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

, an eminent nonconformist divine, and a voluminous writer, was born at Boxstead, in Essex, in 1623, and educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he took his degrees, probably during the usurpation, as we find him D. D. at the restoration. He had the living of St. Stephen’s Norwich, from which he was ejected for non-conformity in 1662. His epitaph says he discharged the work of the ministry in that city for forty- four years, which is impossible, unless he continued to preach as a dissenter after his ejection. He was one of the commissioners at the Savoy conference in the reign of Charles II. He particularly excelled as a textuary and critic. He was a man of various learning, and much esteemed for his great industry, humanity, and exemplary life. He wrote many books of controversy and practical divinity, the most singular of which is his “Weaver’s Pocket-book, or Weaving spiritualized,” 8vo. This book was particularly adapted to the place of his residence, which had been long famous for the manufacture of silks. Granger remarks that Mr. Boyle, in his “Occasional Reflections on several subjects,” published in 1663, seems to have led the way to spiritualizing the common objects, business, and occurrences of life. This was much practised by Mr. Flavel, and by Mr. Herrey; it is generally a “very popular method of conveying religious sentiments, although it is apt to degenerate into vulgar familiarity; but we know not if the practice may not be traced to bishop Hall, who published his” Occasional Meditations“in 1633. Calamy has given a very long list of Dr. Collings’s publications, to which we refer. In Poole’s” Annotations on the Bible" he wrote those on the last six chapters of Isaiah, the whole of Jeremiah, Lamentations, the four Evangelists, the epistles to the Corinthians, Galatians, Timothy and Philemon, and the Revelations. He died at Norwich Jan. 17, 1690.

, a brave and excellent English admiral, the son of Cuthbert Collingwood, of Newcastle upon Tyne, merchant (who died in 1775) and of Milcha, daughter and coheir of Reginald Dobson, of Barwess, in Westmoreland, esq. (who died in 1788) was born at Newcastle, Sept. 26, 1748. After being educated under the care of the rev. Mr. Moises, along with the present lord chancellor Eldon, he entered into the naval service in 1761, under the protection and patronage of his maternal uncle, capt. (afterwards admiral) Braithwaite, and with him he served for some years. In 1766 we find him a midshipman in the Gibraltar, and from 1767 to 1772, master’s mate in the Liverpool, when he was taken into the Lenox, under capt. (now admiral) Roddam, by whom he was recommended to vice-admiral Graves, and afterwards to vice-admiral sir Peter Parker. In Feb. 1774, he went in the Preston, under the command of viceadmiral Graves, to America, and the following year was promoted to the rank of fourth lieutenant in the Somerset, on the day of the battle at Bunker’s Hill, where he was sent with a party of seamen to supply the army with what was necessary in that line of service. The vice-admiral being recalled, and succeeded upon that station by vice-admiral Shuldham, sailed for England on the 1st of February, 1776. In the same year lieutenant Collingwood was sent to Jamaica in the Hornet sloop, and soon after the Lowestoffe came to the same station, of which lord Nelson was at that time second lieutenant, and with whom he had been before in habits of great friendship. His friend Nelson had entered the service some years later than himself, but was made lieutenant in the LowestorTe, captain Locker, in 1777. Here their friendship was renewed; and upon the arrival of vice-admiral sir Peter Parker to take the command upon that station, they found in him a common patron, who, while his country was receiving the benefit of his own services, was laying the foundation for those future benefits which were to be derived from such promising objects of patronage and protection: and here began that succession of fortune which seems to have continued to the last; when he, whom the subject of our present memoir had so often succeeded in the early stages of his promotion, resigned the command of his victorious fleet into the hands of a well-tried friend, whom he knew to be a fit successor in this last and triumphant stage of his glory, as he had been before in the earlier stages of his fortune. For it is deserving of remark, that whenever the one got a step in rank, the other succeeded to the station which his friend had left; first in the Lowestoffe, in which, npori the promotion of lieutenant Nelson into the admiral’s own ship, the Bristol, lieutenant Collingwood succeeded to the LowestofTe; and when the former was advanced in 1778, from the Badger to the rank of post captain in the Hinchinbrooke, the latter was made master and commander in the Badger; and again upon his promotion to a larger ship, capt. Collingwood was made post in the Hinchinbrooke.

In this ship capt. Collingwood was employed in the spring of 1780, upon an expedition to the Spanish main, which, from the unwholesomeness of the climate, proved fatal to most of his ship’s company. In August 1780 he quitted this station, and in the following December was appointed to the command of the Pelican of 21- gnns but on the 1st of August 1781, in the hurricane so fatal to the West India islands, she was wrecked upon the Morant Quay; but the captain and crew happily got on shore. He was next appointed to the command of the Sampson, of 64 guns, in which ship he served to the peace of 1783, when she was paid off, and he was appointed to the Mediator, and sent to the West Indies, upon which station he remained until the latter end of 1786. Upon his return to England, when the ship was paid off, he visited his native country, and remained there until 1790, when on the expected rupture with Spain, on account of the seizure of our ships at Nootka Sound, he was appointed to the Mermaid of 32 guns, under the command of admiral Cornish, in the West Indies; but the dispute with Spain being adjusted without hostilities, he once more returned to his native country, where in June 1791 he married Sarah, the eldest of the two daughters of John Erasmus Blackett, esq. of Newcastle, by whom he left issue two daughters.

On the breaking out of the war with France in 1793, he was called to the command of the Prince, rear-admiral Bowyer’s flag-ship, with whom he served in this ship, and afterwards in the Barfleur, until the engagement of June 1, 1794. In this action he distinguished himself with great bravery, and the ship which he commanded is known to have had its full share in the glory of the day; though it has been the subject of conversation with the public, and was probably the source of some painful feelings at the moment in the captain’s own mind, that no notice was taken of his services upon this occasion, nor his name once mentioned in the official dispatches of lord Howe to the admiralty.

Rear-admiral Bowyer’s flag, in consequence of his honourable wound in this day’s action, no longer flying on board the Barfleur, captain Collingwood was appointed to the command of the Hector, on the 7th of August, 1794, and afterwards to the Excellent, in which he was employed in the Blockade of Toulon, and in this ship he had the honour to acquire fresh laurels in the brilliant victory off the Cape of St. Vincent’s, on the 14th of February, 1797. In this day’s most memorable engagement, the Excellent took a distinguished part, and so well did Nelson know his value, that when the ship which captain Collingwood commanded was sent to reinforce this squadron, he exclaimed with great joy and confidence in the talents and bravery of her captain, “See here comes the Excellent, which is as good as two added to our number.” And the support which he in particular this day received from this ship, he gratefully acknowledged in the following laconic note of thanks:

It did not fall to his lot to have any share in the subse-r quent battle of the Nile, nor had he the good fortune to be placed in a station where any further opportunity was afforded to display his talents during the remainder of the war. He continued in the command of the Excellent, under the flag of lord St. Vincent, till January 1799, when his ship was paid off: and on the 14th of February, in the same year, on the promotion of flag officers, he was raised to the rank of rear-admiral of the white; and on the 12th of May following, hoisted his flag on board the Triumph, one of the ships under the command of lord Bridport on the Channel station. In the month of June 1800 he shifted his flag to the Barfleur, on the same station; and in 1801 was promoted to the rank of rear-admiral of the red, in which ship, and upon the same service, he continued to the end of the war, without any opportunity of doing more than effectually blockading the enemy’s fleet in their own ports, while they were proudly vaunting of their preparations for invading us: a service not less important to the honour, the interest, and the security of the nation, than those more brilliant achievements which dazzle the public eye. On the re-commencement of hostilities, however, admiral Collingwood was again called into service, and on the promotion of admirals on the 23d of April, 1804, was made vice-admiral of the blue, and resumed his former station off Brest. The close blockade which admiral Cornwallis kept up requiring a constant succession of ships, the vice-admiral shifted his flag from ship to ship as occasion required, by which he was always upon his station in a ship fit for service, without the necessity of quitting his station, and returning to port for victualling or repairs. But from this station he was called in May 1805, to a more active service, having been detached with a reinforcement of ships to the blockading fleet at Ferrol And Cadiz. Perhaps it would be difficult to fix upon a period, or a part of the character of lord Collingwood, which called for powers of a more peculiar kind, o-r displayed his talents to more advantage, than the period and the service in which he was now employed. Left with only four ships of the line, to keep in nearly four tjmes the number, it seems almost impossible so to have divided his little force as to deceive the enemy, and effect the object of his service; but this he certainly accomplished. With two of his ships close in as usual to watch the motions of the enemy, and make signals to the other two, which were so disposed, and at a distance from one another, as to repeat those signals from one to the other, and again to other ships that were supposed to receive and answer them, he continued to delude the enemy, and led them to conclude that these were only part of a larger force that was not in sight, and thus he not only secured his own ships, but effected an important service to his country, by preventing the execution of any plan that the enemy might have had in contemplation.

On the return of lord Nelson in the month of September he resumed the command, and vice-admiral Collingwood was his second. Arrangements were now made, and such a disposition of the force under his command as might draw the combined fleets out, and bring them to action. In a letter to a friend, dated the 3d of October, lord Nelson tvrote that the enemy were still in port, and that something rnust be done to bring them to battle. “In less than a fortnight,” he adds, “expect to hear from me, or of me, for who can foresee the fate of battle?”

At length the opportunity offered. The plan that was laid to Jure them out succeeded. Admiral Louis having been detached with four sail of the line to attend a convoy to a certain distance up the Mediterranean, and the rest of the fleet so disposed as to lead the enemy to believe it to be not so strong as it was, admiral Villeneuve was tempted to venture out -with 33 ships under his command (18 French and 15 Spanish), in the hope of doing something to retrieve the honour of rheir flag. On the 19th of October lord Nelson received the joyful intelligence from the ships that were left to watch their motions, that the combined fleet had put to sea, and as they sailed with light westerly winds, his lordship concluding their destination to be the Mediterranean, made all sail for the Straits with the fleet under his command, consisting of 27 ships, three of which were sixty-fours. Here he learnt from capt. Blackwood that they had not yet passed the Straits, and on the 21st, at day-light, had the satisfaction to discover them six or seven miles to the eastward, and immediately made the signal for the fleet to bear up in two columns. It fell to the lot of vice-admiral Collingwoocl, in the Royal Sovereign, to lead his column into action, and first to break through the enemy’s line, which he did in a manner that commanded the admiration of both fleets, and drew from lord Nelson the enthusiastic expression, “Look at that noble fellow! Observe the style in which he carries his ship into action!” while the vice-admiral, with equal justice to the spirit and valour of his friend, was enjoying the proud honour of his situation, and saying to those about him, “What would Nelson give to be in our situation!”

Of this memorable engagement, which will occur again in our life of Nelson, we shall only notice in this place, that it began at twelve o'clock: at a quarter past one, lord Nelson received the fatal wound; and at three, P. M. many of the ships, having struck their colours, gave way. The British fleet was left with nineteen ships of the enemy, ass the trophies of their victory; two of them first rates, with three flag officers, of which the commander in chief (Villeneuve) was one. On the death of lord Nelson, the command of his conquering fleet, and the completion of the victory, devolved upon vice-admiral Collingwood, who, as he had so often done in the early part of his life, now for the last time succeeded him, in an arduous moment, and most difficult service. Succeeding high gales of wind endangered the fleet, and particularly threatened the destruction of the captured ships; but by the extraordinary exertions that were made for their preservation, four 74 gunships (three of them Spanish and one French) were saved and sent into Gibraltar. Of the remainder, nine were wrecked, three burnt, and three sunk. Two others were taken, but got into Cadiz in the gale. Four others which had got off to the southward were afterwards taken by the squadron under sir Richard Strachan. So that out of the thirty-three ships, of which the combined fleet consisted, there were only ten left, and many of these in such a shattered state, as to be little likely to be further serviceable.

Were we disposed, in our esteem of this distinguished character, to pay a compliment to the vice-admiral’s merits that might be considered as more exclusive, it would be the pious gratitude of his feelings, and his confidence in God, that we should hold up as a discriminating feature. We have seldom found the man who can lay aside the pride of the conqueror, and ascribe his successes to God. This in a most eminent degree lord Collingwood did. Scarce was the battle over, when the arrangement was made for a day of thanksgiving throughout the fleet, to that Providence to whom he felt himself indebted for the brilliant success with which the day had terminated. So much to the honour of this illustrious and virtuous character is the general order that he issued on this occasion, that it ought to be recorded as one of the traits which must ever redound to his praise.

On the 9th of November, 1805, when the rank of rearadmiral of the red was restored in the navy, he was advanced from the blue to the rank of vice-admiral of the red. On the same day his majesty was graciously pleased to confer upon him and his heirs male, the title of baron Collinwood, of Caklburne and Hethpoole, in the county of Northumberland: and the two houses of parliament, in addition to their vote of thanks, concurred in a grant of two thousand pounds a year for his own life, and the lives of his two succeeding male heirs, which upon finding that he had only two daughters, was afterwards changed into pensions upon them.

Lord Collingwood was also confirmed in the command of the Mediterranean fleet, to which he succeeded by seniority, and in the opinion of lord Hood wanted only an opportunity to prove himself another Nelson. The bad state of his health had required his return home, but he remained on his station in hopes that the French fleet would come out from Toulon. His last active service was the direction of the preparations which ended in the destruction of two French ships of the line on their own coast He had not seen any of his relatives for a considerable period before his death, yet he appears to have been sensible that his illness would prove fatal. He even ordered a quantity of lead on board at Minorca, for the purpose of making a coffin for his conveyance to England. He died off Minorca, March 7, 1810, onboard the Ville de Paris. His death is supposed to have been occasioned by a large stone in the passage to the bladder; and for some time before his death he was incapable of taking any sustenance. His body having been brought to England was interred. May 11, in St. Paul’s cathedral, with great funeral solemnity. Lord Collingwood was a man of amiable temper and manners, dignified as an officer and commander, yet without any pride; and social among his friends even to a degree of playfulness. His mind was impressed by a strong sense of religion, which he reverenced and enjoined to those under him. He had no enemies but those of his country, and while he cherished all the Old English prejudices against those, he displayed, in the most trying moments, a spirit of humanity which gained their affections. Of this an instance occurred after the great battle of Trafalgar which must not be passed over superficially. In clearing the captured ships of the prisoners, he found so many wounded men, that, as he says in his dispatches, “to alleviate. human misery as much as was in his power,” he seat to the marquis de Solano, governor-general of Andalusia, to offer him the wounded to the care of their country, on receipts being given; a proposal which was received with the greatest thankfulness, not only by the governor, but by the whole country, which resounded with expressions of gratitude. Two French frigates were sent out to receive them, with a proper officer to give receipts, bringing with them all the English who bad been wrecked in several of the ships, and an offer from the marquis de Solano of the use of their hospitals for our wounded, pledging the honour of Spain for their being carefully attended.

, an eminent writer on the side of infidelity, was the son of Henry Collins, esq. a gentleman of considerable fortune; and born at Heston near Hounslow, in Middlesex, June 21, 1676. He was educated in classical learning at Eton school, and removed thence to King’s college in Cambridge, where he had for his tutor Francis Hare, afterwards bishop of Chichester. Upon leaving college he went to London, and was entered a student in the Temple; but not relishing the study of the law, he abandoned it, and applied himself to letters in general. In 1700 he published a tract entitled “Several of the London Cases considered.” He cultivated an acquaintance and maintained a Correspondence with Locke in 1703 and 1704; and that Locke had a great esteem for him, appears from some letters to him published by Des Maizeaux in his collection of “Several pieces of John Locke, never before printed, or not extant in his works.” Locke, who died Oct. 28, 1704, left also a letter dated the 23d, to be delivered to Collins after his decease, full of confidence and the warmest affection; which letter is to be found in the collection above mentioned. It is plain from these memorials, that Collins at that time appeared to Locke to be an impartial and disinterested inquirer after truth, and not, as he afterwards proved, disingenuous, artfuJ, and impious.

Dec. 1709, came out a pamphlet, entitled, “Priestcraft in perfection; or, a detection of the fraud of inserting and continuing that clause, ‘ The church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies, and authority in controversies of faith,’ in the twentieth article of the Articles of the Church of England.” And, Feb. the year following, another called “Reflections on a late pamphlet,entitled, Priestcraft in perfection, &c.” both written by our author. The second and third editions of his “Priestcraft in perfection” were printed, with corrections, in 1710, 8vo. This book occasioned great and diligent inquiries into the subject, and was reflected on in various pamphlets, sermons, and treatises. These were answered by Collins, but not till 1724, in a work entitled, “An historical and critical essay on the 39 Articles of the Church of England: wherein it is demonstrated, that this clause, ‘The Church, &c.’ inserted in the 20th article, is not a part of the article, as they were established by act of parliament in the 13th of Elizabeth, or agreed on by the convocations of 1562 and 1571.” This essay, however, was principally designed as an answer to “The vindication of the Church of England from the aspersions of a late libel, entitled, Priestcraft in perfection, wherein the controverted clause of the church’s power in the 20th article is shewn to be of equal authority with all the rest of the articles, in 1710,” and to “An essay on the 39 Articles by Dr. Thomas Bennet,” published in 1715: “two chief works,” says Collins, “which seem written by those champions who have been supplied with materials from all quarters, and have taken great pains themselves to put their materials into the most artful light.” In the preface he tells us, that he undertook this work at the solicitations of a worthy minister of the gospel, who knew that he had made some inquiries into the “Modern Ecclesiastical History of England;” and, particularly, that he was preparing “An history of the variations of the church of England and its clergy from the reformation down to this time, with an answer to the cavils of the papists, made on occasion of the said variations:” but this work never appeared. The reader may see the whole state of this controversy in Collier’s “Ecclesiastical History,” where particular notice is taken of our author.

In 1710 he published “A vindication of the Divine Attributes, in some remarks on the archbishop of Dublin’s (Dr. King) sermon, entitled, Divine predestination and foreknowledge consisting with the freedom of man’s will.” March 1711, he went over to Holland, where he became acquainted with Le Clerc, and other learned men; and returned to London the November following, to take care of his private affairs, with a promise to his friends in Holland, that he would pay them a second visit in a short time. In 1713 he published his “Discourse of Freethinking, occasioned by the rise and growth of a sect called Free-thinkers;” which was attacked by several writers, particularly by Hoadly, afterwards bishop of Winchester, in some “Queries recommended to the authors of the late discourse of Free-thinking,” printed in his collection of tracts in 1715, 8vo and by Phileleutherus Lipsiensis, in “Remarks upon a late Discourse of Free-thinking, in a letter to F. H. D. D.” This Phileleutherus Lipsiensis was the learned Bentley; and the person to whom this performance is addressed, Hare, afterwards bishop of Chichester. The first part of these remarks gave birth to a pamphlet said to be written by Hare, entitled, “The clergyman’s thanks to Phileleutherus for his remarks on the late Discourse of Freethinking: in a letter to Dr. Bentley, 1713.” The late Mr. Cumberland, in his “Life of himself,” informs us, that when Collins had fallen into decay of circumstances, which, however, we find no where else mentioned, Dr. Bentley, suspecting he had written him out of credit by his “Phileleutherus Lipsiensis,” secretly contrived to administer to the necessities of his baffled opponent in a manner that did no less credit to his delicacy than his liberality. Of all this Dr. Bentley we believe was capable, but it is certain that Collins lived and died in opulence. Soon after the publication of this work, Collins made a second trip to Holland; which was ascribed to the general alarm caused by the “Discourse of Free-thinking,” and himself being discovered by his printer. This is taken notice of by Hare: who, having observed that the least appearance of danger is able to damp in a moment all the zeal of the free-thinkers, tells us, that “a bare inquiry after the printer of their wicked book has frightened them, and obliged the reputed author to take a second trip into Holland; so great is his courage to defend upon the first appearance of an opposition. And are not these rare champions for free-thinking? Is not their book a demonstration that we are in possession of the liberty they pretend to plead for, which otherwise they durst ne'er have writ? And that they would have been as mute as fishes, had they not thought they could have opened with impunity? M Hare afterwards tells us, that” the reputed author of free-thinking is, for all he ever heard, a sober man, thanks to his natural aversion to intemperance; and that,“he observed,” is more than can be said of some others of the club:“that is, the club of free-thinkers, which were supposed to meet and plan schemes in concert, for undermining the foundations of revealed religion. The” Discourse of Free-thinking“was reprinted at the Hague, with some considerable additions, in 1713, 12mo, though in the title-page it is said to be printed at London. In this edition the translations in several places are corrected from Bentley’s remarks; and some references are made to those remarks, and to Hare’s” Clergyman’s thanks."

While this book was circulating in England, and all parties were exerting their zeal, either by writing or preaching against it, the author is said to have received great civilities abroad. From Holland he went to Flanders, and intended to have visited Paris; but the death of a near relation obliged him to return to London, where he arrived Oct. 18, 1713, greatly disappointed in not having seen France, Italy, &c. In 1715 he retired into the county of Essex, and acted as a justice of the peace and deputy-lieutenant for the same county, as he had done before in the county of Middlesex and liberty of Westminster. The same year he published “A philosophical inquiry concerning Human Liberty: r ' which was reprinted with some corrections in 1717. Dr. Samuel Clarke wrote remarks upon this inquiry, which are subjoined to the colJection of papers between him and Leibnitz; but Collins did not publish any reply on this subject, because, as we are told, though he did not think the doctor had the advantage orer him in the dispute, yet, as he had represented his opinions as dangerous in their consequences, and improper to be insisted on, Collins affected to say that, after such an insinuation, he could not proceed in the dispute upon equal terms: The inquiry was translated into French by the rev. Mr. D. and printed in the first volume of Des Maizeaux’s” Recueilde diverses pieces sur la philosophic, la religion naturelle, &c. par M. Leibnitz, Clarke, Newton, &c." published at Amsterdam 1720, 2 vols. 12mo. In 1718 he was chosen treasurer for the county of Essex, to the great joy, it is said, of several tradesmen and others, who had large sums of money due to them from the said county; but could not get it paid them, it having been embezzled or spent by their former treasurer. We are told that he supported the poorest of them with his own private cash, and promised interest to others till it could be raised to pay them: and that in 1722 all the debts were by his integrity, care, and management discharged.

It has already been observed, that he published, in 1724, his “Historical and critical essay upon the 39 Articles, &c.” The same year he published his famous book, called “A discourse of the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion,” in two parts the first, containing some considerations on the quotations made from the Old in the New Testament, and particularly on the prophecies cited from the former, and said to be fulfilled in the latter. The second, containing an examination of the scheme advanced by Whiston in his essay towards restoring the true text of the Old Testament, and for vindicating the citations thence made in the New Testament. To which is prefixed, “An apology for free debate and liberty of writing.” This discourse was immediately attacked by a great number of books; of which Collins has given a complete list, at the end of the preface to his “Scheme of literal Prophecy.” The most considerable were: 1. “A list of suppositions or assertions in the late Discourse of the grounds, &c. which are not therein supported by any real or authentic evidence; for which some such evidence is expected to he produced. By William Whiston, M. A.” 1724, tfvo. In this piece Whiston treats Collins, together with Toland, in very severe terms, as guilty of impious frauds and laycraft. 2. “The literal accomplishment of scripture -prophecies, being a full answer to a late Discourse of the grounds, &c. By William Whiston.” 3. “A defence of Christianity from the prophecies of the Old Testament, wherein are considered all the objections against this kind of proof, advanced in a late Discourse of the grounds, &c.” By Edward Chandler, then bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, afterwards of Durham. 4. “A discourse of the Connection of the Prophecies in the Old Testament, and application of them to Christ.” By Samuel Clarke, D. D. rector of St. James’s, Westminster. This however was not intended for a direct answer to Collins’s book, but as a supplement, occasioned by it, to a proposition in Clarke’s “Demonstration of the principles of natural and revealed religion” with which it has since been constantly printed. 5. “An essay upon the Truth of the Christian religion, wherein its real foundation upon the Old Testament is shewn, occasioned by the Discourse of the grounds,” &c. By Arthur Ashley Sykes. Collins gives it as his opinion, that of all the writers against the “Grounds,” &c. Sykes alone has advanced a consistent scheme of things, which he has proposed with great clearness, politeness, and moderation. 6. “The use and intent of Prophecy in the several ages of the church. In six discourses delivered at the Temple church in 1724.” By Thomas Sherlock, D. D. This was not designed as an answer to the “Grounds,” &c. but only to throw light upon the argument from prophecy attacked by our author. The reader will find the rest of the pieces written against the “Grounds,” &c. enumerated by Collins in the place referred to above; among which are Sermons, London Journals, Woolston’s Moderator between an infidel and an apostate, &c. amounting in number to no less than thirty-five, including those already mentioned. Perhaps there seldom has been a. book to which so many answers have been made in so short a time, that is, within the small compass of two years.

