buildings. It is, perhaps, not a matter worthy of dispute; but we imagine that it would be difficult to prove that Handel ever played at the small-coal man’s concert. Handel was proud, and never had much respect for English composers. He had been caressed and patronised by princes and nobles so long, that he would as soon have gone into a coal-pit to play at a concert, as to the hovel of our vender of small-coal.

About the commencement of the last century, a passion prevailed among several persons of distinction, of collecting old books and Mss.; and it was their Saturday’s amusement during winter, to ramble through various quarters of the town in pursuit of these treasures. The earls of Oxford, Pembroke, Sunderland, and Winchelsea, and the duke of Devonshire, were of this party, and Mr. Bagford and other collectors assisted them in their researches. Britton appears to have been employed by them; and, as he was a very inodest, decent, and unpresuming man, he was a sharer in their conversation, when they met after their morning’s walk, at a bookseller’s shop in Ave-Maria lane, Britton used to pitch his coal-sack on 'a bulk at the door, and, dressed in his b ue frock, to step in and spend an hour with the company. But it was not only by a few literary lords that his acquaintance was cultivated; his humble roof was frequented by assemblies of the fair and the gay; and his fondness for music caused him to be known by many dilettanti and professors, who formed themselves into aciub at his house, where capital pieces were played by some of the first professional artists, and other practitioners; and here Duboprg, when a child, played, standing upon a joint-stool, the Hrst solo that he ever executed in public.

The circumstances of his death were very extraordinary. A ventriloquist was introduced into his company by one justice Robe, who was fond of mischievous jests. This man, in a voice seemingly coming from a distance, announced to poor Britton his approaching end, and bid him prepare for it, by repealing the Lord’s prayer on his knees. The poor man did so, but the affair dwelt so much upon his imagination, that he died in a few days, leaving justice Robe to enjoy the fruits of his mirth. His death happened in September, 1714, when he was upwards of sixty years of age.

Britton' s wife survived her husband. He left little behind him, except his books, his collection of manuscript and printed music, and musical instruments; all which were sold by auction, and catalogues of them are in the hands of some collectors of curiosities. His instrumental music consists of 160 articles; his vocal, of 42; 11 scores; instruments, 27. All these are specified in Hawkins’s History of music, but we shall add the title-page of the catalogue of his library: “The library of Mr. Thomas Britton, small-coal man, deceased; who, at his own charge, kept up a concert of music above forty years, in his little cottge; being a curious collection of every ancient and uncommon book in divinity, history, physic, chejnistry, magick, &c. Also a collection of Mss. chiefly on vellum, which will be sold by auction at Paul’s coffee-house, &c. Jan. 1714-15,” &c. It contained 102 articles in folio; 270 in 4to; 664 in 8vo; 50 pamphlets, and twenty-three Mss. A few of the works in 8vo were sufficiently amatory. A copy of this now very rare catalogue is in Miv Heber’s excellent library.

, a learned Frenchman, was born about the end of the fifteenth century, at Auxerre, or in that diocese; and in his education made great progress in the learned languages, particularly the Greek, from which he translated into Latin, Chrysostom’s treatise on the priesthood; his first eight homilies on the epistle of St. Paul to the Romans, and some other works, which contributed very much to his reputation. He used frequently to compose Greek verses, with which he entertained the literati at his house, where they were sure of an open table. From 1512 he was secretary to queen Anne, and archdeacon of Albi. In 1515 he had a canonry conferred upon him in the church of Auxerre, which, in 1520, he resigned, on being promoted to the same rank at Paris. He calls himself almoner to the king in the title of his rare book “Germani Brixii, gratulatoriae quatuor ad totidem viros classissimos, &c.” Paris, 1531, 4to. This contains also four letters to Erasmus, Jerome Vida, Sadolet, and Lazarus Bayf, with some Latin poetry addressed to Francis I. on a marble statue of Venus, which the chevalier Ilenz had presented to that sovereign. He published also an edition of Longolius’s defences, “Christ. Longolii perduellionis rei detensiones duae,” 1520. Brixius died in 1538. He was the familiar acquaintance of Rabelais, and long the correspondent of Erasmus, but what more particularly entitles him to notice here, is his quarrel with sir Thomas More, on which some of the biographers of that illustrious character have been either silent, or superficial. Brixius in 151*3 composed a poem called “Chordigera,”. where in three hundred hexameter verses, he described a battle fought that year by a French ship, la Cordeliere, and an English ship, the Regent. More, who was not then in the high station which he afterwards reached, composed several epigrams in derision of this poem. Brixius, piqued at this affront, revenged himself by the “AntiMorus,” an elegy of about 400 verses, in which he severely censured all the faults which he thought he had found in the poems of More. Yet he kept this piece of satire by him for some time, declaring, that if he should consent to the publication, it would be purely to comply with his friends, who remonstrated to hirn, that compositions of this kind lost much of their bloom by coming out late. There are three editions of the Anti-Morus. The two first are of Paris; one published by himself, in 1520, the other in 1560, in the second volume of the “Flores Epigrammatum” of Leodegarius a Quercu, or Leger du Che'ne. The third is in the “Corpus Poetarum Latinorum” collected by Janus Gruterus, under the anagrammatic name of Ranutius Gerus. Erasmus says that More despised this poem so much as to have intended to print it; Erasmus at the same time advised More to take no notice of it. The chancellor’s great-grandson and biographer, More, seems to think that he had written something in answer to Brixius, before he received this advice from Erasmus, but called in the copies, “so that,” says his biographer, “it is now very hard to be found; though some have seen it of late.” Much correspondence on the subject may be perused in our authorities.

, son of the rev. W. Broad, of Rendcombe, in Gloucestershire, was born in 1577, and educated at St. Mary’s-hall, Oxford, which he entered in 1594, but soon after went to Aiban-hall, where he took his degrees in arts: In 1611, on the death of his father, he became rector of Rendcombe, where he was held in high esteem for piety and learning, and where he died, and was buried in the chancel of his church, in June, 1635. He wrote: 1. a “Touchstone for a Christian,” Lond. 1613, 12mo. 2. “The Christian’s Warfare,' ibid. 1613, 12mo. 3.” Three questions on the Lord’s Day, c.“Oxon. 1621, 4to. 4.” Tractatus de Sabbato, in quo doctrina ecclesise primitives declaratur ac defenditur," 1627, 4to, and two treatises on the same subject, left in manuscript, and published, with an answer, by George Abbot (not the archbishop), as mentioned in his life.

, a man of a visionary turn, was a native of Venice, born in the beginning of the sixteenth century. He embraced the Protestant religion, and expressed a great zeal against Popery. He published several books in Holland, in which he maintained that the particular events of the sixteenth century had been foretold by the prophets, and after he had applied scripture, as his fancy directed, to things that had already happened, he took the liberty to apply it to future events. In this he succeeded so far as to persuade a French gentleman of noble extraction, and a Protestant, that a Protestant prince would quickly overthrow the Pope’s kingdom, and make himself the head of all the united Christians. This gentleman, Segur Pardaillan, was a faithful servant to the ing of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. and thought heaven designed his master for the glorious enterprise which Brocardus had foretold. Big with these hopes, he proposed to him to send an embassy to the Protestant princes, offering to be his ambassador; and there being nothing in his proposal but what suited with the exigencies of the time, it was approved of, and he was actually deputed to those princes in 1583.

The catholic writers have abused Brocardus as an impostor, and a promoter of wars and insurrections; but though he might have been the cause of disturbances, he does not appear to have been a knavish impostor. He seems to have been sincere, and to have believed what he taught. He retired to Nuremberg at the latter end of his life, where he met with persons who were very kind and charitable to him. “I hear,” -says Bongars in a letter to Camerarius, dated Feb. 3, 1591, “that your republic has kindly received the good old man J. Brocard, who in his youth appeared among the most polite and learned men.” He expresses the same affection for Brocard in another, dated July 24, 1593. “I am mightily pleased with the great affection you express for Brocard. He certainly deserves that some persons of such probity as yours should take care of him. As for me, I am hardly in a capacity to oblige him. I leave no stone unturned to procure him the payment of 300 gold crowns, which Mr. Segur left him by his will.” In another, of Nov. 16, 1594: “I cannot but even thank you for your kind and generous treatment of the poor, but good, old Brocard.” He died soon after, but we do not find exactly when.

Among the works he published, which were most of them printed at Segur Pardaillan’s expence, were his “Commentary on the Revelations of St. John,” and his “Mystical and prophetical explication of Leviticus.” These both came out at Leyden, in 1580; as did some other things of inferior note the same year. The synods of the United Provinces were afraid that people would think they approved the extravagant notions advanced in them, if they were wholly silent about them; and therefore the national senate of Middleburg condemned, in 1581, that method of explaining the scripture; enjoining the divinity-­professor at Leyden to speak to Brocard about his visions; and it has been said, that Brocard, not being able to answer the objections raised against his mode of interpreting prophecies, promised to desist.

, a German lawyer and poet, was born at Lubeck, Sept. 22, 1680, and after having studied and taken his degrees in the civil and canon law, settled and practised at Hamburgh, where his merit soon raised him to the senatorial dignity, to which the emperor, without any solicitation, added the rank of Aulic counsellor, and count Palatine. These counts Palatine were formerly governors of the imperial palaces, and had considerable powers, being authorized to create public notaries, confer degrees, &c. Brockes published in five parts, from 1724 to 1736, 8vo, “Irdisches Vergnugen in Gott, &c.” or “Earthly Contentment in God,” consisting of philosophical and moral poems, which were much praised by his countrymen. He also published translations from Marini, and other Italian poets, into German, and had some thoughts of translating Milton, as he had done Pope’s Essay on Man, a proof at least of his taste for English poetry. His works form a collection of 9 vols. 8vo, and have been often reprinted. He appears to have carefully divided his time between his public duties and private studies, and died much esteemed and regretted, Jan. 16, 1747.

, an eminent English physician, the son of Richard Brocklesby, est}. of the city of Cork, by Mary Alloway, of Minehead, Somersetshire, was born at Minehead, where his mother happened to be on a visit to her parents, Aug. 11, 1722. There he remained until he was three years old, at which time he was carried to Ireland, and privately instructed for some years in his father’s house at Cork. At a proper age he was sent to Ballytore school in the north of Ireland, at which Edmund Burke “was educated, and although they were not exactly contemporaries^ Dr. Brocklesby being seven years older, this circumstance led to a long and strict friendship. Having finished his classical education at Ballytore, with diligence and success, his father, intending him for a physician, sent him to Edinburgh, where after continuing the usual time, he went to Leyden, and took his degree under the celebrated Gaubius, who corresponded with him for several years afterwards. His diploma is dated June 28, 1745, and the same year he published his thesis,” De Saliva sana et morbosa."

On returning home he began practice in Broad-street, London; and diligence, integrity, and œconomy, soon enabled him to surmount the difficulties which a young physician has to encounter, while his father assisted him with 150l. a year, a liberal allowance at that time. In 1746, he published “An Essay concerning the mortality of the horned cattle:” and in April, 1751, was admitted a licentiate of the college of physicians. He had by this time risen into reputation; and as his manners were naturally mild and conciliating, his knowledge well-founded, and his talents somewhat known as an author, he soon became acquainted with the leading men in the profession particularly the celebrated Dr. Mead, Dr. Leatherland, Dr. Heberden, sir George Baker, &c. He added another testimony to the fame of Dr. Mead, by always praising his skill, his learning, urbanity, &c. and amongst many other anecdotes of this extraordinary man, used to relate the circumstance of his giving that celebrated impostor, Psalmanazar, an opportunity of eating nearly a pound of raw human flesh at his table, to prove that this was the constant food of the inhabitants of Formosa.

On the 28th of September 1754, he obtained an honorary degree from the university of Dublin, and was admitted to Cambridge ad eundem the 16th of December following. In virtue of this degree at Cambridge, he became a fellow of the college of London the 25th of June 1756; and, on the 7th of October 1758 (on the recommendation of Dr. Shaw, favoured by the patronage of the late lord Barrington), he was appointed physician to the army. In this capacity he attended in Germany the best part of what is called “the seven years’ war,” where he was soon distinguished by his knowledge, his zeal, and humanity; and particularly recommended himself to the notice of his grace the duke of Richmond, the late lord Pembroke, and others, which with the former mellowed into a friendship, only terminated by the doctor’s life. On the 27th of October 1760, he was appointed physician to the hospitals for the British forces, and returned to England some time before the peace of 1763.

On his return he settled in Norfolk-street, in the Strand, where he was considered as a physician of very extensive experience, particularly in all diseases incident to the army. His practice spread in proportion to his reputation; and, with his half-pay, and an estate of about six hundred pounds per year, which devolved on him by the death of his father, he was now enabled to live in a very handsome manner, and his table was frequently filled with some of the most distinguished persons for rank, learning, and abilities in the kingdom. In the course of his practice, his advice as well as his purse was ever accessible to the poor, as well as to men of merit who stood in need of either. Besides giving his advice to the poor of all descriptions, which he did with an active and unwearied benevolence, he had always upon his list two or three poor widows, to whom he granted small annuities; and who, on the quarter day of receiving their stipends, always partook of the hospitalities of his table. To his relations who wanted his assistance in their business or professions, he was not only liberal, but so judicious in his liberalities as to supersede the necessity of a repetition of them. To his friend Dr. Johnson (when it was in agitation amongst his friends to procure an enlargement of his pension, the better to enable him to travel for the benefit of his health), he offered an establishment of one hundred pounds per year during his life: and, upon doctor Johnson’s declining it (which he did in the most affectionate terms of gratitude and friendship), he made him a second offer of apartments in his own house, for the more immediate benefit of medical advice. To his old and intimate friend Edmund Burke, he had many years back bequeathed by will the sum of one thousand pounds; but recollecting that this event might take place (which it afterwards did) when such a legacy could be of no service to him, he, with that judicious liberality for which he was always distinguished, gave it to him in advance, “ut pignus arnicitite;” it was accepted as such by Mr. Burke, accompanied with a letter, which none but a man feeling the grandeur and purity of friendship like him, could dictate. Passing through a life thus honourably occupied in the liberal pursuits of his profession, and in the confidence and friendship of some of the first characters of the age for rank or literary attainments, the doctor reached his 73d year; and finding those infirmities, generally attached to that time of life, increase upon him, he gave up a good deal of the bustle of business, as well as his half-pay, on being appointed, by his old friend and patron the duke of Richmond, physician general to the royal regiment of artillery and corps of engineers, March, 1794. This was a situation exactly suited to his time of life and inclinations; hence he employed his time in occasional trips to Woolwich, with visits to his friends and patients. In this last list he never forgot either the poor or those few friends whom he early attended as a medical man gratuitously. Scarcely any distance, or any other inconvenience, could repress this benevolent custom; and when he heard by accident that any of this latter description of his friends were ill, and had through delicacy abstained from sending for him, he used to say, somewhat peevishly, “Why am I treated thus? Why was not I sent for?”

Though debilitated beyond his years, particularly for a man of his constant exercise and abstemious and regular manner of living, he kept up his acquaintance and friendships to the last, and in a degree partook of the pleasantries and convivialities of the table. The friends, who knew his habits, sometimes indulged him with a nap in his arm chair after dinner, which greatly refreshed him: he then would turn about to the company, and pay his club of the conversation, either by anecdote or observation, entirely free from the laws or severities of old age.

In the beginning of December 1797, he set out on a visit to Mrs. Burke, at Beaconsfield, the long frequented seat of friendship and hospitality, where the master spirit of the age he lived in, as well as the master of that mansion, had so often adorned, enlivened, and improved the convivial hour. On proposing this journey, and under so infirm a state as he was in, it was hinted by a friend, whether such a length of way, or the lying out of his own bed, with other little circumstances, might not fatigue him too much: he instantly caught the force of this suggestion, and with his usual placidity replied, “My good friend, I perfectly understand your hint, and am thankful to you for it; but where’s the difference whether I die at a friend’s house, at an inn, or in a post-chaise? I hope I'm every way prepared for such an event, and perhaps it would be as well to elude the expectation of it.” He therefore began his journey the next day, and arrived there the same evening, where he was cordially received by the amiable mistress of the mansion, as well as by doctors Lawrence and King, who happened to be there on a visit. He remained at Beaconsfield ‘till the llth of December, but recollecting that his learned nephew, Dr. Young, now foreign secretary to the royal society, was to return from Cambridge to London next day, he instantly set out for his house in town, where he ate his last dinner with his nearest friends and relations, About nine o’clock he desired to go to bed, but going up stairs fatigued him so much, that he was obliged to sit in his chair for some time before he felt himself sufficiently at ease to be undressed. In a little time, however, he recovered himself; and, as they were unbuttoning his waistcoat, he said to his elder nephew, “What an idle piece of ceremony this buttoning and unbuttoning is to me now!” When he got to bed he seemed perfectly composed, but in about five minutes after, expired with out a groan.

He was interred Dec. 18, in the church-yard of St. Cle^ jnent Danes, in a private manner, according to his request. His fortune, amounting to near 30,000l. after a few legacies to friends and distant relations, was divided between his two nephews, Robert Beeby, esq. and Dr. Thomas Young. The preceding facts may be sufficient to illustrate Dr. Brocklesby’s character. His future fame as a writer must rest on his publications, of which the following is, we believe, a correct list: 1. “Dissertatio Inaug. de Saliva Sanaet Morbosa,” Lug. Bat. 1745, 4to. 2. “An Essay concerning the Mortality of the Horned Cattle,” 1746, 8vo. 3. “Eulogium Medicum, sive Oratio Anniyersaria Harveiana habita in Theatris Collegii Regal is Me-? dicorum Londinensium, Die xviii Octobris,” 1760, 4to. 4. “Œconomical and Medical Observations from 1738 to 1763, tending to the improvement of Medical Hospitals,” 1764, 8vo. 5. “An Account of the poisonous root lately found mixed with Gentian,” Phil. Trans. N. 486. 6. “Case of a Lady labouring under a Diabetes,” Med. Observ. No. III. 7. “Experiments relative to the Analysis and Virtues of Seltzer Water,” ibid. vol. IV. 8. “Case of an Encysted Tumour in the Orbit of the Eye, cured by Messrs, Bromfield and Ingram,” ibid. 9. “A Dissertation on the Music of the Antients.” We do not know the date of this last article, but believe it to be amongst his early literary amusements. When Dr. Young was at Leyden, a professor, understanding he was a nephew of Dr. Brocklesby’s, shewed him a translation of it in the German language.

, in Latin Brod&Us, an eminent critic, on whom Lipsius, Scaliger, Grotius, and all the learned of his age, have bestowed high encomiums, was descended from a noble family in France, and born at Tours in 1500. He was liberally educated, and placed under Alciat to study the civil law; but, soon forsaking that, he gave himself up wholly to languages and the belles-lettres. He travelled into Italy, where he became acquainted with Sadolet, Bembus, and other eminent characters; and here he applied himself to the study of philosophy, mathematics, and the sacred languages, in which he made no small proficiency. Then returning to his own country, he led a retired but not an idle life; as his many learned lucubrations abundantly testify. He was a man free from all ambition and vain-glory, and suffered his works to be published rather under the sanction and authority of others, than under his own: a singular example, says Thuanus, of modesty in this age, when men seek glory not only from riches and honours, but even from letters; and that too with a vanity which disgraces them. He died in 1563, at Tours, where he was a canon of St. Martin. His principal works are, 1. his “Miscellanea, a collection of criticisms and remarks, the first six books of which are published in Gruter’s” Lampas, seu fax artium,“vol. II. and the four latter in vol. IV. 2.” Annotationes in Oppianurn, Q. Calabrum, et Coluthum,“Basil, 1552, 8vo. 3.” Notae in Martialem,“ibid. 1619, 8vo. 4.” Annot. in Xenophontem, Gr. et Lat.“ibid. 1559, fol. 5.” Epigrammata Grseca cum Annot. Brodaei et H. Steph." Francfort, 1600, fol. Many of these epigrams were translated into Latin by Dr. Johnson, and are printed with his works.