In 1726 appeared his “Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered; in a view of the controversy occasioned by a late book, entitled, A Discourse of the Grounds, &c.” It was printed at the Hague in 2 vols. 12mo, and reprinted at London with corrections in 1727, 8vo. In this work he mentions a dissertation he had written, but never published, against Whiston’s “Vindication of the Sibylline oracles” in which he endeavours to shew, that those oracles were forged by the primitive Christians, who were thence called Sibyllidts by the pagans. He also mentions a ms discourse of his upon the miracles recorded in the Old and New Testament. The “Scheme of Literal Prophecy 1 * had several answers made to it: the most considerable of which are, 1.” A vindication of the defence of Christianity, from the prophecies of the Old Testament.“By Edward Chandler, D. D.; with a letter from the rev. Mr. Masson, concerning the religion of Macrobius, and his testjfnony touching the slaughter of the infants at Bethlehem, with a postscript upon Virgil’s fourth eclogue, 1728, in 2 vols. 8vo. 2.” The necessity of Divine Revelation, and the truth of the Christian Revelation asserted, in eight sermons. To which is prefixed a preface, with some remarks on a late book entitled The Scheme of Literal Prophecy considered, &c. By John Rogers, D. D.“1727, 8vo. 3.” A letter to the author of the London Journal, April 1, 1727,“written by Dr. Arthur Ashley Sykes. Collins replied to the two last pieces, in” A Letter to Rogers, on occasion of his Eight Sermons, &c. to which is added, a Letter printed in the London Journal, April 1, 1727; with an answer to the same, 1727.“In his” Letter to Rogers“he observes, that the doctor had invited him to martyrdom in these words:” A confessor or two would be a mighty ornament to his cause. If he expects to convince us that he is in earnest, and believes himself, he should not decline giving us this proof of his sincerity. What will not abide this trial, we shall suspect to have but a poor foundation.“These sentiments, Collins tells us, are in his opinion false, wicked, inhuman, irreligious, inconsistent with the peace pf society, and personally injurious to the author of the” Scheme, &c.“He remarks, that it is a degree of virtue to speak what a man thinks, though he may do it in such a way as to avoid destruction of life and fortune, &c.” He declares, that the cause of liberty, which he defends, is “the cause of virtue, learning, truth, God, religion, and Christianity; that it is the political interest of all countries; that the degree of it we enjoy in England is the strength, ornament, and glory of our own; that, if he can contribute to the defence of so excellent a cause, he shall think he has acted a good part in life: in short, it is a cause,” says he to Dr. Rogers, “in which, if your influence and interest were equal to your inclination to procure martyrdom for me, I would rather suffer, than in any cause whatsoever; though I should be sorry that Christians should Le so weak and inconsistent with themselves, as to be your instruments in taking my life from me.”

His health began to decline several years before his death: and he was extremely afflicted with the stone, which at last put an end to his life, Dec. 13, 1729; he was interred in Oxford chapel. It is remarkable that notwithstanding the accusation of being an enemy to religion, he declared, just before his last minutes, “That as he had always endeavoured, to the best of his abilities, to serve God, his king, and his country, so he was persuaded he was going to that place which God had designed for them that love him.” Presently after, he said, that “the catholic religion is to love God, and to love man;” and he advised such as were about him to have a constant regard to those principles. His library, which was very large and curious, was sold by T. Ballard in 1730-1. The catalogue was drawn up by Dr. Sykes. We are told, that “the corruption among Christians, and the persecuting spirit of the clergy, had given him a prejudice against the Christian religion; and at last induced him to think, that, upon the foot on which it is at present, it is pernicious to mankind.” He has indeed given us himself an unequivocal intimation, that he had actually renounced Christianity, Thus, in answer to Rogers, who had supposed that it was men’s lusts and passions, and not their reason, which made them depart from the gospel, he acknowledges, that <c it may be, and is undoubtedly, the case of many, who reject the gospel, to be influenced therein by their vices and immoralities. It would be very strange,“says he,” if Christianity, which teaches so much good morality, and so justly condemns divers vices, to which men are prone, was not rejected by some libertines on that account; as the several pretended revelations, which are established throughout the world, are by libertines on that very account also. But this cannot be the case of all who reject the gospel. Some of them who reject the gospel lead as good lives as those who receive it. And I suppose there is no difference to the advantage of Christians, in point of morality, between them and the Jews, Mahometans, heathens, or others, who reject Christianity.“But we ought not to conclude this article without remarking, that whatever Mr. Collins’s character in private life, he was, at the same time, a most unfair writer. He seemed, with all his morality, to have very little conscience in his quotations, adapting them, without scruple, to his own purposes, however contrary they might be to the genuine meaning of the authors cited, or to the connection in which the passages referred to stood. So many facts of this kind were undeniably proved against him by his adversaries, that he must ever be recorded as a flagrant instance of literary disingenuity. Let these facts, which are clearly proved by Leland, be compared with his dying declarations. In addition to the answerers of Collins, we may mention dean Swift, in an excellent piece of irony, entitled” Mr. Collins’s Discourse of Freethinking, put into plain English, by way of abstract, for the use of the poor,“1713, reprinted in Mr. Nichols’s edition of his Works, vol. X. The twelfth chapter also of the” Memoirs of Martinus Scriblerus," in Pope’s Works, is an inimitable ridicule on Collins’s arguments against Clarke, to prove the soul to be only a quality.

In July 1698, when he was just entered into his 23d year, he married Martha, the daughter of sir Francis Child, who was the year following lord mayor of London and by her he had two sons and two daughters. The elder of his sons died in his infancy. Anthony, the younger, was born Oct. 1701, and was a gentleman of great sweetness of temper, a fine understanding, and of good learning. He was educated at Bene't college in Cambridge, and died universally lamented by all that knew him, Dec. 20, 1723. The year after, Collins married a second wife, namely Elizabeth, the daughter of sir Walter Wrottesley, bart. but had no children by her. His daughters survived him, and were unmarried at his death.

, a laborious antiquary, whose name is familiar as the compiler of peerages and baronetages, was born in 1682. He was the son of William Collins, esq. gentleman to queen Catherine in 1669, but, as he himself informs us, the son of misfortune, his father having run through more than 30,000l. He received, however, a liberal education, and from a very early age culti­% T ated that branch of antiquities, to which he dedicated the remainder of a laborious life. The first edition of his Peerage was published as early as 1708, and we have seen another edition of 1715, 4 vols. 8vo. It afterwards by various additions, and under other editors, was extended to seven volumes, and with a supplement to nine. The last and most improved of all was published in 1812, under the care of sir Egerton Brydges, whose attention to the errors of the preceding editions cannot be too highly praised, and the additional articles more immediately from his pen are marked by elegance of style and sentiment and a just discrimination of character. Mr. Collins’s “Baronetage” was first published in 1720 in two volumes, extended in 1741 to five volumes, since when there has been no continuation under his name, but the loss is amply supplied by Mr. Betham’s very enlarged work. Mr. Collins’s other publications are, 1. “The Life of Cecil, Lord Burleigh,” 1732, 8vo. 2. “Life of Edward the Black Prince,” 1740, 8vo. 3. “Letters and Memorials of State, collected by Sir Henry Sidney and others,” 1746, 2 vols. folio. 4. “Historical Collections of the Noble Families of Cavendish, Holies, Vere, Harley, and Ogle,” 1752, folio. We know little of Mr. Collins’s private life, unless what is painful to re.cord, that he seldom received any substantial encouragement from the noble families on whose history he employed his time, that he frequently laboured under pecuniary embarrassments, and as frequently experienced the nullity of promises from his patrons among the great, until at length his majesty George II. granted him a pension of 400l. a year, which, however, he enjoyed but a few years. He died March 16, 1760, at Battersea, where he was buried on the 24th, He was father of major-general Arthur Tooker Collins, who died Jan. 4, 1793, leaving issue David Collins, esq. the subject of the next article.

, judge advocate and historian of the new settlement in South Wales, the son of gen. A. T. Collins, and of Harriet Frazer, of Pack, in the king’s county, Ireland, was born March 3, 1756, and received a liberal education at the grammar-school of Exeter, where his father then resided. In 1770 he was appointed lieutenant in the marines; and, in 1772, was with the late admiral M'Bride, in the Southampton frigate, when the unfortunate Matilda, queen of Denmark, was rescued from the dangers that awaited her by the energy of the British government, and conveyed to a place of safety in the king her brother’s Hanoverian dominions. On that occasion he commanded the guard that received her majesty, and had the honour of kissing her hand. In 1775, he was at the battle of Bunker’s-hill; in which the first battalion of marines, to which he belonged, so signally distinguished itself, having its commanding officer, the gallant major Pitcairne, and a great many officers and men, killed in storming the redoubt, besides a very large proportion of wounded. In 1777, he was adjutant of the Chatham division; and, in 1782, captain of marines on-board the Courageux, of 74 guns, commanded by the late lord Mulgrave, and participated in the partial action that took place with the enemy’s fleet, when lord Howe relieved Gibraltar. Reduced to half-pay at the peace of 1782, he resided at Rochester in Kent (having previously married an American lady, who survives him, but without issue); and on its being determined to found a colony, by sending convicts to Botany Bay, he was appointed judge advocate to the intended settlement, and in that capacity sailed with governor Philip in May 1787 (who also appointed him his secretary), which situation he filled with the greatest credit to himself and advantage to the colony, until his return to England in 1797. The History of the Settlement, which he soon after published, followed by a second volume, is a work abounding with information, highly interesting, and written with the utmost simplicity. The appointment of judge advocate, however, proved eventually injurious to his real interests. While absent, he had been passed over when it came to his turn to be put on full pay; nor was he permitted to return to England to reclaim his rank in the corps; nor could he ever obtain any effectual redress; but was afterwards compelled to come in as junior captain of the corps, though with his proper rank in the army, and died a captain instead of a colonel-commandant, his rank in the army being merely brevet. He had then the mortification of finding that, after ten years’ distinguished service in the infancy of a colony, and the sacrifice of every real comfort, his only reward had been the loss of many years’ rank, a vital injury to an officer. A remark which his wounded feelings wrung from him at the close of the second volume of his History of the Settlement, appears to have awakened the sympathy of those in power; and he was, almost immediately after its publication, offered the government of the projected settlement on Van Diemen’s land, which he accepted, and sailed once more for that quarter of the globe, where he founded his new colony; struggled with great difficulties, which he overcame; and, after remaining there eight years, was enjoying the flourishing state his exertions had produced, when he died suddenly, after a few days’ confinement from a slight cold, on, the 24rth of March, 1810.

, an eminent accomptant and mathematician, was the son of a nonconformist divine, and horn at Wood Eaton near Oxford in March 1624. At sixteen years of age he was put apprentice to a bookseller in Oxford; but soon left that trade, and was employed as clerk under Mr. John Mar, one of the clerks of the kitchen to prince Charles, afterwards Charles II. This Mar was eminent for his mathematical knowledge, and constructed those excellent dials with which the gardens of Charles I. were adorned: and under him Collins made no small progress in the mathematics. The intestine troubles increasing, he left that employment and went to sea, where he spent the greatest part of seven years in an English merchantman, which became a man of war in the Venetian service against the Turks. Here having leisure, he applied himself to merchants accompts, and some parts of the mathematics, for which he had a natural turn; and on coming home, he took to the profession of an accomptant, and composed several useful treatises upon practical subjects. In 1652 he published a work in folio, entitled “An Introduction to Merchants’ Accompts,” which was reprinted in 1665, “with an additional part, entitled” Supplements to accomptantship and arithmetic.“A part of this work, relating to interest, was reprinted in 1685, in a small 8vo volume In 1658 he published in 4to, a treatise called” The Sector on a Quadrant; containing the description and use of four several quadrants, each accommodated for the making of sun-dials, &c. with an appendix concerning reflected dialling, from a glass placed at any inclination.“In 1659, 4to, he published his” Geometrical dialling;“and also the same year, his” Mariner’s plain Scale new plained.“In the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society, of which he was now become a member, he fully explained and demonstrated the- rule given by the Jesuit De Billy, for” finding the number of the Julian period for any year assigned, the cycles of the sun and moon, with the Roman indiction for the years being given.“To this he has added some very neatly-contrived rules for the ready finding on what day of the week any day of the month falls for ever; and other useful and necessary kalendar rules. In the same Transactions he has a curious dissertation concerning the resolution of equations in numbers. In No. 69 for March 1671, he has given a most elegant construction of that chorographical problem, namely:” The distances of three objects in the same plane, and the angles made at a fourth place in that plane, by observing each object, being given; to find the distances of those objects from the place of observation?“In 1680 he published a small treatise in 4to, entitled” A Plea for the bringing in of Irish cattle, and keeping out the fish caught by foreigners; together with an address to the members of parliament of the counties of Cornwall and Devon, about the advancement of tin, fishery, and divers manufactures.“In 1682 he published in 4to,” A discourse of Salt and Fishery;“and in the Philosophical Transactions, No. 159, for May 1684, is published a letter of his to Dr. JohnWallis, oh some defects in algebra. Besides these productions of his own, he was the chief promoter of many other valuable publications in his time. It is to him that the world is indebted for the publication of Barrow’s” Optical and geometrical lectures;“his abridgment of” Archimedes’s works,“and of” Apollonius’s Conies“Branker’s translation of” Rhonius’s Algebra, with Pell’s additions“” Kersey’s Algebra“Wallis’s History of Algebra” “Strode of Combinations” and many other excellent works, which were procured by his unwearied solicitations.

While Anthony earl of Shaftesbury was lord chancellor, he nominated Collins, in divers references concerning suits depending in chancery about intricate accounts, to assist in the stating thereof. From this time his talents were in request in other places, and by other persons; by which he acquired, says Wood, some wealth and much fame, and became accounted, in matters of that nature, the most useful and necessary person of his time; and in the latter part of his life, he was made accomptant to the royal fishery company. In 1682, after the act at Oxford was finished, he rode from thence to Malmesbury in Wiltshire, in order to view the ground to be cut for a river between the Isis and the Avon; but drinking too freely of cyder, when over-heated, he fell into a consumption, of which he died Nov. 10, 1683. About twenty-five years after his death, all his papers and most of his books came into the hands of the learned and ingenious William Jones, esq. fellow of the Royal Society, and father to the more celebrated sir Wm. Jones; among which were found manuscripts upon mathematical subjects of Briggs, Oughtred, Pell, Scarborough, Barrow, and Newton, with a multitude of letters received from, and copies of letters sent to, many learned persons, particularly Pell, Wallis, Barrow, Newton, James Gregory, Flamstead, Towniey, Baker, Barker, Branker, Bernard, Slusius, Leibnitz, Ischirphaus, father Bertet, and others. From these papers it is evident, that Collins held a constant correspondence for many years with all the eminent mathematicians of his time, and spared neither pains nor cost to procure what was requisite to promote real science. Many of the late discoveries in physical knowledge, if not actually made, were yet brought about by his endeavours. Thus, in 1666, he had under consideration the manner of dividing the meridian line on the true nautical chart; a problem of the utmost consequence in navigation: and some time after he engaged Mercator, Gregory, Barrow, Newton, and Wallis, severally, to explain and find an easy practical method of doing it; which excited Leibnitz, Halley, Bernoulli, and all who had capacity to think upon, such a subject, to give their solutions of it: and by this means the practice of that most useful proposition is reduced to the greatest simplicity imaginable. He employed some of the same persons upon the shortening and facilitating the method of computations by logarithms, till at last that whole affair was completed by Halley. It was Collins who engaged all that were able to make any advances in the sciences, in a strict inquiry into the several parts of learning, for which each had a peculiar talent; and assisted them by shewing where the defect was in any useful branch of knowledge; by pointing out the difficulties attending such an inquiry; by setting forth the advantages of completing that subject; and lastly, by keeping up the spirit of research and improvement.

Collins was likewise the register of all the new improvements made in the mathematical science; the magazine, to which all the curious had recourse; and the common repository, where every part of useful knowledge was to be found. It was upon this account that the learned styled him “the English Mersenus.” If some of his correspondents had not obliged him to conceal their communications, there could have been no dispute about the priority of the invention of a method of analysis, the honour of which evidently belongs to the great 0\ T ewton. This appears undeniably from the papers printed in the “Commercium epistolicuni D. Joannis Collins & aliorum de analysi promota jussu societatis regiae in lucem editum, 17 12,” in 4to.

, an unfortunate but excellent English poet, was born at Chichester, Dec. 25, about 1720, the son of a reputable hatter in that city. In 1733 he was admitted scholar of Winchester college under Dr. Burton, and at nineteen was elected upon the foundation to Newcollege in Oxford. He was first upon the list; and, in order to wait for a vacancy in that society, was admitted a commoner of Queen’s college in the same university; but no such vacancy occurring, his tutor, very sensible of his desert, recommended him to the society of Magdalen; and this recommendation, backed by an uncommon display of genius and learning in the exercises performed on the occasion, procured him to be elected a demy of that college in July 1741. During his residence in this place, which was till he had taken a bachelor’s degree, he applied himself to poetry, and published an epistle to sir Thomas Hanmer on his edition of Shakspeare, and the “Persian,” or, as they have been since entitled, “Oriental Eclogues,” which, notwithstanding their merit, were not attended with any great success; and it was objected to them, that though the scenery and subjects are oriental, the style and colouring are purely European. Of the force of this objection, Mr. Collins himself became sensible in the latter part of his life. Yet their poetical merit is very great and Dr. Langhorne has not scrupled to assert, “that in simplicity of description and expression, in delicacy and softness of numbers, and in natural and unaffected tenderness, they are not to be equalled by any thing of the pastoral kind in the English language.”

About 1744 he suddenly left the university, and came to London, a literary adventurer, with many projects in his head, and very little money in his pocket. He designed many works, but either had not perseverance in himself, or the frequent calls of immediate necessity broke his schemes, and suffered him to pursue no settled purpose. Among other designs he published proposals for a “History of the Revival of Learning;” and Dr. Johnson has heard him speak with great kindness of Leo X. and with keen resentment of his tasteless successor. But probably not a page of the history was ever written. He also planned several tragedies, but he only planned them. Yet there were times when his poetical genius triumphed over his indolence; and produced in 1746, his “Odes descriptive and allegorical.” The success of this publication was inferior to that of the Oriental Eclogues. Mr. Millar, the bookseller, gave the author a handsome price, as poems were then estimated, for the copy, but the sale of them was not sufficient to pay the expence of printing. Mr. Collins, justly offended at the bad taste of the public, as soon as it was in his power, returned Mr Millar the copymoney, indemnified him for the loss he had sustained, and consigned the unsold part of the impression to the flames. Highly as Mr. Collins’s Odes deserved a superior fate, it is not surprising that they were not popular at their first appearance. Allegorical and abstracted poetry is not suited to the bulk of readers.

About this time Dr. Johnson fell into his company, who tells us, that “the appearance of Collins was decent and manly; his knowledge considerable, his views extensive, his conversation elegant, and his disposition cheerful. By degrees,” adds the doctor, “I gained his confidence; and one day was admitted to him when he was immured by a bailiff, that was prowling in the street. On this occasion recourse was had to the booksellers, who, on the credit of a translation of ‘ Aristotle’s Poetics,’ which” he engaged to write with a large commentary, advanced as much money as enabled him to escape into the country. He shewed me the guineas safe in his hand. Soon afterwards his uncle, Mr. Martin, a lieutenant-colonel, left him about 2000l. a sum which Collins could scarcely think exhaustible, and which he did not live to exhaust. The guineas were then repaid; and the translation neglected. But man is not born for happiness: Collins, who, while he studied to live, felt no evil but poverty, no sooner lived to study, than his life was assailed by more dreadful calamities, disease and insanity.“Dr. Johnson’s character of him, while it was distinctly impressed upon that excellent writer’s memory, is here at large inserted:” Mr. Collins was a man of extensive literature, and of vigorous faculties. He was acquainted, not only with the learned tongues, but with the Italian, French, and Spanish languages. He had employed his mind chiefly upon works of fiction, and subjects of fancy; and by indulging some peculiar habits of thought, was eminently delighted with those flights of imagination which pass the bounds of nature, and to which the mind is reconciled only by a passive acquiescence in popular traditions. He loved fairies, genii, giants, and monsters; he delighted to rove through the meanders of enchantment, to gaze on the magnificence of golden palaces, to repose by the water-falls of Elysian gardens. This was, however, the character rather of his inclination than his genius; the grandeur of wildness, and the novelty of extravagance, were always desired by him, but were not always attained. Yet as diligence is never wholly lost; if his efforts sometimes caused harshness and obscurity, they likewise produced in happier moments sublimity and splendour. This idea which he had formed of excellence, led him to Oriental fictions and allegorical imagery; and, perhaps, while he was intent upon description, he did not sufficiently cultivate sentiment. His poems are the productions of a mind not deficient in fire, nor unfurnished with knowledge either of books or life, but somewhat obstructed in its progress by deviation in quest of mistaken beauties. His morals were pure, and his opinions pious: in a long continuance of poverty, and long habits of dissipation, it cannot be expected that any character should be exactly uniform. There is a degree of want by which the freedom of agency is almost destroyed; and long association with fortuitous companions will at last relax the strictness of truth, and abate the fervour of sincerity. That this man, wise and virtuous as he was, passed always linen tangled through the snares of life, it would be prejudice and temerity to affirm; but it may be said that at least he preserved the source of action unpolluted, that his principles were never shaken, that his distinctions of right and wrong were never confounded, and that his faults had nothing of malignity or design, but proceeded from some unexpected pressure, or casual temptation. The latter part of his life cannot be remembered but with pity and sadness. He languished some years under that depression of mind which enchains the faculties without destroying them, and leaves reason the knowledge of right without the power of pursuing it. These clouds which he perceived gathering on his intellects, he endeavoured to disperse by travel, and passed into France; but found himself constrained to yield to his malady, and returned. He was for some time confined in a house of lunatics, and afterwards retired to the care of his sister in Chichester , where death, in 1756, came to his relief. After his return from France, the writer of this character paid him a visit at Islington, where he was waiting for his- sister, whom he had directed to meet him there was then nothing of disorder discernible in his mind by any but himself; but he had withdrawn from study, and travelled with no other book than an English Testament, such as children carry to the school: when his friend took it into his hand out of curiosity, to see what companion a man of letters had chosen: ‘ I have but one book,’ says Collins, ‘ but that is the best.’ Such was the fate of Collins, with whom I once delighted to converse, and whom I yet remember with tenderness. He was visited at Chichester in his last illness by his learned friends Dr. Warton and his brother; to whom he spoke with disapprobation of his t Oriental Eclogues,‘ as not sufficiently expressive of Asiatic manners, and called them his ’ Irish Eclogues.‘ He shewed them, at the same time, an ode inscribed to Mr. John Hume, ’ On the Superstitions of the Highlands;' which they thought superior to his other works, but which no search has yet found. His disorder was not alienation of mind, but general laxity and feebleness, a deficiency rather of his vital than intellectual powers. What he spoke wanted neither judgment nor spirit; but a few minutes exhausted him, so that he was forced to rest upon the couch, till a short cessation restored his powers, and he was again able to talk with his former vigour. The approaches of this dreadful malady he began to feel soon after his uncle’s death; and with the usual weakness of men so diseased, eagerly snatched that temporary relief with which the table and the bottle flatter and seduce. But his health continually declined, and he grew more and more burthensome to himself. “To what I have formerly said of his writings may bft added, that his diction was often harsh, unskilfully laboured, and injudiciously selected. He alVected the obsolete when it was not worthy of revival; and he puts his words out of the common order, seeming to think, with some later candidates for fame, that not to write prose is certainly to write poetry. His lines commonly are of slow motion, clogged and impeded with clusters of consonants. As men are often esteemed who cannot be loved, so the poetry of Collins may sometimes extort praise when it gives little pleasure .”

From this opinion of Collins’s genius many critics have diftered, whose more favourable sentiments appear to have revived his reputation of late years and Mrs. Barbauld’s prefatory Essay to an elegant- edition of his works, published in 1797, has contributed not a little to the same effect. It is necessary, however to add, that the Ode on the “Superstitions of the Highlands,” mentioned in Dr. Johnson’s account as having been lost, has been recovered, The manuscript, in Mr. Collins’s hand- writing, fell into the hands of Dr. Alexander Carlyle, among the papers of a friend of his and Mr. John Home’s, who died in 1754. Soon after Dr. Carlyle found the poem,Jie shewed it to Mr. Home, who told him that it had been addressed to him by Mr. Collins, on his leaving London in the year 1749, and that it was hastily composed and incorrect. This is apparent from the ode itself. It is evidently the prima euro, of the poem, as will easily be perceived from the alterations made in the manuscript, by the blotting out of many lines and words, and the substitution of others. In particular, the greatest part of the twelfth stanza is modelled in that manner. The poem, which is entitled “An Ode on the Popular Superstitions of the Highlands of Scotland, considered as the subject of Poetry,” was first published in the first volume of the “Transactions of the Royal Society of Edinburgh,” with the fifth stanza and part of the sixth, which were lost, supplied by Mr. Mackenzie. Though there are evident proofs that it was hastily composed, it evinces, at the same time, the vigour of the author’s imagination, and the ready command he possessed of harmonious numbers. The construction of the stanza is different from what Mr. Collins has used on any former occasion, not perfectly pleasing, and too operose and formal. That the poem is highly beautiful, every man of taste must, strongly feel; but still there will probably be found per-, sons who will give the preference to the “Ode upon the Passions.”

In 1795 a monument of exquisite workmanship was erected by public subscription to the memory of Collins, the whole executed by Flaxtnan, with au epitaph by Mr. Hayley.

, was an ingenious botanist, whose family is of ancient standing in the north. Peter and James were the great grandsons of Peter Collinson, who lived on his paternal estate called Hugal-Hall, or Height of Hugal, near Windermere Lake, in the parish of Stavely, about ten miles from Kendal in Westmoreland. Peter, who vvus born Jan. 14, 1693-4, whilst a youth, discovered his attachment to natural history. He began early to make a collection of dried specimens of plants; had access to the best gardens at that time in the neighbourhood of London; and became early acquainted with the most eminent naturalists of his time; the doctors Derham, Woodward, Dale, Lloyd, and Sloane, were amongst his friends. Among the great variety of articles which form, that superb collection, now (by the wise disposition of sir Hans Sloane and the munificence of parliament) the British Museum, small was the number of those with whose history Collinson was not well acquainted, he being one of those few who visited sir Hans at all times familiarly; their inclinations and pursuits in respect to natural history being the same, a firm friendship had early been established between, them. Peter Collinson was elected F. R. S. Dec. 12, 1728 and perhaps was one of the most diligent and useful members, not only in supplying them with many curious observations, but in promoting and preserving a most extensive correspondence with learned and ingenious foreigners, in all countries, and on every useful subject. Besides his attention to natural history, he minuted every striking hint that occurred either in reading or conversation; and from this source he derived much information, as there were very few men of learning and ingenuity, who were not of his acquaintance at home; and most foreigners of eminence in natural history, or in arts and sciences, were recommended to his notice and friendship. His diligence and economy of time was such, that though he never appeared to be in a hurry, he maintained an extensive correspondence with great punctuality; acquainting the learned and ingenious in distant parts of the globe, with the discoveries and improvements in natural history in this country, and receiving the like information from the most eminent persons in almost every other. His correspondence with the ingenious Cadwallader Golden, esq, of NewYork, and the celebrated Dr. Franklin of Philadelphia, furnish instances of the benefit resulting from his attention to all improvements. The latter of these gentlemen communicated his first essays on electricity to Collinson, in a series of letters, which were then published, and have been reprinted in a late edition of the doctor’s works. Perhaps, at the present period, the account procured of the management of sheep in Spain, published in the Gentleman’s Magazine for May and June 1764, may not be considered among the least of the benefits accruing from his extensive and inquisitive correspondence. His conversation, cheerful and usefully entertaining, rendered his acquaintance much desired by those who had a relish for natural history, or were studious in cultivating rural improvements; and secured him the intimate friendship of some of the most eminent personages in this kingdom, as distinguished by their taste in planting and horticulture, as by their rank and dignity. He was the first who introduced the great variety of trees and shrubs, which are now the principal ornaments of every garden; and it was owing to his indefatigable industry, that so many persons of the first distinction are now enabled to behold groves transplanted from the Western continent flourishing so luxuriantly in their several domains, as if they were already become indigenous to Britain. He had some correspondents in almost every nation in Europe; some in Asia, and even at Pekin, who all transmitted to him the most valuable seeds they could collect, in return for the treasures of America. Linnæus, during his residence in England, contraded an intimate friendship with Mr. Collinson, which was reciprocally increased by a multitude of good offices, and continued to the last. Besides his attachment to natural history, he was very conversant in the antiquities of our own country, having been elected F. S. A. April 7, 1737; and he supplied the society with many curious articles of intelligence, and observations respecting both our own and other countries. In the midst of all these engagements, he was a mercer by trade, and lived at the Red Lion, in Gracechurch-street. His person was rather short than tall; he had a pleasing and social aspect; of a temper open and communicative, capable of feeling for distress, and ready to relieve and sympathize. Excepting some attacks of the gout, he enjoyed, in general, perfect health and great equality of spirits, and had arrived at his 75th year; when, being on a visit to lord Petre, for whom he had a singular regard, he was seized with a total suppression of urine, which, baffling every attempt to relieve it, proved fatal Aug. 11, 1768. Mr. Collinson left behind him many materials for the improvement of natural history; and the present refined taste of horticulture may in some respects be attributed to his industry and abilities. He married, in 1724, Mary, the daughter of Michael Russell, esq. of Mill Hill, with whom he lived very happily till her death, in 1753. He left issue a son, named Michael, who resided at Mill Hill, and died Aug. 11, 1795, whose son is still living; and a daughter, Mary, married to the late John Cator, esq. of Beckenham, in Kent. Both his children inherited much of the taste and amiable disposition of their father.

, an eminent dramatic author and manager, the son of Thomas Colman, esq. British resident at the court of the grand duke of Tuscany at Pisa, whose wife was a sister of the countess of Bath, was born at Florence about the year 1733, and placed at a very early age in Westminster-school, where he soon distinguished himself by the rapidity of his attainments, and the dawning splendour of his talents. He was elected to Christ Church college, Oxford, in 1751, and took the degree of M. A. in 1758. During his progress at Westminster, and while at college, he formed those literary connections with whom he remained in friendship till they severally dropped off the stage of life. Lloyd, Churchill, Bonnel Thornton, Cowper, and other celebrated wits of that period, were among the intimate associates of Mr. Colman, and gave a lustre to his name, by noticing him in some of their compositions. Even so early as the publication of the “Rosciad,” Churchill proposed Mr. Colman as a proper judge to decide on the pretensions of the several candidates for the chair of Roscius; and only complains that he may be thought too juvenile for so important an award.

It was during his residence at Oxford that he engaged with his friend Bonnel Thornton, in publishing the “Connoisseur,” a periodical paper, which appeared once a week, and was continued from January 31, 1754, to September 30, 1756. When the age of the writers of this entertaining miscellany is considered, the wit and humour, the spirit, the good sense, and shrewd observations on life and manners, with which it abounds, will excite some degree of wonder, but will, at the same time, evidently point out the extraordinary talents which were afterwards to be more fully displayed in the “Jealous Wife” and tfee “Clandestine Marriage.” When he came to London, the recommendation of his friends, or his choice, but probably the former, induced him to fix upon the law for his profession, and he was received with great kindness by lord Bath, who seemed to mark him for the object of his patronage: a circumstance that gave rise to the suspicion that his lordship had a natural bias in favour of young Colman. He was entered of the society of Lincoln’s-inn, and in due season called to the bar. He attended there a very short time, though, from the frequency of his attendance on the courts, we must conclude that it was not for want of encouragement that he abandoned the profession. It is reasonable to suppose that he felt more pleasure in attending to the muse than to briefs and reports; and it will therefore excite no surprise, that he took the earliest opportunity of relinquishing pursuits not congenial to his taste. “Apollo and Littleton,” says Wycherley, “seldom meet in the same brain.” At this period Lloyd addressed to him a very pleasant poem on the importance of his profession, and the seducements to which he was liable, on account of his attachment to the sisters of Helicon. His first poetical performance is a copy of verses addressed to his cousin lord Pulteney, written in the year 1747, while he was yet at Westminster, and published in the St. James’s Magazine, a work conducted by his unfortunate friend Robert Lloyd; in conjunction with whom he wrote the best parodies of modern times, the “Odes to Oblivion and Obscurity.” In 1760, his first dramatic piece, “Polly Honeycomb,” was acted at Drury-lane with great success; and next year he was one of three different candidates for public favour in the higher branch of the drama; viz. Mr. Murphy, who exhibited the “Way to keep him;” Mr. Macklin, the “Married Libertine” and Mr. Colman, “The Jealous Wife.” The former and latter of these were successful, and Colman in a very high degree. About the same time the newspaper entitled “The St. James’s Chronicle” was established; of which he became a proprietor, and exerted the full force of his prosaic talents to promote its interest, in a series of essays and humourous sketches on occasional subjects. Among these he opened a paper called “The Genius,” which he published at irregular intervals as far as the fifteenth number. These papers appear, upon the whole, to be superior to the general merit of the Connoisseurs they haye rather more solidity, and the humour is more chaste and classical, His occasional contributions to the St. James’s Chronicle were very numerous, and upon every topic of the day, politics, manners, the drama, &c. A selection from them appears in his prose works, published by himself in 1787.

In the establishment of the St. James’s Chronicle, he had likewise Mr. Thornton for a colleague, who was one of the original proprietors: and by their joint industry they drew the productions of many of the wits of the times to this paper, which, as a depository of literary intelligence, literary contests and anecdotes, and articles of wit and humour, soon eclipsed all its rivals. It appears that the principal departments were for some time filled by the following persons the papers entitled “The Genius,” by Mr. Colman “Smith’s Letters,” by Peregrine Phillips, esq. short essays of wit, by Bonnei Thornton, esq. longer essays of wit, by ——— Waller, esq.; rebusses and letters, signed “Nick Testy” and “Alexander Grumble,” ——— Forest; letters signed “Oakly,” Mr. Garrick.

In July 1764, lord Bath died, and left Mr. Colman a very comfortable annuity, and he now found himself in circumstances fully sufficient to enable him to follow the bent of his genius. The first publication which he produced, after this event, was a translation of the comedies of Terence, in the execution of which he rescued that author from the hands of his former tasteless and ignorant translators.

The successor of lord Bath, general Pulteney, died in 1767; and Mr. Colman found himself also remembered in his will by a second annuity, which confirmed the independency of his fortune. He seems, however, to have taken the first opportunity to engage in active life; as, about the year 1768, Mr. Beard, being incapable of bearing any longer the fatigues of a theatrical life, and wishing to retire from the management of Covent-garden theatre, disposed of his property in that house to Messrs. Colman, Harris, Powell, and Rutherford. These gentlemen carried on the management conjointly; but, in a short time, Mr. Colman appearing to aspire to a greater authority than the other patentees, excepting Mr. Powell, were disposed to grant, Mr. Colman, after a severe literary contest, which was published, sold his share, and retired. Soon after, Mr. Foote, then proprietor of the Haymarket theatre, having beeu induced to withdraw from the stage, disposed of his theatre to Mr. Colman for a handsome annuity, which he did not long enjoy. On his death, Mr. Colman obtained th*e license; and, from that period, conducted the theatre with great judgment and assiduity, occasionally supplying many dramas from his own fancy, as well as many pleasant translations from the French.

While Mr. Colman was thus shewing his attention to the theatre, he did not entirely neglect his classical studies. He gave the public, in 1783, a new translation of “Horace’s Art of Poetry,” accompanied with a commentary, in which he produced a new system to explain that very difficult poem. In opposition to Dr. Hurd, he supposes, “that one of the sons of Piso, undoubtedly the elder, had either written or meditated a poetical work, most probably a tragedy; and that he had, with the knowledge of the family, communicated his piece or intention to Horace; but Horace, either disapproving of the work, or doubting of the poetical faculties of the elder Piso, or both, wished to dissuade him from all thoughts of publication. With this view he formed the design of writing this epistle, addressing it with a courtliness and delicacy perfectly agreeable to his acknowledged character, indifferently to the whole family, the father and his two sons: Epistola ad Pisones de arte poetica.” This hypothesis is supported with much learning, ingenuity, and modesty; and the bishop of Worcester, on its publication, said to Dr. Douglas, the late bishop of Salisbury: “Give my compliments to Colman, and thank him for the handsome manner in which he has treated me, and tell him, that 1 think he is right” It may be added, that the late Dr. Warton and Dr. Beattie were of the same opinion.

Some time about the year 1790 Mr. Colman had a stroke of the palsy, which nearly deprived him of the use of one side of his body; and in a short time afterwards he gave evident signs of mental derangement; in consequence of which, he was placed under proper management at Paddington, and the conduct of the theatre was vested in his son. He died the 14th of August 1794. Mr. Colman, as a scholar, holds a very respectable rank, as may be seen by his translations of Horace’s Art of Poetry, and of the comedies of Terence; and his manners were as pleasing as his talents were respectable. His various dramatic pieces have been published in 4 vols. 8vo. The year after his death appeared a pamphlet, entitled “Some Particulars of the Life of the late George Colman, esq. written by himself, and delivered by him to Richard Jackson, esq. one of his executors, for publication after his decease.” The object of this pamphlet was to contradict two reports which had long been current. The one, that by his literary pursuits and dramatic compositions, he lost the favour and affection of the earl of Bath; the other, that by his purchase of a fourth of the patent of Coventgarden theatre, he knowingly and voluntarily forfeited the intended bequest of a certain estate under the will of general Pulteney. In opposition to these reports, he proves very clearly that he did not lose the favour of the earl of Bath, and that general Pulteney, while he did not openly resist his becoming a manager of the theatre, but rather consented to it, changed his intentions towards him, and left him, in lieu of the estate, an annuity of four hundred pounds. The general appears, however, to have considered the family as disgraced by Mr. Colman’s becoming a manager, for the latter is obliged to remind him of gentlemen who had been managers, of sir William Davenant, sir Richard Steele, sir John Vanburgh, and Mr. Congreve.

, in Latin Angelus Colotius, an elegant Italian scholar, descended of an ancient and noble family, was born at Jesi, in 1467. He obtained in his youth the honour of knighthood, which was conferred upon him by the hands of Andreas Palaeologus Despota, when, then a refugee at Rome, he was recognized as the legitimate heir to the imperial diadem of Constantinople. Colocci was a disciple of Georgius Valla, under whom he made great progress in philosophy, but particularly in polite literature. For political reasons, which are detailed J>y Ubaldinus, in his life of this illustrious scholar, the family of Colocci were obliged, in the pontificate of Innocent VIII. to abandon the city of Rome where they had taken up their residence. Angelo, in consequence, repaired to Naples, where he became a member of the Pontana academy, under the assumed name of Angelus Colotius Bassus, and acquired an intimacy with the most eminent poets and wits of his time. Six years afterwards, Raving been permitted to return to his country, he divided his time betwixt his literary pursuits and the official duties entrusted to him by his countrymen, who sent him as ambassador to Alexander VI. in 1498. He then took up his residence at Rome, where his hause became an elegant and liberal resort for men of learning and genius, and where the academy of Rome, which after the death of Pomponius Laetus had fallen into decay, was again revived under his care. Here also his extensive gardens, which, in addition to the most captivating scenery resulting from a happy combination of nature and art, were adorned with a profusion of statues, inscriptions, and other elegant remains of classic antiquity, revived Uie magnificence and amenity of the celebrated gardens of Saliust, of which they were supposed to occupy the actual site. On such objects, and on the patronage of learning and learned men, he employed his riches. The senate of Rome, struck with his liberality, bestowed on him the title of patrician, which extended to his family; and he was held in the highest estimation by the popes Leo X. Clement VII. and Paul III. Leo, independently of 4000 crowns with which he rewarded him for some verses in his praise, made him his secretary, and gave him the reversion of the bishopric of Nocera in 1521, Colocci having at that time survived two wives. This gift was afterwards confirmed to him by Clement VII. who also appointed him governor of Ascoli. These favours, however, were insufficient to secure him when Rome was sacked in 1527. On that occasion, his house was burnt, his gardens pillaged, and he was obliged to pay a large sum for his life and liberty. He then went for some time to his country, and on coming back to Rome, his first care was to invite together the members of the academy who had been dispersed. In 1537 he took possession of the bishopric of Nocera, and died at Rome in 1549. His Latin and Italian poems were published in 1772, but our authority does not mention where or in what shape. Most of them had, however, previously appeared in his life by Ubaldinus, Rome, 1673, 8vo.

, a famous Jesuit, born at St. Symphorien, two leagues from Lyons, in 1641, acquired great reputation among his order by his extraordinary talents in the pulpit. He was preacher for two years at the court of James II. of England, who listened to his sermons with great pleasure, and, as it is said by the Romanists, with edification; hut, falling under the suspicion, though not convicted, of being concerned in a conspiracy, he was banished England, and betook himself to Parai, in the Charolois, where he died, Feb. 15, 1682. In conjunction with Marie Alacoque, he recommended the celebration of the solemnity of the heart of Jesus, and composed an office for the occasion. The first inventor of this rite, however, was Thomas Goodwin, president of Magdalen college, Oxford, an Arminian, who excited great notice in England, in the middle of the seventeenth century, by his ascetical and theological writings. His book entitled “Cor Christi in ccelis erga peccatores in terris,” printed in 1649, comprises the whole system of this devotion and was intended to promote the spread of it in England. La Colombiere, who was sent to London as confessor and preacher to the duchess of York, afterwards queen, found there a numerous sect, who, after Goodwin’s example, paid adoration to the fleshly heart of Jesus, as the symbolical image of divine love. He was astonished at the novelty of so ravishing a devotion, which had so long escaped the fertile invention of his fraternity; and carried it in triumph back with him to France, where, under the influence of heavenly visions and miracles, it struck deep root, and was extensively propagated. Among other agents a nun of the name of Marie Alacoque, who, in her heavenly visions, pretended to have conversed familiarly with Christ, was employed by the Jesuits to aid the deception, and in one of her visions, asserted that she had received orders from heaven to acquaint father la Colombiere, that he should institute a yearly festival to the heart of Jesus, propagate this devotion with all his might, and announce to such as should dedicate themselves to it, the assurance of their predestination to eternal life. The Jesuits immediately and zealously complied with the celestial mandate. There appeared at once in all quarters of the world, and in all languages, an innumerable swarm of publications, manuals, copper-plates, and medals, with hearts decorated with crowns of thorns, with lambent flames, transpiercing swords, or other symbolical impresses. They distributed scapularies to be worn day and night upon the breast, and tickets to be swallowed for driving out fevers. In all Spain there was not a nun who had not a present from the Jesuits of a heart cut out of red cloth, to be worn next the skin. In every catholic city and town, in all parts of the world, fraternities were erected, passionmasses and nine-day devotions were instituted, to the honour of the heart of Jesus; and panegyrical sermons delivered, exhorting the faithful to augment their zeal. The proselytes must vow, before the holy sacrament of the altar, an eternal fidelity to the heart of Jesus; and every soul was made responsible for the increase and growth of this new devotion; nay, the display of a burning zeal for making proselytes was regarded as the peculiar characteristic of the true worshipper of the heart. This devotion was represented in their sermons and writings, as a necessary means to the enjoyment of a blissful hereafter: it was no wonder, then, that the partisans of this devotion were in a short time as numerous in all catholic Christendom as the sands of the sea. The bishops approved and confirmed the brotherhoods, and consecrated churches, altars, and chapels, erected to the promotion of this enthusiasm. Kings and queens preferred petitions to the papal throne, that a proper office might be appointed in the breviary and choir, and a peculiar mass for the solemnization of the anniversary; and even at Rome fraternities arose and flourished that devoted themselves to the worship of the heart of Jesus. In recommendation of it the Jesuits were not wanting either in prophecies or miracles; among the foremost of whom was la Colombiere, who had an excellent taste in his compositions, and a noble delivery in the pulpit. His masterly eloquence displays itself amidst the extreme simplicity ofhis style, as we are told by the abbe Trublet, speaking of his sermons, published at Lyons 1757, in 6 volumes 12mo. He had an impetuous and lively imagination, and the warmth of his heart appears through all his discourses: it is the unction of pere Che'minaisr, only more ardent and glowing. All his sermons breathe the most gentle, and at the same time the most fervent piety: he has been equalled by few in the art of affecting his hearers, and no enthusiast ever fell less into the familiar. The celebrated Patru, his friend, speaks of him as the best skilled of his time in the refinements and niceties of the French language. There are likewise by him, “Moral Reflections,” and “Spiritual Letters.”

, or Colomesius, a learned French protestant, was born at Rochelle in 1638, where his father was a physician, and where he was probably educated. His application to various reading must evidently have been very extensive, and although he has no decided claims to originality, his works ranked in his own day, and some of them may still, as ably illustrating the history of learning and learned men. He faithfully treasured what he found in old, scarce, and almost unknown authors, and knew how to render the reproduction of learned curiosities both agreeable and useful. His great intimacy and high regard for Vossius, induced him to visit England, where Vossius was then canon of Windsor, and by his interest or recommendation he was appointed librarian at Lambeth, with a competent salary. This, however, he lost at the revolution, when his patron, archbishop Bancroft, was deprived for not taking the oaths to the new government. After this it is said that he fell into poverty, and died in Jan. 1692; and was buried in St. Martin’s church-yard. His principal works are, 1. “Gallia Orientalis,” reprinted at Hamburgh, 1709, in 4to, under the care of the learned Jabricius; and containing an account of such French as were learned in the Oriental languages. 2. “Hispania & Italia Orientalis,” giving an account of the Spanish and Italian Oriental scholars. 3. “Bibliotheque Choisie;” reprinted at Paris, 1731, with notes of M. de la Monnoye, 12mo. This was published at Hamburgh, 4to, by Christ. Wolf, an useful work, and of great erudition. 4. “Theologorum Presbyterianorum Icon,” in which he shews his attachment to episcopacy; and for which he was attacked by Jurieu (who had not half his candour and impartiality) in a book entitled “De P esprit d'Arnauld.” 5. “Des opuscules critiques & historiques,” collected and published in 1709, by Fabricius. 6. “Melanges Historiques,” &c. 7. “La vie du pere Sirmond,” &c. His “Colomesiana,” make a volume of the collection of Anas.

, an eminent botanist, was born at Naples in 1567, the son of Jerome, who was the natural son of the cardinal Pompeio Colonna. He devoted himself from his youth to the pursuit of natural history, and particularly to that of plants, which he studied in the writings of the ancients; and, by indefatigable application, was enabled to correct the errata with which the manuscripts of those authors abounded. The languages, music, mathematics, drawing, painting, optics, the civil and canon law, filled up the moments which he did not bestow on botany, and the works he published in this last science were considered as master-pieces previous to the appearance of the labours of the latter botanists. He wrote, 1. “Plantarum aliquot ac piscium historia,” 1592, 4to, with plates, as some say, by the author himself, executed with much exactness. The edition of Milan, 1744, 4to, is not so valuable as the former. 2. “Minus cognitarum rariorumque stirpium descriptio; itemque de aquatilibus, aliisque nonnullis animalibus libellus,” Rome, 1616, two parts in 4to. This work, which may be considered as a sequel to the foregoing, was received with equal approbation. The author, in describing several singular plants, compares them with the descriptions of them both by the ancients and moderns, which affords him frequently an opportunity of opposing the opinions of Matthiolo, Dioscorides, Theophrastus, Pliny, &c. He published a second part, at the solicitation of the duke of Aqua-Sparta, who had been much pleased with the former. The impression, was entrusted to the printer of the academy of the Lyncasi, a society of literati, formed by that duke, and principally employed in the study of natural history. This society, which subsisted only till 1630, that is, till the death of its illustrious patron, was the model on which all the others in Europe were formed. Galileo, Porta, Achillini, and Colonna, were some of its ornaments. 3. “A Dissertation on the Glossopetrae,” in Latin, to be found with a work of Augustine Sciila, on marine substances, Rome, 1647, 4to. 4. He was concerned in the American plants of Hernandez, Rome, 1651, fol. fig. 5. A Dissertation on the Porpura, in Latin; a piece much esteemed, but become scarce, was reprinted at Kiel, 1675, 4to, with notes by Daniel Major, a German physician. The first edition is of 1616, 4to.