, or John Broeckhuizen, a distinguished scholar in Holland, was born Nov. 20, 1649, at Amsterdam, where his father was a clerk in the admiralty. He learned the Latin tongue under Hadrian Junius, and made a prodigious progress in polite literature, but his father dying when he was very young, he was taken from literary pursuits’, and placed with an apothecary at Amsterdam, with whom he lived some years. Not liking this, he went into the army, where his behaviour raised him to the rank of lieutenant-captain; and, in 1674, was sent with his regiment to America in the fleet under admiral de Ruyter, but returned to Holland the same year. In 1678 he was sent to the garrison at Utrecht, where he contracted a friendship with the celebrated Grsevius; and here, though a person of an excellent temper, he had the misfortune to be so deeply engaged in a duel, that, according to the laws of Holland, his life was forfeited: but Gnevius wrote immediately to Nicholas Heinsius, who obtained his pardon from the stadtholder. Not long after, he became a captain of one of the companies then at Amsterdam; which post placed him in an easy situation, and gave him leisure to pursue his studies. His company being disbanded in 1697, a pension was granted him; upon which he retired to a country-house near Amsterdam, where he saw but little company, and spent his time among his books. He died Dec. 15, 1707, and was interred at Amsterween, near Amsterdam; a monument was afterwards erected to his memory, with an inscription, the letters of which are arranged so as to form the date of the year, which we presume was considered as a great effort of genius:

His works are, 1. his “Carmina,” Utrecht, 1684, 12 mo, and afterwards more splendidly by Hoogstraaten, at Amst. 1711, 4to, under the title of “Jani Broukhusii poematnm libri sedecim.” 2. “Actii Sinceri Sannazarii, &c. Opera Latina; accedunt notoe, &c.” Amst. 1680, 12mo, without his name, which was added to the best edition, Amst 1727. 3. “Aonii Palearii Verulani opera,” ibid. 1696,8vo, without his name, and by some mistaken for one of Greevius’s editions. 4. “S. Aurelii Propertii Elegiarum libri IV.” ibid. 1702, 4to; ibid. 1727, 4to. 5. “AlbiiTibulli quse extant, &c.” ibid. 1708, 4to. His “Dutch poems” were published by Hoogstraaten, Amst. 1712, 8vo, with the author’s life. Modern critics seem agreed in the value of his editions of the classics, although he has been sometimes censured for bold freedoms.

, was born at Stoke Golding, in Leicestershire, Sept. 29, 1637, and educated at Trinity college, Cambridge, and was afterwards rector of Rowley, in the East riding of Yorkshire. He wrote a “Life of Jesus Christ;” and was a principal assistant to Mr. Nelson in compiling his “Feasts and Fasts of the Church of England.” He was also author of “An History of the government of the primitive Church, for the three first centuries, and the beginning of the fourth,” printed by W. B. 1712, 8vo. In a dedication to Mr. Francis Cherry, dated Shottesbroke, Aug. 13, 1711, the author says, “The following treatise challenges you for its patron, and demands its dedication to yourself, in that I wrote it under your roof> was encouraged in my studies by that respectful treatment I there found, and still meet with; and withal, as I was assisted in my work by your readiness to supply me, out of your well-replenished library, with such books as I stood in need of in collecting this history. I esteem myself, therefore, in gratitude obliged to make this public acknowledgement of your favours, and to tell the world, that when I was by God’s good providence reduced to straits (in part occasioned by my care lest I should make shipwreck of a good conscience), I then found a safe retreat and kind reception in your family, and there both leisure and encouragement to write this following treatise.” As Mr. Brokesby’s straits arose from his principles as a nonjuror, he was, of course, patronised by the most eminent persons of that persuasion. The house of the benevolent Mr. Cherry, however, was his asylum; and there he formed an intimacy with Mr. Dodwell, whose “Life” he afterwards wrote, and with Mr. Nelson, to whom the Life of Dodwell is dedicated. He died suddenly soon after that publication, in 1715. Mr. Brokesby was intimately acquainted with the famous Oxford antiquary, Hearne, who printed a valuable letter of his in the first volume of Leland’s Itinerary; and was said to be the author of a tract, entitled “Of Education, with respect to grammar-schools and universities,” 1710, 8vo.

, almoner to king Edward II. is allowed to have shared the honour of founding Oriel college, Oxford, with that monarch. The only accounts we have of De Brom state, that he was rector of Hanworth in Middlesex, in 1313; the year following, chancellor of the diocese of Durham; in 1319, archdeacon of Stow; and a few months after was promoted to the living of St. Mary, OxfordJ In 1324 he requested of his sovereign to be empowered to purchase a messuage in Oxford, where he might found, to the honour of the Virgin Mary, a college of scholars, governed by a rector of their own choosing, “sub nomine Rectoris Domus Scholarium Beatae Marias.” With this the king readily complied, and De Brom immediately commenced his undertaking by purchasing a tenement in St. Mary’s parish; and, by virtue of the charter granted by the king, dated 1324, founded a college of scholars for the study of divinity and logic. He then resigned the whole into the hands of the king, of whose liberality he appears to have made a just estimate, and from whose power he expected advantages to the society, which he was himself incapable of conferring. Nor was he disappointed in the issue of this well-timed policy. The king took the college under his own care, and the next year granted anew charter, appointing it to be a college for divinity and the canon-law, to be governed by a provost, and for their better maintenance, besides some tenements in St. Mary’s parish, he gave them the advowson of St. Mary’s church, &c. Adam de Brom, who was deservedly appointed the first provost, drew up a body of statutes in 1326, and gave his college the church of Aberforth in Yorkshire; and in 1327, Edward III. bestowed upon them a large messuage, situated partly in the parish of St. John Baptist, called La Oriole, to which the scholars soon removed, and from which the college took its name. De Brom procured other advantages for the college, the last of which was the advowson of Coleby in Lincolnshire. He died June 16, 1332, and was buried in St. Mary’s church, in a chapel still called after his name. It is said to have been built by him, and his tomb, now decayed, was visible in Antony Wood’s time. In this chapel the heads of houses assemble on Sundays, &c. previous to their taking their seats in the church.

, an English poet, has the reputation of ably assisting the royal party in the time of Charles I. and of even having no inconsiderable hand in promoting the restoration. Of his personal history, we have only a few notices in the Biographia Dramatica. He was born in 1620, and died June 30, 1666. He was an attorney in the lord mayor’s court, and through the whole of the protectorship, maintained his loyalty, and cheered his party by the songs and poems in his printed works, most of which must have been sung, if not composed, at much personal risk. How far they are calculated to excite resentment, or to promote the cause which the author espoused, the reader must judge. His songs are in^neasures, varied with considerable ease and harmony, and have many sprightly turns, and satirical strokes, which the Roundheads must have felt. Baker informs us that he was the author of much the greater part of those songs and epigrams which were published against the rump. Phillips styles him the “English Anacreon.” Walton has draxvn a very favourable character of him in the eclogue prefixed to his works, the only one of the commendatory poems which seems worthy of a republication; Mr. Ellis enumerates three editions of these poems, the first in 1660, the second in 1664, and the third in 1668. That, however, used in the late edition of the English Poets is dated 1661. In 1660 he published “A Congratulatory Poem on the miraculous and glorious Return of Charles II.” which we have not seen. Besides these poems he published a “Translation of Horace,” by himself, Fanshaw, Holliday, Hawkins, Cowley, Ben Jonson, &c. and had once an intention to translate Lucretius, In 1654 he published a comedy entitled “The Cunning Lovers,” which was acted in 1651 at the private house in Drury Lane. He was also editor of the plays of Richard Brome, who, however, is not mentioned as being related to him.

lived also in the reign of Charles I, and was contemporary with Decker, Ford, Shirley, &c f His extraction was mean; for he was originally no better than a menial servant of Ben Jonson. He wrote himself, however, into high repute; and is addressed in some lines by his quondam master, on account of his comedy called the “Northern Lass.” His genius was entirely turned tu comedy, and we have fifteen of his productions in this way remaining. They were acted in their day with great applause, and have been often revived since. Even in our own time, one of them, called the “Jovial Crew,” has, with little alteration, been revived, and exhibited at Covent-garden with great and repeated success. He died in 1652.

, an eminent English surgeon, was born in London, in 1712, and studied surgery under the celebrated Ranby, by whose instructions he was soon enabled to practise on his own account. In 1741, he began to give lectures on anatomy and surgery, and soon found his theatre crowded with pupils. Some years after, in conjunction with the rev. Mr. Madan, he formed the plan of the Lock hospital, into which patients were first received Jan. 3, 1747, and was made first surgeon to that establishment, an office he filled with advantage to the patients and credit to himself for many years. With a view of contributing to its success, he altered an old comedy, “The City Match,” written in 1639, by Jaspar Maine, and procured it to be acted at Drury-lane theatre, in 1755, for the benefit of the hospital. He was also, very early after its being instituted, elected one of the surgeons to St. George’s hospital. In 1761, he was appointed in the suite of the noble persons, who were sent to bring over the princess of Mecklenburgh, our present queen, and was soon after appointed surgeon to her majesty’s household. In 1751, he sent to the royal society a case of a woman who had a foetus in her abdomen nine years, which is printed in their Transactions for the same year. In 1757, he published an account of the English night shades, the internal use of which had been recommended in scrophulous cases; but they had failed in producing the expected benefit with him. In 1759, he gave “A Narrative of a Physical Transaction with Mr. Aylet, surgeon, at Windsor.” This is a controversial piece of no consequence now, but the author clears himself from the imputation of having treated his antagonist improperly. Ira 1767, he published “Thoughts concerning the present peculiar method of treating persons ^inoculated for the Small-pox.” This relates to the Suttons, who were now in the zenith of their reputation. He thinks their practice of exposing their patients to the open air in the midst of winter, of repelling the eruption, and checking or preventing the suppurative process, too bold, and hazardous, On the whole, however, he acknowledges, they were deserving of commendation, for the improvements they had introduced, in the treatment, both of the inoculated and natural small-pox. His next work, the most considerable one written by him, was “Chirurgical Cases and Observations,” published in 1773, in 2 vols. 8vo. Though there are much judicious practice, and many valuable observations contained in these volumes, yet they did not answer the expectations of the public, or correspond to the fame and credit the author had obtained: accordingly in the following year they were attacked by an anonymous writer, said to be Mr. Justamond, in a pamphlet, entitled “Notes on Chirurgical Cases and Observations, by a Professor of Surgery.” The strictures contained in these notes are keen and ingenious, and, though evidently the produce of ill-humour, yet seem to have had the effect of preventing so general a diffusion of the cases, as the character of the author would otherwise have procured them. They have never been reprinted. About this time the author took a spacious mansion in Chelsea park, which he enlarged, altered, and furnished in an elegant style. Hither he retired, after doing his business, which he began gradually to contract into a narrower circle. With that view, a few years after, he gave up his situation as surgeon to the Lock hospital. His other appointments he kept to the time of his death, which happened on the 24th of November, 1792, in the 80th year of his age.

, an English clergyman, was a native of Shropshire, but where educated is not known. In the beginning of king James II.'s reign he was curate of St. Giles’s in the Fields, London, but afterwards turned Roman catholic, and was employed as a corrector of the press in the king’s printing-house, which afforded him a comfortable subsistence. When obliged to quit that, after the revolution, he undertook a boarding-school for the instruction of young gentlemen, some of whom being the sons of opulent persons, this employment proved very beneficial. His biographer informs us that Pope, the celebrated poet, was one of his pupils. He afterwards travelled abroad with some young gentlemen, as tutor, but retired at last to his own country, where he died Jan. 10, 1717. He published only a translation of the “Catechism of the Council of Trent,” Lnhd. 1687, 8vo.

was a Cistercian monk, and abbot of Jorevall, or Jerevalf, in Richmondshire. The “Chronicon” that goes under his name begins at the year 588, when Augustin the monk came into England, and is carried on to the death of king Richard I. anno domini 1198. This chronicle, Selden says, does not belong to the person whose name it goes under, and that John Brompton the abbot did only procure it for his monastery of Jorevall. But whoever was the author, it is certain he lived after the beginning of the reign of Edward III. as appears by his digressive relation of the contract between Joan, king Edward’s sister, and David, afterwards king of Scots. This historian has borrowed pretty freely from Hoveden. His chronicle is printed in the “Decem Script. Hist. Angliae,” Lond. 1652, fol.

, of Nimeguen, where he was born in 1494, and therefore sometimes called NoviOMAGUS, was an eminent mathematician of the sixteenth century, and rector of the school of Daventer, and afterwards professor of mathematics at Rostock. He died at Cologne in 1570. Saxius says that he was first of Rostock, then of Cologne, and lastly of Daventer, which appears to be probable from the dates of his writings. He wrote, 1. “Scholia in Dialecticam Georgii Trapezuntii,” Cologne and Leyden, 1537, 8vo. 2. “Arithmetica,” ibid, and Paris, 1539. 3. “De Astrolabii compositione,” Cologne, 1533, 8vo. 4. “Urbis Pictaviensis (Poitiers) tumultus, ej usque Restitutio,” an elegiac poem, Pictav. 1562, 4to. 5. “Ven. Bedae de sex mundi setatibus,” with scholia, and a continuation to the 26th of Charles V. Cologne, 1537. He also translated from the Greek, Ptolomy’s Geography.

, son of the preceding, was born at Daventer in 1554, and became one of the most celebrated lawyers in the Netherlands. He studied at Cologne, Erfurt, Marpurg, Wittemberg, and Basil, at which last place he took his doctor’s degree in 1579. He afterwards taught law at WittemHerg for a year, and at Erfurt for two years, and returned then to his own country, where he was appointed burgomaster of Daventer in 1586, and the year following professor at Leyden, where he died May 27, 1627. His principal works were: 1. “Centuriae et conciliationes earundem controversiarum juris, Cent. II.” 1621. 2. “Methodus Feudorum,” Leyden, 8vo. 3. “Aphorismi politici,” first collected by Lambert Danseus, and enlarged by Bronchorst, probably a good book, as it was prohibited at Rome in 1646.

, an Italian physician, was born of wealthy parents, in Abadia, near Rovigo, in the Venetian territory, in 1577. After making great progress in the study of the belles lettres, philosophy, and astronomy, he was sent to Padua, where he was initiated into the knowledge of medicine and anatomy, and in 1597, was made doctor. He now went to Venice, where he practised medicine to the time of his death, in 1630. His publications are, “De innato calido, et naturali spiritu, in quo pro veritate rei Galeni doctrina defenditur,” 1626, 4to; “Disputatio de Principatu Hepatis ex Anatome Lampetrse,” Patav. 4to. Though from dissecting the liver of this animal he was satisfied the blood did not acquire its red colour there, yet he did not choose to oppose the doctrine of Galen, His observation, however, was probably not lost, but led the way to a more complete discovery of the fact, by subsequent anatomists. He published also, “De Principio Effective Semini insito.”

, whose maiden name was Moore, was the daughter of a clergyman, and the wife of the rev. John Brooke, rector of Colney in Norfolk, of St. Augustine in the city of Norwich, and chaplain to the garrison of Quebec. She was as remarkable for her gentleness and suavity of manners as for her literary talents. Her husband died on the 21st of January 1789, and she herself expired on the 26th of the same month, at Sleaford, where she had retired to the house of her son, now rector of Folkingham in Lincolnshire. Her disorder was a spasmodic complaint. The first literary performance we know of her writing was the “Old Maid,” a periodical work, begun November 15, 1755, and continued every Saturday until about the end of July 1756. These papers have since been collected into one volume 12mo. In the same year (1756) she published “Virginia,” a tragedy, with odes, pastorals, and translations, 8vo. In the preface to this publication she assigns as a reason for its appearance, “that she was precluded from all hopes of ever seeing the tragedy brought upon the stage, by there having been two so lately on the same subject.” “If hers,” she adds, “should be found to have any greater resemblance to the two represented, than the sameness of the story made unavoidable, of which she is not conscious, it must have been accidental on her side, as there are many persons of very distinguished rank and unquestionable veracity, who saw hers in manuscript before the others appeared, and will witness for her, that she has taken no advantage of having seen them. She must here do Mr. Crisp the justice to say, that any resemblance must have been equally accidental on his part, as he neither did, nor could see her Virginia before his own was played; Mr. Garrick having declined reading hers till Mr. Crisp’s was published.” Prefixed to this publication were proposals for printing by subscription a poetical translation, with notes, of il Pastor Fido, a work which probably was never completed.

In 1763 she published a novel, entitled, “The History of Lady Julia Mandeville,” concerning the plan of which there were various opinions, though of the execution there seems to have been but one. It was read with much avidity and general approbation. It has been often, however, wished that the catastrophe had been less melancholy; and of the propriety of this opinion the authoress herself is said to have been satisfied, but did not choose to make the alteration. In the same year she published “Letters from Juliet lady Catesby to her friend lady Henrietta Campley,” translated from the French, 12mo. She soon afterwards went to Canada with her husband, who was chaplain to the garrison at Quebec; and there saw those romantic scenes so admirably painted in her next work, entitled, “The History of Emily Montagu,” 1769, 4 vols. 12mo. The next year she published “Memoirs of the Marquis of St. Forlaix,” in 4 vols. 12mo. On her return to England accident brought her acquainted with Mrs. Yates, and an intimacy was formed between them which lasted as long as that lady lived; and when she died, Mrs. Brooke did honour to her memory by a eulogium printed in the Gentleman’s Magazine. If we are not mistaken, Mrs. Brooke had with Mrs. Yates fora time some share in the opera-house. She certainly had some share of the libellous abuse which the management of that theatre during the above period gave birth to. We have already seen that her first play had been refused by Mr. Garrick. After the lapse of several years she was willing once -more to try her fortune at the theatre, and probably relying on the influence of Mrs. Yates to obtain its representation, produced a tragedy which had not the good fortune to please the manager. He therefore rejected it; and by that means excited the resentment of the authoress so much that she took a severe revenge on him in a novel published in 1777, entitled the “Excursion,” in 2 vols. 12mo. It is not certainly known whether this rejected tragedy is or is not the same as was afterwards acted at Covent-garden. If it was, it will furnish no impeachment of Mr. Garrick’s judgment. It ought, however, <to be added, that our authoress, as is said, thought her invective too severe; lamented and retracted it. In 1771 she translated “Elements of the History of England, from the invasion of the Romans to the reign of George II. from the abbe Millot,” in 4 vols. 12mo. In January 1781, the “Siege of Sinope,” a tragedy, was acted at Coventgarden. This piece added but little to her reputation, though the principal characters were well supported by Mr. Henderson and Mrs. Yates. It went nine nights, but never became popular; it wanted energy, and had not much originality; there was little to disapprove, but nothing to admire. Her next and most popular performance was “Rosina,” acted at Covent-garden in December 1782. This she presented to Mr. Harris, and few pieces have been equally successful. The simplicity of the story, the elegance of the words, and the excellence of the music, promise a long duration to this drama. Her concluding work was “Marian,” acted 1788 at Covent-garden with some success, but very much inferior to Rosina.