, a Venetian dominican, who died May 17, 1520, in his eightieth year, is chiefly known by a scarce book, entitled “Poliphili Hypnerotomachia,” Venice, 1499, fol. There is an edition of 1545, but none of 1467; the copies which pass for that edition, are of one or the other above mentioned editions; and the mistake has arisen from the last leaf, which contained the elate of the impressions, heing taken out, and the last but one left; on which is the date of the time when the work was written. It is a romance filled with mythological learning, of very little value but for its scarcity and whimsical composition, and has been translated into French by John Martin, Paris, 1561, fol

, a person ever memorable for his benefactions and charities, was the eldest son of William Colston, esq. an eminent Spanish merchant in Bristol, and born in that city Nov. 2, 1636. He was brought up to trade, and resided some time in Spain with his brothers, two of whom were inhumanly murdered there by assassins*. He inherited a handsome fortune from his parents, which received continual additions from the fortunes of his brethren; all of whom, though numerous, he survived. This family substance he increased immensely by trade; and having no near relations, he disposed qf a great part of it in acts of charity and beneficence. In 1691 he built upon his own ground, at the charge of about 2500l. St. Michael’shilL alms-houses in Bristol; and endowed them with lands, of the yearly rent of 282 J. 3s. 4</. The same year he gave houses and lands, without Temple-gate in that city, to the society of merchants for ever, towards the maintenance of six poor old decayed sailors, to the yearly value of 24l. In 1696 he purchased a piece of ground in Temple-street in the same city, and built at his own charge a school and dwelling-house for a master, to instruct forty boys, who are also to be clothed, instructed in writing, arithmetic, and the church-catechism. The estate given for this cbarity amounted to 80l. yearly, clear of all charges. In 1702 he gave 500l. towards rebuilding queen Elizabeth’s hospital on the College-green in Bristol; and for the clothing and educating of six boys there, appropriated an

it was often objected to them, " That return; but their elder brother, Mr.

reply, that if it pleased God to bring by bandittis or bravoes. estate of 60l. a year, clear of charges, besides lOl. for placing out the boys apprentices. In 1708 he settled his great benefaction of the hospital of St. Augustine in Bristol, consisting of a master, two ushers, and one hundred boys; for the maintenance of which boys, he gave an estate of 138l. 155. 6fd. a year. The charge of first setting up this hospital, and making it convenient for the purpose, amounted, it is said, to about 11,000l. He gave also 6l. yearly to the minister of All- Saints in Bristol, for reading prayers every Monday and Tuesday morning throughout the year, and I/, a year to the clerk and sexton: also 6l. a year for ever, for a monthly sermon and prayers to the prisoners in Newgate there; and 20l. yearly for ever to the clergy beneficed in that city, for preaching fourteen sermons in the time of Lent, on subjects appointed by himself. The subjects are these the Lent fast against atheism and infidelity the catholic church the excellence of the church of England the powers of the church baptism confirmation confession and absolution the errors of the church of Rome; enthusiasm and superstition restitution frequenting the divine service frequent communion the passion of our blessed Saviour. He bestowed, lastly, upwards of 2000l. in occasional charities and benefactions to churches and charity-schools, all within the city of Bristol. Beyond that city his benefactions were equally liberal. He gave 6000l. for the augmentation of sixty small livings, on the following terms: Any living that was entitled to queen Anne’s bounty might have this too, on condition that every parish, which did receive this, should be obliged to raise 100l. to be added to the lOOl. raised by Colston: and many livings have had the grant of this bounty. He gave to St. Bartholomew’s hospital in London 2000l. with which was purchased an estate of 100l. a year, which is settled on that hospital and he left to the same, by will, 500l. To Christ’s hospital, at several times, 1000l. and 1000l. more by will. To the hospitals of St. Thomas and Bethlehem 500l. each. To the workhouse without Bishopsgate, 2001. To the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts, 300l. He built an almshouse for six poor people at Shene in Surry, and left very handsome legacies to Mortlake in the same county, where he died: viz. 45l. yearly, to be continued for twelve years after his death, for clothing and educating twelve boys and twelve girls in that place; and also 85l. he being so many years old, to eighty- five poor men and women there, to each 1l. to be distributed at the time of his decease. He gave lOO/. per annum, to be continued for twelve years after his death, and to be distributed by the direction of his executors: either to place out every year ten boys apprentices, or to be given towards the setting up ten young tradesmen, to each 10l. He gave likewise to eighteen charity-schools in several parts of England, and to be continued to them for twelve years after his death, to each school yearly 5l. Finally, he gave towards building a church at Manchester in Lancashire 20l. and towards the building of a church at Tiverton in Devonshire 50l.

Besides these known and public benefactions, he gave away every year large sums in private charities, for many years together; and the preacher of his funeral sermon informs us, that these did not fall much short of his public. In all his charities, Colston seems to have possessed no small share of judgment; for, among other instances of it, he never gave any thing to common beggars, but he always ordered, that poor house-keepers, sick and decayed persons, should be sought out as the fittest objects of his charity. We must not forget to observe, that though charity was this gentleman’s shining virtue, yet he possessed other virtues in an eminent degree. He was a person of great temperance, meekness, evenness of temper, patience, and mortification. He always looked cheerful and pleasant, was of a peaceable and quiet disposition, and remarkably circumspect in all his actions. Some years before his decease, he retired from business, and came and Jived at London, and at Mortlake in Surry, where he had a country seat. Here he died Oct. 11, 1721, almost 85; and was buried in the church of All-saints, Bristol, where a monument is erected to his memory, on which are enumerated his public charities, mentioned in this article. His funeral sermon was preached by Dr. Harcourt, and printed at London the same year.

, an ancient Italian poet and philosopher, was born at Stignano in Pescia, in 1330, His father, who was in the army, being involved in the troubles of his country, was obliged to retire to Bologna, where Coluccio was educated, or rather where he taught himself for some time without % master. It appears indeed from a letter which he wrote to Bernardo cli Moglo, that he did not apply himself to the cultivation of polite literature till he was arrived at man’s estate, and that it was then he went to Bologna? and attended the public lectures of the father of the above Bernardo. By his own father’s request, he afterwards studied law, but on his death quitted that profession for eloquence and poetry. It is not stated when he left Bologna, nor when he was permitted to return to Florence; but in 1363, in his thirty-eighth year, we find him the colleague of Francis Bruin, as apostolical secretary to pope Urban V, and it is probable that he quitted this employment when Urban went to France. He quitted at the same time the ecclesiastical habit, and married a lady by whom he had ten children. His reputation for knowledge and eloquence procured him the greatest offers from popes, emperors, and kings; but his love for his native country made him prefer, to the most brilliant prospects, the office of chancellor of the republic of Florence, which was conferred on him in 1375, and which he filled very honourably for thirty years. The letters he wrote appeared so striking to John Galeas Visconti, then at war with the republic, that he declared one letter of Coluccio’s to be more mischievous to his cause than the efforts of a thousand Florentine knights.

In the midst of his more serious functions, he found leisure to cultivate poetry, and particularly to make a collection of ancient manuscripts, in which he was so successful, that at his death his library consisted of eight hundred volumes, a princely collection before the invention of printing. His contemporaries speak of him in terms of the highest admiration, as a second Cicero and Virgil; but although modern critics cannot acquiesce in this character, his Letters, the only part of his works which are printed, evidently prove him a man of learning and research, and no inconsiderable contributor to the revival of letters. He died May 4, 1406; and his remains, after being decorated with a crown of laurel, were interred with extraordinary pomp in the church of St. Maria de Fiore.

Coluccio was the author of the following works, ms copies of most of which are preserved in the Laurentian library 1 “De Fato et Fortuna.” 2. “De saeculo et religione.” 3. “De nobilitate legum et medicinae.” 4. “Tractatus de Tyranno.” 5. “Tractatus quod medici eloquentiue studeant, et de verecundia an sit virtus aut vitium.” 6. De laboribus Herculis.“7.” Historia de casu hominis.“8.” De arte dictandi.“9.” Certamen Fortunae.“10.” Declamationes.“11.” Invectiva in Antonium Luscum.“12.” Phyllidis querimonise.“13.” Eclogae octo.“14.” Carmina ad Jacobum Allegrettum.“14.” Sonetti.“And, lastly, various” Epistles.“Of these, except the Epistles, the only article published is his treatise” De nobilitate legurn,“&c. Venice, 1542. His” Epistles" have appeared in two editions, the one by Mehus, Florence, 1741, with a learned preface and notes the other by Lami, in the same year but Mazzuchelli remarks, that it is necessary to have both collections, as they do not contain the same epistles. Some of Coluccio’s poems have appeared in various collections of Italian poetry.

, renowned in Scotch history as the founder of a monastery at Icolmkill, and the chief agent in converting the northern Picts, was a native of Ireland, where he was a priest and abbot, and is supposed to have been born at Gartan, in the county of Tyrconnel, in 521. From thence, about the year 565, he arrived in Scotland, and received from Bridius, the son of Meilochon, the then reigning king of the Picts, and his people, the island of Hij, or Hy, one of the Western Isles, which was afterwards called from him Icolmkill, and became the famous burial-place of the kings of Scotland. There he built a monastery, of which he was the abbot, and which for several ages continued to be the chief seminary of North Britain. Columba acquired here such influence, that neither king or people did any thing without his consent. Here he died June 9, 597, and his body was buried on the island; but, according to some Irish writers, was afterwards removed to Down in Ulster, and laid in the same vault with the remains of St. Patrick and St. Bridgit. From this monastery at iona, of which some remains may yet be traced, and another, which he had before founded in Ireland, sprang many other monasteries, and a great many eminent men; but such are the ravages of time and the revolutions of society, that this island, which was once “the luminary of the Caledonian regions, whence savage clans and roving barbarians derived the benefits of knowledge, and the blessings of religion,” had, when Dr, Johnson visited it in 1773, “no school for education, nor temple for worship, only two inhabitants that could speak English, and not one that could write or read.”

, another eminent missionary for the propagation of the Christian religion in the sixth century, was a native of Ireland according to Jonas, who wrote his life, sir James Ware, and others; but Mackenzie maintains that he was a North Briton. From either Scotland or. Ireland, however, he went into England, where he continued some time, and in 589 proceeded to France, and founded the monastery of Luxevil, near Besanon, which he governed during twenty years. In 598 we find him engaged in a controversy with pope Gregory concerning the proper time of keeping Easter, which was then a frequent object of dispute; but Columbanus at last submitted to the court of Rome. After so long residence in France, he was banished for censuring the immoralities of Theodoric and his queen. He then went to Switzerland, where he was kindly received by Theodebert, king of that country, and was successful in converting the pagans; but the Swiss army being defeated by the French, he was obliged to remove to Italy, where, under the protection of the king of the Lombards, he founded, in 613, the abbey of Bobio, near Naples. Over this monastery he presided but a short time, dying Nov. 21, 61S. Authors are not agreed as to the order of monks to which Columbanus belonged, but it is certain that his disciples conformed to the rules of the Benedictines. His works are printed in the Bibl. Patrum, and consist of monastic rules, sermons, poems, letters, &c.

, a Genoese, and frequently mentioned in history as the discoverer of America, was born in 1442. Ferdinand his son, who wrote his life, would suggest to us, that he was descended from an ancient and considerable family; but it is generally believed that his father was a woolcomber, and that he himself was of the same trade, till, by having been at sea, he had acquired a taste for navigation. In his early years he applied himself much to the study of geometry and astronomy at Pavia, in order to understand cosmography: and learnt to draw, in order to describe lands, and set down cosmographical bodies, plains, or rounds. He went to sea at the age of fourteen: his first voyages were to those ports in the Mediterranean frequented by the Genoese; after which he took a voyage to Iceland; and proceeding still further north, advanced several degrees within the polar circle. After this, Columbus entered into the service of a famous sea-captain of his own name and family, who commanded a small squadron fitted out at his own expence; and by cruising against the Mahometans and Venetians, the rivals of his country in trade, had acquired both wealth and reputation. With him Columbus continued for several years, no less distinguished for his courage than his experience as a sailor. At length, in an obstinate engagement, off the coast of Portugal, with some Venetian caravals returning richly laden from the Low Countries, his ship took fire, together with one of the enemy’s ships to which it was first grappled. Columbus threw himself into the sea, laid hold of a floating oar, and by the support of it, and his dexterity in swimming, reached the shore, though above two leagues distant.

After this disaster he went to Lisbon, where he married a daughter of Bartholomew Perestrello, one of the captains employed by Prince Henry in his early navigations, and who had discovered and planted the islands of Porto Santo and Madeira, and by getting possession of his journals and charts, Columbus was seized with an irresistible desire of visiting unknown countries. He first made a voyage to Madeira; and continued during several years to trade with that island, the Canaries, Azores, the settlements in Guinea, and all the other places which the Portuguese had discovered on the continent of Africa. By these means he soon became one of the most skilful navigators in Europe. At this time the great object of discovery was a passage by sea to the East Indies, which was at last accomplished by the Portuguese, by doubling the Cape of Good Hope. The danger and tediousness of the passage, however, induced Columbus to consider whether a shorter and more direct passage to these regions might not be found out; and at length he became convinced that, by sailing across the Atlantic Ocean, directly towards the West, new countries, which probably formed a part of the vast continent of India, must infallibly be discovered. In 1474, he communicated his ideas on this subject to one Paul, a physician in Florence, a man eminent for his knowledge in cosmography, who suggested several facts in confirmation of the plan, and warmly encouraged Columbus to persevere in an undertaking so laudable, and which must redound so much to the honour of his country and the benefit of Europe. Columbus, fully satisfied of the truth of his system, was impatient to set out on a voyage of discovery, and to secure the patronage of some of the considerable powers of Europe, capable of undertaking such an enterprize. He applied first to the republic of Genoa; afterwards to the courts of Portugal, Spain, and England, successively, but met with a variety of mortifying interruptions. At last his project was so far countenanced by Ferdinand of Spain and queen Isabella, that our adventurer set sail with three small ships, the whole expence of which did not exceed 4000l. During his voyage he met with many difficulties from the mutinous and timid disposition of his men. He was the first who observed the variation of the compass, which threw the sailors into the utmost terror. For this phenomenon Columbus was obliged to invent a reason, which, though it did not satisfy himself, yet served to dispel their fears, or silence their murmurs. At last, however, the sailors lost all patience; and the admiral was obliged to promise so r lemnly, that in case land was not discovered in three days, he should return to Europe. That very night, however, the island of San Salvador was discovered, and the sailors were then as extravagant in the praise of Columbus as they had before been insolent in reviling and threatening him. They threw themselves at his feet, implored his pardon, and pronounced him to be a person inspired by heaven with more than human sagacity and fortitude, in order to accomplish a design so far beyond the ideas and conception of all former ages. Having visited several of the West India islands, and settled a colony in Hispaniola, he again set sail for Spain; and after escaping great dangers from violent tempests, arrived at the port of Palos on the 15th of March 1493.

As soon as Columbus’ s ship was discovered approaching, all the inhabitants of Palos ran eagerly to the shore, where they received the admiral with royal honours. The court was then at Barcelona, and Columbus took care immediately to announce his arrival to the king and queen, who were no less delighted than astonished with this unexpected event, and gave orders for conducting him into the city with all imaginable pomp receiving him clad in their royal robes, and seated on a throne under a magnificent canopy. Notwithstanding all this respect, however, Columbus was no longer regarded than he was successful. The colonists he afterwards carried over were to the last degree unreasonable and unmanageable; so that he was obliged to use some severities with them; and complaints, were made to the court of Spain against him for cruelty. On this, Francis de Bovadilla, a knight of Calatrava, was appointed to inquire into the conduct of Columbus; with orders, in case he found the charge of mal-administration, proved, to supersede him, and assume the office of governor of Hispaniola. The consequence of this was, that Columbus was sent to Spain in chains. From these, however, he was freed immediately on his arrival, and had an opportunity granted him of vindicating his innocence. He was, however, deprived of all power; and notwithstanding his great services, and the solemnity of the agreement between him and Ferdinand, Columbus never could obtain the fulfilment of any part of that treaty. At last, disgusted with the ingratitude of a monarch whom he had served with such fidelity and success, and exhausted with fatigues, he died May 29th, 1506.

Ferdinand, who had slighted his well-founded claims when living, bestowed upon him funeral honours, and confirmed to his children their hereditary rights. Columbus was buried in the cathedral at Seville, and on his tomb was engraven an epitaph, in memory of his renowned actions and discovery of a New World, which, in justice, ought to have been denominated Columbia, in order that the name might for ever excite the remembrance of the hero who, in spite of every obstacle, succeeded in realizing a. project, esteemed by his contemporaries as the chimera of a disturbed imagination.

, brother of Christopher, acquired a reputation by the sea-charts and the spheres, which he made in a superior manner, considering the time in which he lived. He had passed from Italy to Portugal before his brother, whose tutor he had been in cosmography. Don Ferdinand Columbus, his nephew, says, that his uncle having embarked for London, was taken by a corsair, who carried him into an unknown country, where he was reduced to the extremity of distress, from which he delivered himself by making charts for navigation; and, having amassed a considerable sum of money, he went to England, presented to the king a map of the world in his own method, explained to him the plan his brother had formed of striking much farther forward on the ocean than had ever yet been done: the prince intreated him to invite over Christopher, promising to defray the whole expence of the expedition; but the latter had already entered into an engagement with the crown of Castile. Part of this story, and especially the proposal made by the king of England, seems totally without foundation: but it appears that Bartholomew had a share in the bounty bestowed on Christopher by the king of Castile; and in 1493 these two brothers, and Diego Columbus, who was the third, were ennobled. Don Bartholomew underwent with Christopher the fatigues and dangers inseparable from such long voyages as those in which they both engaged, and built the town of St. Domingo. He died in 1514, possessed of riches and honours.

, a native of Spain, was a Latin writer, of whom nothing is known, except that he flourished under the Roman Emperor Claudius, about the year of Christ 42; and has left some books upon agriculture, and a “Treatise upon Trees.” These works are curious and valuable, as well for their matter as style, which latter is thought by some to be not very remote from the Latin of the Augustan age. They have usually been published with the “Scriptores de re rustica.”

, was a native of Messina in Sicily, who followed Edward I. into England, on his return from the Holy Land. About the year 1287 he compiled a chronicle in 36 books, and wrote several historical tracts in relation to England. His most curious work is, “The history of the siege of Troy,” in Latin, Cologne 1477, 4to, and Strasbourg 1486, fol. These editions are very scarce, as are the Italian translations 1481, Venice, in fol. and Florence 1610, 4to but the edition of Naples 1655, 4to, is not so rare.

, a Greek poet, was a native of Lycopolis, a city of Thebais, in Upper Egypt, of whose parentage or education nothing is recorded; but we learn from Suidas that he lived in the reign of Anastasius, who succeeded Zeno in the government of the Eastern empire, about the year 491. He wrote Caledonics, Persies, and Encomia; but none of his works now remain, except the “Rape of Helen,” and that in a mutilated state. It is not, however, destitute of imagery, and is adorned by a variety of striking and expressive epithets, although we may infer from it, that the true poetic spirit had then ceased to flourish. The first edition of this work is that by Aldus, 8vo, without a date, along with Quintus Calaber; and the last, if we mistake not, was by Harles, 1776, 8vo, but the best is said to be that of Lanness, Gr. & Lat. 1747, 8vo. The Italians and French have good translations in their respective languages, and there are three in English; the first by sir Edward Sherborne in 1701, valuable chiefly for his learned notes; the second partly by Fawkes, and partly by a nameless coadjutor, in 1780; and the third, inferior to that of Fawkes, by an anonymous writer, was published in 1786.

, a Scotch divine and poet, was born near St. Andrew’s in Fifeshire, 1620, and educated in the university of Edinburgh, where he took his degree of D. D. and was settled minister at Dysart. In 1662 he complied with the act of uniformity, and was appointed principal of the university of Edinburgh, in the room of Dr. Leighton, promoted to the see of Dumblane. He wrote several controversial tracts, most of which are now forgotten; but that which particularly recommends him to the notice of the public, is a humorous poem entitled “Scotch Hudibras,” written in the manner of Butler. This book gave great offence to the presbyterians but still, although little known in England, is well esteemed in Scotland. He died at Edinburgh 1676, aged 58.

, a learned Dominican, was born in 1605 at Marmande, and distinguished for his learning and piety. The clergy of France appointed him a pension of 1000 livres in 1650, as a reward for his merit, and an encouragement to complete those editions of the Greek fathers which have procured him a name. He died at Paris March 23, 1679, aged 74. He published the works of St. Amphilochus, St. Methodius, St. Andrew of Crete, and several opuscula of the Greek fathers, and an addition to the library of the fathers, 3 vols. folio, Gr. and Lat. He also contributed to the edition of the Byzantine history, * e Histories Bizant. Script, post Theophanem," 1685, folio; and there is a library of the fathers by him, for the preachers, 1662, 8 vols. folio, and other works. The chief objection to this laborious writer is the inelegance of his Latin style, which renders some of his translations obscure.

, dean of Durham, the son of James Comber, and Mary Burton, who, when she married his father was the widow of Mr. Edward Hampden of Westerham in Kent, was born at Westerham March 19, 1644, and was the last child baptised in that parish church according to the rites of the church of England, before those rites were prohibited by the usurping powers. His father was so persecuted in that tumultuous period, for his loyalty, as to be compelled to take refuge in Flanders, leaving his son entirely under the care of jiis mother. His early education he received at the school of Westerham, under the rev. Thomas Walter, a teacher of piety as well as learning. Here his progress was so rapid that he could read and write Greek before he was ten years old, and in other respects was accounted a pupil of great promise. From this place he removed in 1653 to London, and passed some time under a schoolmaster, a distant relation, but without adding much to his stock of knowledge, and in 1656 returned to his first master at Westerham, and on his death, read Greek and Latin, for a year, assisted by the rev. William Holland.

In 1659 he was admitted of Sidney-Sussex college, Cam-, bridge, April 18, after having completed his fourteenth year. Here he was under the care of the rev. Edmund Matthews, B. D. senior fellow and president of the college. To this gentleman he acknowledges his obligations for the pains he took in teaching him experimental philosophy, geometry, astronomy, and other parts of the mathematics, music, painting, and even the oriental languages, and the elements of philosophy and divinity. His family having been sufferers by the rebellion, he was obliged to husband his little property with the utmost care, and seems to have considered an exhibition of ten pounds annually as a very important acquisition; because with the addition of five pounds from a private benefactor, he informs us, “it enabled him to live very well, and from that time, he put his parents to no other expence, but that of providing him his clothes and books.” In January 1662 he was chosen scholar of the house, with another pension of five pounds per annum % which cheered an ceconomist of such humble expectations with the prospect of absolute plenty. Having been admitted to the degree of A. B. Jan. 21, 1662, he now indulged the natural wish of a young scholar, to continue in the university, and was led to entertain hopes of obtaining a fellowship, either in his own college, or in St. John’s, the master of which, Dr. Gunning, had made him many promises; but these proving abortive, and the ten pound exhibition being withdrawn (which did not come from the college, but from a fund raised by certain Kentish men resident in London) he was obliged to leave the university, and retire to his father’s house. In this situation, however, he was not without friends; a Mr. John Holney of Eden-bridge, a pious old gentleman, and his father’s particular friend, found out his merit, and made him a handsome present, with a request that he would draw upon him at any time for any sum he might want; and so many other friends from other quarters appeared, that Mr. Comber never found it necessary to avail himself of Mr. Holney’s munificence in the future periods of his life.