, an amiable and ingenious writer, was a native of Ireland, where he was born in the year 1706. His father, the rev. William Brooke of Rantavan, rector of the parishes of Killinkare, Mullough, Mybullough, and Licowie, is said to have been a man of grent talents and worth; his mother’s name was Digby. His education appears to have been precipitated in a manner not very usual: after being for some time the pupil of Dr. Sheridan, he was sent to Trinity college, Dublin, and from thence removed, when only seventeen years old, to study law in the Temple. Dr. Sheridan was probably the means of his being introduced in London to Swift and Pope, who regarded him as a young man of very promising talents. How long he remained in London we are not told*, but on his return to Ireland he practised for some time as a chamber counsel, when an incident occurred which interrupted his more regular pursuits, and prematurely involved him in the cares of a family. An aunt, who died at Westmgath about the time of his arrival in Ireland, committed to him the guardianship of her daughter, a lively and beautiful girl between eleven and twelve years old. Brooke, pleased with the trust, conducted her to Dublin, and placed her at a boarding-school, where, during his frequent visits, he gradually changed the guardian for the lover, and at length prevailed on her to consent to a private marriage. In the life prefixed to his works, this is said to have taken place before she had reached her fourteenth year: another account, which it is neither easy nor pleasant to believe, informs us that she was a mother before she had completed that year. When the marriage was discovered, the ceremony was again performed in the presence of his family. For some time this happy pair had no cares but to please each other, and it was not until after the birth of their third child that Brooke could be induced to think seriously how such a family was to be provided for. The law had long been given up, and he had little inclination to resume a profession which excluded so many of the pleasures of imagination, and appeared inconsistent with the feelings of a mind tender, benevolent, and somewhat romantic. Another journey to London, however, promised the advantages of literary society, and the execution of literary schemes by which he might indulge his genius, and be rewarded by fame and wealth. Accordingly, soon after his arrival, he renewed his acquaintance with his former friends, and published his philosophical poem, entitled “Universal Beauty.” This had been submitted to Pope, who, probably, contributed his assistance, and whose manner at least is certainly followed. At what time this occurred is uncertain. The second part was published in 1735, and the remainder about a year after. What fame or advantage he derived from it we know not, as no mention is made of him in the extensive correspondence of Pope or Swift. He was, however, obliged to return to Ireland, where for a short time he resumed his legal profession.

In 1737 he went a third time to London, where he was introduced to Lyttelton and others, the political and literary adherents of the prince of Wales, “who,” it is said, “caressed him with uncommon familiarity, and presented him with many elegant and valuable tokens of his friendship.” Amidst such society, he had every thing to point his ambition to fame and independence, and readily caught that fervour of patriotic enthusiasm which was the bond of union and the ground of hope in the prince’s court.

In 1738 he published a translation of the First Three Books of Tasso, of which it is sufficient praise that Hoole says: “It is at once so harmonious and so spirited, that I think an entire translation of Tasso by him would not only have rendered my task unnecessary, but have discouraged those from the attempt whose poetical abilities are much superior to mine.” He was, however, diverted from completing his translation, by his political friends, who, among other plans of hostility against the minister of the day, endeavoured to turn all the weapons of literature against him, Their prose writers were numerous, but principally essayists and pamphleteers: from their poets they had greater expectations; Paul Whitehead wrote satires; Fielding, comedies and farces; Glover, an epic poem; and now Brooke was encouraged to introduce Walpole in a tragedy. This was entitled “Gustavus Vasa, the deliverer of his country,” and was accepted by Drury-lane theatre, and almost quite ready for performance, when an order came from the lord chamberlain to prohibit it. That it contains a considerable portion of party-spirit cannot be denied, and the character of Trollio, the Swedish minister, however unjustly, was certainly intended for sir Robert Walpole; but it may be doubted whether this minister gained much by prohibiting the acting of a play which he had not the courage to suppress when published, and when the sentiments, considered deliberately in the closet, might be nearly as injurious as when delivered by a mouthing actor. The press, however, remained open, and the prohibition having excited an uncommon degree of curiosity, the author was more richly rewarded than he could been by the profits of the stage. Above a thousand copies were subscribed for at five shillings each, and by the sale of the subsequent editions, the author is said to have cleared nearly a thousand pounds. The editor of the Biographia Dramatica says that it was acted in 1742, with some alterations, on the Irish stage, by the title of “The Patriot.” Dr, Johnson, who at this time ranked among the discontented, wrote a very ingenious satirical pamphlet in favour of the author, entitled “A complete vindication of the Licensers of the Stage from the malicious and scandalous aspersions of Mr. Brooke, author of GustavusVasa,” 1739, 4to.

The fame Brooke acquired by this play, which has certainly many beauties, seemed the earnest of a prosperous career, and as he thought he could now afford to wait the slow progress of events, he hired a house at Twickenham, near to Pope’s, furnished it genteelly, and sent for Mrs. Brooke and his family. But these flattering prospects were soon clouded. He was seized with an ague so violent and obstinate that his physicians, after having almost despaired of his life, advised him, as a last resource, to try his native arr. With this he complied, and obtained a complete recovery. It was then expected that he should return to London, and such was certainly his intention, but to the surprize of his friends, he determined to remain in Ireland. For a conduct so apparently inconsistent not only with his interest, but his inclination, he was long unwilling to account. It appeared afterwards, that Mrs. Brooke was alarmed at the zeal with which he espoused the cause of the opposition, and dreaded the consequences with which his next intemperate publication might be followed. She persuaded him therefore to remain in Ireland, and for so singular a measure at this favourable crisis in his history, he could assign no adequate reason without exposing her to the imputation of caprice, and himself to that of a too yielding temper.

During his residence in Ireland, he kept up a literary correspondence with his London friends, but all their letters were consumed by an accidental fire. Two from Pope, we are told, are particularly to be lamented, as in one of these he professed himself in heart a protestant, but apologized for not publicly conforming, by alleging that it would render the eve of his mother’s life unhappy. Pope’s filial affection is the most amiable feature in his character; but this story of his declining to conform because it would give uneasiness to his mother, falls to the ground when, the reader is told that his mother had been dead six: or seven years before Brooke went to Ireland. In another letter, he is said, with more appearance of truth, to have advised Brooke to take orders, “as being a profession better suited to his principles, his disposition, and his genius, than that of the law, and also less injurious to his health.” Why he did not comply with this advice cannot now be known; but, before this time, he appears to have been of a religious turn, although it is not easy to reconcile his principles, which were those of the strictest kind, with his continual ambition to shine as a dramatic writer.

For some years after his arrival in Ireland, little is known of his life, except that lord Chesterfield, when viceroy, conferred upon him the office of barrack-master. His pen, however, was not idle. In 1741, he contributed to Ogle’s version of Chaucer, “Constantia, or the Man of Law’s Tale;” and in 1745, according to one account, his tragedy of the “Earl of Westmoreland” was performed on the Dublin stage; but the editor of the Biographia Dramatica informs us that it was first acted at Dublin in 1741, under the title of the “Betrayer of his Country,” and again in 1754 under that of “Injured Honour.” Its fame, however, was confined to Ireland, nor was it known in England until the publication of his poetical works in 1778. A more important publication was his “Farmer’s Letters,” written in 1745, on the plan of Swift’s D rapier’s Letters, and with a view to rouse the spirit of freedom among the Irish, threatened, as they were, in common with their fellow-subjects, by rebellion and invasion.

In 1746 he wrote an epilogue on the birth-day of the duke of Cumberland, spoken by Mr. Garrick in Dublin, and a prologue to Othello. In 1747 he contributed to Moore’s volume of Fables, four of great poetical merit, viz. “The Temple of Hymen;” “The Sparrow and Dove;” “The Female Seducers,” and “Love and Vanity.” In 1748 he wrote a prologue to the Foundling, and a dramatic opera entitled “Little John and the Giants.” This was acted only one night in Dublin, being then prohibited on account of certain political allusions. On this occasion he wrote “The last speech of John Good, alias Jack the Giant Queller,” a satirical effusion, not very pointed, and mixed with political allegory, and a profusion of quotations from scripture against tyrants and tyranny. In 1749, his “Karl of Essex,” a tragedy, was performed at Dublin, and afterwards, in 1760, at Drury-lane theatre, with so much success as to he preferred to the rival plays on the same subject by Banks and Jones. At what time his other dramatic pieces were written, or acted, if acted at all, is uncertain.

His biographer informs us, that, “wearied at length with fruitless efforts to arouse the slumbering genius of his country disgusted with her ingratitude and sick of her venality, he withdrew to his paternal seat, and there, in the society of the muses, and the peaceful bosom of domestic love, consoled himself for lost advantages and disappointed hopes. An only brother, whom he tenderly loved, accompanied his retirement, with a family almost as numerous as his own; and there, for many years, they lived together with uninterrupted harmony and affection: the nephew was as dear as the son the uncle as revered as the father and the sister-in-law almost as beloved as the wife.”

In 1762, he published a pamphlet entitled “The Trial of the Roman Catholics,” the object of which was to remove the political restraints on that class, and to prove that this may be done with safety. In this attempt, however, his zeal led him so far as to question incontrovertible facts, and even to assert that the history of the Irish massacre in 1641 is nothing but an old wives fable; and upon the whole he leans more to the principles of the Roman catholic religion, than an argument professedly political, or a mere question of extended toleration, seemed to require. His next work excited more attention in England. In 1766 appeared the first volume of the “Fool of Quality, or the History of the earl of Moreland,” a novel, replete with knowledge of human life and manners, and in which there are many admirable traits of moral feeling and propriety, but mixed, as the author advances towards the close, with so much of religious discussion, and mysterious stories and opinions, as to leave it doubtful whether he inclined most to Behmenism or popery. It became, however, when completed in five volumes, 1770, a very popular novel, and has often been reprinted since.

In 1772, he published “Redemption,” a poem, in which that great mystery of our religion is explained and amplified by bolder figures than are usually hazarded. His taste was indeed evidently on the decline, and in this as well as all his later performances, he seems to have yielded to the enthusiasm of the moment, without any reserve in favour of his better judgment. In this poem, too, heappears to have lost his pronunciation of the English so far as to introduce rhymes which must be read according to the vulgar Irish. His last work was “Juliet Grenville,” a novel in three volumes, which appeared in 1774. This is very justly entitled “The History of the Human Heart,” the secret movements of which few novelists have better understood; but there is such a mixture of the most sacred doctrines of religion with the common incidents and chitchat of the modern romance, that his best friends could with difficulty discover among these ruins, some fragments which indicated what his genius had once been.

In this year (1774) we are told, that Garrick pressed him earnestly to write for the stage, and offered to enter into articles with him at the rate of a shilling per line for all he should write during life, provided that he wrote for him alone. “This Garnck,” says his biographer, “looked upon as an extraordinary compliment to Mr, Brooke’s abilities; but he could not, however, bring him over to his opinion, nor prevail with him to accept of his offer; on the contrary, he rejected it with some degree of haughtiness for which Garrick never forgave him. He was then in the full and Haltering career to fortune and to fame, and would have thought it a disgrace to hire out his talents, and tie himself down to necessity.” In this story there is enough to induce us to reject it. Brooke was so far from being at this time in the full and flattering career to fortune and to fame, that he had out-lived both. And supposing that there may be some mistake in the date of Garrick’s, proposal, and that for 1774 we should read 1764, or even 1754, the proposal itself is too ridiculous to bear examination.

Our author’s tenderness of heart and unsuspecting temper involved him in pecuniary difficulties. He was ever prone to give relief to the distressed, although the immediate consequence of his liberality was that he wanted relief himself, and at length was compelled to dispose of his property, and remove to Kildare. After living some time here, he took a farm near his former residence. Where this residence was, his biographers have not mentioned; but soon after his return, they inform us that he lost his wife, to whom he had been happily united for nearly fifty years. The shock which this calamity gave to a mind, never probably very firm, and the wreck of a family of seventeen children now reduced to two, was followed by a state of mental imbecility from which he never recovered. The confusion of his ideas, indeed, had been visible in most of his later writings, and the infirmities of age completed what his family losses and personal disappointments had begun. His last days, however, were cheered by the hopes of religion, which became brighter as he approached the hour in which they were to be fulfilled. He died Oct. 10, 1783, leaving a son, since dead, and a daughter, the child of his old age.

His poetical works were collected in 1778, in four volumes octavo, printed very incorrectly, and with the addition of some pieces which were not his. In 1792 another edition was published at Dublin, by his daughter, who procured some memoirs of her father prefixed to the first volume. In this she informs us she found many difficulties. He had lived to so advanced an age, that most of his contemporaries departed before him, and this young lady remembered nothing of him previous to his retirement from the world. Such an apology cannot be refused, while we must yet regret that miss Brooke was not able to collect information more to be depended on, and arranged with more attention to dates. The narrative, as we find it, is confused and contradictory.

From all, however, that can now be learned, Brooke was a man of a most amiable character and ingenuous temper, and perhaps few men have produced writings of the same variety, the tendency of all which is so uniformly in favour of religious and moral principle. Yet even in this there are inconsistencies which we know not how to explain, unless we attribute them to an extraordinary defect in judgment. During a great part of his life, his religious opinions approached to what are now termed methodistical, and one difficulty, in contemplating his character, is to reconcile this with his support of the stage, and his writing those trifling farces we find among his works. Perhaps it may be said that the necessities of his family made him listen to the importunity of those friends who considered the stage as a profitable resource; but by taking such advice he was certainly no great gainer. Except in the case of his “Gustavus” and “Earl of Essex,” there is no reason to think that he was successful, and the greater part of his dramas were never performed at all, or printed until 1778, when he could derive very little advantage from them. Nor can we impute it to any cause, except a total want of judgment and an ignorance of the public taste, that he intermixed the most awful doctrines of religion, and the lighter incidents and humorous sketches of vulgar or fashionable life, in his novels. He lived, however, we are told, more consistently than he wrote. No day passed in which he did not collect his family to prayer, and read and expounded the scriptures to them : Among his tenants and humble friends he was the benevolent and generous character which he had been accustomed to depict in his works, and while he had the means, he literally went about doing good.

As a poet, he delights his readers principally by occasional flights of a vivid imagination, but has in no instance given us a poem to which criticism may not suggest many reasonable objections. The greater part of his life, he lived remote from the friends of whose judgment he might have availed himself, and by whose taste his own might have been regulated. His first production, Universal Beauty, has a noble display of fancy in many parts. It is not improbable that Pope, to whom he submitted it, gave him some assistance, and he certainly repaid his instructor by adopting his manner; yet he has avoided Pope’s monotony, and would have done this with more effect, if we did not perceive a mechanical lengthening of certain lines, rather than a natural variety of movement. On the other hand, the sublimity of the subject, by which he was inspired and which he hoped to communicate, sometimes betrays him into a species of turgid declamation. Harmony appears to be consulted, and epithets multiplied to please the ear at the expence of meaning.

, late Somerset-herald, was the son of William Brooke, M. D. of Fieidhead, near Dodsworth in Yorkshire, and a gentleman by descent. He was born in 1748, and put apprentice to Mr. James Kirkby, a chemist, in Bartlett’s-buildings, London; but discovering a strong turn to heraldic pursuits, and having, by a pedigree of the Howard family, which he drew, attracted the notice of the then duke of Norfolk, he procured him a place in the college of arms, by the title of Rouge Croix pursuivant, in 1775, from which, in 1778. he was advanced to that of Somerset herald, which office he held at his death, and by the interest of the present duke of Norfolk he was also one of the lieutenants in the militia of the West Riding of Yorkshire. On Feb. 3, 1794, he was suffocated, with his friend Mr. Pingo of York, and many other persons, in attempting to get into the pit at the little theatre in the Hay market. It did not appear that he had been thrown down, but was suffocated as he stood; his countenance had the appearance of sleep, and even the colour in his cheeks remained. He was interred, with great respect, and the attendance of the principal members of the college and of the society of antiquaries, Feb. 6, in a vault under the heralds’ seat, in the church of St. Bennet, Paul’s Wharf. A mural monument, by Ashton, has since been placed over his remains by Edmund Lodge x esq. Lancaster herald.

Mr. Brooke, by a well-regulated ceconomy, had acquired about 14,000l. By his will he appointed his two sisters executrixes and residuary legatees, and bequeathed his Mss. to the college of arms. He made many collections, chiefly relative to the county of York. His father inheriting the Mss. of his great uncle, the rev. Brooke, which he had made as a foundation for the topography of that great division of the kingdom, they came into his hands, and he greatly enlarged them by his own industry, and by copying the manuscripts of Jennings and Tellyson, which treated upon the same subject. His collections were not confined to Britain; but he added much to his literary labours whilst on a tour to the continent. The whole shew his judgment as well as application. Becoming, April 6, 1775, a member of the society of antiquaries, he enriched their volumes with some curious papers relative to the ancient seal of Robert baron Fitzwaltet, and those of queens Catharine Parr and Mary d'Este; illustrations of a Saxon inscription in Kirkdale church, in the North Riding of Yorkshire, and another in Aldborough church, in Holderness; and of a deed belonging to the manor of Nether-Sillington, in Yorkshire. Some items of his, signed J. B. appear in the Gentleman’s Magazine; and the first writers of the age in history, biography, and topography, have been indebted to him.

, York herald, whose real name was Brookesworth, until he changed it to Brooke, was bred to the trade of a painter-stainer, of which company he became free, September 3, 1576, and leaving this, he became an officer at arms. He was so extremely worthless and perverse, that his whole mind seems bent to malice and wickedness: unawed by virtue or station, none were secure from his unmerited attacks. He became a disgrace to the college, a misfortune to his contemporaries, and a misery to himself. With great sense and acquirements, he sunk into disgrace and contempt. He was particularly hostile to Camden, publishing “A Discovery of Errors” found in his Britannia. Camden returned his attack partly by silence, and partly by rallying Brooke, as entirely ignorant of his own profession, incapable of translating or understanding the “Britannia,” in which he had discovered faults, offering to submit the matter in dispute to the earl Marshal, the college of heralds, the society of antir quaries, or four persons learned in these studies. Irritated still more, he wrote a “Second Discovery of Errors,” which he presented to James I. January 1, 1619-20, who, on the 4th following, prohibited its publication, but it was published by Anstis, in 1723, in 4to. In it are Camden’s supposed errors, with his objections, Camden’s reply, and his own answers. In the appendix, in two columns, are placed the objectionable passages in the edition of 1594, and the same as they stood in that of 1600. In 1622, he published a valuable work, dedicated to James I. entitled “A Catalogue and Succession of Kings, Princes, Dukes, Marquises, Earls, and Viscounts of this Realm, since the Norman Conquest, until 1619, &c.” small folio. In his address to his majesty, he says, “he had spent fifty years’ labour and experience, having served his majesty and the late queen Elizabeth, of famous memory, forty years an more.” That no doubt might be entertained of his ability, he said he had in his custody the collections of the principal heralds deceased, before and during his time, adding, without ostentation be it spoken, he held his library better furnished than the office of arms. He does not neglect to intreat James to prohibit upstarts and mountebanks from impoverishing his majesty’s poor servants, the officers of arms, who labour daily, and spend both their bodies and substance in doing their duty. He was twice suspended and imprisoned for scandalous misbehaviour: the first time, for his shameful conduct to Segar, Garter; and in 1620, a petition was exhibited against him and Creswell as disturbers of the whole body of heralds. On Oct. 15,

1621, with a view probably to expel him the college, it was solemnly argued, whether he was a herald; but the chief baron of the exchequer, Whitfield, decided in his favour. Dec. 4, he and Creswell, Somerset herald, were sentenced to the Marshaisea for having spoken contemptuously of the Earl Marshal. Cresweil was obliged to resign, but Brooke died in his office, universally despised, Oct. 15, 1625, and was buried in the church of Reculver in Kent.