Early in 1663, he accepted an invitation to the house of his late preceptor Mr. Holland, now rector of All-hallows Staining, London, and being ordained deacon Aug. 18, he read prayers for Mr. Holland, and employed the week in studying at Sjon college. Soon after he was invited to be curate to the rev. Gilbert Bennet, who held the living of Stonegrave in Yorkshire, and who promised, if he liked him, to resign in his favour in a year or two, as he was possessed of other preferment. Having accepted this offer, he was next year ordained priest at York minster by archbishop Sterne, and no objection, was made to his age (twenty years) on account of his uncommon qualifications; and when this circumstance, which had not passed unobserved, was afterwards objected to the archbishop, as an irregularity, he declared he had found no reason to repent. In 1666 he was admitted at Cambridge to his master’s degree by proxy, the plague then raging at the university. At Stonegrave, his character having recommended him to the notice of Mr. Thornton of East-Newton in Yorkshire, he was invited to reside at that gentleman’s house, and he afterwards married one of his daughters. While he lived with this family, he wrote various theological pieces, and also amused himself with poetical compositions. In 1669 Mr. Bennet resigned the living of Stonegrave, and Mr, Comber was inducted in October of that year.

Having long been an admirer of the church-service, ne determined to recommend* it to the public, which at that time was frequently interested in disputes respecting set forms and extempore prayer; and with this view published, about 1672, the first part of his “Companion to the Temple;” in 1674 the second part; and in 1675, the third part, of which a different arrangement was adopted in the subsequent editions. In 1677, he was installed prebend of Holme in the metropolitan church of York, and the same year, so rapid was the sale, a third edition of his “Companion to the Temple” was published, and at the same time a new edition of a very useful tract, to which he did not put his name, entitled “Advice to the Roman Catholics,” and his first book of “The Right of Tithes,” &c. against Elwood the quaker, and also without his name, The same year appeared his “Brief Discourse on the Offices of Baptism, Catechism, and Confirmation,” dedicated to Tillotson. In 1678 the living of Thornton becoming vacant, he was presented to it by sir Hugh Choimeley; and as this place was only ten miles from Stonegrave, he found no difficulty in obtaining a dispensation from the archbishop of Canterbury, who also created him, by patent, D. D. In 1680 we find him combating an adversary, on the subject of tithes, far more considerable than Elwood, namely, John Selden, so justly celebrated for his learning and abilities. In confutation of Selden’s “History of Tithes,” he now published the first part of his “Historical Vindication of the Divine right of Tithes,” and in 1681, the second part. Some time in this year, he published a tract, entitled “Religion and Loyalty,” which he informs us was intended to convince the duke of York, that no person in succession to the throne of England ought to embrace popery; and to persuade the people of England not to alter the succession. As in this pamphlet he seemed to favour the doctrine of non-resistance, he was attacked by the popular party as an enemy to freedom; but his biographer has defended him with success against such charges.

Some inferior preferments, obtained by Dr. Comber, were followed (in 16S3) by a grant of the dignity of precentor of York. He was in this situation when a series of imprudent and arbitrary measures roused that national spirit which drove James II. from his throne. The precentor was not slow in promoting this spirit; and, when the prince and princess of Orange had been called to the throne, he vindicated the legality of the new government against the calumnies of the Tory party. His patriotic exertions were not unrewarded; for he was promoted in 1691 to the valuable deanry of Durham, partly by the interest of archbishop Tillotson, but was not a little affected in owing the vacancy to the deprivation of his friend Dr. Dennis Grenville, a nonjuror. He would probably have been at length advanced to the episcopal dignity, had not a consumption put an end to his life in 1699, before he had completed his fifty-fifth year.

Besides the works already noticed, Dr. Comber wrote, 1. “A Scholastical History of the primitive and general use of Liturgies in the Christian Church; together with an Answer to Mr. David Clarkson’s late Discourse concerning Liturgies,” Lond. 1690, dedicated to king William and queen Mary. 2. “A Companion to the Altar; or, an Help to the worthy Receiving of the Lord’s Supper, by Discourses and Meditations upon the whole Communionoffice.” 3. “A brief Discourse upon the Offices of Baptism, Catechism, and Confirmation,” printed at the end of the Companion to the Altar.“4.” A Discourse on the occasional Offices in the Common Prayer, viz. Matrimony, Visitation of the Sick, Burial of the Dead, Churching of Women, and the Commination.“5.” A Discourse upon the Manner and Form of making Bishops, Priests, and Deacons,“London, 1699, 8vo, dedicated to archbishop Tenison. 6.” Short Discourses upon the whole Common Prayer, designed to inform the judgment, and excite the devotion of such as daily use the same;“chiefly byway of paraphrase, London, 1684, 8vo, dedicated to Anne, princess of Denmark, to whom the author was chaplain. 7. f Roman Forgeries in the Councils during the first four Centuries; together with an Appendix, concerning the forgeries and errors in the annals of Baronius,” ibid. 1689, 4to. It seems doubtful whether the edition of Fox’s “Christus Triumphans,” which appeared in 1672, was published by him. From his correspondence, and from a ms account of his life left in his family, his great grandson, the rev. T. Comber of Jesus college, Cambridge, published in 1799, an interesting volume, entitled “Memoirs of the Life and Writings of Thomas Comber, D. D. some time dean of Durham; in which is introduced a candid view of the scope and execution of the -several works of Dr. Comber, as well printed as ms.; also a fair account of his literary correspondence.” Of this we have availed ourselves as to the preceding facts, and must still refer to it for a more satisfactory detail of Dr. Comber’s public services and private character. He was unquestionably a pious, learned, and indefatigable supporter of the doctrine and discipline of the church of England; and his private character added a very striking lustre to his public professions. His principal works, not of the controversial kind, are those he wrote on the various parts of the liturgy, which, although in less reputation now than formerly, unquestionably were the first of the kind, and rendered the labours of his successors Nichols, Wheatley, &c. more easy. His style is in general perspicuous, although void of ornament, and the phraseology, somewhat peculiar; but these liturgical commentaries are chiefly valuable for the accumulation of learned references and authorities. As to his private character, his biographer assures us, that “his modesty and inambition were singularly remarkable. Content with a moderate fortune, he was desirous of continuing in a private station, though possessed of abilities and integrity capable of adorning the most exalted and splendid rank. Insensible equally to the calls of ambition and the allurements of wealth, we behold him declining situations of honour and emolument, to obtain which thousands have made shipwreck of their honour and conscience. When the importunity of his friends had at last prevailed on him to lay aside his thoughts of continuing in obscurity, and induced him to step forward into a more public life, we see him respected by all the great and good men of his time, and frequently receiving public marks of esteem from the lips of royalty itself. The same modesty which had made him desirous of continuing in a private station, still adhered to him when preferred to an eminent dignity in the church: unassuming and humble in private life, in public he was dignified without pride, and generous without ostentation.”

There was also another Thomas Comber, D. D. who lived in the same century, and was of Trinity college in Cambridge. He was born -in Sussex, Jan. 1, 1575 5 admitted scholar of Trinity college, May 1593; chosen fellow of the same, October 1597; preferred to the deanery of Carlisle, August 1630; and sworn in master of Trinity college, Oct. 1631. In 1642, he was imprisoned, plundered, and deprived of all his preferments; and died February 1653, at Cambridge. He was a man of very extensive learning, particularly in the classical and oriental languages; and Neal, the historian of his persecutors, bears testimony to the excellence of his character in this and other respects. He is here however noticed, chiefly to correct the mistakes of the Biog. Britannica, Wood’s Athenas, &c. in which he is confounded with the dean of Durham, and said to have entered into a controversy with Selden on the subject of tithes. He was, however, related to him, the dean’s grandfather John Comber, esq. being his uncle.

, LL. D. grandson to the preceding Dr. Comber, dean of Durham, was educated at Jesus college, Cambridge, where he took his degrees of B. A. 1744, M. A. 1770, and LL. D. 1777. He was rector of Kirkby Misperton, Yorkshire, and afterwards rector of Morborne and Buckworth in Huntingdonshire. He was a man of considerable parts and learning, and the author of several controversial tracts, among which are: 1. “The Heathen rejection of Christianity in the first ages considered/' 1747, 8vo. 2.” An Examination of a late introductory Discourse concerning Miraculous Power,“by Dr. Middleton, a pamphlet in which Warburton discovered marks of genius and sense, but with some puerilities. 3.” A Vindication of the great Revolution in England in 1688, &c.“1758, 8vo. 4.” A Free and Candid Correspondence on the Farmer’s Letter to the people of England, &c. with the Author,“1770, 8vo. 5.” A Treatise of Laws, from the Greek of Sylburgius’s edition of Theodoret, bishop of Cyprus, &c.“177G, 8vo. 6.” Memoirs of the Life and Death of the right hon. the Lord Deputy Wandesforde,“Cambridge, 1778, 12mo. Dr. Comber was great great grandson to this nobleman. This last is a very curious and a very scarce performance. It is marked on the title-page, vol. II. and was to be considered as the second volume of a work published by our author in 1777, entitled” A Book of Instructions, written by sir Christopher Wandesforde to his son, but they are seldom found together." Dr. Comber died in 1778.

, a celebrated grammarian and protestant divine, was born in Moravia in 1592. Having studied in several places, and particularly at Herborn, he returned to his own country in 1614, and was made rector of a college there. He was ordained minister in 1616, and two years after became pastor of the church of Fulnec: at which time he was appointed master of a school lately erected. He then appears to have projected the introduction of a new method for teaching the languages. He published some essays for this purpose in 1616, and had prepared other pieces on that subject, which were destroyed in 1621, when the Spaniards plundered his library, after having taken the city. The ministers of Bohemia, and Moravia being outlawed by an edict in 1624, and the persecution increasing the year after, Comenius fled to Lesna, a city of Poland, and taught Latin. There he published in 1631, his book entitled “Janua linguarum reserata,” or, “the gate of languages unlocked” of which he gives us an account which is universally allowed to be true “I never could have imagined,” says he, “that this little book, calculated only for children, should have met with universal applause from the learned. This has been justified by the letters I have received from a great number of learned men of different countries, in which they highly congratulate me on this new invention; as well as by the versions which have been emulously made of it into several modern tongues. For it has not only been translated into twelve European languages, namely, Latin, Greek, Bohemian, Polish, German, Swedish, Dutch, English, French, Spanish, Italian, Hungarian; but likewise into the Asiatic languages, as, Arabic, Turkish, Persian, and even the Mogul, which is spoken all over the East Indies.” It was afterwards reprinted under the title of “Orbis sensualium pictus,” and is still, according to baron Born, used in the schools of Bohemia, Comenius being particularly skilled in the language of that country.

This book gained Comenius such reputation, that the governing powers of Sweden wrote to him in 1633, and offered him a commission for new regulating all the schools in that kingdom; which offer, however, he did not think proper to accept, but only promised to assist with his advice those who should be appointed to execute that commission. He then translated into Latin, a piece which he had written in his native tongue, concerning the new method of instructing youth, a specimen of which appeared under the title of “Pansophiae prodromus,” or “The forerunner of universal learning,” printed at London, 1639, 12mo, and translated by Jer. Collier, 1651. This made him considered as one very capable of reforming the method of teaching; and the parliament of England desired his assistance to reform the schools of this kingdom. He arrived at London, Sept. 1641, but the rebellion then commencing, shewed Comenius that this was not a juncture favourable to his designs; he went therefore to Sweden, whither he had been invited by Lewis de Geer, a gentleman of great merit, who had the public welfare very much at heart. He arrived there in August 1642, and discoursed with Oxenstiern about his method: the result of which conference was, that he should go and fix at Elbing in Prussia, and compose it. la the mean time Lewis de Geer settled a considerable stipend upon him, by which means, being delivered from the drudgery of teaching a school, he employed himself wholly in finding out general methods for those who instructed youth; Having spent four years at Elbing in this study, he returned to Sweden to shew his composition, which was examined by three commissioners, and declared worthy of being made public when completed. He spent two more years upon it at Elbing, and then was obliged to return to Lesna. In 1650 he took a journey to the court of Sigismund Ragotski, prince of Transilvania; where a conference was desired with him on the subject of education. He gave this prince some pieces, containing instructions for regulating the college of Patak, pursuant to the maxims laid down in his “Pansophia;” and, during four years, he was allowed to propose whatever he pleased with regard to the government of that college. After this he returned to Lesna, and did not leave it till it was burnt by the Poles; of which calamity, as we shall see below, Comenius was charged with being the cause. He lost there all his manuscripts, except what he had written on Pansophia, and on the Revelations. He fled into Silesia, thence to Brandenburgh, afterwards to Hamburgh, and lastly to Amsterdam; where he met with so much encouragement, that he was tempted to continue there for the remainder of his life. He printed there, in 1657, at the expence of his Maecenas, the different parts of his new method of teaching. The work is in folio, and divided into four parts. “The whole,” says Bayle, “cost the author prodigious pains, other people a great deal of money, yet the learned received no benefit from it; nor is there, in my opinion, any thing practically useful in the hints of that author.”

But Comenius was not only intent upon the reformation of schools; he had become a deep re’searcher into prophecies, revolutions, the ruining of antichrist, the millennium, &c. and had collected with prodigious care the chimeras of Kotterus, those of Christiana Poniatovia, and of Drabicius, and published them at Amsterdam. These writers promised miracles to those who stiould endeavour to extirpate the house of Austria and the pope. Gustavus Adolphus, and Charles Gustavus, kings of Sweden, Cromwell and Ragotski, had been promised as those who should accomplish those splendid prophecies; to which, however, the event did not correspond. We are told that Comenius, not knowing how to extricate himself, at last took it into his head to address Lewis XIV, of France; that he sent him a copy of Drabicius’s prophecies, and insinuated that it was to this monarch God promised the empire of the world, by the downfall of those who persecuted Christ. He wrote some books at Amsterdam; one particularly against des Marets concerning the millennium, and Des Marets answered with contempt and asperity, representing him as an impostor.

Comenius became at last sensible of the vanity of his labours, as we learn from the book he published in 1668 at Amsterdam, entitled “Unius necessarii,” or “Of the one thing needful;” in which he acquaints us also with the resolution he had made, of employing all his future thoughts wholly on his salvation, and this he probably kept. He died at Amsterdam, 1671, in his eightieth year. Had he lived much longer, he would have seen the falsity of his prophecies with regard to the millennium, which he affirmed would begin in 1672, or 1673. Whatever mortification Comenius must have felt on the score of his prophecies, his enemies have brought more serious charges against him. He was first reproached with having done great prejudice to his brethren, who were banished with him from Moravia. Most of them had fled from their country with considerable sums of money; but, instead of being ceconomists, they squandered it away in a short time, because Comenius prophesied they should return to their country immediately, and thus they were very soon reduced to beggary. He was also accused of having been the cause of the plundering and burning of Lesna, where his brethren had found an asylum, by the panegyric he made so unseasonably upon Charles Gustavus of Sweden, when he invaded Poland. Comenius proclaimed him in a prophetic manner to be the immediate destroyer of popery; by which the protestants of Poland became extremely odious to the Roman catholics of that kingdom. He did not seem to be undeceived when the king of Sweden turned his arms against Denmark; for he made him a second panegyric, wherein he congratulated him no less on this new invasion than he had done upon the former. But whatever credit the protestants of Lesna might give to Comenius, that city was surprised and burnt by the Polish army; on which occasion Comenius lost his house, his furniture, and his library; a proof that, if he was an impostor, he had first deceived himself. Part of his apocalyptic treatises, and some other pieces relating to his Pansophia, escaped the flames; he having just time to cover them, in a hole under ground, from which they were taken ten days after the fire but his “Lexicon Bobemicum,” a work which baron Born conceives would have been of the highest utility, was totally destroyed. On this he had spent above forty years of his life.

, or Noel Conti, an Italian writer, was born at Venice about the commencement of the sixteenth century, and became greatly distinguished for classical learning. He translated from Greek into Latin the “Deipnosophistse of Athenaeus,” the “Rhetoric of Hermogenes,” and he published original poems in both these languages. He wrote a history of his own times from 1545 to 1581, fol. 1612, a very scarce edition. The first was that of 1572, 4to, but his principal work is a system of mythology entitled “Mythologiae, sive explicationis Fabularum, lib. X.” Padua, 1616, 4to, and often reprinted. It was dedicated to Charles IX. of France. He died in 158i., and on account of his love of allegory and mysticism he was denominated by Joseph Scaliger, rather harshly, "Homo futilissimus.

, canon of Ernbrun, his native place, was \ rofessor of mathematics at Paris, and was employed some time on the Journal des Savans, but becoming blind, he entered the Quinze- Vingts of Paris, where he died in. 1693. The chief of his works are, l.“The new science of the nature of Comets.” 2. “A Discourse on Comets.” 3. “Three Discourses on- the art of prolonging Life/' suggested by an article in the Gazette of Holland concerning a Louis Galdo, who was said to have lived 400 years. These discourses are curious from the number of anecdotes they contain. 4.” A Tract on Spectacles for assisting the Sight,“1682. 5. A Treatise on Prophecies, Vaticinations, Predictions and Prognostications,” against M. Jurieu, 12mo. 6. “A Treatise on Speech, on Languages, and Writings, and on the art of secret speaking and writing,” Liege, 1691, 12mo, which, says our authority, although it passed through two editions, is extremely rare.

, or Commines, Lat. Cominæus (Philip de), an excellent French historian, was born of a noble family in Flanders, 1446. He was a man of great abilities, which, added to his illustrious birth, soon recommended him to the notice of Charles the Bold, duke of Burgundy, with whom he lived in intimacy for about eight years. He was afterwards 'invited to the court of France by Louis XI. and became a man of consequence, not only from the countenance which was given him by the monarch, but from other great connections also, which he formed by marrying into a noble family. Louis made him his chamberlain, and seneschal or chief magistrate of the province of Poictou. He also employed him in several negotiations, which he executed in a satisfactory manner, and enjoyed the high favour of his prince. But after the death of Louis, when his successor Charles VIII. came to the throne, the envy of his adversaries prevailed so far, that he was imprisoned at Loches, in the county of Berry, and treated with great severity; but by the application of his wife, he was removed at length to Paris. After some time he was convened before the parliament, in which he pleaded his own cause with such effect, that, after a speech of two hours, he was discharged. In this harangue he insisted much upon what he had done both for the king and kingdom, and the favour and bounty of his master Louis XI. He remonstrated to them, that he had done nothing either through avarice or ambition; and that if his designs had been only to have enriched himself, he had as fair an opportunity of doing it as any man of his condition in France. He died in a house of his own called Argenton, Oct. 17, 1509; and his body, being carried to Paris, was interred in the church belonging to the Augustines, in a chapel which he had built for himself. In his prosperity he had the following saying frequently in his mouth: “He that will not work, let him not eat:” in his adversity he used to say, “I committed myself to the sea, and am overwhelmed in a storm.”

He was a man of great parts, but not learned. He spoke several modern languages well, the German, French, and Spanish especially; but he knew nothing of the ancient, which he used to lament. His “Memoirs of his own times,” commence from 1464, and include a period of thirty-four years; in which are commemorated the most remarkable actions of the two last dukes of Burgundy, and of Louis XL and Charles VIII. kings of France; as likewise the most important contemporary transactions in EngJand, Flanders, Germany, Italy, and Spain. The great penetration and judgment which Comines has shewn in, these memoirs, the extensive knowlege of men and things, the wonderful skill in unfolding counsels and tracing actions to their first springs, and the variety of excellent precepts, political and philosophical, with which the whole is wrought up, have long preserved the credit of this work. Catherine de Medicis used to say, that Comines had made as many heretics in politics as Luther had in religion. He has one qualification not yet mentioned, which ought particularly to recommend him to our favour; and that is, the great impartiality he shews to the English. Whenever he has occasion to mention our nation, it is with much respect; and though, indeed, he thinks us deficient in political knowledge, when compared with his own countrymen, he gives us the character of being a generous, boldspirited people; highly commends our constitution, and never conceals the grandeur and magnificence of the English nation. Dryden, in his life of Plutarch, has made the historian some return for his civilities in the following elogium: “Next to Thucydides,” says that poet, “in this kind may be accounted Polybius among the Grecians; Livy, though not free from superstition, nor Tacitus from, ill-nature, amongst the Romans; amongst the modern Italians, Guicciardini and d'Avila, if not partial: but above all men, in my opinion, the plain, sincere, unaffected, and most instructive Philip deComines amongst the French, though he only gives his history the humble name of Commentaries. I am sorry I cannot find in our own nation, though it has produced some commendable historians, any proper to be ranked with these.” There are a very great number of editions of these “Memoirs” in French, enumerated by Le Long: the best, in the opinion of his countrymen, is that of the abbe Lenglet du Fresnoy, Paris, 1747, 4 vols. 4to, under the title of London. It was translated into English in 1596, as noticed by Ames and Herbert, who have, however, confounded him with Philip de Mornay. The last English translation was that of Uvedale, 1712, 2 vols. 8vo.

, a celebrated mathematician and linguist, who was born at Urbino in Italy, in 1509, and died in 1575, was famous for his learning and knowledge in- the sciences. To a great depth and just taste in the mathematics, he joined a critical skill in the Greek language; a happy conjunction which made him very well qualified for translating and expounding the writings of the Greek mathematicians. And, accordingly, with a most laudable zeal and industry, he translated and published several of their works for the first time. On which account, Francis Moria, duke of Urbino, who was very conversant in those sciences, proved a very affectionate patron to him. He is greatly applauded by Bianchini, and other writers and he justly deserved their encomiums. Of his own works Commandine published the following: 1. “Commentarius in Planisphserium Ptolomosi,” 1558, 4to. 2. “De Centre Gravitatis Solidorum,” Bonon. 1565, 4to. 3. “Horologiorum Descriptio,” Rom. 1562, 4to. He translated and illustrated with notes the following works, most of them beautifully printed, in 4to, by the celebrated printer Aldus: 1. “Archimedis Circuli Dimensio de Lineis Spiralibus Quadratura Parabolae de Conoidibus et Sphseroidibus de Arenas Numero,” 1558. 2. “Ptolomaei Planisphaerium et Planisphaerium Jordani,” 1558. 3. “Ptolomuei Analemma,” 1562. 4. “Archimedis de iis qua? vehuntur in aqua,” 1565. 5. “Apollonii Perggei Conicorum libri quatuor, una cum Pappi Alexandrini Lemmatibns, et Commentariis Eutocii AscalonitaV' &c. 1566. 6.” Machometes Bagdadinus de Superficierum Divisionibus,“1570. 7.” Elementa Euclidis,“1572. 8.” Aristarchus de magnitudinibus et distantiis Solis et Luna:,“1572. 9.” Heronis Alexandrini Spiritualium liber,“1583. 10.” Pappi Alexandrini Collectiones Mathematics.'," 1588.

, a celebrated French printer, native of Douav, settled first at Geneva, afterwards at Heidelberg, where he died in 1598. He was a very learned scholar, as appears by all the editions of the Greek and Latin fathers which he corrected, and to which he added notes that are much esteemed. He printed since 1560, in Switzerland, S. Chrysostomus in Nov. Testarnentum, 1596, 4 vols. fol. This edition, with that of the Old Testament printed at Paris, makes this work complete, and the best edition. He took up his residence at Heidelberg for the convenience of consulting the Mss. in the Palatine library. He printed many other books; those without his name are known by his mark, which represents Truth sitting in a chair. His edition of Apollodorus is well known in classical libraries, but unfortunately he did not live to finish it, which was accomplished in 1599 by his assistant Bonutius.

, a distinguished botanist, was born at Amsterdam, July 23, 1629. He succeeded his father as one of the magistrates of the city, and while holding this office was very active in forming a new botanical garden; the ground occupied by the old garden having been taken into the city. The second and third volumes of the “Hortus Indicus Malabaricus,” owe much of their value to his judicious notes and observations. He published “Catalogus Plantarum indigenarum Hollandiae,” 1685, 12mo, containing a list of 776 plants and, in 1689, “Catalogus Plantarum Horti Medici Amstelodami, pars prior,” both which have been frequently reprinted. While preparing to complete this work, he died at Amsterdam in 1692. His nephew, Caspar Commelin, after taking his degree of doctor in medicine, was appointed prote>sor in botany, and director of the garden at Amsterdam, oftices which he filled with distinguished ability and attention,. He completed the work begun by his uncle, which he published in 1701. His next production was “Flora Malabarica, seu Horti Malabarici Catalogus,” serving as an index to the Hortus Malabaricus. This was followed by “Praeludia Anatomica,” 1703, 4to and the same year, “Praeludia Botanica,” with figures for the benefit of students in those arts. In 1715 he published “Icones Plan?­tarum, presertim ex Indiis collectarum,” 4to and in 1718, “Botanographia Malabarica, a nominum barbarismis restituta,” Lugduni Bat. folio.