, lord chief justice of the common pleas in the reign of queen Mary, and author of several books in the law, was son of Thomas Brooke of Claverly in Shropshire, by Margaret his wife, daughter of Hugh Grosvenor of Farmot in that county. He was born at Claverly, and studied in the university of Oxford, which was of great advantage to him when he studied the law in the Middle Temple, according to Mr. Wood, though Mr. Stow, in his Annals under the year 1552, says he was of Gray’s-inn. By his prodigous application and judgment he became the greatest lawyer of his time. In 1542 he was elected autumn or summer reader of the Middle Temple, and in Lent, 1550, he was chosen double reader. In 1552 he was by 'writ called to be serj ear* at law; and in 1553, which was the first of queen Mary’s reign, he was appointed lord chief justice of the common pleas, and not of the king’s bench, as some have affirmed; and about that time he received the honour of knighthood from the queen, in whose reign he was highly ^valued for his profound skill in the law, and his integrity in all points relating to the profession of it. Mr. Wood mentions a manuscript in the Ashmolean library at Oxford, which informs us, that he had likewise been common serjeant and recorder of the city of London, and speaker of the house of commons; and that he died as he was visiting his friends in the country, September 5, 1558, and was interred in the chancel of Claverly church, with a monument erected to him. In his last will, proved October 12 the same year, he remembers the church and poor of Putney near London. He left his posterity a good estate at Madeley in Shropshire, and at one or two places in Suffolk. He wrote “La Graunde Abridgement,” which contains, according to Mr. Wood, an abstract of the Yearbooks to the reign of queen Mary; and Nicolson, in his “English Historical Library,” tells us, that in this work he followed the example of Nicholas Statham, one of the barons of the exchequer in the time of Edward IV. who t abridged the larger arguments and tedious reports of the Year-books into a short system under proper heads and common places to the reign of king Henry VI.; and that our author, sir Robert Brooke, made in his “Graunde Abridgement,” an alphabetical abstract of all the choice matters in our law, as contained in such commentaries, records, readings, &c. and that this work is a general epitome of all that could be had upon the several heads’ there treated upon. It has had several editions, particularly in London in a small folio, 1573, 1576, 1586, &c. amongst which editions, says Nicolson, (as it commonly fares with the authors of that professsion) the eldest are still reckoned the best. He collected likewise the most remarkable cases adjudged in.*the court of common pleas from the sixth year of king Henry VIII. to the fourth of queen Mary, which book is entitled “Ascuns novelCases, c.” and frequently printed, particularly at London, 1578, 1604, 1625, Sac. in 8vo. He wrote also “A Reading on the Statute of Limitations 32 Henry VIII. cap. 2,” London, 1647, 8vo. Mr. Wood supposes that it had been printed likewise before that time.

, born in 1612, the son of George Brooksbank of Halifax, was entered a batler in Brazen-nose college, in Michaelmas term 1632, took a degree in arts, went into orders, and had a curacy. At length removing to London, he taught school in Fleet-street, and preached there. The time of his death is not known. He published, 1. “Breviate of Lilly’s Latin Grammar, &c.” London, 1660, 8vo. 2. “The welltuned Organ; or an exercitation, wherein this question is fully and largely discussed, Whether or no instrumental and organical music be lawful in holy public assemblies? Affirmatur,” ibid. 1660, 4to. 3. “Rebels tried and cast, in three Sermons,” ibid. 1661, 12mo.

was born in Cheshire, as is said, of very mean parents. Of the place of his birth, or the first part of his life, we have not been able to gain any intelligence. He was educated upon the foundation at Eton, and was captain of the school a whole year, without any vacancy, by which he might have obtained a scholarship at King’s college. Being by this delay, such as is said to have happened very rarely, superannuated, he was sent to St. John’s college by the contributions of his friends, where he obtained a small exhibition. At his college he lived for some time in the same chamber with the well-known Ford, by whom Dr. Johnson heard him described as a contracted scholar and a mere versifier, unacquainted with life, and unskilful in conversation. His addiction to metre was then such, that his companions familiarly called him Poet. When he had opportunities of mingling with mankind, he cleared himself, as Ford likewise owned, from great part of his scholastic rust.

He appeared early in the world as a translator of the Iliads into prose, in conjunction with Ozell and Oldisworth. How their several parts were distributed is not known. This is the translation of which Ozell boasted as superior, in Toland’s opinion, to that of Pope: it has long since vanished, and is now in no danger from the critics. He was introduced to Mr. Pope, who was then visiting sir John Cotton at Madingley, near Cambridge, and gained so much of his esteem, that he was employed to make extracts from Eustathius for the notes to the translation of the Iliad; and in the volumes of poetry published by Lintot, commonly called Pope’s Miscellanies, many of his early pieces were inserted. Pope and Broome were to be yet more closely connected. When the success of the Iliad gave encouragement to a version of the Odyssey, Pope, weary of the toil, called Fenton and Broome to his assistance; and, taking only half the work upon himself, divided the other half between his partners, giving four books to Fenton, and eight to Broome. Fenton’s books are enumerated in Dr. Johnson’s Life of him. To the lot of Brooine fell the 2d, 6th, 8th, llth, 12th, 16th, 18th, and 23d; together with the burthen of writing all the notes. The price at which Pope purchased this assistance was three hundred pounds paid to Fenton, and five hundred to Broome, with as many copies as he wanted for his friends, which amounted to one hundred more. The payment made to Fenton is known only by hearsay; Broome’s is very distinctly told by Pope, in the notes to the Dunciad. It is evident that, according to Pope’s own estimate, Broome was unkindly treated. If four books could merit three hundred pounds, eight, and all the notes, equivalent at least to four, had certainly a right to more than six. Broome probably considered himself as injured, and there was for some time more than coldness between him and his employer. He always spoke of Pope as too much a lover of money, and Pope pursued him with avowed hostility, for he not only named him disrespectfully in the “Dunciad,” but quoted him more than once in the Bathos, as a proficient in the Art of Sinking; and in his enumeration of the different kinds of poets distinguished for the profound, he reckons Broome among “the parrots who repeat another’s words in such a hoarse odd tone as makes them seem their own.” It has been said that they were afterwards reconciled; but we are afraid their peace was without friendship. He afterwards published a Miscellany of poems, and never rose to very high dignity in the church. He was some time rector of Sturston in Suffolk, where he married a wealthy widow; and afterwards, when the king visited Cambridge, 1728, became LL, D. He was, 1733, presented by the crown to the rectory of Pulham in Norfolk, which he held with Oakley Magna in Suffolk, given him by the lord Cornwallis, to whom he was chaplain, and who added the vicarage of Eye in Suffolk; he then resigned Pulham, and retained the other two. Towards the close of his life he grew again poetical, and amused himself with translating odes of Anacreon, which he published in the Gentleman’s Magazine, under the name of Chester. He died at Bath, Nov. 16, 1745, and was buried in the abbey church.

Of Broome, says Dr. Johnson, though it cannot be said that he was a great poet, it would be unjust to deny that he was an excellent versifier; his lines are smooth and sonorous, and his diction is select and elegant. His rhymes are sometimes unsuitable, but such faults occur but seldom, and he had such power of words and numbers as fitted him for translation; but in his original works, recollection seems to have been his business more than invention. His imitations are so apparent, that it is a part of his reader’s employment to recall the verses of some former poet. What he takes, however, he seldom makes worse; and he cannot be justly thought a mean man, whom Pope chose for an associate, and whose co-operation was considered by Pope’s enemies as so important, that he was attacked by Henley with this ludicrous distich:

Broome went before, and kindly swept the way."

Broome also published a coronation sermon in 1727, and an assize sermon in 1737.

, better known under the name of Farinello, was born the 24th of January, 1705, at Andria, in the kingdom of Naples, of a family noble, though poor. From the patent of his knighthood of the order of Calatrava, it appears that he was indebted for the lasting agreeableness of his voice, not to a voluntary mutilation from the thirst of gain, but that he was obliged to undergo the cruel operation on account of a dangerous hurt he received in his youth, by a fall from a horse. He owed the first rudiments of the singing art to his father Salvatore Brosco, and his farther formation to the famous Porpora. At, that time there flourished at Naples three wealthy brothers of the name of Farina, whose family is now extinct. These persons vouchsafed him their distinguished patronage, and bestowed on him the name of Farinello. For some time his fame was confined to the convivial concerts of his patrons, till it happened that the count of Schrautenbach, nephew of the then viceroy, came to Naples. To celebrate his arrival, -the viceroy and his familiar friend Antonio Caracciolo, prince della Torella, caused the opera of “Angelica and Medoro” to be represented, in which Metastasio and Farinello plucked the first laurels of their immortal fame.

Thus fortune united the two greatest luminaries that have appeared on the theatre in modern times, at the entrance on their career. Metastasio was then not more than eighteen, and Farinello not above fifteen years of age. This circumstance gave birth to an intimacy between them, which at length was improved into a cordial friendship, supported and confirmed, as long as they lived, by a regular intercourse of epistolary correspondence.

Soon after Farinello was called to the principal theatres in Italy, and every where richly rewarded. Between the years 1722 and 1784, he gave proofs of his powers at Naples, Rome, Venice, and most of the cities of Italy; and indeed more than once in almost all these places; six times at Rome, and at Venice seven. The report of his talents at length found its way across the Alps. Lord Essex, the English ambassador at Turin, received a commission to invite him to London; where, for six months performance, he was paid 1500l. At Rome, during the run of a favourite opera, there was a struggle every night between him and a famous player on the trumpet, in a song accompanied by that instrument; this, at first, seemed amicable, and merely sportive, till the audience began to interest themselves in the contest, and to take different sides. After severally swelling out a note, in which each manifested the power of his lungs, and tried to rival the other in brilliancy and force, they had both a swell and a shake together, by thirds, which was continued so long, while the audience eagerly waited the event, that both seemed to be exhausted; and, in fact, the trumpeter wholly spent, gave it up, thinking however his antagonist as much tired as himself, and that it would be a drawn battle; when Farinello, with a smile on his countenance, shewing he had only been sporting with him all this time, broke out all at once in the same breath, with fresh vigour, and not only swelled and shook the note, but ran the most rapid and difficult divisions, and was at last silenced only by the acclamations of the audience. From this period may be dated that superiority which he ever maintained over all his contemporaries.

Scarcely ever had any singer a like capacity of perpetually giving new accessions of force to his voice, and always with pleasure; and when it had attained to the highest degree of energy, to keep it for a long time at that pitch which the Italians call mezza di voce. While he sung at London, in the year 1734, in an opera composed by his brother Riccardo, at another theatre they were performing an opera set to music by Handel, wherein Senesini, Carestini, and the no less celebrated Cuzzoni, had parts. Farinello from the very beginning was acknowledged to have the superiority by a mezza di voce, though the rival theatre was favoured by the king and the princess of Orange, of whom the latter had been Handel’s scholar. By this inferiority it fell into a debt of nine thousand pounds.

The desire of exciting admiration, and of captivating the ear more than the mind of an auditor, still adhered to him, but his good fortune provided him with an opportunity of discovering and correcting this error. During his youth he was three times at Vienna. In the year 1732 he was there declared chamber-singer to his imperial majesty. The emperor Charles V I. shewed him great affection, partly on account of his excellency as a singer, and partly also because he spoke the Neapolitan dialect with great formality and drollery. The emperor was a nice judge of singing, and would frequently accompany him on the harpsichord. One day he entered into a friendly conversation with him on music, and praued indeed his wonderful force and dexterity in this art, but blamed the too great affectation of an excellence which does not touch the heart. “Choose,” said he, “a simpler and easier method; and be sure that, with the gifts wherewith you are so richly endowed by nature, you will captivate every hearer.” This advice had uch an effect on Farinello, thai, from that hour he struck out into a different manner. He confessed, himself, to Dr. Burney, that the emperor’s gracious advice had had more effect upon him than all the lessons of his teachers, and all the examples of his brother artists. Whoever is desirous of knowing more concerning the perfection he had reached in the art he professed, will get all the satisfaction he can require on that head, by perusing the “Riflessioni sopra il canto figurato” of Giovanni Baptista Mancini.

From the moral failings to which theatrical performers are commonly addicted, he was either totally free, or indulged them with moderation. At first he was fond of gaming, but after some time he forsook it entirely. He behaved with sigular probity to the managers of the opera. As they paid him richly, he made it a point of honour to promote their interest as far as it depended on him. For this reason he carefully avoided every thing that might be a hindrance to him in the fulfilling of his engagements. He even set himself a strict regimen, and moderated himself in his amusements. He was so conscientious on this head, that he would not for any consideration be prevailed on to let a song be heard from him out of the theatre; and, during Jus three years stay in England, he constantly passed the spring season in the country, for the sake of invigorating his lungs, by breathing a free and wholesome air. In his xpences he was fond of elegance, yet he indulged it without extravagance; so'that even before he left Italy, he had already laid out a capital upon interest at Naples, and had purchased a country-house, with lands about it, situated at the distance of half ah Italian mile from Bologna. By degrees he rebuilt the mansion in a sumptuous style, in hopes of making it a comfortable retreat for his declining years: and there he afterwards ended his life.

In the year 1737, when he had reached the summit of fame, he appeared for the last time on the stage at London; from whence he departed for the court of Spain, whither he was invited through the solicitations of queen Elizabeth, vho had known his excellence at Parma. Her design was, by the ravishing notes of this great master, to wean her spouse king Philip V. from his passion for the chace, to which his strength was no longer adequate. On his way to Madrid, he had the honour to give a specimen of his talents before the French king at Paris; and we are told by Riccoboni, that all the audience were so astonished at hearing him, that the French, who otherwise detested the Italian music, began from that time to waver in their notions. He had scarcely set his foot in Madrid, but the king hastened to hear him; and was so much taken with the agreeableness of his song, that he immediately settled on him, by a royal edict, a salary equal to what he had received in England, together with an exemption from all public taxes, as a person destined to his familiar converse; and granted him, besides, the court equipages and livery, free of all expence. He could not pass a day without him; not only on account of his vocal abilities, but more on account of the agreeable talents he possessed for conversation. He spoke French and Italian elegantly, had some knowledge of the English and German, and in a short time learnt the Castilian. By his courtesy and discretion he gained the affection of every one. In his converse he was sincere to an uncommon degree, even towards the royal personages who honoured him with their intimacy; and it was jchiefly this that induced the monarch to set so high a value on him. His first words, when he waked in the morning, were regularly these: “Let Farinello be told that I expect him this evening at the usual hour.” Towards midnight Farinello appeared, and was -never dismissed till break of day, when he betook himself to rest, in the apartments assigned him in the palace, though he had likewise a house in the city. To the king he never sung more than two or three pieces; and, what will seem almost incredible, they were every evening the same. Excepting when the king was to go to the holy sacrament on the following day, Farinello was never at liberty to get a whole night’s sleep.

Farinello had as great an affection for the king, as that prince had for him; and had nothing more at heart than to cheer and enliven his spirits: and indeed herein he had the happy talent of succeeding to admiration, though himself was inclined to melancholy. Under Ferdinand, Philip’s successor, he had an ampler field for the display of his genius and skill. This monarch had a good ear for music, and knew how to judge properly of it; as he had studied under Domenico Scarlatti, who had likewise been tutor to queen Barbara, whose taste in music was exquisite. As king Philip had given Farinello the charge of selecting recreations and amusements suitable to his calm and gentle disposition, a variety of new institutions were set on foot through his means at court. Operas were only used to be performed on very solemn and extraordinary occasions; the nation at large was contented with comedies. They now began to grow more common; and Farinello, though he played no part in them, had the management of the whole. He possessed all the qualities that were requisite for the direction of an opera. For, with a perfect knowledge of music, he had great skill in painting, and made drawings with a pen. He was fruitful in inventions, particularly of such machines as represent thunder, lightning, rain, hail, and the like. The celebrated machinist Jacob Bonavera formed himself under his direction. In regard to the morality of the theatre he was very conscientious. Under his direction all went on at the king’s expence; and none but persons in the service of the royal family, the ministers from foreign potentates, the nobility, with the principal officers of state, and a few others, by particular favour, had admittance. In his country-house near Bologna are to be seen, among other paintings, those from whence Francis Battagliuoli copied the scenes in the operas Niteti, Didone, and Armida.

Besides the choice and arrangement of the royal amusements, Farinello was employed in various other matters that required a delicate taste. Queen Barbara having resolved on an institution for the education of young ladies, our singer was pitched upon not only to plan and direct the erection of the convent, and the proper retirade for the queen adjoining, but he gave orders for the making of the furniture suitable to the structure; and the church vessels, which he caused to be executed with incredible alacrity, at Naples, Bologna, and Milan. He himself made a donation to this establishment of a picture, by the hand of the celebrated Moriglio, of St. John de Dio, founder of the brethren of mercy, carrying a sick man on his back. He was likewise inspector of the music of the royal chapel; which he provided with the most noted spiritual compositions, by which the chapel of his holiness at Rome is distinguished above all others. King Ferdinand had purposed all along to reward the ingenuity and attachment of Farinello by splendid promotions. He had already offered him several posts of honour, and at length pressed him to accent of a place in the royal council of finance. But, on his refusing them all, the king privately found means to get from Naples the attestations of his nobility, that he might honour him with the order of Calatrava. One day, holding up to him the cross of the order, he said to him, “Let us see then whether thou wilt persevere in refusing every thing that comes from our hand. 7 ' Farinello fell on his knee before the king, and begged him graciously to withhold this honour, at least till he could have the proofs of the genuine nobility of his blood fie prove del sangue) transmitted him from home.” I have already performed the part of a surgeon,“returned the king,” and have found that thy blood is good;" and then with his own hand fixed the cross upon his breast. He afterwards received the order with all due formality from the grand master, in the convent of the ladies of Comthury of Calatrava, among the archives whereof the originals of it are preserved.

The world were not a little surprised at the elevation of Farinello. But to those who looked narrowly into his moral character it was no wonder at all; and they rejoiced at it. He had nothing in. him of what are called the airs of a courtier. He enjoyed the favour of the monarch more in being serviceable to others, than in turning it to his own emolument. When right and equity spoke in behalf of any one, that person might be sure of his interest with the king; but, if the case was reversed, he was immoveable as a rock. One of the great men applied to him once for his recommendation to be appointed viceroy of Peru, and offered him a present of 400,000 piastres by way of inducement. Another sent him a_ casket filled with gold, desiring no other return than his friendship. He generously spurned at the proposals of both. General Montemar had brought with him from Italy a great number of musicians and other artists, who, on the disgrace of that officer, were all left destitute of bread. Farinello took them into his protection, and furnished them with the means of gaining a livelihood. Among them was Jacob Campana Bonavera, whom he placed as assistant to the machinist Pavia, and afterwards promoted him to the inspectorship of the royal theatre. Theresa Castellini of Milan, the singer who had been called by queen Barbara to Madrid, and who at that time had a greater disposition than qualification for the art, he took under his instruction, and completed her for her employment In the dreadful distresses that ensued upon the earthquake at Lisbon, when the vocal performers and dancers implored his assistance, to the collection he made for them from the royal family and his friends, he added two thousand doubloons from his own private purse. Disposed as he was to be liberal in his bounty towards others, he found it no less difficult to ask for any thing that had reference to himself. It was not by his recommendation, but by his own deserts, that his brother Riccardo was promoted to the office of commissary at war for the marine department. This Riccardo died in 1756, in the flower of his age. He had been master of the band in the service of the duke of Wurtemberg; and a musical work printed at London is a proof of his force and skill in composition.

He was also grateful and generous towards every one that had shewn him any kindness. Never was he heard to speak ill of any man; and when he was injured, he magnanimously overlooked it. There are even examples of his heaping favours on some that shewed themselves envious and malignant towards him. To a Spanish nobleman who murmured that the king testified so much munificence to a castrato, he made no other return than by procuring for his son a place he applied for in the army, and delivering to him himself the king’s order for his appointment. He was in general extremely circumspect not to distinguish himself by any thing by which he might excite the envy and jealousy of the nation against him. Hence it was, that he constantly declined accepting the comthury of the order of Calatrava, which the king had so frequently offered him; beseeching him rather to bestow it on one of his deserving subjects. His generous way of thinking was not unnoticed by the Spaniards. Every one courted his friendship. The grandees of the kingdom, the foreign and domestic ministers, vouchsafed him their visits, and he was never wanting in due respect for their civilities. Towards persons of inferior stations he was always condescending and friendly.

To put away all suspicion of self-interested views, he made it a condition in the disbursements for the entertainments of the king and queen, that all accounts should pass through the hands of a treasurer appointed for that purpose, which were always with the utmost exactitude en-.­tered in a book. He was zealously devoted to the Roman catholic religion. He kept his domestic chaplain at London, as he had obtained a permission from Benedict XIV. to have a portable altar during his residence there, and to have mass celebrated at it in the chapel in his house. To this ecclesiastic he always gave precedence on all occasions. Indeed, while in England, he ate flesh on Fridays and Saturdays; but then he had a licence for it from Rome. Who would have thought that so brilliant a success would be brought to an end in the course of a very short period? King Ferdinand and queen Barbara were both of them in the flower of their age; both healthy and strong. Yet death carried them off in a short space, one after the other. The queen went first, and left Farinello her collection of music and her harpsichords, as a token of regard. The king, who loved her tenderly, fell into a deep dejection of spirits. To get away from the doleful sounds of the death-bells, he retired to the pleasure-house of villa Viciosa, where his excessive melancholy, after a space of fourteen days, laid him on the bed of sickness. Farinello was called to him the day after his departure from Madrid, and never quitted him till he was no more. He died the 10th of August, 1759, of a rapid decline, in. the 46th year of his age, after a sickness of eleven months from the death of the queen.

The loss of such a friend, and the consequences of it, were extremely distressing to Farinello. The king had hardly closed his eyes, but the favourite’s apartments were as solitary as a desert. Friends and acquaintance, whom he had loaded with benefits, now turned their backs upon him, and a general revolution took place in his affairs. Two days after the king’s death he returned to Madrid, and there remained till the arrival of king Charles from Italy. He went as far as Saragossa to ineet him, to thank him for the assurance he had given him of continuing his appointment. The king received him very graciously, and confirmed the promise he had already made him the foregoing year, at the same time adding, that he was induced to this by his moderation and discretion, and that he was thoroughly convinced that he had never abused the king’s partiality for him. After a stay of three weeks at Saragossa, he bent his course towards Italy, without returning to Madrid, where he had commissioned a friend to send his baggage after him. In Italy his first care was to wait upon don Philippo duke of Parma, and the king of Naples, who gave him a very gracious reception. The joy which his old friends and patrons testified on his retarn to Naples is not to be described. After remaining here six months, he repaired to Naples by the way of Bologna, where he passed the rest of his days in tranquillity.

In the year 1769, when the emperor Joseph II. was travelling through Bologna, though his stay was to be but short in that place, one of the first questions he asked was, where Farinello had taken up his abode? and on being told that he dwelt just without the city, he testified some displeasure; and added, that a man who possessed so great a force of genius, had never injured any one, but had done all the good that lay in his power to mankind, was worthy of every token of respect that could be paid him. But the emperor on his return stopped longer at Bologna, and Farinello had the honour of conversing with him often for a length of time, and quite alone.

In the very lap of ease, rest was a stranger to Farinello’s bosom. As some veteran mariner, long accustomed to great and perilous voyages, cannot endure the tediousness of abiding in harbour, so it was with Farinello' s active mind. He fell the effects of that melancholy to which he was disposed by nature, growing on him from day to day, and which was nourished and augmented by the continual sight of the portraits of his distant and for the most part deceased friends, with which his apartments were adorned. His voice continued clear and melodious to the last. He still sung frequently, and he alone perceived the depredations of time, while his friends who heard him observed no defect. During the three last weeks of his life, like what is fabled of the dying swan, he sung almost every day. He died the 16th of September, 1782, of a fever, in the 78th year of his age, without the least abatement of his intellectual powers throughout his illness. He left no wealth behind him; as ivhile he was in Spain he had always lived up to his annual income, and what remained over to him while in Italy, he shared among his relations and friends and the necessitous, during his life-time. His land, his pleasure-house at Bologna, and all the rest of his property, among which were several harpsichords of great value, and the music he had inherited from the queen, he left to his eldest sister, who was married to Giovanni Domenicq Pisani, a Neapolitan. His corpse was interred in the church of the Capuchins, which stands on a hill before Bologna. He was of a very large stature, strong built, of a fair complexion, and a lively aspect. His picture, which is to be seen among the portraits and works of the famous vocal artists collected by father Martini, in the library of the minorites at Bologna, is a perfect likeness.

, an eminent French musician, born in 1660, in the former part 'of his life had been prebendary and chapel-master of the cathedral church of Strasburgh, but afterwards became grand chaplain and chapel-master in the cathedral of Meaux. He published a work entitled “Prodromus Musicalis, on elevations et motets a voix seule, avec une Basse continue,” 2 vols. fol. the second edition in 1702; but his most useful book was his “Dictionnaire de Musique,” Amst. 1703, fol. at the end of which is a catalogue of authors, ancient and modern, to the amount of nine hundred, who have written on music, divided into classes, with many curious observations relating to the history of music, which have been of great service to musical writers and historians. Grassineau’s Dictionary, published in 1740, is not much more than a translation of Brossard' s work; it was also of great service to Rousseau, whose eloquence has certainly furnished us with a more ^pleasant book, yet Rousseau is acknowledged to be most correct where he most closely copies Brossard. Brossard died in 1730. He had a numerous library of music, which he presented to Louis XIV. who gave himself a pension of 1200 livres, and the same sum to hfs niece.

, physician in ordinary to Louis XIII. obtained from that king, in 1626, letters patent for the establishment of the royal garden of medicinal plants, of which he was the first director. He immediately set about preparing the ground, and then furnished it with upwards of 2000 plants. The list of them may be seen in his “Description du jardin royale,” 1636, 4to. Richelieu, Seguier, and Bullion, contributed afterwards to enrich itHe composed a treatise on the virtues of plants, 1628, 8vo, and before this, in 1623, one on the plague. He died in 1641.

, a French writer of great learning, was born at Dijon, in 1709, and became a counsellor of parliament, in 1730, and president a worker in 1742. During the leisure which his public employments afforded, he cultivated most of the sciences, and was allowed to be well acquainted with all. Voltaire only has attacked his literary reputation, and this his countrymen ascribe to the malice which that writer was seldom anxious to conceal. Buffon, on the contrary, regarded him as a scholar of the first rank, an acute philosopher, and an original and valuable writer; nor was he less estimable in private life. In 1774 he was appointed president of the parliament of Burgundy, but died soon after, at Paris, in 1777, whither he had come to visit his married daughter. He was a member of the academy of Dijon, of the inscriptions and belles lettres, and other learned societies. He wrote: 1. “Lettres sur la Decouverte de la ville d'Herculaneum,” 1750, 8vo. 2. “Histoire des Navigations aux Terres Australes,” 1756, 2 vols. 4to, in which he endeavoured to prove the existence of a southern continent, which subsequent navigators have disproved. 3. “Du culte des dieux Fetiches, ou parallele de l'ancienne idolatrie avec celle des peuples de Nigritie,” 1760, 12mo, a piece which has been improperly attributed to Voltaire. 4. “Traite de la formation mecanique des Langues,” 1765, 2 vols. 12mo, in which he attempts a general etymological system founded on the mechanical formation of articulate sounds; but his countrymen allow that he leans too much to paradox, which certainly has long been an extensive branch of French philosophy. 5. “Histoire de la Republique Romaine dans la cours du VII siecle, par Salluste,” Dijon, 3 vols. 4to. This may be accounted his principal work, and was long his principal employment. He was so sensible of the loss of Sal lust’s principal work, that he resolved to collect his fragments with greater care than had ever been employed before; and by the most accurate arrangement to trace out as near as possible the plan and chief features of that work, and then to connect these fragments in the manner of Freinshemius in his “Fragmenta Livii.” But as De Brosses soon became sensible of the difficulty of assimilating his Latin diction to that of Sallust, he changed his first design, and resolved on translating both the fragments and his author’s histories of the Catilinarian and Jugurthine wars into French, and to attempt to supply the lost work from other ancient writers. The first volume opens with a preface containing remarks on the various methods of writing history, and some information concerning Roman names, ranks, magistracies, and elections. The body of the work itself begins with a translation of, and commentary on, Sallust’s Jugurthine war. The notes subjoined to this part treat chiefly of the geography and population of Africa, and the text is illustrated by a map of Africa, a plan of Meteilus’s march against Jugurtha, and its illustration by a military connoisseur. After this follows the restoration of Sallust’s five books, continued in vol. II. comprizing the war with Mithridates: a description of the Pontus Euxinus, with the adjacent countries; the Gladiatorian war, raised by Spartacus, and the war of Greta. The third volume contains a translation of the Catilinarian war, with its sequel, illustrated with historical and political notes; Sallust’s two letters to Caesar, commonly styled “Orat. de Rep. ordinanda,” which De Brosses considers as genuine; a very minute collection of all the notices of Sallust’s life, writings, gardens, buildings, and even of the remains discovered in later times. The whole concludes with the abb Cassagne’s “Essay on the Art of composing History, and on the works of Sailust.‘-’ Industrious as M. de Brosses has been in this work, we believe that in the life of Sailust, at least, he has been improved upon by Henry Stuart, esq. in his late elaborate publication,” The works of Sailust,“1806, 2 vols. 4to, Besides these, De Brosses contributed many learned papers to the Paris and Dijon memoirs, but his family disown 3 vols. of” Lettres historiques et critiques sur l'Italie," published in 1799 in his name.

, of France, was born at Lyons in 1671. He was at first a Jesuit, but afterwards an advocate, a member of the academy of Lyons, and librarian of the public library there. In 1716, he published the works of Boileau, in 2 vols. 4to, with historical illustrations: and, after that, the works of Regnier. He reformed the text of both these authors from the errors of the preceding editions, and seasoned his notes with many useful and curious anecdotes of men and things. His only fault, the fault of almost all commentators, is, that he did not use the collections he had made with sufficient sobriety and judgment; and has inserted many things, no ways necessary to illustrate his authors, and some that are even frivolous. He wrote also “L'Histoire abrege*e de la ville de Lyon,” with elegance and precision, 1711, 4to; and died there in 1746. He had a friendship and correspondence with many of the literati, and particularly with Rousseau the poet, and Voltaire. The latter used to tell him, that he “resembled Atticus. who kept terms, and even cultivated friendship, at the same time with Caesar and Pompey.” The enmity between Rousseau and Voltaire is well known.

, an eminent classical scholar and editor, was born at Tanay, a small village of the Nivernois, in 1722, and died at Paris, Feb. 12, 1789, at the age of 67. In his youth he made it his practice to write notes in every book that he read; and the margins of severaHn his library were entirely filled with them. Until his last moment he pursued the same 'method of study. All these he arranged wonderfully in his memory; and if it had been possible after his death to have put his papers in that order which he alone knew, they would have furnished materials for several curious volumes. With this method, and continued labour for twelve hours a day, the abbé Brotier acquired an immense stock of various knowledge. Except the mathematics, to which it appears he gave little application, he was acquainted with every thing; natural history, chemistry, and even medicine. It was his rule to read Hippocrates and Solomon once every year in their original languages. These he said were the best books for curing the diseases of the body and the mind. But the belles lettres were his grand pursuit. He had a good knowledge of all the dead languages, but particularly the Latin, of which he was perfectly master: he was besides acquainted with most, of the languages of Europe. This knowledge, however extensive, was not the only part in which he excelled. He was well versed in ancient and modern history, in chronology, coins, medals, inscriptions, and the customs of antiquity, which had always been objects of his study. He had collected, a considerable quantity of materials for writing a new history of France, and it is much to be regretted that he was prevented from undertaking that work. The akl>6 Brotier recalls to our remembrance those laborious writers, distinguished for their learning, Petau, Sirmond, Labbu, Cossart, Hardouin, Souciet, &c. who have done so much honour to the college of Louis XIV. in which he himself was educated, and where fre lived several years as librarian; and his countrymen say he is the last link of that chain of illustrious men, who have succeeded one another without interruption, for near two centuries. On the dissolution of the order of Jesuits, the abbe Brotier found an asylum equally peaceful and agreeable in the house of Mr. de la Tour, a printer, eminent in his business, who has gained from all connoisseurs a just tribute of praise for those works which have come from his press. It was in this friendly retirement that the abbe Brotier spent the last twenty-six years of his life, and that he experienced a happiness, the value of which he knew how to appreciate, which arose from the care, attention, and testimonies of respect, bestowed upon him both by Mr. and Mrs. de la Tour. It was there also that he published those works which will render his name immortal; an edition of Tacitus, enriched not only with notes and learned dissertations, but also with supplements, which sometimes leave the reader in a doubt, whether the modern writer is not a successful rival of the ancient: this was first published in 1771, 4 vols. 4to, and reprinted in 1776, in 7 vols. fcvo. He published also in 1779, 6 vols. 12mo, an edition of Pliny the naturalist, which is only a' short abridgment of what he had prepared to correct and enlarge the edition of Hardouin, and to give an historical series of all the new discoveries made since the beginning of this century; an immense labour, which bespeaks the most extensive erudition. To these two editions, which procured the abbe Brotier the applauses of all the literati in Europe, he added in 1778, 8vo, an edition of Rapin on gardens, at the end of which he has subjoined a history of gardens, written in Latin with admirable elegance, and abounding in the most delightful imagery: for the abbe was not one of those pedants, according to the expression of the poet, “herisses de Grec & de Latin;” he possessed a lively imagination, and a fine taste, with clearness and perspicuity; and above all, a sound judgment, which never suffered him to adopt in writing any thing that was not solid, beautiful, and true. His other works are, 1. “Examen de PApologie de M. I 7 Abbe de Prades,” 1753, 8vo. 2. “Conclusiones ex universa Theologia,” 1754, 4to. 3. “Traite des Monnoies Romanies, Grecques, et Hebr. compares avec les Monnoies de France, pour l'intelligencederEcriture Sainte, et de tous les auteurs Grecs, et Remains,” 1760, 4to. 4. “Prospectus d'une edit. Lat. de Tacite,” 1761,5 vols. 4to. 5, “Supplementa, lib. 7. loAnnal. Taciti,” 17 v 55, 8vo. 6.“Cl. viri de la Caille vita”7 1763, 4to. 7. “Phaedri Fabularum, lib. v. cum notis et suppl. access. Parallela J. de la Fontaine Fabulse,” 1785, 12mo. 8. “Memoire du Levant” 1780, and an edition of“Brumoy’s Theatre,” 1785, 13 vols. 8vo. In 1790 his nephew published his “Parolles Memorables,” a work of which Mr. Seward has made great use in his “Anecdotes.”

We shall conclude this account of the amiable abbe with his character as drawn by his friend the abbe de Fontenay. “That intimate and sincere friendship,” says he, “which united me to the abbe Brotier, gratitude, for the services which he did me, his talents and his virtues, will always endear his memory tome; and I may justly say, that his death, though lamented by many good men, was lamented by none more deeply than by me. However great may have been the merit of this learned man, not less conspicuously eminent for the qualities of his heart than for those of his head, one must have been intimate with him to form a just and true idea of his character. As often as my avocations would permit, I indulged myself in the pleasure of his company, and many delightful hours I have spent with him. Humble and unassuming, modest, and even to a degree of timidity that caused him to blush when the least encomium was passed upon him; good-tempered, plain in his manner, and giving himself up to society with the smiles and simplicity of a child, his conversation was engaging, and always instructive when it turned upon subjects of literature or science. Widely differing in this respect from those men of letters who are misers, if we may say so, of their knowledge, and who seem to hoard it only for themselves, or to make an ostentatious display of it in some publication, the abbe* Brotier readily replied to the questions of those who sought information from him, and instructed those around him with the utmost affability and condescension. I confess,” continues the abbe Fontenay, “that need of consulting him induced me often to visit him; and I can declare that whatever questions I put to him, I never found him in one instance wrong. He either satisfied me immediately respecting my queries, or pointed out those books in which I found what I wanted to know. He left a nephew of the same name, who is in the church. He is pursuing his uncle’s steps in the same departments of erudition, and has already published works which sufficiently evince the progress he has made.”

, a divine of great eminence for his extensive knowledge in Hebrew and rabbinical learning, was descended from an ancient family, and born in 1549, at Oldbury, in the county of Salop. Dr. Lightfoot says, that it is uncertain in what school he was instructed in grammar, but, according to the writers of the life of Bernard Gilpin, he was brought up in the school founded by that excellent man at Houghton, and by him sent to Cambridge. Gilpin is said to have become acquainted with him by accident, when he was a poor boy travelling on the Oxford road, and finding him a good scholar, took the charge of his farther education. The biographer of Gilpin adds, apparently upon slender foundation, that Broughton acted with ingratitude to Gilpin, when the latter was old and infirm, and persuaded the bishop of Durham to give him a living intended for Gilpin.

At Cambridge, Broughton became one of the fellows of Christ’s college, and there laid the first foundation of his Hebrew studies, under a Frenchman, who read upon that tongue in the university. His parts and learning soon rendered him very conspicuous at Cambridge, and also attracted the notice of the earl of Huntingdon, who became a liberal patron to him, and greatly encouraged him in his studies. From the university he repaired to London, where he distinguished himself as a preacher, and increased the number of his friends, some of whom were of high rank. He still, however, continued to prosecute his studies with the most unremitting assiduity; so that he is said frequently to have spent sixteen hours out of the fourand-twenty at his books.

In 1588, he published a piece, entitled “The Consent of Scriptures.” This was a work in which he was employed several years; and which, therefore, he used to call his “little book of grest pains.” It is a kind of scripture chronology, and scripture genealogies, and appears to have been compiled with great labour. It was dedicated to queen Elizabeth, to whom it was presented by himself, on her inauguration day, Nov. 17, 1589. He appears to have had some assistance in it from Speed, who overlooked the press, and compiled those genealogies which are prefixed to the old Bibles; but Broughton certainly directed and digested them. Speed is said to have owed many obligations to Broughton, and had a vast number of his manuscripts, which, for whatever reason, he burnt. But, to return to the “Consent of Scripture;” it excited much attention at its first publication, but was strongly opposed by Dr. Reynolds at Oxford. This gave great offc-nce to Mr. Broughton, who had a very earnest and absurd desire to have the dispute between him and Dr. Reynolds, concerning the scripture chronology, settled by public authority. He addressed on this subject queen Elizabeth, Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. His work was opposed, not only at Oxford, but at Cambridge, where Mr. Lively, a professor, read publicly against it. He was, therefore, induced to read lectures in defence of his performance, which he did first in St. Paul’s, at the east end of the church, and afterwards in a large room in Cheapside, and in Mark-lane .