, doctor of physic, king’s botanist, and member of the faculty of Montpelier, was born at Chatilon les Dombes near Bourgin Bresse, in 1727, He discovered an early propensity to botany and other branches of natural history, which he pursued with unremitting ardour, and, as it is said, with very little delicacy, performing the same tricks in a garden, which coin and print collectors have been known to perform in museums and libraries. When at Montpelier, he made no scruple to pluck the rarest and most precious plants in the king’s botanic garden there, to enrich his herbal; and when on this account the directors of the garden refused him admittance, he scaled the walls by night to continue his depredations. The reputation, however, of a better kind, which he gained during a residence of four years at Montpelier, induced Linnæus to recommend him as a proper person to form the queen of Sweden’s collection of the rarest fishes in the Mediterranean, and to compose accurate descriptions of them; which undertaking he executed with great labour and dexterity, producing a complete Ichthyology, 2 vols. 4to, with a Dictionary and Bibliography, containing accounts of all the authors who had treated that branch of natural history. Among his various productions, is a dissertation entitled “The Martyrology of Botany,” containing accounts of all the authors who lost their lives by the fatigues and accidents incident to the zeal for acquiring natural curiosities; a list, in which his own name was destined to be enrolled. Sometimes he has been found in his closet with a candle burning long after sunrise, with his head bent over his herbal, unconscious of its being day-light; and used frequently to return from his botanical excursions torn with briars, bruised with falls from rocks, and emaciated with hunger and fatigue, after many narrow escapes from precipices and torrents. These ardent occupations did not, however, extinguish sentiments of a more tender nature. M. Commerson married in 1760 a wife who died in childbed two years after, and whose memory he preserved by naming a new kind of plant, whose fruit seemed to contain two united hearts, “Pulcheria Commersonia.” He arrived at Paris in 1764, where he became connected with all the learned botanists, particularly the celebrated Jussieu; and was recommended to the duke de Praslin, minister for the marine department, to accompany M. Bougainville in his voyage round the world. The duke conceived the highest idea of his merit from the skdch he drew of the observations that might be made relative to natural history in such a voyage; and he sailed accordingly, in 1766, making the most industrious use of every opportunity to fulfil his engagements! He died at the Isle of France in 1773, and by his will left to the king’s cabinet all his botanical collections, which, before he engaged in this voyage, amounted to above 200 volumes in folio; those made during the voyage, together with his papers and herbal, were sent home in 32 cases, containing an inestimable treasure of hitherto unknown materials for natural history, and Messrs. Jussieu, D'Aubenton, and Thouin, were commissioned to examine and arrange them.

, a Jesuit, was born March 25, 1625, at Amboise, where his father kept a tennis-court. The study of the ancients, joined to his natural abilities, imbued his writings with a considerable share of taste, beauty, purity, and eloquence. He also taught the belles lettres, and divinity, and died at Paris, December 25, 1702. There is extant a volume of his Latin poems, and a collection of his posthumous works, 1754, 2 vols. 12mo. The odes and fables are particularly admired. He appears to have meditated a history of the “Wars of the English,” but it probably was never completed.

, of Gaza, a Christian poet of the third century, is the author of a Latin piece entitled “Institutiones.” It is composed in the form of verse, but without either measure or quantity: only care is taken that each line comprises a complete sense, and that it begins with something like an acrostic. It lay a long time in obscurity, until Rigaltius published it in his edition of Cyprian, and Davies at the end of Minutius Felix. It is more valuable for the strain of piety which prevails throughout the whole than for any poetical merit. Commodianus appears to have been originally a heathen, and as he informs us, was converted by reading the scriptures, and appears to have been also acquainted with secular authors. Lardner has bestowed a chapter on this work, and on the history of its author, in his “Credibility of the Gospel History.”

, a Jesuit of Bourdeaux, was sent to China, as a missionary and mathematician in 1685, and published a book in considerable reputation before that of Du Halde appeared, entitled “Memoires sur la Chine,” 2 vols. 12mo, to which was added a history of the emperor’s edict in favour of Christianity. His “Memoirs” were censured by the faculty of divinity at Paris, because of his uncommon prejudices in favour of the Chinese, whom he equalled to the Jews, and maintained that they had worshipped the true God during two thousand years, and sacrificed to him in the most ample temple of the universe, while the rest of mankind were in a state of corruption. The parliament for the same reason ordered the work to be burnt, by a decree passed in 1762. Le Comte died in 1729.

, only son of William, first earl of Northampton, by Elizabeth, sole daughter and heiress of sir John Spencer, alderman of London, was born in 1601. He was made knight of the bath in 1616, when Charles, duke of York (afterwards Charles I.) was created prince of Wales; with whom he became a great favourite. In 1622 he accompanied him into Spain, in quality of master of his robes and wardrobe; and had the honour to deliver all his presents, which amounted, according to computation, to 64,000l. At the coronation of that prince he attended as master of the robes; and in 1639, waited on his majesty in his expedition against the Scots. He was likewise one of those noblemen, who, in May 1641, resolved to defend the protestant religion, expressed in the doctrine of the church of England, and his majesty’s royal person, honour, and estate as also the power and privilege of parliaments, and the lawful rights and liberties of the subject. In 1642 he waited upon his majesty at York, and after the king set up his standard at Nottingham, was one of the first who appeared in arms for him. He did him signal services, supporting his cause with great zeal in the counties of Warwick, Stafford, and Northamptom. He was killed, March 19, 1643, in a battle fought on Hopton-heath, near Stafford; in which, though the enemy was routed, and much of their artillery taken, yet his lordship’s horse being unfortunately shot under him, he was somehow left en­“compassed by them. When he was on his feet, he killed with his own hand the colonel of foot, who first came up to him; notwithstanding which, after his head-piece was struck off with the butt-end of a musquet, they offered him quarter, which he refused, saying,” that he scorned to accept quarter from such base rogues and rebels as they were:“on this he was killed by a blow with an halbert on the hinder part of his head, receiving at the same time another deep wound in his face. The enemy refused to deliver up his body to the young earl of Northampton, unless he would return, in exchange for it, all the ammunition, prisoners, and cannon he had taken in the late battle: but at last it was delivered, and buried in Allhallows church in Derby, in the same vault with his relation the old countess of Shrewsbury. His lordship married Mary, daughter of sir Francis Beaumont, knt. by whom he had six sons and two daughters. The sons are all said to have inherited their father’s courage, loyalty, and virtue particularly sir William, the third son, who had the command of a regiment, and performed considerable service at the taking of Banbury, leading his men on to three attacks, during which he had two horses shot under him. Upon the surrender of the town and castle, he was made lieutenantgovernor under his father; and on the 19th of July, 1644, when the parliament’s forces came before the town, he returned answer to their summons;” That he kept the castle for his majesty, and as long as one man was left alive in it, willed them not to expect to have it delivered:“also on the 16th of September, they sending him another summons, he made answer,” That he had formerly answered them, and wondered they should send again." He was so vigilant in his station, that he countermined the enemy eleven times, and during the siege, which held thirteen weeks, never went into bed, but by his example so animated the garrison, that though they had but two horses left uneaten, they would never suffer a summons to be sent to them, after the preceding answer was delivered. At length, his brother the earl of Northampton raised the siege on the 26th of October, the very day of the month, on which both town and castle had been surrendered to the king two years before. Sir William continued governor of Banbury, and performed many signal services for the king, till his majesty left Oxford, and the whole kingdom was submitting to the parliament; and then, on the 8th of May, 1646, surrendered upon honourable terms. In 1648, he was major-general of the king’s forces at Colchester, where he was so ni'ich taken notice of for his admirable behaviour, that Oliver Cromwell called him the sober young man, and the godly cavalier. At the restoration of king Charles II. he was made one of the privy-council, and master-general of the ordnance; and died October 19, 16h3, in the 39th year of his age. There is an epitaph to his memory in the church of Compton- Winyate. Henry, the sixth and youngest, who was afterwards bishop of London, is the subject of the next article.

, an eminent prelate of the church of England, was the youngest son of the preceding Spencer second earl of Northampton, and born at Compton in 1632. Though he was but ten years old when his father was killed, yet he received an education suitable to his quality; and when he had gone through the grammarschools, was entered a nobleman of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1649. He continued there till about 1652; and after having lived some little time with his mother, travelled into foreign countries. Upon the restoration of Charles II. he returned to England; and became a cornet in a regiment of horse, raised about that time for the king’s guard: but soon quitting that post, he dedicated himself to the service of the church; and accordingly went to Cambridge, where he was created M, A. Then entering into orders, when about thirty years of age, and obtaining a grant of the next vacant canonry of Christ church in Oxford, he was admitted canon-commoner of that college, in the beginning of 1666, by the advice of Dr. John Fell, then dean of the same. In April of the same year, he was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, and possessed at that time the rectory of Cottenham in Cambridgeshire, worth about 500l. per annum. In 1667, he was made master of St. Crosse’s hospital near Winchester. On May 24, 1669, he was installed canon of Christ church, in the room of Dr. Heylin deceased; and two days after took the degree of B. D. to which, June 28 following, he added that of doctor. He was preferred to the bishopric of Oxford in December 1674; and about a year after was made dean of the chapel royal, and was also translated to the see of London.

King Charles now caused him to be sworn one of his privy council; and committed to his care the educating of his two nieces, the princesses Mary and Anne, which important trust he. discharged to the nation’s satisfaction. They were both confirmed by him upon January 23> 1676; and it is somewhat remarkable that they were both likewise married by him: the eldest, Mary, with William prince of Orange, November 4, 1677; the youngest, Anne, with George prince of Denmark, July 28, 1683. The attachment of these two princesses to the protestant religion was owing, in a great measure, to their tutor Compton; which afterwards, when popery came to prevail at the court of England, was imputed to him as an unpardonable crime. In the mean time he indulged the hopeless project of bringing dissenters to a sense of the necessity of an union among protestants; to promote which, he held several conferences with his own clergy, the substance of which he published in July 16SO. He further hoped, that dissenters might be the more easily reconciled to the church, if the judgment of foreign divines should be produced against their needless separation: and for that purpose he wrote to M. le Moyne, professor ef divinity at Leyden, to M. de PAngle, one of the preachers of the protestant church at Charenton near Paris, and to M. Claude, another eminent French divine. Their answers are published at the end of bishop Stillingfleet’s “Unreasonableness of Separation,” 1681, 4to; all concurring in the vindication of the church of England from any errors in its doctrine, or unlawful impositions in its discipline, and therefore in condemning a separation from it as needless and uncharitable. But popery was what the bishop most strenuously opposed; and while it was gaining ground at the latter end of Charles the lid’s reign, under the influence of the duke of York, there was no method he left untried to stop its progress. This zeal was remembered and resented on the accession of James II.; when, to his honour, he was marked out as the first sacrifice to popish fury, being immediately dismissed from the council-table; and on December 16, 1685, from being dean of the royal chapel. Means were also devised to entrap him into some measure which might affect his office as bishop of London, nor could this be difficult in the case of a man so firm and conscientious. The following is a striking instance of the intentions of the court to overturn the national church. Dr. John Sharp, rector of St, Giles’s in the Fields, afterwards archbishop of York, having in some of his sermons vindicated the doctrine of the church of England against popery; the king sent a letter, dated June 14, 1686, to bishop Compton, “requiring and commanding him forthwith to suspend Dr. Sharp from further preaching in any parish church or chapel within his diocese, until he had given the king satisfaction.” In order to understand how Sharp had offended the king, it must be remembered, that king James had caused the directions concerning preachers, published in 1662, to be now reprinted; and reinforced them by a letter directed to the archbishops of Canterbury and York, given at Whitehall, March 5, 1686, to prohibit the preaching upon controversial points; that was, in effect, to forbid the preaching against popery, which Sharp had done. The bishop refusing to suspend Dr. Sharp, because, as he truly alleged, he could not do it according to law, was cited to appear, August y, before the new ecclesiastical commission: when he was charged with not having observed his majesty’s command in the case of Sharp, whom he was ordered to suspend. The bishop, after expressing some surprise, humbly begged a copy of the commission, and a copy of his charge; but was answered by chancellor Jefferies, “That he should neither have a copy of, nor see, the commission neither would they give him a copy of the charge.” His lordship then desired time to advise with counsel; and time was given him to the 16th, and afterwards to the 3 1st of August. Then his lordship offered his plea to their jurisdiction: which being overruled, he protested to his right in that or any other plea that might be made for his advantage; and observed, “that as a bishop he had a right, by the most authentic and universal ecclesiastical laws, to be tried before his metropolitan, precedently to any other court whatsoever.” But the ecclesiastical commissioners would not upon any account suffer their jurisdiction to be called in question; and therefore, in spite of all that his lordship or his counsel could allege, he was suspended on Sept. 6 following, for his disobedience, from the function and execution of his episcopal office, and from all episcopal and other ecclesiastical jurisdiction, during his majesty’s pleasure; and the bishops of Durham, Rochester, and Peterborough, were appointed commissioners to exercise ecclesiastical jurisdiction within, the diocese of London. But the court did not think fit to meddle with his revenues. For the lawyers had settled that benefices were of the nature of freeholds; therefore, if the sentence had gone to the temporalities, the bishop would have had the matter tried over again in the king’s bench, where he was likely to find justice.

While this matter was in dependence, the princess of Orange thought it became her to interpose in the bishop’s favour; and wrote to the king, earnestly begging him to be gentle tp the bishop, who she could not think would offend willingly. She also wrote to the bishop, expressing the great share she took in the trouble he was fallen into; as did also the prince. The king wrote an answer to the princess, reflecting severely on the bishop, not without some sharpness on her for meddling in such matters. The bishop in the mean time acquiesced in his sentence; but being suspended only as a bishop, and remaining still whole in his other capacities, he made another stand against the king, as one of the governors of the Charter-house, in refusing to admit one Andrew Popham, a papist, into the first pensioner’s place in that hospital. While he was thus sequestered from his episcopal office, he applied himself to the improvement of his garden at Fulham; and having a great genius -for botany, enriched it with a variety of curious plants, domestic and exotic*. His suspension, however, was so flagrant a piece of arbitrary power, that the prince of Orange, in his declaration, could not omit taking notice of it; and when there was an alarm of his highness’s coming over, the court was willing to make the bishop reparation, by restoring him, as they did on Sept. 23, 1688, to his episcopal function. But he made no haste to resume his charge, and to thank the king for his restoration; which made some conjecture, and, as appeared afterwards with good reason, that he had no mind to be restored in that manner, and that he knew well enough what had been doing in Holland. On Oct. 3, 1688, however, he waited upon king James, with the archbishop of Canterbury, and seven other bishops, when they suggested to his majesty such advice as they thought conducive to his interest, but this had no effect. The first part the bishop acted in the revolution, which immediately ensued, was the conveying, jointly with the earl of Dorset, the princess Anne of Denmark safe from London to Nottingham; lest she, in the present confusion of affairs, might have been sent away into France, or put under restraint, because the prince, heir consort, had left king James, and was gone over to the prince of Orange.

* We learn from Mr. Ray and Plu- fore in England. This repository was kenet, that he jwined to his taste for ever open to the inspection of the cugardening, a real and scientific know- rious and scientific and we find Ray, led^e of plants; an attainment not Petiver, and Plukenet, in numerous usual among the great in those days, instances, acknowledging the assistHe collected a greater variety of green- ance they received from the free cornhouse rarities, and planted a greater munication of rare and new plants out variety of hardy exotic trees and shrubs, of the garden at FulUam. Pulteaey'5 than had been seen in any garden be* Sketches. At his return to London, he discovered his zeal for the revolution, and first set his hand to the association begun at Exeter. He waited on the prince of Orange, Dec. 21, at the head of his clergy; and, in their names and his own, thanked his highness fur his very great and hazardous undertaking for their deliverance, and the preservation of the protcstant religion, with the anc; ent laws and liberties of this nation. He gave his royal highness the sacrament, Dec. 30; and upon Jan. 29 following, when the house of lords, in a grand committee, debated the important question, “Whether the throne, being vacant, ou^ht to be filled by a regent or a king?” Compton was one of the two bisiiops, sir Jonathan Trelawny bishop of Bristol being the other, who made the majority for filling up the throne by a king. On February 14, he was again appointed of the privy-council, and made dean of the royal chapel; from both which places king James had removed him: and was afterwards chosen by king William, to perform the ceremony of his and queen Mary’s coronation, upon April 11, 1689. The same year he was constituted one of the commissioners for revising the liturgy, in which he laboured with much zeal to reconcile the dissenters to the church; and also in the convocation, that met Nov. 21, 1689, of which he was president. But the intended comprehension met with insuperable difficulties, the majority of the lower house being resolved not to enter into any terms of accommodation with the dissenters; and his lordship’s not complying so far as the dissenters liked, is supposed to have been the reason of Burnet’s calling him “a weak man, wilful, and strangely wedded to a party.” This however must seem extraordinary to those who consider, that those who are usually called high churchmen have spoken very coolly of him ever since, on that very account: and that even his opposing, as he did, the prosecution against Sacheverell in 1710, declaring him not guilty, and also protesting against several steps taken in that affair, has not been sufficient to reconcile them to his complying so far with the dissenters as he did. The fact appears to have been that the bishop endeavoured to act with moderation, for which no allowance is made in times of violent party- spirit.

King William having soon after named commissioners of trade and plantations, his lordship was made one of them; and the bishop of London, for the time being, is always to be one, in virtue of his being superintendent of all the churches in the plantations. In the beginning of 1690-1, at his own charge, he attended king William to the famous congress at the Hague, where the grand alliance against France was concluded. But notwithstanding the zealous part he acted in the revolution, and his subsequent services, no sooner was the storm over, but jealousies were infused, and calumnies dispersed, to supplant and undermine him; insomuch, that though the metropolitan see of Canterbury was twice vacant in that reign, yet he still continued bishop of London . However, he went on consistently, and like himself, despising all other rewards but the quiet and the applause of his own conscience, and the high esteem and intimacy of queen Mary, which he preserved to her dying day. At the accession of queen Anne to the throne, he seemed to stand fairest for the royal favour; and though many things were said to disparage him at court, yet nothing could discourage him from paying his duty and attendance there. About the beginning of May 1702, he was sworn of her majesty’s privy-council. The same year, he was put in the commission for the union of England and Scotland, but was left out in the new commission issued out in April 1706. Two years before, he very much promoted the “Act for making effectual her majesty’s intention for the augmentation of the maintenance of the poor clergy, by enabling her majesty to grant the revenues of the first fruits and tenths.”

He maintained all along a brotherly correspondence with the foreign protestant churches, and endeavoured to promote in them a good opinion of the church of England, and her moderation towards them; as appears, not only by his application to le Moyne, Claude, and de P Angle before mentioned, but also from letters, afterwards printed at Oxford, which passed between his lordship and the university of Geneva, in 1706. It was this spirit of moderation, which rendered bishop Compton less popular >vith the clergy, and probably, as we have already noticed, hindered his advancement to Canterbury. Towards the close of his life, he was afflicted with the stone and gout; which, turning at length to a complication of distempers, put an end to it at Fulham, July 7, 1713, at the age of 31. His body was interred the 15th of the same month in the churchyard of Fulham, according to his particular direction: for he used to say, that “the church is for the living, and the church-yard for the dead.” On the 26th “A sermon Oh the occasion of his much-lamented death,” was preached at St. Paul’s, before the mayor and aldermen of London, by Dr. Thomas Gooch, lately one of his domestic chaplains, then fellow, and afterwards master, of Caius college in Cambridge, and bishop, first of Norwich, then of Ely. Over his grave was erected an handsome tomb, surrounded with iron rails, having only this short inscription: “H. Lond. El Mh En Th Stayph. MDCCXIII.” That is, “Henry London. Save in the cross. 1713.”

Among the many excellent features of his character given by Dr. Gooch, his munificence stands conspicuous. “He disposed of money to every one who could make out (and it was very easy to make that out to him) that he was a proper object of charity. He answered literally the apostle’s character, poor enough himself, yet making many rich. He had divers ancient people, men and women^ whom he supported by constant annual pensions; and several chiklren at school, at his own cost and charge, besides those educated from children, and brought up to the universities, to the sea, or to trades, &c. The poor of his parish were always attending his gate for their dole, and for the remains of his constant hospitable table, which was always furnished, and free to those whom respect or business drew to him. His hall was frequented in the morning with petitioners of all sorts. More particularly, he spared no cost nor pains to serve the church and clergy. He bought many advowsons out of lay-hands. He gave great sums for the rebuilding of churches, and greater still for the buying in impropriations, and settling them on the poor vicars. There was no poor honest clergyman, or his widow, in want, but had his benevolence when applied for: not any in the reformed churches abroad, to whom he was not a liberal patron, steward, and perpetual solicitor for. The French refugees drank deep of his bounty for many years; so did the Irish in their day of affliction and likewise the Scotch episcopal party,” when ejected from their livings at the revolution. It may truly 'be said, that by his death the church lost an excellent bishop; the kingdom a consistent and able statesman; the protestant religion, at home and abroad, an ornament and refuge; and the whole Christian world, an eminent example of virtue and piety.

His works are: 1. “A translation from the Italian, of the Life of Donna Olympia Maldachini, who governed the church during the time of Innocent X. which was from the year 1644- to 1655,” London, 1667. 2. “A translation i'roni the French, of the Jesuits’ intrigues; with the private instructions of that society to their emissaries,” 1669. 3. “A treatise of the Holy Communion,” 1677. 4. “A Letter to the Clergy of the diocese of London, concerning Baptism, the Lord’s Supper, Catechising, dated April 25, 1679.” 5. “A second letter concerning the Half- communion, Prayers in an unknown tongue, Prayers to Saints, July 6, 1680.” 6. “A third letter, on Confirmation, and Visitation of the Sick, 1682.” 7. “A fourth letter, upon the 54th Canon,” April 6, 1683. 8. “A fifth letter, upon the 118th Canon, March 19, 1684.” 9. “A sixth letter, upon the 13th Canon, April Is, 1685.” They were all reprinted together in 1686, 12mo, under the title of “Episcopalia, or Letters of the right reverend father in God, Henry lord hishop of London, to the Clergy of his Diocese.” There is also, 10. “A Letter of his to a Clergyman in his Diocese, concerning Nonresistance:” written soon after the revolution, and inserted in the Memoirs of the life of Mr. John Kettlewell.

, a learned English divine, was born Oct. 18, 1608, at Yeatenton in Devonshire. He was educated in classical learning at private schools, and, in 3626, sent to Exeter college in Oxford. He soon distinguished himself for uncommon parts and learning*; by means of which he grew highly in favour with Dr. John Prideaux, then rector of Exeter college, and king’s professor in divinity, who, accordingto the fashion of wit in those times, used to say of him, “Conanti nihil est difficile.” He took his degrees regularly; and, July 1633, was chosen fellow of his college, in which he became an eminent tutor. Upon the breaking out of the civil war, he judged it convenient to leave the university in 1642. He retired first to Lymington, a living of his uncle’s in Somersetshire; where, his uncle being fled, and he in orders, he officiated as long as he could continue there with safety. While he was at Lymington, he was constituted by the parliament one of the assembly of divines; bnt it is said that he never sat among them, or at least very seldom, since it is certain that he never took the covenant. He afterwards followed his uncle to London, and for some time assisted him in the church of St. Botolph Aldgate. He then became a domestic chaplain to lord Chandos, in whose family he lived at Harefield. He is said to have sought this situation, for the sake of keeping himself as clear from all engagements and difficulties as the nature and fickle condition of those times would permit. Upon the same motive he resigned his fellowship of Exeter college, Sept. 27, 1647; but, June 7, 1649, was unanimously chosen rector of it by the fellows, without any application of his own; and. Wood allows that under his care it flourished more than any other college.

In a very short time, however, after being thus settled, he was in great danger of being driven out of all public employment again, by the parliament’s enjoining what was called* the engagement, which he did not take within the time prescribed. He had a fortnight given him to consider further of it; at the end of which he submitted, but under a declaration, subscribed at the same time with the engagement, which in fact enervated that instrument entirely. The terms of the engagement were; “You shall promise to be true and faithful to the commonwealth of England, as it is now established without king or house of lords.” Cojiant’s declaration before the commissioners, when he took the engagement, was in this form and manner: “Being required to subscribe, I humbly premise, first, that I be not hereby understood to approve of what hath been done in.- order unto, or under this present government, or the government itself nor will I be thought to condemn it; they being things above my reach, and I not knowing the grounds of the proceedings. Secondly, that I do not bind myself to do any thing contrary to the word of God. Thirdly, that I do not so hereby bind myself, but that, if God shall remarkably call me to submit to any other power, I may be at liberty to obey that call, not withstanding the present engagement. Fourthly, in this sense, and in this sense only, I do promise to be true and faithful to the present government, as it is now established without king or house of lords.”

This difficulty being got over, he went on to discharge his office of rector of P^xeter college with great approbation. In 1652 he received priest’s orders at Salisbury, and, in Dec. 1654, became divinity- professor of the university of Oxford. In 1657 he accepted the impropriate rectory of Abergely near St. Asaph in Denbighshire, as some satisfaction for the benefices formerly annexed to the divinity chair, which he never enjoyed; but knowing it to have belonged to the bishopric of St. Asaph, he immediately quitted it, upon the re-establishment of episcopacy. Oct. 19, 1657, he was admitted vice-chancellor of the university; which high dignity he held till August 5, 1660. During his office he was very instrumental in procuring Mr. Selden’s large and valuable collection of books for the public library; and was the principal means of defeating a design, to which the protector Oliver gave his consent, of erecting a kind of university at Durham. He was yet more serviceable in preventing some persons in the university from sacrificing their rights and privileges, by a petition to the protector Richard’s parliament. Upon the restoration of Charles II. Dr. Conant, as vice-chancellor of Oxford, came up to London, attended by the proctors and many of the principals; and was introduced to the king, to whom he made a Latin speech, and presented a book of verses written by the members of the university. March 25, 1661, the king issued a commission for the review of the book of Common-prayer, in which Conant was one of the commissioners, and assisted at the Savoy conferences: but after this, upon the passing of the act of uniformity, not thinking it right to conform, he suffered himself to be deprived of his preferments; and accordingly his rectory of Exeter college was pronounced vacant, Sept. 1, 1662.

At length, after eight years 1 serious deliberation upon the nature and lawfulness of conformity, his conscience was satisfied, and he resolved to comply in all parts; and in particular with that about which he had probably most scruple, the being re-ordained. To this, however, he consented, and the ceremony was performed Sept. 28, 1670, by Reynolds bishop of Norwich; whose daughter he had married in August 1651, and by whom he had six sons and as many daughters. Preferments were offered him immediately, and the same year he was elected minister of St. Mary Aldermanbury, in London; but, having spent some years in the town of Northampton, where he was much beloved, he chose rather to accept the invitation of his neighbours to remain among them; and Dr. Simon Ford, who was then minister of All-saints in Northampton, going to St. Mary’s Aldermanbury, he was nominated to succeed him. On Sept. 20, 1675, he had the mortification to see the greatest part of his parish, together with his church, burnt to the ground, though providentially his own house escaped. In 1676, the archdeaconry of Norwich becoming vacant, the bishop offered him that preferment, with this singular compliment, “I do not expect thanks from you, but I will be very thankful to you, if yon will accept of it.” He accepted it after some deliberation, and discharged the office worthily, as long as health permitted him. Dec. 3, 1681, he was installed a prebendary in the church of Worcester. The earl of Radnor, an old friend and contemporary of his at Exeter college, asked it for him from Charles 11. in these terms: “Sir, I come to beg a preferment of you for a very deserving person, who never sought any thing for himself:” and upon naming him, the king very kindly consented. In 1686, after his eyes had been for some time weak, he lost his sight entirely: but he did not die till March 12, 1693, when he was in his 86th year. He was buried in his own parish church of All-saints in Northampton, where a monument was erected over him by his widow, with a suitable inscription.

He was a man oif great piety, and of solid and extensive learning; and so very modest, it is said, that though he understood most of the Oriental languages, and was particularly versed in the Syriac, yet few people knew it. There have been published six volumes of his sermons; the first in 1693, and dedicated by himself to the inhabitants of Northampton; the second, after his death, in 1697, by John bishop of Chichester; the third in 1698, the fourth in 1703, the fifth in 1708, by the same editor; the sixth in 1722, by Digby Cotes, M. A. principal of Magdalenhall in Oxford. Many more of his sermons and visitation charges are still in the hands of his descendants, as is a life of him written by his son John Conant, LL. D. also in manuscript, but communicated to the editors of the first edition of the Biog. Britannica. For want of attention to this account, which must undoubtedly be deemed authentic, Mr. Palmer, in his “Nonconformists’ Memorial,” (a new edition, with continuations of Calamy’s work), has introduced him for the purpose of giving some extracts from an unpublished ms. relative to the oppressions he suffered from the bishop of Bath and Wells, all which story evidently belongs to his uncle John Conant, B. D. and rector of Lymington.

, a very popular artist, was born at Gaeta in 1676. He studied under Solimene, and by persevering practice soon became an able machinist. At little less than forty, the desire of seeing Rome prompted him to visit that city, where he became once more a student, and spent five years in drawing after the antique and the masters of design: but his hand, debauched by manner, refused to obey his mind, till wearied by hopeless fatigue, he followed the advice of the sculptor le Gros, and returned to his former practice, though not without considerable improvements, and nearer to Pietro da Cortona than his master. He had fertile brains, a rapid pencil, and a colour which at first sight fascinated every eye by its splendor, contrast, and the delicacy of its flesh tints. His dispatch was equal to his employment, and there is scarcely a collection of any consequence without its Conca. He was courted by sovereigns and princes, and pope Clement XI. made him a cavaliere at a full assembly of the academicians of St. Luke. He died, far advanced in age, in 1764. Sir Robert Strange, in whose possession was a Virgin and Child," by Conca, observes that, with all his defects, he was a great painter, and must be regarded as one of the last efforts which this expiring art made in Italy.

, a miscellaneous writer of some note in his day, was born in Ireland, and bred to the law, in which we do not find that he ever made any great figure. From thence he came over to London, in company with a Mr. Stirling, a dramatic poet of little note, to seek his fortune; and finding nothing so profitable, and so likely to recommend him to public notice, as political writing, he soon commenced an advocate for the government. There goes a story of him, however, but we will hope it is not a true one, that he and his fellow-traveller, who was embarked in the same adventure, for the sake of making their trade more profitable, resolved to divide their interests; the one to oppose, the other to defend the ministry. Upon which they determined the side each was to espouse by lots, or, according to Mr. Reed’s account, by tossing up a halfpenny, when it fell to Concanen’s part to defend the ministry. Stirling afterwards went into orders, and became a clergyman in Maryland. Concanen was for some time concerned in the “British” and “London Journals,” and in a paper called “The Specnlatist,” which last was published in 1730, 8vo. In these he took occasion to abuse not only lord Bolingbroke, who was naturally the object of it, but also Pope; by which he procured a place in the Dvwiciad. In a pamphlet called “A Supplement to the Profound,” he dealt very unfairly by Pope, as Pope’s commentator informs us, in not only frequently imputing to him Broome’s verses (for which, says he, he might seem in some degree accountable, having corrected what that gentleman did), but those of the duke of Buckingham and others. His wit and literary abilities, however, recommended him to the favour of the duke of Newcastle, through whose interest he obtained the post of attorney-general of the island of Jamaica in 1732, which office he filled with the utmost integrity and honour, and to the perfect satisfaction of the inhabitants, for near seventeen years; when, having acquired an ample fortune, he was desirous of passing the close of his life in his native country; with which intention he quitted Jamaica and came to London, proposing to pass some little time there before he went to settle entirely in Ireland. But the difference of climate between that metropolis and the place he had so long been accustomed to, had such an effect on his constitution, that he fell into a consumption, of which he died Jan. 22, 1749, a few weeks after his arrival in London. His original poems, though short, have considerable merit; but much cannot be said of his play, entitled “Wexford Wells.” He was also concerned with Mr. Roome and other gentlemen in altering Richard Broome’s “Jovial Crew” into a ballad opera, in which shape it is now frequently performed. Concanen has several songs in “The Musical Miscellany, 1729,” 6 vols. But a memofable letter addressed to him by Dr. Warburton will perhaps be remembered longer than any writing of his own pen. This letter^ which Mr. Malone first published (in his Supplement to Shakspeare, vol. I. p. 222), shews that, in 1726, Warbtirton, then an attorney at Newark, was intimate with Concanen, and an associate in the attacks made on Pope’s fame and talents. In 1724, Concanen published 3, volume of “Miscellaneous Poems, original and translated,” by himself and others.

, a very celebrated Dominican divine, of the congregation of St. James Salomoni, was born about 1686 in Friuli, on one of the estates of the signiors Savoriani, noble Venetians. He entered the Dominican order 1708, preached, with great applause, in the prin^ pipal towns of Italy, gained the esteem of pope Clernent XII. and Benedict XIV. and wrote incessantly against the opinions of the relaxed casuists. He died February 21, 1756, at Venice, aged 69. His works are numerous, both in Latin and Italian the latter are “The Lent of the litigious ecclesiastical Courts,” Venice, 1739, 4to “The Church discipline respecting the fast of Lent,” &c. Venice, 1742, 4to; “Dissertations theological, moral, and critical, on the history of probability and rigourism,” &c. Venice, 1743, 2 vols. 4to, and two pieces in defence of this work, 4to; an “Explanation of the four paradoxes which are in vogue in our age,” Lucca, 1746, 4to. This work has been translated into French, 12mo. “The dogma of the Roman Church respecting Usury,” Naples, 1746, 4to; an ^ Historical Memoir on the use of chocolate upon fast 'days,“Venice,” 1748; a “Treatise on revealed Religion, against atheists, deists, materialists, and indifte rents,” Venice, 1754, 4tq; ^'Instructions for confessors and penitents,“Venice, 1753, 4to. The following are written in Latin three volumes upon Usury, 4to three others on” Monastic discipline and poverty“” Nine letters on relaxed morality.“But the most valuable of all his works is his” Theologia Christiana dogmatico-moralis," Rome, 1746, 12 vols. 4to.

, chevalier de St. Lazare, member of a great number of academies, and a celebrated traveller, was born at Paris in 1701. He began his journey to the east very young; and after having coasted along the shores of Africa and Asia in the Mediterranean, he was chosen, in 1736, to accompany M. Godin to Peru, for the purpose of determining the figure of the earth at the equator. The difficulties and dangers he surmounted in this expedition are almost incredible; and at one time he had nearly perished by the imprudence of one of his companions, M. Seniergues, whose arrogance had so much irritated the inhabitants of New Cuenca, that they rose tumultuously against the travellers; but, fortunately for the rest, the offender was the only victim. On his return home, la Condamine visited Rome, where pope Benedict XIV. made him a present of his portrait, and granted him a dispensation to marry one of his nieces, which he accordingly did, at the age of fifty-five. By his great equanimity of temper, and his lively and amiable disposition, he was the delight of all that knew him. Such was his gaiety or thoughtlessness, that two days before his death he made a couplet on the surgical operation that carried him to the grave; and, after having recited this couplet to a friend that came to see him, “You must now leave me,” added he, “1 have two letters to write to Spain; probably, by next post it will be too late.” La Condamine had the art of pleasing the learned by the concern he shewed in advancing their interests, and the ignorant by the talent of persuading them that they understood what he said. Even the men of fashion sought his company, as he was full of anecdotes and singular observations, adapted to amuse their frivolous curiosity. He was, however, himself apt to lay too much stress on trifles; and his inquisitiveness, as is often the case with travellers, betrayed him into imprudencies. Eager after fame, he loved to multiply his correspondences and intercourse; and there were few men of any note with whom he had not intimacies or disputes, and scarcely any journal in which he did not write. Replying to every critic, and flattered with every species of praise, he despised no opinion of him, though given by the most contemptible scribbler. Such, at least, is the picture of him, drawn by the marquis de Condorcet in his eloge. Among his most ingenious and valuable pieces are the following 1 “Distance of the tropics,” London, 1744. 2. “Extract of observations made on a voyage to the river of the Amazons,” 1745. 3. “Brief relation of a voyage to the interior of South America,” 8vo. 1745. 4. “Journal of the voyage jnade by order of the king to the equator; with the supplement,” 2 vols. 4to. 1751, 1752. 5. On the Inoculation of the Small-pox,“12mo, 1754. 6.” A letter on Education,“8vo. 7.” A second paper on the Inoculation of the Small pox,“1759. 8.” Travels through Italy,“1762, 12mo. These last three were translated and published here. 9.” Measure of the three first degrees of the meridian in the southern hemisphere,“1751, 4to. The style of the different works of la Condamine is simple and negligent; but it is strewed with agreeable and lively strokes that secure to him readers. Poetry was also one of the talents of our ingenious academician; his productions of this sort were, <e Vers de societe,” of the humorous kind, and pieces of a loftier style, as the Dispute for the armour of Achilles and others, translated from the Latin poets; the Epistle from an old man, &c. He died the 4th of February 1774, in consequence of an operation for the cure of a hernia, with which he had been afflicted.

, D. D. a dissenting divine, was born at Wimple, in Cambridgeshire, June 3, 1714, and educated in London under Dr. Ridgley, an eminent dissenting minister. He was ordained in 1738, and his first settlement was at Cambridge, where he had a considerable congregation for about sixteen years; but having written an essay on the importance of the ministerial character in the independent line, he was in 1755 placed at the head of the academy for preparing young men for the ministry, then situated at Mile End, but since removed to Hommertou. In 1759 he was chosen one of the preachers of the “Merchants’ lecture” at Pinner’s Hall, and in May 1760 assistant to Mr. Hall in the pastoral office in the meeting on the pavement near Moorfields, whom he succeeded in 1763, and where he continued to officiate till the time of his death, May 30, 1781, aged 67. Besides the essay above mentioned, he printed several sermons on public occasions, particularly funerals and ordinations.

, of the French academy and that of Berlin, abbe of Mureaux, preceptor of the infant don Ferdinand duke of Parma, was born at Grenoble about the year 1715, and died of a putrid fever at his estate of Flux near Baugenci, the 2dof August 1780. Strong sense, sound judgment, a clear and profound knowledge of metaphysics, a well chosen and extensive reading, a sedate character, manners grave without austerity, a style rather sententious, a greater facility in writing than in speaking, more philosophy than sensibility and imagination; form, according to the opinion of his countrymen, the principal features in the portrait of the abbe de Condillac. A collection in 3 vols. 12mo, under the title of his Works, contains his essay on the origin of human sciences, his treatise of sensations, his treatise of systems; all performances replete with striking and novel ideas, advanced with boldness, and in which the modern philosophic style seems perfectly natural to the author. His “Course of Study,” 1776, 16 vols. 12mo, composed for the instruction of his illustrious pupil, is esteemed the best of his works. He also wrote “Commerce and Government considered in their mutual relations,” 12mo, a book which has been decried by anti-qeconomists, and it is allowed by his admirers that it might have been as well if the author had not laid down, certain systems on the commerce of grain; that he had given his principles an air less profound and abstracted, and that on those matters that are of moment to all men, he had written for the perusal of all men. It is observed in some of the abbe Condillac’s works, that he had a high opinion of his own merit, and thought it his duty not to conceal it. He has also been more justly censured for having, in his treatise of “Sensations,” established principles from which the materialists have drawn pernicious conclusions and that in his course of study, he has, like an incompetent judge, condemned several flights of Boileau, by submitting poetry, which in its very nature is free, irregular, and bold, to the rules of geometry. His works we may suppose are still in favour in France, as a complete edition was printed in 1798, in 25 vols. 8vo.

, of Ripa Transona, the most obscure of modern artists, though a biographer of some celebrity, owes that and a place here to his connexion with Michael Angelo, whose life he published in 1553. If we believe Vasari, his imbecility was at least equal to his assiduity in study and desire of excelling, which were extreme. No work of his exists in painting or in sculpture. Hence Gori, the modern editor of his book, is at a loss to decide on his claim to either, though from the qualities of the writer, and the familiarity of M. Angelo, he surmises that Condivi must have had merit as an artist. From the last no conclusion can be formed; the attachment of M. Angelo, seldom founded in congeniality, was the attachment of the strong to the weak, it was protection; it extended to Antonio Mini of Florence, another obscure scholar of his, to Giuliano Bugiardini, to Jacopo L'Indaco: all men unable to penetrate the grand motives of his art, and more astonished at the excrescences of his learning in design, than elevated by his genius. Condivi intended to publish a system of rules and precepts on design, dictated by Michael Angelo, a work, if ever he did compose it, now perhaps irretrievably lost; from that, had destiny granted it to us, we might probably have formed a better notion of his powers as an artist, than we can from a biographic account, of which simplicity and truth constitute the principal merit. Condivi published this life, consisting of fifty pages, under the title “Vita de Michelagnolo Buonarroti, raccolta per Ascanio Condivi da la Ilipa Transone. In Roma appresso Antonio Blado Stampatore Canierale nel M. D. LIII. alii XVI. di Luglio.” According to Beyero, in his “Memoriae Historico-criticae, lib. rariorum,” this is one of the scarcest books in Europe. In 1746, Gori republished it in folio, and as it was originally published ten years before the death of Michael Angelo, continued it to that period. Gori’s work is a small folio, printed at Florence, 1746.

, an eminent French philosopher and mathematician, was born at Ribemont in Pirardy, three leagues from Saint-Quintin and De la Fere, September 17, 1743, of a very ancient family. At the age of fifteen he was sent to study philosophy at the college of Navarre, under Giraud de Keroudon, who has since distinguished himself by several scientific works, and was an able teacher of mathematics. During the first year of his residence there, young Condorcet exhibited but little relish for the metaphysical questions relative to the nature of ideas, of sensations, and of memory, but in the course of the following year, mathematics and natural philosophy decided his future vocation; and although he had more than one hundred and twenty fellow-students, he acquired a greater portion of fame than any of them. At Easter he supported a public thesis, at which Clairaut, D'Alembert, and Fontaine, the first geometricians of France, assisted; and his conduct on this occasion obtained their approbation. After his course of philosophy was finished, he returned to his family, but still continued to cultjrate geometry; and his attachment to it carried him back to Paris in 1762, where he lived with his old professor, in order to have more frequent opportunities of indulging his ruling passion. He at the same time attended the chemical lectures of Macquer and Beaume, and soon distinguished himself among the geometricians.

In 1765 he published his first work “Sur le Calcul Integrel,” in which he proposed to exhibit a general method of determining the finite integral of a given differential equation, either for differences infinitely small, or finite differences. D'Alembert and Bezout, the commissioners of the academy, employed to examine the merits of this performance, bestowed high praises on it as a work of invention, and a presage of talents worthy of encouragement. In 1767 he published a second work, the problem of three bodies, “Probleme des Trois corps,” in which he presented the nine differential equations of the movement of the bodies of a given system, supposing that each of these bodies should be propelled by a certain force, and that a mutual attraction subsisted among them. He also treated of the movement of three bodies of a given figure, the particles of which attracted each other in the inverse ratio of the square of the distance. In addition to this, he explained a new method of integers, by approximation, with the assistance of infinite series; and added to the methods exhibited in his first work, that which M. de la Grange had convinced him was still wanting. Thus Condorcet, says his eulogist La Lande, was already numbered with the foremost mathematicians in Europe. “There was not,” he adds, “above ten of that class; one at Petersburgh, one at Berlin, one at Basle, one at Milan, and five or six at Paris; England, which had set such an illustrious example, no longer produced a single geometer that could rank with the former.” It is mortifying to us to confess that this remark is but too much founded on truth. Yet, says a late writer of the life of Condorcet, we doubt not but there are in Great Britain at present mathematicians equal in profundity and address to any who have existed since tho illustrious Newton but these men are not known to the learned of Europe, because they keep their science to themselves. They have no encouragement from the taste of the nation, to publish any thing in those higher departments of geometry which have so long occupied the attention of the mathematicians on the continent.

He was received into the French academy on the 8th of March, 1769, and in the course of the same year he published a memoir on the nature of infinite series, on the extent of solutions afforded by this mode, and on a new method of approximation for the differential equations of all the orders. In the volumes of 1770, and the following years, he presented the fruits of his researches on the equations with partial and finite differences; and in 1772 he published “L‘Essai d’une methode pour distinguer les Equations differentielles possibles en termes finis de celies qui ne le sont pas,” an essay on a method to distinguish possible differential equations in finite terms, from those which are not so. The mode of calculation here presented, although an admirable instrument, is still very far distant from that degree of perfection to which it may be brought. In the midst of these studies, he published an anonymous pamphlet, entitled “A Letter to a Theologian,” in which he replied with keen satire to the attacks madfc by the author of “The Three Centuries of Literature,” against the philosophic sect. “But (subjoins the prudent La Lande) he pushed the matter somewhat too far, for, even, supposing his system demonstrated, it would be advantageous to confine those truths within the circle of the iniliated, because they are dangerous, in respect to the greater part of mankind, who are unable to replace, by means of principles, that which they are bereaved of in the shape of fear, consolation, and hope.” Condorcet was now in fact leagued with the atheists; and La Lande, who wished well to the same sect, here censures not his principles, but only regrets his rashness. In 1773 he was appointed secretary to the academy of sciences, when he composed eulogies upon several deceased members who had been neglected by Fontenelle; and in 1782 he was received into the French academy, on which occasion he delivered a discourse concerning the influence of philosophy. In the following year he succeeded D'Alembert as secretary to that academy, and pronounced an able eulogy to the memory of his deceased friend, whose literary and scientific merits are set forth with great ability. The death of Euler afforded Condorcet another opportunity of displaying his own talents by appreciating those of the departed mathematician. The lives of Turgot and Voltaire, and the eulogy pronounced upon the death of the celebrated Franklin, were decided testimonies to the abilities of Condorcet as a biographical writer. Turgot had occupied much of his time and attention with moral and political sciences, and was particularly anxious that the certainty of which different species of knowledge are susceptible, might be demonstrated by the assistance of calculation, hoping that the human species would necessarily make a progress towards happiness and perfection, in the same manner as it had done towards the attainment of truth. To second these views of Turgot, Condorcet undertook a work replete with geometrical knowledge. He examined the probability of an assembly’s rendering a true decision, and he explained the limits to which our knowledge of future events, regulated by the laws of nature, considered as the most certain and uniform, might extend. If we do not possess a real, yet he thought, we ha\ 7 e at least a mean probability, that the law indicated by events, is the same constant law, and that it will be perpetually observed. He considered a forty-five thousandth part as the value of the risk, in the case when the consideration of a new law comes in question and it appears from his calculation, that an assembly consisting of 6 1 votes, in which it is required that there should be a plurality of nine, will fulfil this condition, provided there is a probability of each vote being equal to four-fifths, that is, that each member voting shall be deceived only once in five times. He applied these calculations to the creation of tribunals, to the forms of elections, and to the decisions of numerous assemblies; inconveniences attendant on which were exhibited by him. This work, says his eulogist, furnished a grand, and at the same time, an agreeable proof of the utility of analysis in important matters to which it had never before been applied, and to which we may venture to assert it never will be applied while human reason is allowed any share in human transactions. There are many of these paradoxes in geometry, which, we are told, it is impossible to resolve without being possessed of metaphysical attainments, and a degree of sagacity not always possessed by the greatest geometricians; but where such attainments and sagacity are to be found, even Condorcet himself has not exemplified. In his “Euler’s Letters,” published in 1787-89, he started the idea of a dictionary, in which objects are to be discovered by their qualities or properties, instead of being searched for under their respective names; he also intimated a scheme for constructing tables by which ten milHards of objects might be classed together, by means of only ten different modifications.

In October 1791 he sat as a member of the national assembly, and for the last time in the academy on Nov. 25, 1792, after which it was suppressed by the barbarians who then were in power. Of their conduct, however, Condorcet, who had contributed to place them there, could not complain with a good grace. In the mean time the members of the academy considered it as allowable to assemble, but terror soon dispersed them, and that dispersion continued during nearly two years. At length Daunou delivered in his report relative to the National Institute, which was read to the convention in the name of the commission of eleven, and the committee of public safety. The consequence was, that the restoration of the academies was decreed, under the title of a National Institute, the first class of which contained the whole of the academy of sciences. This assembly was installed soon after, and Condorcet furnished the plan.