He continued several years in London, where he procured many friends. One of these was Mr. William Cotton, whose son Rowland, who was afterwards knighted, he instructed in the Hebrew tongue. In 1589 Mr. Broughton went over into Germany, accompanied by Mr. Alexander Top, a young gentleman who had put himself under his care, and travelled with him, that he might continually receive the benefit of his instructions. He was some time at Frankfort, where he had a long dispute in the Jewish synagogue, with rabbi Elias, on the truth of the Christian religion. He appears to have been very solicitous for the conversion of the Jews, and his taste for rabbinical and Hebrew studies naturally led him to take pleasure in the conversation of those learned Jews whom he occasionally met with. In the course of his travels, he had also disputes with the papists; but in hig contests both with them and with the Jews, he was not very attentive to the rules either of prudence or politeness. It appears, that in 1590 he was at Worms; but in what other places is not mentioned. In 1591 he returned again to England, and met at London with his antagonist Dr. Reynolds; and they referred the -decision of the controversy between them, occasioned by his “Consent of Scripture,” to Dr. Whitgift, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Aylmer, bishop of London. Another piece which he published, entitled “An Explication of the article of Christ’s Descent to Hell,” was a source of much controversy, though his opinion on this subject is now generally received. Two of his opponents in this controversy were archbishop Whitgift and bishop Bilson. He addressed on this subject “An Oration to the Geneveans,” which was first published in Greek, at Mentz, by Albinus. In this piece he treats the celebrated Beza with much severity. In 1592 he was in Germany again, and published a piece called “The Sinai Sight,” which he dedicated to the earl of Essex, and had the odd whim of having it engraved on brass, at a considerable expence. About the year 1596, rabbi Abraham Reuben wrote an epistle from Constantinople to Mr. Broughton, which was directed to him in London; but he was then in Germany. He appears to have continued abroad till the death of queen Elizabeth; and during his residence in foreign countries, cultivated an acquaintance with Scaliger, Raphelengius, Junius, Pistorius, Serrarius, and other eminent and learned men. He was treated with particular favour by the archbishop of Mentz, to whom he dedicated his translation of the Prophets into Greek. He was also offered a cardinal’s hat, if he wo<;ld have embraced the Romish religion. But that offer he retused to accept, and returned again to England, soon after the accession of king James I. In 1603 he preached before prince Henry, at Oatlands, upon the Lord!s Prayer. In 1607 the new translation of the Bible was begun; and Mr. Broughton’s friends expressed much surprize that he was not employed in that work. It might probably be disgust on this account, which again occasioned him to go abroad; and during his stay there, he was for some time puncher to the English at Middleburgh. But finding his health decline, 'having a consumptive disorder, which he found to increase, he returned again to England in November, 1611. He lodged in London, during the winter, at a friend’s house in Cannon-street; but in the spring he was removed, for the benefit of the air, to the house of another friend, at Tottenham High-cross, where he died of a pulmonary consumption on the 4th of August, 1612, in the sixty-third year of his age. During his illness he made such occasional discourses and exhortations to his friends, as his strength would enable him; and he appears to have had many friends and admirers’ even to the last. His corpse was brought to London, attended by great numbers of people, many of whom had put themselves in mourning for him; and interred in St. Amholin’s church, where his funeral sermon was preached by the rev. James Speght, B. D. afterwards D. D. minister of the church in Milkstreet, London. Lightfoot mentions it as a report, that the bishops would not suffer this sermon to be published; but it was afterwards printed at the end of his works.

His person was comely and graceful, and his countenance expressive of studiousness and gravity. His indefatigable attention to his studies, gave him an air of austerity; and, at times, there appears to have been no inconsiderable degree of moroseness in his deportment: notwithstanding which, he is represented as behaving in a very kind and affable manner to his friends, and as being very pleasant in conversation with them, especially at his meals. He would also be free and communicative to any persons who desired to learn of him, but very angry with scholars, if they did not readily comprehend his meaning. Open impiety and profaneness were always opposed by him with great zeal and courage. He was much dissatisfied, as appears from several passages in his works, that his great learning had not procured him more encouragement, and he evidently thought that he had a just claim to some considerable preferment. He was unquestionably a man of very uncommon erudition, but -extremely deficient in taste and judgment. He was also of a testy and choleric temper, had a high opinion of his own learning and abilities, was extremely dogmatical, and treated those who differed from him in opinion with much rudeness and scurrility; though some allowance must be made for the age in which he lived, in which that mode of writing was much more common among divines and scholars than it is at present. From the general tenor of his life and of his works, and the opinion formed of him by those who were the best acquainted with him, it seems equitable to conclude, that, with all his failings, he meant well; nor do we apprehend that there is any sufficient ground for the extreme severity with which the late Mr. Gilpin has treated him in his “Lite of Bernard Gilpin.” He translated the Prophetical writings into Greek, and the Apocalypse into Hebrew. He was desirous of translating the whole New Testament into Hebrew, which he thought would have contributed much to the conversion of the Jews, if he had met with proper encouragement. And he relates, that a learned Jew with whom he conversed, once said to him, “O that you would set over all your New Testament into such Hebrew as you speak to me, you should turn all our nation.” Most of his works were collected together, and printed at London in 1662, under the following title: “The Works of the great Albionean divine, renowned in many nations for rare skill in Salems and Athens tongues, and familiar acquaintance with all Rabbinical learning, Mr. Hugh Broughton.” This edition o'f his works, though bound in one large volume, folio, is divided into four tomes. Dr. Lightfoot, who was himself a great rmister of Hebrew and rabbinical learning, says, that in the writings of Broughton, “the serious and impartial student of them will find these two things. First, as much light given in scripture, especially in the difficultest things thereof, as is to be found in any one author whatsoever; nay, it may be, in all authors together. And, secondly, a winning and enticing enforcement to read the scriptures with a seriousness and searching more than ordinary. Amongst those that have studied his books, multitudes might be named that have thereby grown proficients so far, as that they have attained to a most singular, and almost incredible skill and readiness, in his way, in the understanding of the Bible, though otherwise unlearned men. Nay, some such, that, by the mere excitation of his books, have set to the study of the Hebrew tongue, and come to a very great measure of knowledge in it; nay, a woman might be named that hath done it. This author’s writings do carry with them, I know not what, a kind of holy and happy fascination, that the serious reader of them is won upon, by a sweet violence, to look in the scripture with all possible scrulinousness, and cannot choose. Let any one but set to read him in good earnest, and, if he find not, that he sees much more in scripture than ever he could see before, and that he is stirred up 'to search much more narrowly into the scripture than ever he was before, he misseth of that which was never missed of before by any that took that course, if multitude of experiences may have any credit.” It will justly be thought in the present age, that Dr. Lightfoot formed'too high an opinion of the value of Broughton’s writings; but in whatever estimation they may now be held, the celebrity of Broughton in his own time, and his extraordinary learning, gave him a reasonable claim to some memorial in a work of this kind. Many of his theological Mss. are preserved in the British Museum, of which a list is given in Ayscough’s catalogue.

, a popish ecclesiastical historian, was born at Great Stukely in Huntingdonshire, and studied for some time at Oxford, but it does not appear that he entered any college, and only seems to have resided there for the purpose of consulting the public library. He received his regular education at the English college at Rheims, and took priest’s orders in 1593. He was afterwards sent into England as a missionary, and promoted the popish interest as far as lay in his power, without giving public offence. He died in 1634, and was buried in the church of Great Stukely. His principal works were, “An Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain; from the Nativity to the conversion of the Saxons,” Doway, 1633, fol. replete with legendary matter;“A True Memorial of the ancient, most holy, and religious state of Great Britain, &c. in the time of the Britons, and primitive church of the Saxons,” 1650, 8vo; and, “Monasticon Britannicum,” 1655, 8vo.

, a learned divine, and one of the original writers of the Biographia Britannica, was born at London, July 5, 1704, in the parish of St. Andrew, Holborn; of which parish his father was minister. At an early age he was sent to Eton-school, where he soon distinguished himself by the acuteness of his genius and the studiousness of his disposition. Being superannuated on this foundation, he removed, about 1722, to the university of Cambridge; and, for the sake of a scholarship, entered himself of Gonville and Caius college. Here two of the principal objects of his attention were, the acquisition of the knowledge of the modern languages, and the study of the mathematics under the famous professor Sanderson. May 28, 1727, Mr. Broughton, after taking the degree of B. A. was admitted to deacon’s orders. In the succeeding year, Sept. 22, he was ordained priest, and proceeded to the degree of M. A. At this time he removed from the university to the curacy of Offley in Hertfordshire. In 1739, he was instituted to the rectory of Stepington, otherwise Stibmgton, in the county of Huntingdon, on the presentation of John duke of Bedford, and was appointed one of that nobleman’s chaplains. Soon after, he was chosen reader to the Temple, by which means he became known to bishop Sherlock, then master of it, who conceived so high an opinion of our author’s merit, that, in 1744, this eminent prelate presented Mr. Broughton to the valuable vicarage of Bedminster, near Bristol, together with the chapels of St. Mary Redcliff, St. Thomas, and Abbot’s Leigh, annexed. Some short time after, he was collated, by the same patron, to the prebend of Bedminster and Redcliff, in the cathedral of Salisbury. Upon receiving this preferment, he removed from London to Bristol, where he married the daughter of Thomas Harris, clerk of that city, by whom he had seven children, six of whom survived him. He resided on his living till his death, which happened Dec. 21, 1774, in the 71st year of his age. He was interred in the church of St. Mary RedclifF.

From the time of Mr. Broughton’s quitting the university, till he was considerably advanced in life, he was engaged in a variety of publications; and some little time before his death, composed “A short view of the principles upon which Christian churches require, of their respective clergy, Subscription to established Articles of Religion;” but this work never appeared in print. He possessed, likewise, no inconsiderable talent for poetry, as is evident from many little fugitive pieces in manuscript, found among his papers; and particularly, from two unfinished tragedies, both written at the age of seventeen. During his residence in London, he enjoyed the esteem and friendship of most of the literary men of his time. He was a great lover of music, particularly the ancient; which introduced him to the knowledge and acquaintance of Mr. Handel, whom he furnished with the words for many of his compositions. In his public character, Mr. Brougbton was distinguished by an active zeal for the Christian cause, joined with moderation. In private life, he was devoted to the interests and happiness of his family; and was of a mild, cheerful, and liberal temper. This disposition, which is not always united with eminent literary abilities, attended him "to his grave. In 1778, a posthumous volume of sermons, on select subjects, was published by his son, the rev. Thomas Broughton, M. A. of Wadham college, Oxford, and vicar of Tiverton, near Bath.

The following is a list of his publications, but we have not been able to recover the dates of all of them: 1. “Christianity distinct from the Religion of Nature, in three parts; in answer to Christianity as old as the Creation.” 2. “Translation of Voltaire’s Temple of Taste.” 3. “Preface to his father’s letter to a Roman catholic.” 4. “Alteration of Dorrel on the Epistles and Gospels from a Popish to a Protestant book,” 2 vols. 8vo. 5. Part of the new edition of Bayle’s Dictionary in English, corrected: with a translation of the Latin and other quotations. 6, “Jarvis’s Don Quixote;” the language thoroughly altered and corrected, and the poetical parts new translated. 7. “Translation of the mottoes of the Spectator, Guardian, and Freeholder.” 8. “Original poems and translations, by John Dryden, esq” now first collected and published together, 2 vols. 9. “Translation of the quotations in Addison’s Travels, by him left untranslated.” 10. “The first and third Olynthiacs, and the four Philippics of Demosthenes” (by several hands), revised and corrected; with a new translation of the second Olynthiac, the oration de Pace, and that de Chersoneso: to which are added, all the arguments of Libanius, and select notes from Ulpian, 8vo. Lives in the Biographia Britannica, marked T. 11. “The bishops of London and Winchester on the sacrament, compared.” 12. “Hercules,” a musical drama. 13. “Bibliotheca historico-sacra, an Historical dictionary of all religions, from the creation of the world to the present times,” 1756, 2 vols. folio. 14. “A defence of the commonly-received doctrine of the Human Soul.” 15. “A prospect of Futurity, in four dissertations; with a preliminary discourse on the natural and moral evidence of a future state.”

, viscount Brouncker, of Castle Lyons in Ireland, son of sir William Brouncker, afterwards made viscount in 1645, was born about 1620; and, having received an excellent education, discovered an early genius for mathematics, in which he afterwards became very eminent. He was created M. D. at Oxford, June 23, 1646. In 1657 and 1658, he was engaged in a correspondence on mathematical subjects with Dr. John Wallis, who published the letters in his “Commercium. Epistoiicum,” Oxford, 1658, 4to. He, with others of the nobility and gentry who had adhered to king Charles I. in and about London, signed the remarkable declaration published in April 1660. After the restoration, he was made chancellor to the queen consort, and a commissioner of the navy. He was one of those great men who first formed the royal society, and, by the charter of July 15, 1662, and that of April 22, 1663, was appointed the first president of it: which office he held with great advantage to the society, and honour to himself, till the anniversary election, Nov. 30, 1677. Besides the offices mentioned already, he was master of St. Ratherine’s near the Tower of London; his right to which post, after a long contest between him and sir Robert &tkyns, one of the judges, was determined in his favour, Nov. 1681. He died at his house in St. James’s street, Westminster, April 5, 1684; and was succeeded in his honours by his younger brother Harry, who died Jan. 1687. Of his works, notwithstanding his activity in promoting literature and science, there are few extant. These are: “Experiments on the recoiling of Guns,” published in Dr. Sprat’s History of the Royal Society; “An algebraical paper upon the squaring of the Hyperbola,” published in the Philosophical Transactions. (See Lowthorp’s Abr. vol. I. p. 10, &c.); “Several Letters to Dr. James Usher, archbishop of Armagh,” annexed to that primate’s life by Dr. Parr; and “A translation of the Treatise of Des Cartes, entitled Musicae Compendium,” published without his name, but enriched with a variety of observations, which shew that he was deeply skilled in the theory of the science of music. Although he agrees with his author almost throughout the book, he asserts that the geometrical is to be preferred to the arithmetical division; and with a view, as it is presumed, to the farther improvement of the “Systema Participato,” he proposes a division of the diapason by sixteen mean proportionals into seventeen equal semitones; the method of which division is exhibited by him in an algebraic process, and also in logarithms. The “Systema Participato,” which is mentioned by Bontempi, consisted in the division of the diapason, or octave, into twelve equal semitones, by eleven mean proportionals. Descartes, we are informed, rejected this division for reasons which are far from being satisfactory. Mr. Park, in his edition of lord Orford’s “Royal and Noble Authors,” to which we are frequently indebted, points out an original commission, among the Sloanian Mss. from Charles II. dated Whitehall, Dec. 15, 1674, appointing lord Brouncker and others to inquire into, and to report their opinions of a method of finding the longitude, devised by Sieur de St. Pierre.

, a French Protestant and martyr, was born at Nismes, in 1647, He was an advocate, and distinguished by his 'pleadings at Castres and Toulouse; and it was at his house that the deputies of the Protestant churches assembled in 1683: where they took a resolution to continue to assemble, although their churches were demolished. The execution of this project occasioned violent conflicts, seditions, executions, and massacres, which ended at length in an amnesty on the part of Lewis XIV. Brousson retired then to Nismes; but, fearing to be apprehended with the principal authors of this project, who do not seem to have been comprised within the amnesty, he became a refugee at Geneva first, and thence at Lausanne. He shifted afterwards from town to town, and kingdom to kingdom, to solicit the compassion of Protestant princes towards his suffering brethren in France. Returning to his own country, he travelled through several provinces, exercised some time the ministry in the Cevennes, appeared at Orange, and passed to Berne, in order to escape his pursuers. He was at length taken at Oleron, in 1698, and removed to Montpellier; where, being convicted of having formerly held secret correspondence with the enemies of the state, and of having preached in defiance of the edicts, he was broke upon the wheel the same year. He was a man of great eloquence as well as zeal, greatly esteemed among strangers, and regarded as a martyr by those of his own persuasion. The states of Holland added six hundred florins, as a pension for his widow, to four hundred which had been allowed to her husband. His writings being principally those which, arose out of the circumstances in which the reformed church were then placed, we shall refer to Moreri for the exact titles and dates, and give only the subjects, namely: 1. “The state of the reformed in France.” 2. “Letters to the French clergy in favour of the reformed religion.” 3. “Letters from the Protestants in France to all other Protestants,” printed and circulated at the expence of the elector of Brandenburg. 4. “Letters to the Roman Catholics.” 5. “A summary relation of the wonders, wrought by God in the Cevennes and Lower Languedoc, for the consolation of his church.” 6. A volume of Sermons. 7. “Remarks on Amelotte’s translation of the New Testament;” and some religious tracts, which he published for circulation in France.

, an eminent French naturalist, was born at Montpellier, Feb. 28, 1761, where his father was a reputable schoolmaster, and soon discovered in him an insatiable thirst of knowledge, which we may conclude he assisted him in gratifying. At the early age of eighteen he was appointed by the university of Montpellier to fill a professor’s chair, and six years after he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences by an unanimous vote, a case which had not occurred from the foundation of that learned body, but their choice appeared amply justified by the several dissertations on natural history, botany, and medicine, which he published. It was his earnest wish to establish the system of Linnæus more extensively in France. With this view, as well as for his own improvement, he went to Paris, and examined the collections and museums, but not finding sufficient materials for his purpose, he determined to visit the most celebrated foreign collections, and came first to England, where he was admitted an honorary member of the royal society, and where he began his labours on the celebrated work on fishes. On his return to Paris, he was appointed perpetual secretary of the society of agriculture, which the intendant Berthier de Sauvigny resigned for him. In 1789 he was appointed a member of the electoral college of Paris, and like the other electors, was to supply such vacancies as were occasioned by any interruptions in the exercise of the office of magistracy; and the day it was his turn to go to the Hotel de Ville, he saw his friend and protector, Berthier, barbarously murdered by the populace. Broussonet was then ordered to superintend the provisions of the capital, and was frequently“in danger of his life at that turbulent period. In 1791 he had a seat in the legislative assembly, but quitted Paris the year following for his native city, from which he was soon obliged to make his escape, and after many dangers, arrived at Madrid, where he was gladly received, and liberally assisted by the literati of that city. There, however, the French emigrants were so enraged at his having filled any office under the revolutionary government, that they obliged him to leave Madrid, and soon after, Lisbon, to which he had removed. At last he had an opportunity of going out as physician to an embassy which the United States sent to the emperor of Morocco, and on this occasion, his friend sir Joseph Banks, hearing of his distresses, remitted him a credit for a thousand pounds. After his arrival at Morocco, he employed all his leisure hours in extending his botanical knowledge, and learning that his native country was recovering from its late anarchy, he solicited and obtained permission to return, when the directory appointed him consul at the Canaries. In consequence of this he resided for two years at Teneriffe. In 1796, on his return, he was admitted a member of the Institute, and again became professor of botany at Montpellier, with the direction of the botanical garden. He was afterwards chosen a member of the legislative body, but died July 27, 1807, at Montpellier, of an apoplectic stroke. It was to him that France owes the introduction of the Merino sheep, and Angola goats. His publications are: 1.” Varise positiones circa Respirationem,“Montpellier, 1778. 2.” Ichthyologia, sistens Piscium descriptiones et icones,“London, 1782, containing descriptions of the most rare fishes. 3.” Essai sur Phistoire naturelle de quelques especes de Moines, decrites a la maniere de Linnee,“1784, 8vo, This is the translation only of a Latin satire on the monks, the original of which appeared in Germany, in 1783. 4.” Annee rurale, ou calendrier a I'usage des cultivateurs,“Paris, 1787-8, 2 vols. 12mo. 5.” Notes pour servir a Thistoire de l‘ecole de medicine de Montpellier pendant l’an VI.“Montpellier, J 1 9 5, 8vo. 6.” La Feuille dn cultivateur," 1788, and following years, 8 vols. 4to, which he conducted with Messrs. Parmentier, Dubois, and Lefebure. He contributed also a great many dissertations to the academy of sciences, the society of agriculture, &c. and left many works in manuscript.

, a celebrated painter, according to some, was born at Oudenarde, in Flanders, or according to others, at Haerlem, in Holland, in 1608. His parents were of the poorer sort. His mother sold to the country people bonnets and handkerchiefs, on which Adrian, when almost in infancy, used to paint flowers and birds, and while thus employed, was discovered by Francis Hals, an eminent artist, who, charmed with the ease and taste he displayed in his art, proposed to take him as an apprentice, and Brouwer did not long hesitate about accepting such an dffer. His master soon discovered his superior talents, and separated him from his companions, that he might profit the better by him, locked him up in a garret, and compelled him to work, while he nearly starved him, but some pieces he painted by stealth, which probably irritated his jailor to be more watchful of him. By the advice, however, of Adrian Van Ostade, one of his companions, he contrived to make his escape, and took refuge in a church. There, almost naked, and not knowing where to go, he was recognised by some person, who brought him back to his master, and by means of a suit of clothes and some caresses, effected a temporary reconciliation; but being again subjected to the same mercenary and tyrannical usage, he made his escape a second time, and went to Amsterdam, where he had the happiness to find that his name was well known, and that his works bore a great price. A picture dealer with whom he lodged, gave him an hundred ducatoons for a painting representing gamesters, admirably executed, which Brouwer, who had never possessed so much money, spent in a tavern in the course of ten days. He then returned to his employer, and when asked what he had done with his money, answered that he had got rid of it, that he might be more at leisure; and this unfortunate propensity to alternate work and extravagance marked the whole of his future life, and involved him in many ridiculous adventures and embarrassments unworthy of a man of genius. As soon as ‘he had finished any piece, he offered it for sale; and if it did not produce a stipulated price, he burnt it, and began another with greater care. Possessing a vein of low humour, and engaging, both sober and drunk, in many droll adventures, he removed from Amsterdam to Antwerp, where he was arrested as a spy, and committed to prison. This circumstance introduced him to an acquaintance with the duke d’Aremberg, who, having observed his genius, by some slight sketches drawn with black lead while in custody, requested Rubens to furnish him with materials for painting. Brouwer chose for his subject a groupe of soldiers playing at cards in a corner of the prison; and when the picture was finished, the duke himself was astonished, and Rubens, when he saw it, offered for it the sum of 600 guilders. The duke, however, retained it, and gave the painter a much larger sum. Upon this, Rubens procured his release, and received him into his house; but, uninfluenced by gratitude to his benefactor, he stole away, and returned to the scenes of low debauch, to which he had been formerly accustomed. Being reduced to the necessity of flying from justice, he took refuge in France; and, having wandered through several towns, he was at length constrained by indigence to return to Antwerp, where he was taken ill, and obliged to seek relief in an hospital; and in this asylum of self-procured poverty and distress he died in his 32d year. Rubens lamented his death, and procured for him an honourable interment in the church of the Carmelites.

Such were the talents of Brouwer, that, in the course of a dissipated life, he attained to distinguished excellence in the style of painting which he adopted. His subjects were taken from low life, and copied after nature; such as droll conversations, feasts, taverns, drunken quarrels, boors playing and disputing at cards, or surgeons dressing the wounded. His expression, however, is so lively and characteristic; the management of his colours so surprising; and truth was united with exquisite high finishing, correctness of drawing, and wonderful transparence, to such a degree, that his paintings are more valuable, and afford higher prices, than many works of the most eminent masters. Some of his best works are found at Dusseldorp. His drawings are dispersed in the various cabinets of Europe, Several of his designs have been engraved; and we have some few etchings by himself of subjects usually represented in his pictures, which are signed with the initials of his name, H. B.; Adrian being spelled with an H.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Arnheim in 1559, and entered among the Jesuits at Cologne in 1580, among whom he was distinguished for his talents. He taught philosophy at Treves, was afterwards rector of the college of Fulde, and chiefly employed at his leisure hours in composing his works, which procured him great reputation, and the esteem of many men of learning, especially cardinal Baronius, who often mentions Brower in his annals of the church, with high praise. He died -at Treves June 2, 1617. His writings are, 1. An edition of “Venantius Fortunattis,” with notes and additions, Cologne, 1624, 4to. 2. “Scholia on the poems of Rabanus Maurus,” in vol. VI. of the works of Maurus. 3. “Antiquitates Fuldenses,” 1612, 4to. 4. “Sidera illustrium et 'S. S. Virorum qui Germaniam lebus gestis ornarunt,” Mentz, 1616, 4to. 5. “Historia Episcoporum Trevereusium, &c.” Cologne, 162t>. He had also a principal hand in the “Antiquities and Annals of Treves,” 1626, 2 vols. folio, and reprinted 1670; but some antiquaries are of opinion that in his anxiety to give correct copies of certain ancient documents, he took liberties with the originals which tend to lessen the authority of his transcripts.

, an English traveller and scholar, the son of James Brown, M. D. (who died Nov. 24, 1733), was born at Kelso, in the shire or Roxburgh, in Scotland, May 23, 1709, and was educated under Dr. Freind at Westminster school, where he made great proficiency in the Latin and Greek classics. In the latter end of 1722, he went with his father to Constantinople, and having a great aptitude for the learning of languages, acquired a competent knowledge of the Turkish, vulgar Greek, and Italian; and on his return home in 1725, made himself master of the Spanish tongue. About the year 1732, he first started the idea of a very useful book in the mercantile world, although not deserving a place in any literary class, “The Directory,” or list of principal traders in London; and having taken some pains to lay the foundation of it, he gave it to the late Mr. Henry Kent, printer in Finch-lane, Cornhill, who continued it from year to year, and acquired an estate by it. In 1741, Mr. Brown entered into an agreement with twenty-four of the principal merchants of London, members of the Russia Company, as their chief agent or factor, for the purpose of carrying on a trade, through Russia, to and from Persia, and he sailed for Riga Sept. 29. Thence he passed through Russia, down the Volga to Astracan, and sailed along the Caspian sea to Reshd in Persia, where he established a factory, in which he continued near four years. During this time, he travelled in state to the camp of Nadir Shah, commonly known by the name of Kouli Khan, with a letter which had been transmitted to him from the late George II. to that monarch. While he resided in this country, he applied himself much to the study of that language, and made such proficiency in it that, after his return home, he compiled a very copious “Persian Dictionary and Grammar,” with many curious specimens of their writing, which is yet in manuscript. But not being satisfied with the conduct of some of the merchants in London, and being sensible of the dangers that the factory was constantly exposed to from the unsettled and tyrannical nature of the government of Persia, he resigned his charge to the gentlemen who were appointed to succeed him, returned to London Dec. 25, 1746, and lived to be the last survivor of all the persons concerned in the establishment of that trade, having outlived his old friend Mr. Jonas Hanway above two years. In May 1787, he was visited with a slight paralytic stroke, all the alarming effects of which very speedily vanished, and he retained his wonted health and chearfulness till within four 1 days of his death; when a second and more severe stroke proved fatal Nov. 30, 1788. He died at his house at Stoke Newington, where he had been an inhabitant since 1734, and was succeeded by his worthy son James Brown, esq. F. S. A. now of St. Alban’s. Mr. Lysons informs us that the elder Mr. Brown published also a translation of two “Orations of Isocrates” without his name. He was a man of the strictest integrity, unaffected, piety, and exalted, but unostentatious benevolence; of an even, placid, chearful temper, which he maintained to the last, and which contributed to lengthen his days. Few men were ever more generally esteemed in life, or more respectfully spoken of after death by all who knew him.

, an ingenious English writer, descended from the Browns of Colstown near Haddington in Scotland, was born in Northumberland, Nov. 5, 1715, at Rothbury, of which place his father was curate, but removed almost immediately after to the vicarage of Wigton in. Cumberland, where, at a grammar-school, he received the first part of his education; and was thence removed, May 8, 1732, to St. John’s college in Cambridge. He remained here, till in 1735 he took the degree of B. A. then returned to Wigton, and soon after went into orders. His first settlement was in Carlisle, being chosen a minor canon and lecturer in the cathedral there. This situation he afterwards resigned, on being reproved for omitting the Athanasian creed, which it is said was merely accidental. His pride, however, was hurt, and next Sunday he read the creed, out of course, and immediately after resigned. In 1739 he took a M. A. degree at Cambridge. In the rebellion of 1745, he acted as a volunteer at the siege of Carlisle, and behaved himself with great intrepidity; and, after the defeat of the rebels, when some of them were tried at Carlisle in 1746, he preached two excellent sermons in the cathedral, “on the mutual connection between religious truth and civil freedom; and between superstition, tyranny, irreligion, and licentiousness.” These are to be found in the volume of his sermons.

Thus distinguished, he fell under the notice of Dr. Osbaldeston; who, when raised to the see of Carlisle, made him one of his chaplains; he had before obtained for him from the chapter of Carlisle the living of Moreland in Westmoreland. It is probably about this time that he wrote his poem entitled “Honour;” to shew, that true honour can only be founded in virtue: it was inscribed to lord Lonsdale. His next poetical production, though not immediately published, was his “Essay on Satire,” in three parts, afterwards addressed to Dr. Warburton, who introduced him to Mr. Allen of Prior Park near Bath. While at Mr. Alien’s he preached at Bath, April 22, 1750, a sermon for promoting the subscription towards the general hospital in that city, entitled “On the pursuit of false pleasure, and the mischiefs of immoderate gaming;” and there was prefixed to it, when published, the following advertisement: “In justice to the magistrates of the city of Bath, it is thought proper to inform the reader, that the public gaming-tables were by them suppressed there, soon after the preaching of this sermon.” The year after, appeared the “Essay on Satire,” prefixed to the second volume of Pope’s Works by Warburton; with which it still continues to be printed, as well as in Dodsley’s collection.

Brown now began to make no small figure as a writer 5 and in 1751, published Jiis “Essays on Shaftesbury’s Characteristics,” 8vo, a work written with elegance and spirit, aud so applauded as to be printed a fifth time in 1764. This was suggested to him by Warburton, and to Warburton by Pope, who told Warburton that to his knowledge the Characteristics had done more harm to revealed religion in England than all the works of infidelity put together. He is imagined to have had a principal hand in another book, published also the same year, and called w An essay on musical expression;“though the avowed author was Mr. Charles Avison. (See Avison.) In 1754 he printed a sermon,” On the use and abuse of externals in religion: preached before the bishop of Carlisle, at. the consecration of St. James’s church in Whitehaven, and soon after he was promoted to Great Horkesiey in Essex; a living conferred upon him by the late earl of Hard wick e. His next appearance was as a dramatic writer. In 1755, hk tragedy “Barbarossa,” was produced upon the stage, and afterwards his “Athelstan” in 1756. These tragedies were acted with considerable success, under the management of Garrick; and the former long remained what is called a stock-piece, notwithstanding many critical objections offered to it in the publications of the time.

Our author had taken his doctor of divinity’s degree in 1755. In 1757, came out his famous work, “An Estimate of the manners and principles of the times,” 8vo; of which, seven editions were printed in little more than a year, and it was perhaps as extravagantly applauded, and as extravagantly censured, as any book that was ever written. The design of it was to show, that “a vain, luxurious, and selfish effeminacy, in the higher ranks of life, marked the character of the age; and to point out the effects and sources of this effeminacy.” And it must be owned, that, in the prosecution of it, the author has given abundant proofs of great discernment and solidity of judgment, a deep insight into human nature, an extensive knowledge of the world; and that he has marked the peculiar features of the times with great justness and accuracy. The great objection was, that a spirit of self-importance, dogmaticalness, and oftentimes arrogance, mixed itself in what he says; and this certainly did more towards sharpening the pens of his numerous adversaries, and raised more disgust and offence at him, than the m'atter objected to in his work, for it may be added that those who wrote against him were not men of the first rank in literature, and could have done little against him without the aid of those personalities which arise from the temper of an author. In 1758 he published a second volume of the Estimate, &c. and, afterwards, “An explanatory defence of it, &c.”

Between the first and second volume of the Estimate, he republished Dr. Walker’s “Diary of the Siege of Londonderry;” with a preface, pointing out the useful purposes to which the perusal of it might be applied. He was, about this time, presented by the bishop of Carlisle, Dr. Osbaldeston, to the vicarage of St. Nicholas in Newcastle upon Tyne, resigning Great Horkesley in Essex; and was made one of the chaplains in ordinary to his present majesty. These were all the preferments our author ever received; and, as this was supposed to be no small mortification to a man of Dr. Brown’s high spirit, so it was probably this high spirit which was the cause of it; for such was his temper that he never could preserve his friends long, and he had before this time quarrelled with Warburton and lord Hardwicke. In 1760 he published an additional dialogue of the dead, between “Pericles and Aristides,” being a sequel to a dialogue of lord Lyttelton’s between “Pericles and Cosmo.” This is supposed by some to have been designed as a vindication of Mr. Pitt’s political character, against some hints of disapprobation by lord Lyttelton; while others have not excluded a private motive of resentment. It is said that lord Lyttelton in a numerous and mixed company neglected to take notice of our author in so respectful a manner as he thought he deserved; and in revenge, weak enough certainly, he composed the dialogue. His next publication was “The Cure of Saul,” a sacred ode; which was followed the same year by a “Dissertation on the rise, union, and power, the progressions, separations, and corruptions of poetry and music,” 4to. This is a pleasing performance, displays great ingenuity, and, though not without mistakes, very instructing as well as amusing. “Observations” were printed upon it by an anonymous writer, and Dr. Brown defended himself in “Remarks.” He published in 8vo, 1764, the “History of the rise and progress of Poetry through its several species:” being the substance of the above work concerning poetry only, for the benefit of classical readers not knowing in music. The same year, he printed a volume of “Sermons,” most of which had been printed separately; and in 1765, “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction;” a piece, drawn up with great parade, and assuming a scientific form, with an intention to censure the opposers of administration at that time. A sermon on the “Female character and education,” preached the 16th of May, 1765, before the guardians of the asylum for deserted female orphans.

His last publication, in 1766, was a “Letter to the rev. Dr. Lowth,” occasioned by his late letter to the right rev. author of the “Divine Legation of Moses.” Dr. Lowth had pointed at Dr. Brown, as one of the extravagant flatterers and creatures of Warburton; and Dr. Brown defended himself against the imputation, as an attack upon his moral character. To do him justice, he had a spirit too strong and independent, to bend to that literary subjection which the author of the Divine Legation expected from his followers. He insisted upon the prerogative of his own opinion; to assent and dissent, whenever he saw cause, in the most unreserved manner: and this was to Dr. Browiij as it was to many others, the cause of misunderstanding with Warburton. Besides the works mentioned, he published a poem on “Liberty,” and some anonymous pamphlets. At the end of his later writings, he advertised an intention of publishing “Principles of Christian Legislation,” but was prevented by death. He ordered, however, by his will, that the work should be published after his decease; but it was left too imperfect for that purpose. The last memorable circumstance of his life was his intended expedition to Russia. While Dr. Dumaresque resided in Russia, 1765, whither, having been chaplain to our factory at St. Petersburg from 1747 to 1762, he had been invited the year before by the empress, to assist in the regulation of several schools she was about to establish; a correspondent in England suggested the idea tQ him of communicating the affair to Dr. Brown, as a proper person to consult with, because he had puhlished some sermons upon education. This brought on a correspondence between Dr. Dumaresque and Dr. Brown; the result of which, being communicated to the prime minister at St. Petersburg, was followed by an invitation from the empress to Dr. Brown also. Dr. Brown, acquainting the Russian court with his design of complying with the empress’s, invitation, received an answer from the minister, signifying how pleased her imperial majesty was with his intention, and informing him, that she had ordered to be remitted to him, by her minister in London, 1000l. in order to defray the expences of his journey. All the letters which passed, the plans which were drawn by Dr. Brown, and, in short, every thing relating to this affair, may be seen at large under his article in the “Biographia Britannica,” as communicated to the author of it by Dr. Dumaresque.

In consequence of the above proceedings, while he was. ardently preparing for his journey, and almost on the point of setting out for St. Petersburg, the gout and rheumatism, to which he was subject, returned upon him with violence, and put a stop to the affair for the present, to his no small disappointment. This disappointment concurring with his ill state of health, was followed by a dejection of spirits, which terminated in his putting an end to his life, at his lodgings in Pall-mall, Sept. 23, 1766, in his 5 1st year. He cut the jugular vein with a razor, and died immediately. He had, it seems, a constitutional tendency to insanity, and from his early life had been subject at times to disorders in the brain, at least to melancholy in its excess; of which he used to complain to his friends, and to “express his fears, that one time or another some ready mischief might present itself to him, at a time when he was wholly deprived of his reason.”

Dr. Brown was a man of uncommon ingenuity, but unfortunately tinctured with an undue degree of self-opinion, and perhaps the bias of his mind to insanity will assign this best cause, as well as form the best excuse, for this. genius was extensive; for, besides his being so elegant a prose writer in various kinds of composition, he was a poet, a musician, and a painter. His learning does not, however, appear to have been equal to his genius. His invention was, indeed, inexhaustible; and hence he was led to form magnificent plans, the execution of which required a greater depth of erudition than he was possessed of. In divinity, properly so called, as including an extensive knowledge of the controverted points of theology, and a critical acquaintance with the Scriptures, he was not deeply conversant. All we can gather from his sermons is, that his ideas were liberal, and that he did not lay much stress on the disputed doctrines of Christianity. His temper, we are told, was suspicious, and sometimes threw him into disagreeable altercations with his friends; but this arose, in a great measure, if not entirely, from the constitutional disorder described above, a very suspicious turn of mind being one of the surest prognostics of lunacy. He has been charged with shifting about too speedily, with a view to preferment; and it was thought, that his “Thoughts on Civil Liberty, Licentiousness, and Faction,” seemed to have something of this appearance. He, however, in that performance endeavoured to remove the objection, by observing, that, if he had indirectly censured those whom he had formerly applauded, he never was attached to men, but measures; and that, if he had questioned the conduct of those only who were then out of power, he had heretofore questioned their conduct with the same freedom, when in the fulness of their power. Upon the whole, Dr. Brown’s defects, which chiefly arose from a too sanguine temperament of constitution, were compensated by many excellencies and virtues. With respect to his writings, they are all of them elegant. Even those which are of a more temporary nature may continue to be read with pleasure, as containing a variety of curious observations; and in his Estimate are many of those unanswerable truths that can never be unseasonable or unprofitable.

, a Scotch artist, the son of a goldsmith and watchmaker, was born in 1752 at Edinburgh, and was early destined to take up the profession of a painter. He travelled into Italy in 1771, and durmg the course of ten years residence there, the pencil and crayon were ever in his hand, and the sublime thoughts of Raphael and Michael Angelo ever in his imagination. By continual practice he obtained a correctness and elegance of contour, rarely surpassed by any British artist, but he unfortunately neglected the mechanism of the pallet till his taste was so refined that Titian, and Murillo, and Correggio made his heart to sink within him when he touched the canvass. When he attempted to lay in his colours, the admirable correctness of his contour was lost, and he had not self-sufficiency to persevere till it should be recovered in that tender evanescent outline which is so difficult to be attained even by the most eminent painters. At Rome he met with sir William Young and Mr. Townley; who, pleased with some very beautiful drawings done by him in pen and ink, took him with them, as a draftsman, into Sicily. Of the antiquities of this celebrated island he took several very fine views in pen and ink, exquisitely finished, yet still preserving the character and spirit of the buildings he intended to represent. He returned some years afterwards from Italy to his native town, where he was much beloved and esteemed, his conversation being extremely acute and entertaining on most subjects, but peculiarly so on those of art; and his knowledge of music 'being very great, and his taste in it extremely just and refined. Lord Monboddo gave him a general invitation to his elegant and convivial table, and employed him ip, making several drawings in pencil for him. Mr. Brown, however, in 1786, came to London, and was caressed by scholars and men of taste in that metropolis, where he was very much employed as a painter of small portraits in black lead pencil, which were always correctly drawn, and exhibited, with a picturesque fidelity, the features and character of the person who sat to him.:

Mr. Brown was not only known as an exquisite drafts.­man, he was also a good philosopher, a sound scholar, and endowed with a just and refined taste in all the liberal and polite arts, and a man of consummate worth and integrity. Soon after his death his “Letters on the Poetry and Music of the Italian Opera,” 12mo, were published. They were originally written to his friend lord Monboddo, who wished to have Mr. Brown’s opinion on those subjects, which have so intimate a connection with his work on the Origin and Progress of Language; and who was so pleased with the style and observations contained in them, that he wrote an introduction, which was published with them, in one volume, 12mo, 1789, for the benefit of his widow. The letters, written with great elegance and perspicuity, are certainly the production of a strong and fervid mind, acquainted with the subject; and must be useful to most of the frequenters of the Italian opera, by enabling them to understand the reasons on which the pleasure they receive at that musical performance is founded, a knowledge in which they are generally very deficient. Not being written for publication, they have that spirit and simplicity which every man of genius diffuses through any subject which he communicates in confidence, and which he is but too apt to refine away when he sits down to compose a work for the public. Lord Monboddo, in the fourth volume of the Origin and Progress of Language, speaking of Mr. Brown, says, “The account that I have given of the Italian language is taken from one who resided above ten years in Italy; and who, besides understanding the language perfectly, is more learned in the Italian arts of painting, sculpture, music, and poetry, than any man I ever met with. His natural good taste he has improved by the study of the monuments of ancient art, to be seen at Rome and Florence; and as beauty in all the arts is pretty much the same, consisting of grandeur and simplicity, variety, decorum, and a suitableness to the subject, I think he is a good judge of language, and of writing, as well as of painting, sculpture, and music.” A very well-written character in Latin, by an advocate of Edinburgh, is appended to the Letters. Mr. Brown left behind him several very highly-finished portraits in pencil, and many very exquisite sketches in pencil and in pen and ink, which he had taken of persons and of places in Italy; particularly a book of studies of heads, taken from the life, an inestimable treasure to any history painter, as a common-place book for his pictures, the heads it contained being all of them Italian ones, of great expression, or of high character. He was so enraptured with his art, and so assiduous in the pursuit of it, that he suffered no countenance of beauty, grace, dignity, or expression, to pass him unnoticed; and to be enabled to possess merely a sketch for himself, of any subject that struck his fancy, he would make a present of a high-finished drawing to the person who permitted his head to be taken by him. The characteristics of his hancl were delicacy, correctness, and taste, as the drawings he made from many of Mr. Townley’s best statues very plainly evince. Of his mind, the leading features were acuteness, liberality, and sensibility, joined to a character firm, vigorous, and energetic. The last efforts of this ingenious artist were employed in making two very exquisite drawings, the one from Mr. Townley’s celebrated bust of Homer, the other from a fine original bust of Pope, supposed to have been the work of Rysbrac. From these drawings two very beautiful engravings have been made by Mr. Bartolozzi and his pupil Mr. Bovi. After some stay in London, his health, which had never been robust, yielded to extraordinary application, and he was forced to try a seavoyage, and return on a visit to Edinburgh, to settle his father’s affairs, who was then dead, having been some time before in a state of imbecility. On the passage from London to Leith, he was somehow neglected as he lay sick on his hammock, and was on the point of death when he arrived at Leith. With much difficulty he was brought up to Edinburgh, and laid in the bed of his friend Runciman, the artist, who had died not long before in the same place. Here he died, Sept. 5, 1787. His portrait with Runciman, disputing about a passage in Shakspeare’s Tempest, is in the gallery at Dryburgh abbey. This was the joint production of Brown and Runciman before the death of the latter in 1784.

, a clergyman of the church of Scotland, who long kept an academy for the education of young men for the ministry among the class called Seceders in that country, was born in 1722, in a village called Kerpoo, in the county of Perth. His parents died when he was very young, leaving him almost destitute, but by some means he contrived to obtain books, if not regular education, and by dint of perseverance acquired a considerable knowledge of Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, with which last he was critically conversant. He could also read and translate the French, Italian, German, Arabic, Persian, Syriac, and Ethiopic, but his favourite studies were divinity, and history both ecclesiastical and civil. His principles being Calvinistic, his reading was much confined to writers of that stamp, but he appears to have studied every controversy in which the church has been involved, with much attention. At what time he was ordained, does not appear, but his extensive* learning pointed him out to the associate synod, or synod of seceders, as a fit person to be their professor of divinity, and train up young men, who had had a previous education, for the office of the ministry within their pale. His residence was at Haddington, where he was preacher to a numerous congregation of the seceders. At one time he received a pressing invitation from the Dutch church in the province of New York, to be their tutor in divinity, which he declined. He died June 19, 1787. His principal works are, 1. An edition of the Bible, called “The Self-interpreting Bible,” from its marginal references, which are far more copious than in any other edition, London, 1791, 2 vols. 4to, and since reprinted. 2. “Dictionary of the Bible, on the plan of Calmet, but principally adapted to common readers; often reprinted, 2 vols. 8vo. 3.” Ex-> plication of Scripture Metaphors,“' 12mo. 4.” History of the Seceders,“eighth edition, 1802, 12mo. 5.” The Christian Student and Pastor,“1781, an abridgment of the Lives of Pious Men. 6.” Letters on the Government of the Christian Church.“7.” General History of the Church,“1771, 2 vols. 12mo, a very useful compendium of church history, partly on the plan of Mosheim, or perhaps rather of Lampe. After his death appeared a volume entitled” Select Hemains," with some account of his life.

, M. D. author of what has been called the Brunonian system in medicine, was born in the parish of Buncle, in the county of Berwick, in the year 1735, of parents in a mean situation in life, but, in common with the children of other villagers in Scotland, he received his education at a grammar-school. As his mind was much above the rank he was born in, his progress in literature was proportionably superior to the rest of his school-fellows. He there imbibed a taste for letters, so that when he was afterwards put apprentice to a weaver, instead of attending to Ms business, his whole mind was bent on procuring books, which he read with great eagerness. Finding this disposition could not be conquered, his father took him from the loom, and sent him to the grammarschool at Dunse, where, under the tuition of Mr. Cruickshanks, he made such progress that he was soon regarded as a prodigy. He read all the Latin classics with the greatest facility, and was oo mean proficient in the knowledge of the Greek language. “His habits,” we are told, “were sober, he was of a religious turn, and was so strongly attached to the sect of Seceders, or Whigs as tlrey are called in Scotland, in which he had been bred, that he would have thought his salvation hazarded, if he had attended the meetings of the established church. He aspired to be a preacher of a purer religion.” An accident, however, disgusted him with this society, before he was of art age to be chosen a pastor, for which it appears he was intended. Having been prevailed on by some of his schoolfellows to attend divine service at the parish church of Dunse, he was summoned before the session of the seceding congregation to answer for this offence; but his high spirit not brooking to make an apology, to avoid the censures of his brethren, and the ignominy of being expelled their community, he abdicated his principles, and professed himself a member of the established church. As his talents for literature were well known, he was taken, at the age of twenty, to the house of a gentleman in the neighbourhood of Dunse, as tutor to his son. Here he did not long reside, but went the same year, 1755, to Edinburgh, where he applied to the study of divinity, in which he proceeded so far as to deliver, in the public hall, a discourse upon a prescribed portion of scripture, the usual step preliminary to ordination. But here his theological studies appear to have ended, and he suddenly left Edinburgh, returned to Dunse, and officiated as an usher in the school where he had been educated. He now exhibited himself as a free-liver and free-thinker, his discourse and manners being equally licentious and irregular, which accounts for his dereliction of the study of theology. At Dunse he continued about a year. During this time, a vacancy happening in one of the classes in the high school at Edinburgh, Brown appeared as a candidate, but was not successful. Soon after he was applied to by a student in medicine, at Edinburgh, to put his inaugural thesis into, Latin. This he performed in so superior a manner, that it gained him great reputation; it opened to him a path which he had not probably before thought of, for turning his erudition to profit. On the strength of the character procured him by this performance, he returned to 'Edinburgh, and determined to apply to the study of medicine. “He had now,” he said, “discovered his strength, and was ambitious of riding in his carriage as a physician.” At the opening of the session he addressed Latin letters to each of the professors, who readily gave him tickets of admission to their lectures, which he attended diligently for several years; in the interim, teaching Latin to such of the pupils as applied, and assisting them in, writing their theses, or turning them into Latin. The price, when he composed the thesis, was ten guineas; when he translated their compositions into Latin, five. If he had been now prudent, or had not indulged in the most destructive excesses, he might, it is probable, in a few years, have attained the eminence he promised himself; but he marred all by his intemperance. In no long time after this, his constitution, which had been hardy and robust, became debilitated, and he had the face and appearance of a worn-out debauchee. His bad habits had not, however, prevented his getting the friendship or assistance of Dr. Cullen, who, desirous of availing himself of his talents, employed him as a tutor to his sons, and made use of him as an assistant in his lectures; Brown repeating to his pupils in the evening, the lecture they had heard in the morning, and explaining to them such parts as were abstruse and difficult. In 1765 he married, and took a house, which was soon filled with boarders; but, continuing his improvident course, he became a bankrupt at the nd of three or four years. He now became a candidate for one of the medical chairs, but failed; and as he attributed his missing this promotion to Dr. Cullen, he very unadvisedly broke off his connection with him, and became the declared enemy to him and his system; which he had always before strenuously defended. This probably determined him to form a new system of medicine, doubtless meaning to annihilate that of his former patron. As he had read but few medical books, and was but little versed in practice, his theory must have been rather the result of contemplation than of experience. That in forming it, he was influenced by his attachment to spirituous liquors, seems probable from internal evidence, and from the effects he attributed to them of diminishing the number as well as the severity of the fits of the gout, under which he suffered. He always found them more severe and frequent, he says, he lived abstemiously. One of his pupils informed Br; Beddoes, “that he was used, before he began to read his lecture, to take fifty drops of laudanum in a glass of whisky; repeating the dose four or five times during the lecture. Between the effects of these stimulants, and voluntary exertions, he soon waxed warm, and by degrees his imagination was exalted into phrenzy.” His intention seems to have been to simplify medicine, and to render the knowledge of it easily attainable, without the labour of studying other authors. All general or universal diseases were therefore reduced by him to two great families or classes, the sthenic and the asthenic; the former depending upon excess, the latter upon deficiency of exciting power. The former were to be removed by debilitating, the latter by stimulant medicines, of which the most valuable and powerful are wine, brandy, and opium. As asthenic diseases are more numerous y and occur much more frequently than those from an opposite cause, his opportunities of calling in the aid of these powerful stimuli were proportionately numerous. “Spasmodic and convulsive disorders, and even hemorrhages,” he says, “were found to proceed from debility; and wine, and brandy, which had been thought hurtful in these diseases, he found the most powerful of all remedies in removing them.” When he had completed his plan, 'he published his theory or system, under the title of “Elementa Medicinse,” from his preface to which the preceding quotations have been principally taken. Though he had been eleven or twelve years at Edinburgh, he had not taken his degree of doctor; and as he was now at variance with all the medical professors, not thinking it prudent to offer himself there, he went to St. Andrew’s, where he was readily admitted to that honour. He now commenced public teacher of medicine, making his “Elementa” his text book; and convinced, as it seems, of the soundness of his doctrine, he exultingly demands (preface to a new edition of the translation of his “Elementa,” by Dr. Beddoes), whether the medical art, hitherto conjectural, incoherent, and in the great body of its doctrines false, was not at last reduced to a science of demonstration, which might be called the science of life? His method in giving his lectures was, first to translate the text book, sentence by sentence, and then to expatiate upon the passage. The novelty of the docfeine procured him at first a pretty numerous class of pupilsj but as he was irregular in his attendance, and his habits of drinking increased upon him, they were soon. reduced in number, and he became so involved in his circumstances, that it became necessary for him to quit Edinburgh; he therefore came to London in the autumn of the year 1786. Here, for a time, he was received with favour, but his irregularities in living increasing upon him, he came to his lodgings, in the evening of the 8th of October, in 1788, intoxicated, and taking, as it was his custom, a large dose of laudanum, he died in the course of the night, before he had entered on his career of lecturing, for which he was making preparations. He had the preceding year published “Observations on the Old Systems of Physic,” as a prelude to the introduction of his own; but it was little noticed. His opinions have, however, ' met with patrons in Germany and Italy, as well as in this country, and several volumes have been Written on the subject of them; but they are now pretty generally, and deservedly, abandoned.

In 1796, Dr. Beddoes published an edition of “The Elements of Medicine of John Brown, M. D.” for the benefit of his family, with a biographical preface, from which the above account was taken by a learned gentleman for the Cyclopædia. Perhaps from the same materials, a more favourable colouring might be given, and has been given in Dr. Gleig’s Supplement to the Encycl. Britannica, but we question if any account can be given more consistent with truth.

, an eminent horticulturist, and, from a word often employed by him in laying out gardens, called Capability Brown, was born at Kirkharle, in Northumberland, Aug. 1715. Of his education we have no account, but he came early in life to the metropolis, and was employed by lord Cobham in improving the grounds at Stowe; and afterwards at Richmond, Blenheim, Luton, Wimbledon, Nuneham, &c. where he improved ornamental gardening in a very high degree, and approached more nearly to nature than his predecessors. In these operations he frequently discovered a very highly cultivated taste, and may be said to have led the fashion in horticulture for nearly half a century. He associated also with familiarity with many of his noble and opulent employers, and realized a handsome fortune. In 1770 he served the office of high sheriff for the counties of Huntingdon and Cambridge. He died suddenly in Hertfordstreet, May-fair, Feb. 6, 1783, being at that time head gardener to his majesty, at Hampton-court.

, an English divine of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, from whom the sect of the Brownists derived its name, was descended of an ancient and worshipful family, says Fuller, (one whereof founded a fair hospital in Stamford), and was nearly allied to the lord-treasurer Cecil. He was the son of Anthony Brown, of Tol thorp, in Rutlandshire, esq. (though born at Northampton, according to Mr. Collier), and grandson of Francis Brown, whom king Henry VIII. in the eighteenth year of his reign, privileged by charter to wear Jiis cap in the presence of himself, his heirs, or any of his nobles, and not to uncover but at his own pleasure; which charter was confirmed by act of parliament. Robert Brown studied divinity at Cambridge, in Corpus Christi college, and was afterwards a schoolmaster in Southwark. He was soon discovered by Dr. Still, master of Trinity-college, to have somewhat extraordinary in him that would prove a great disturbance to the church. Brown soon verified what the doctor foretold, for he not only jm^ bibed Cartwright’s opinions, but resolved to refine upon his scheme, and to produce something more perfect of his own. Accordingly, about the year 1580, he began to inveigh openly against the discipline and ceremonies of the church of England, and soon shewed that he intended to go much farther than Cartwright had ever done. In his discourses the church government was antichristian; her sacraments clogged with superstition; the liturgy had a mixture of Popery and Paganism in it; and the mission of the clergy was no better than that of Baal’s priests in the Old Testament. He first preached at Norwich, in 1581, where the Dutch having a numerous congregation, many of them inclined to Ahabaptism; and, therefore, being the more disposed to entertain any new resembling opinion, he made his first essay upon them; and having made some progress, and raised a character for zeal and sanctity, he then began to infect his own countrymen; for which purpose he called in the assistance of one Richard Harrison, a country schoolmaster, and they formed churches out of both nations, but mostly of the English. He instructed his audience that the church of England was no true church; that there was little of Christ’s institution in the public ministrations, and that all good Christians were obliged to separate from those impure assemblies; that their only way was to join him and his disciples, among whom all was pure and unexceptionable, evidently inspired by the Spirit of God, and refined from all alloy and prophanation. These discourses prevailed on the audience; and his disciples, now called Brownists, formed a society, and made a total defection from the church, refusing to join any congregation in any public office of worship. Brown being convened before Dr. Freake, bishop of Norwich, and other ecclesiastical commissioners, he maintained his schism, to justify which he had also written a book, and behaved rudely to the court, on which he was committed to the custody of the sheriff of Norwich; but his relation, the lord treasurer Burghley, imputing his error and obstinacy to zeal, rather than malice, interceded to have him charitably persuaded out of his opinions, and released. To this end he wrote a letter to the bishop of Norwich, which procured his enlargement. After this, hisjordship ordered Brown up to London, and recommended him to archbishop Whitgift for his instruction and counsel, in order to his amendment; but Brown left the kingdom, and settled at Middleburgh in Zealand, where he and his followers obtained leave of the states to form a church according to their own model, which was drawn in a book published by Brown at Middleburgh in 1582, and called “A treatise of Reformation, without staying for any man.” How long he remained at Middleburgh, is not precisely known; but he was in England in 1585, when he was cited to appear before archbishop Whitgift, to answer to certain matters contained in a book published by him, but what this was, we are not informed. The archbishop, however, by force of reasoning, brought Brown at last to a tolerable compliance with the church of England; and having dismissed him, the lord treasurer Burgh.­Jey sent him to his father in the country, with a letter to recommend him to his favour and countenance, but from another letter of the lord treasurer’s, we learn that Brown’s errors had sunk so deep as not to be so easily rooted out as was imagined; and that he soon relapsed into his former opinions, and shewed himself so incorrigible, that his good old father resolved to own him for his son no longer than his son owned the church of England for his mother; and Brown chusing rather to part with his aged sire than his new schism, he was discharged the family. When gentleness was found ineffectual, severity was next practised; and Brown, after wandering up and down, and enduring great hardships, at length went to live at Northampton, where, industriously labouring to promote his sect, Lindsell, bishop of Peterborough, sent him a citation to come before him, which Brown refused to obey; for which contempt he was excommunicated. This proved the means of his reformation; for he was so deeply affected with the solemnity of this censure, that he made his submission, moved for absolution, and received it; and from that time continued in the communion of the church, though it was not in his power to close the chasrn^ or heal the wound he had made in it. It was towards the year 1590 that Brown renounced his principles of separation, antl was soon after preferred to the rectory of Achurch, near Thrapston in Northamptonshire. Fuller does not believe that Brown ever formally recanted his opinions, either by word or writing, as to the main points of his doctrine; but that his promise of a general compliance with the church of England, improved by the countenance of his patron and kinsman, the earl of Exeter, prevailed upon the archbishop, and procured this extraordinary favour for him. He adds, that Brown allowed a salary for one to discharge his cure; and though he opposed his parishioners in judgment, yet agreed in taking their tithes. He was a man of good parts and some learning, but was imperious and uncontroulable; and so far from the Sabbatarian strictness afterwards espoused by some of his followers, that he led an idle and dissolute life. In a word, says Fuller, he had a wife with whom he never lived, and a church in which he never preached, though he received the profits thereof: and as all the other scenes of his life were stonny and turbulent, so was his end: for the constable of his parish requiring, somewhat roughly, the payment of certain rates, his passion moved him to blows, of which the constable complaining to justice St. John, he rather inclined to pity than punish him but Brown behaved with so much insolence, that he was sent to Northampton gaol on a feather-bed in a cart, being very infirm, and aged above eighty years, where he soon after sickened and died, anno 1630, after boasting, “That he had been committed to thirty-two prisons, in some of which he could not see his hand at noon-day.” He was buried in his church of Achurch in Northamptonshire.

Those who are acquainted with the tenets and practices of some modern sects, will easily recognize in Brown their founder. The Brownists equally condemned episcopacy and presbytery, as to the jurisdiction of consistories, classes, and synods; and| would not join with any other reformed church, because they were not sufficiently assured of the sanctity and probity of its members, holding it an impiety to communicate with sinners. Their form of church-government was democratical. Such as desired to be members of their church made a confession of their faith, and signed a covenant obliging themselves to walk together in the order of the gospel. The whole power of admitting and excluding members, with the decision of all controversies, was lodged in the brotherhood. Their church officers for preaching the word, and taking care of the poor, were chosen from among themselves, and separated to their several offices by fasting, prayer, and imposition of hands from some of the brethren. They did not allow the priesthood to be any distinct order, or to give any indelible character; but as the vote of the brotherhood made a man a minister, and gave authority to preach the word and administer the sacraments among them; so the same power could discharge him from his office, and reduce him to a mere layman again. As they maintained the bounds of a church to be no greater than what would contain as many as could meet together in one place, and join in one communion, so the power of their officers was prescribed within the same limits. The minister or pastor pf a church could not administer the eucharist or baptism to the children of any but those of his own society. A lay brother was allowed the liberty of giving a word of exhortation to the people; and it was usual for some of them, after sermon, to ask questions, and reason upon the doctrines that had been preached. Until the civil war, they were much discouraged in England; but upon the ruin of episcopacy, they quitted Holland, and came over to England, they began to form churches on their peculiar model. The Presbyterians cortiplained of this as an encroachment, and insisted that the Independents should come under the Scotch regulation; This the latter refused to comply with, and continued a distinct sect, or faction; and, during the civil wars, became the most powerful party; and getting to the bead of affairs, most of the other sects, which were averse to the Church. of England^ joined with them, and all of them yielded to lose theit former names, in the general one of Independents.