The political labours of Condorcet entirely occupied the last years of his existence. Among them were, his work, “Sur les assemblies provinciales,” and his “Reflexions sur le commerce des bk-s,” two of the most harmless. In 1788, Roucher undertook to give a new translation of an excellent English work by Smith, entitled “The Wealth of Nations,” with notes by Condorcet, who, however, had but little concern with it, and on this and other occasions he was not unwilling to sell his name to the booksellers to give a reputation to works with which he had no concern. Chapelier and Peissonel announced a periodical collection, entitled “Bibliotheque de I'liomme Public, &c.” (The statesman’s library, or the analysis of the best political works.) This indeed was one way of enabling the deputies of the assembly to learn what it was important for them, to become acquainted with; it was supposed that the name of Condorcet might be useful on this occasion also, and it was accordingly made use of. The work itself contained one of his compositions which had been transmitted to the academy at Berlin. The subject discussed was, “Est il permis de tromper le peuple r” (Ought the people to be deceived?) This question, we presume, must have always been decided in the affirmative by such politicians as Condorcet, since what amounts to the same effect) almost all his writings tended to pave the way for a revolution in which the people were completely deceived. He was afterwards a member of the popular clubs at Paris, particularly that of the jacobins, celebrated for democratic violence, where he was a frequent but by no means a powerful speaker. He was chosen a representative for the metropolis, when the constituent assembly was dissolved, and joined himself to the Brissotine party, which finally fell the just victims to that revolutionary spirit which they had excited. Condorcet at this period was the person selected to draw up a plan for public instruction, which he comprehended in two memoirs, and which it is acknowledged were too abstract for general use. He was the author of a Manifesto addressed from the French people to the powers of Europe, on the approach of war; and of a letter to Louis XVI. as president of the assembly, which was dictated in terms destitute of that respect and consideration to which the first magistrate of a great people has, as such, a just claim. He even attempted to justify the insults offered to the sovereign by the lowest, the most illiterate, and most brutal part of a delirious populace. On the trial of the king, his conduct was equivocal and unmanly; he had declared that he ought not to be arraigned, yet he had i^t courage to defend h\s opinion, or justify those sentiments which he had deliberately formed in the closet.

After the death of Louis, Condorcet undertook to frame a new constitution, which was approved by the convention, but which did not meet the wishes and expectations of the nation. A new party, calling themselves the Mountain, were now gaining an ascendancy in the convention over Brissot and his friends. At first the contest was severe; the debates, if tumult and discord may be so denominated, ran high, and the utmost acrimony was exercised on all sides. Condorcet, always timid, always anxious to avoid danger, retired as much as possible from the scene. By this act of prudence he at first escaped the destruction which overwhelmed the party; but having written against the bloody acts of the mountain, and of the monster Robespierre, a decree was readily obtained against him. He was arrested in July 1793, but contrived to escape from the vigilance of the officers under whose care he was placed. For nine months he lay concealed at Paris, when, dreading the consequences of a domiciliary visit, he fled to the house of a friend on the plain of Mont-Rouge, who was at the time in Paris. Condorcet was obliged to pass eight-and-forty hours in the fields, exposed to all the wretchedness of cold, hunger, and the dread of his enemies. On the third day he obtained an interview with his friend; he, however, was too much alive to the sense of danger to admit Condorcet into his habitation, who was again obliged to seek the safety which unfrequented fields and pathless woods could afford. Wearied at length with fatigue and want of food, on March 26 he entered a little inn and demanded some eggs. His long beard and disordered clothes, having rendered him suspected by a member of the revolutionary committee of Clamar, who demanded his passport, he was obliged to repair to the committee of the district of Bourg-la-Reine. Arriving too late to be examined that night, he was confined in the prison, by the name of Peter Simon, until he could be conveyed to Paris. He was found dead next day, March 28, 1794. On inspecting the body, the immediate cause of his death could not be discovered, but it was conjectured that he had poisoned himself. Condorcet indeed always carried a dose of poison in his pocket, and he said to the friend who was to have received him into his house, that he had been often tempted to make use of it, but that the idea of a wife and daughter, whom he loved tenderly, restrained him. During the time that he was concealed at Paris, he wrote a history of the “Progress of the Human Mind,” in two volumes, of which it is necessary only to add, that among other wonderful things, the author gravely asserts the possibility, if not the probability, that the nature of man may be improved to absolute perfection in body and mind, and his existence in this world protracted to immortality, a doctrine, if it deserves the name, which, having been afterwards transfused into an English publication, has been treated with merited ridicule and contempt.

Condorcet’s private character is described by La Lande, as easy, quiet, kind, and obliging, but neither his conversation nor his external deportment bespoke the fire of his genius. D'Alembert used to compare him to a volcano covered with snow. His public character may be estimated by what has been related. Nothing was more striking in him than the dislike, approaching to implacable hatred, which he entertained against the Christian religion; his philosophical works, if we do not consider them as the reveries of a sophist, have for their direct tendency a contempt for the order Providence has established in the world. But as a philosopher, it is not very probable that Condorcet will hereafter be known, while his discoveries and improvements in geometrical studies will ever be noticed to his honour. If he was not superior to his contemporaries, he excelled them all in the early display of talent; and it would have been happy for him ancl his country, had he been only a geometrician.

, or Con-Fu-Tsee, the celebrated Chinese philosopher, was born in the kingdom of Lou, which is at present the province of Chan Long, in the 2 1 st year of the reign of Ling van, the 23d emperor of the race of Tcheou, 551 years B. C. He was contemporary with Pythagoras, and a little before Socrates. He was but three years old when he lost his father Tcho leang he, who had enjoyed the highest offices of the kingdom of Long; but left no other inheritance to his son, except the honour of descending from Ti ye, the 27th emperor of the second race of the Chang. His mother, whose name wasChing, and who sprung originally from the illustrious family of the Yen, lived twenty-one years after the death of her husband, Confucius did not grow in knowledge by degrees, as children ordinarily do, but seemed to arrive at reason and the perfect use of his faculties almost from his infancy. Taking no delight in amusements proper for his age, he had a grave and serious deportment, which gained him respect, and was joined with an appearance of unexampled artd exalted piety. He honoured his relations; he endeavoured in all things to imitate his grandfather, who was then alive in China, and a most holy man: and it was observable, that he never ate any thing but he prostrated himself upon the ground, and offered it first to the supreme Lord of heaven. One day, while he was a child, he heard his grandfather fetch, a deep sigh; and going up to him with many bowings and much reverence, “May I presume,” says he, “without losing the respect I owe you, to inquire into the occasion of your grief? perhaps you fear that your posterity should degenerate from your virtue, and dishonour you by their vices.” “What put this thought into your head,” says Coum-tse to him, “and where have you learnt to speak after this manner?” “From yourself,” replied Confucius: “I attend diligently to you every time you speak; and I have often heard you say, that a son r who does not by his virtue support thfe glory of his ancestors, does not deserve to bear their name.” After his grandfather’s death he applied himself to Tcem-se, a celebrated doctor of his time; and, under the direction of so great a master, soon made a surprising progress in antiquity, which he considered as the source from whence all genuine knowledge was to be drawn. This love for the ancients very nearly cost him his life when he was not more than sixteen years of age. Falling into discourse one day about the Chinese books with a person of high quality, who thought them obscure, and not worth the pains of searching into, “The books you despise,” says Confucius, “are full of profound knowledge, which is not to be attained but by the wise and learned: and the people would think cheaply of them, could they comprehend them of themselves. This subordination of spirits, by which the ignorant are dependent upon the knowing, is very useful, and even necessary in society. Were all families equally rich and equally powerful, there could not subsist any form of government; but there would happen a yet stranger disorder, if mankind were all equally knowing, viz. every one would be for governing, and none would think themselves obliged to obey. Some time ago,” added Confucius, “an ordinary fellow made the same observation to me about the books as you have done, and from such a one indeed nothing better could be expected: but I wonder that you, a doctor, should thus be found speaking like one of the lowest of the people.” This rebuke had indeed the good effect of silencing the mandarin, and bringing him to a better opinion of the learning of his country; yet vexed him so at the same time, as it came from almost a boy, that he would have revenged it by violence, if he had not been prevented.

At the age of nineteen he took a wife, who brought him a son, called Pe yu. This son died at fifty, but left behind him a son called Tsou-tse, who, in imitation of his grandfather, applied himself entirely to the study of wisdom, and by his merit arrived to the highest offices of the empire. Confucius was content with his wife only, so long as she lived with him; and never kept any concubines, as the custom of his country would have allowed him to have done, because he thought it contrary to the law of nature. He divorced her, however, after some time, and for no other reason, say the Chinese,' but that he might be free from all incumbrances and connexions, and at liberty to propagate his philosophy throughout the empire. In his twenty-third year, when he had gained a considerable knowledge of antiquity, and acquainted himself with the laws and customs of his country, he began to project a scheme of general reformation. All the petty kingdoms of the empire now depend upon the emperor; but then every province was a distinct kingdom, which had its particular laws, and was governed by a prince of its own. Hence it often happened that the imperial authority was not sufficient to keep them within the bounds of their duty and allegiance, and a taste for luxury, the love of pleasure, and a general dissolution of manners, prevailed in all those little courts.

Confucius, wisely persuaded that the people could never be happy under such circumstances, resolved to preach up a severe morality; and, accordingly, he began to enforce temperance, justice, and other virtues, to inspire a contempt of riches and outward pomp, to excite to magnanimity and a greatness of soul, which should make men ipcapable of dissimulation and insincerity; and used all the means he could think of to redeem his countrymen from a life of pleasure to a life of reason. In this pursuit, his extensive knowledge and great wisdom soon made him known, and his integrity and the splendour of his virtues made him beloved. Kings were governed by his counsels, and the people reverenced him as a saint. He was offered several high offices in the magistracy, which he sometimes accepted, but always with a view of reforming a currupt state, and amending mankind; and never failed to resign those offices, as soon as he perceived that he could be no longer useful. On one occasion he was raised to a considerable place of trust in the kingdom of Lou, his own native country: before he had exercised his charge about three months, the court and provinces, through his counsels and management, became quite altered. He corrected many frauds and abuses in traffic, and reduced the weights and measures to their proper standard. He inculcated fidelity and candour amongst the men, and exhorted the women to chastity and a simplicity of manners. By such methods he wrought a general reformation, and established every where such concord and unanimity, that the whole kingdom seemed as if it were but one great family. This, however, instead of exciting the example, provoked the jealousy of the neighbouring princes, who fancied that a king, under the counsels of such a man as Confucius, would quickly render himself too powerful; since nothing can make a state flourish more than good order among the members, and an exact observance of its laws. Alarmed at this, the king of Tsi assembled his ministers to consider of putting a stop to the career of this new government; and, after some deliberations, the following expedient was resolved upon. They got together a great number of young girls of extraordinary beauty, who had been instructed from their infancy in singing and dancing, and were perfectly mistresses of all those charms and accomplishments which might please and captivate the heart. These, under the pretext of an embassy, they presented to the king of Lou, and to the grandees of his court. The present was joyfully received, and had its desired effect. The arts of good government were immediately neglected, and nothing was thought of but inventing new pleasures for the entertainment of the fair strangers. In short, nothing was regarded for some months but feasting, dancing, shows, &c. and the court was entirely dissolved in luxury and pleasure. Confucius had foreseen all this, and endeavoured to prevent it by advising the refusal of the pressnt; and he now laboured to take off the delusion they were fallen into, and to bring them back to reason and their duty. But all his endeavours proved ineffectual, and the severity of the philosopher was obliged to give way to the overbearing fashion of the court. Upon this he immediately quitted his employment, exiling himself at the same time from his native country, to try if he could find in other kingdoms, minds and dispositions more fit to relish and pursue his maxims.

He passed through the kingdoms of Tsi, Guci, and Tson, but met with insurmountable difficulties every where, as at that time, rebellion, wars, and tumults, raged throughout the empire, and men had no time to listen to his philosophy, and were in themselves ambitious, avaricious, and voluptuous. Hence he often met with ill treatment and reproachful language, and it is said that conspiracies were formed against his life: to which may be added, that his neglect of his own interests had reduced him to the extremest poverty. Some philosophers among his contemporaries were so affected with the state of public affairs, that they had rusticated themselves into the mountains and deserts, as the only places where happiness could be found; and would have persuaded Confucius to have followed them. But, “I am a man,” says Confucius, “and cannot exclude myself from the society of men, and consort with beasts. Bad as the times are, I shall do all I can to recall men to virtue: for in virtue are all things, and if mankind would but once embrace it, and submit themselves to its discipline and laws, they would not want me or any body else to instruct them. It is the duty of a good man, first to perfect himself, and then to perfect others. Human nature,” said he, “came to us from heaven pure and perfect; but in process of time, ignorance, the passions, and evil examples have corrupted it. All consists in restoring it to its primitive beauty; and to be perfect, we must re-ascend to that point from which we have fallen. Obey heaven, and follow the orders of him who governs it. Love your neighbour as yourself. Let your reason, and not your senses, be the rule of your conduct: for reason will teach you to think wisely, to speak prudently, and to behave yourself worthily upon all occasions.” Confucius in the mean time, though he had withdrawn himself from kings and palaces, did not cease to travel about and do what good he could among the people, and among mankind in general. He had often in his mouth the maxims and examples of their ancient heroes, Yao, Chun, Yu, Tischin tang, &c. who were thought to be revived in the person of this great man; and hence he proselyted great numbers, who were inviolably attached to his person. He is said to have had at least 3000 followers, 72 of whom were distinguished above the rest by their superior attainments, and ten above them all by their comprehensive view and perfect knowledge of his whole philosophy and doctrines. He divided his disciples into four classes, who applied themselves to cultivate and propagate his philosophy, each according to his particular distinction. The first class were to improve their minds by meditation, and to purify their hearts by virtue: The second were to cultivate the arts of reasoning justly, and of composing elegant and persuasive discourses: The study of the third class was, to learn the rules of good government, to give an idea of it to the mandarins, and to enable them to fill the public offices with honour t The last class were concerned ip delivering the principles of morality in a concise and polished style to the people; and these chosen disciples were the flower of Confucius’s school.

He sent 600 of his disciples into different parts of the empire, to reform the manners of the people; and, not satisfied with, benefiting his own country only, he made frequent resolutions to pass the seas, and propagate his doctrine to the farthest parts of the world. Hardly any thing can be added to the purity of his morality. He seems rather to speak like a doctor of a revealed law, than a man who had no light but what the law of nature afforded him, and he taught as forcibly by example as by precept. In short, his gravity and sobriety, his rigorous abstinence, his contempt of riches, and what are commonly called the goods of this life, his continual attention and watchfulness pver his actions, and, above all, that modesty and humility which are npt to be found among the Grecian sages; all these would almost tempt one to believe that he wa.s not a mere philosopher formed by reason only, but a man raised up for the reformation of the world, and to check that torrent of idolatry and superstition which was about to overspread that particular part of it. He is said to have lived secretly three years, and to have spent the latter part of his life in sorrow. A few days before his last illness, he told his disciples with tears in his eyes, that he was overcome with grief at the sight of the disorders which prevailed in the empire: “The mountain,” said he, “is fallen, the high machine is demolished, and the sages are all fled/' His meaning was, that the edifice of perfection, which he had endeavoured to raise, was entirely overthrown. He began to languish from that time; and the 7th day before his death,” the kings,“said he,” reject my maxims; and since I am no longer useful on the earth, I may as well leave it.“After these words he fell into a lethargy, and at the end of seven days expired in the arms of his disciples, in his seventy-third year. Upon the first hearing of his death, Ngai cong, who then reigned in the kingdom of Lou, could not refrain from tears:” The Tien is not satisfied with me,“cried he,” since it has taken away Confucius.“Confucius was lamented by the whole empire, which from that moment began to honour him as a saint. Kings have built palaces for him in all the provinces, whither the learned go at certain times to pay him homage. There are to be seen upon several edifices, raised in honour of him, inscriptions in large characters,” To the great master.“” To the head doctor.“” To the saint.“” To the teacher of emperors and kings." They built his sepulchre near the 'city Kio fou, on the banks of the river Su, where he was wont to assemble his disciples; and they have since inclosed it with walls, which look like a small city to this very day.

Confucius did not trust altogether to the memory of his disciples for the preservation of his philosophy; but composed several books: and though these books were greatly admired for the doctrines they contained, and the fine principles of morality they taught, yet such was the unparalleled modesty of this philosopher, that he ingenuously ponfessed, that the doctrine was not his own, but was much more ancient; and that he had done nothing more than collect it from those wise legislators Yao and Chun, who lived 1500 years before him. These books are held in the liighest esteem and veneration, because they contain all that he had collected relating to the ancient laws, which are looked upon as the most perfect rule of government. The number of these classical and canonical books, for so it seems they are called, is four. The first is entitled “Ta Hio, the Grand Science, or the School of the Adults.” It is this that beginners ought to study first, as the porch of the temple of wisdom and virtue. It treats of the care we ought to take in governing ourselves, that we may be able afterwards to govern others: and of perseverance in the chief good, which, according to him, is nothing but a conformity of our actions to right reason. It was chiefly designed for princes and grandees, who ought to govern their people wisely. “The whole science of princes,” says Confucius, “consists in cultivating and perfecting the reasonable nature they have received from Tien, and in restoring that light and primitive clearness of judgment, which has been weakened and obscured by various passions, that it may be afterwards in a capacity to labour the perfections of others. To succeed then,” says he, “we should begin within ourselves; and to this end it is necessary to have an insight into the nature of things, and to gain the knowledge of good and evil; to determine the will toward a love of this good, and an hatred of this evil: to preserve integrity of heart, and to regulate the manners according to reason. When a man has thus renewed himself, there will be less difficulty in renewing others: and by this means concord and union reign in families, kingdoms are governed according to the laws, and the whole empire enjoys peace and tranquillity.”

The second classical or canonical book is called “Tchong Yong, or the Immutable Mean;” and treats of the mean which ought to be observed in all things. Tchong signifies meanS) and by Yong is understood that which is constant, eternal, immutable. He undertakes to prove, that every wise man, and chiefly those who have the care of governing the world, should follow this mean, which is the essence of virtue. He enters upon his subject by defining human nature, and its passions; then he brings several examples of virtue and piety, as fortitude, prudence, and filial duty, which are proposed as so many patterns to be imitated in keeping this mean. In the next place he shews, that this mean, and the practice of it, is the right and true path which a wise man should pursue, in order to attain the highest pitch of virtue. The third book, “Yun Lu, or the Book of Maxims,” is a collection of sententious and moral discourses, and is divided into 20 articles, containing only questions, answers, and sayings of Confucius and his disciples, On virtue, good works, and the art of governing well; the tenth article excepted, in which the disciples of Confucius particularly describe the outward deportment of their master. There are some maxims and moral sentences in this collection, equal to those of the seven wise men of Greece, which have always been so much admired. The fourth book gives an idea of a perfect government it is called “Meng Tsee, or the Book of Mentius;” because, though numbered among the classical and canonical books, it is more properly the work of his disciple Mentius. To these four books they add two others, which have almost an equal reputation; the first is called “Hiao King,” that is, “of Filial Reverence,” and contains the answers which Confucius made to his disciple Tseng, concerning the respect which is due to parents. The second is called “Sias Hio,” that is, “the Science, or the School of Children;” which is a collection of sentences and examples taken from ancient and modern authors. They who would have a perfect knowledge of all these works, will find it in the Latin translation of father Noel, one of the most ancient missionaries of China, which was printed at Prague in 1711.

We must not conclude our account of this celebrated philosopher, without mentioning one most remarkable particular relating to him, which is this; viz. that in spite of all the pains he had taken to establish pure religion and sound morality in the empire, he was nevertheless the innocent occasion of their corruption. There goes a tradition in China, that when Confucius was complimented upon the excellency of his philosophy, and his own conformity thereto, he modestly declined the honour that was done him, and said, that “he greatly fell short of the most perfect degree of virtue, but that in the west the most holy was to be found.” Most of the missionaries who relate this are firmly persuaded that Confucius foresaw the coming of the Messiah, and meant to predict it in this short sentence; but whether he did or not, it is certain that it has always made a very strong impression upon the learned in China: and the emperor Mimti, who reigned 65 years after the birth of Christ, was so touched with this saying of Confucius, together with a dream, in which he saw the image of a holy person coming from the west, that he fitted out a fleet, with orders to sail till they had found him, and to bring back at least his image and his writings. The persons sent upon this expedition, not daring to venture farther, went a-shore upon a little island not far from the Red Sea, where they found the statue of Fohi, who had infected the Indies with his doctrines 500 years before the birth of Confucius. This they carried back to China, together with the metempsychosis, and the other reveries of this Indian philosopher. The disciples of Confucius at first oppossed these newly imported doctrines with all the vigour imaginable; inveighing vehemently against Mimti, who introduced them, and denouncing the judgment of heaven on such emperors as should support them. But all their endeavours were vain; the torrent bore hard against them, and the pure religion and sound morality of Confucius were soon corrupted, and in a manner overwhelmed, by the prevailing idolatries and superstitions which were introduced with the idol Fohi.

By his sage counsels, says Brucker, his moral doctrine, and his exemplary conduct, Confucius obtained an immortal name, as the reformer of his country. After his death, his name was held in the highest veneration; and his doctrine is still regarded, among the Chinese, as the basis of all moral and political wisdom. His family enjoys by inheritance the honourable title and office of Mandarins and religious honours are paid to his memory. It is nevertheless asserted by the missionaries of the Franciscan and Dominican orders, that Confucius was either wholly unacquainted with, or purposely "neglected, the doctrine of a future life, and that in his moral system he paid little regard to religion.

, an English dramatic writer and poet, the son of William Congreve ofBardsey Grange, about eight miles from Leeds, was born in Feb. 1669-70. He was bred at the school of Kilkenny in Ireland, to which country he was carried over when a child by his father, who had a command in the army there. In 1685 he was admitted in the university of Dublin, and after having studied there some years, came to England, probably to his father’s house, who then resided in Staffordshire. On the 17th of March 1690-1, he became a member of the society of the Middle Temple; but the law proving too dry for him, he troubled himself little with it, and continued to pursue his former studies. His first production as an. author, was a novel, which, under the assumed name of Cleophil, he dedicated to Mrs. Catherine Leveson. The title of it was, “Incognita, or Love and Duty reconciled,” which has been said to have considerable merit as the production of a youth of seventeen, but it is certain he was now full twenty-one, and had sense enough to publish it without his name, and whatever reputation he gained by it, must have been confined within the circle of a few acquaintance.

Soon after, he applied himself to dramatic composition, and wrote a comedy called “The Old Bachelor;” of which Dryden, to whom he was recommended by Southerne, said, “That he never saw such a first play in his life; and that it would be a pity to have it miscarry for a few things, which proceeded not from the author’s want of genius or art, but from his not being acquainted with the stage and the town.” Dryden revised and corrected it; and it was acted in 1693. The prologue, intended to be spoken, was written by lord Falkland; the play was admirably performed, and received with such general applause, that Congreve was thenceforward considered as the prop of the declining stage, and as the rising genius in dramatic poesy. It was this play, and the very singular success that attended it upon the stage, and after it came from the press, which recommended its author to the patronage of lord Halifax: who, being desirous to place so eminent a wit in a state of ease and tranquillity, made him immediately one of the commissioners for licensing hacknej'-coaches, which was followed soon after by a place in the Pipe-office; and the office of a commissioner of wine licenses, worth 600l. per annum. After such encouragement as the town, and even the critics, had given him, he quickly made his appearance again on the stage, by bringing on “The Double Dealer;” but this play, though highly approved and commended by the best judges, was not so universally applauded as his last, owing, it is supposed, to the regularity of the performance; for regular comedy was then a new thing.

Queen Mary dying at the close of this year, Congreve wrote a pastoral on that occasion, entitled “The Mourning Muse of Alexis;” which, for simplicity, elegance, and correctness, was long admired, and for which the king gave him a gratuity of 100l. In 1695 he produced his comedy called “Love for Love,” which gained him much applause; and the same year addressed to king William an ode “Upon the taking of Namiir;” which was very successful. After having established his reputation as a comic writer, he attempted a tragedy; and, in 1697, his “Mourning Bride” was acted at the new theatre in Lincoln' s-inn-fields, which completely answered the very high expectations of the public and of his friends. His attention, however, was now called off from the theatre to another species of composition, which was wholly new, and in which he was not so successful. His four plays were attacked with great sharpness by that zealous reformer of the stage, Jeremy Collier; who, having made his general attack on the immorality of the stage, included Congreve among the writers who had largely contributed to that effect. The consequence of the dispute which arose between Collier and the dramatic writers we have related in Collier’s article. It may be sufficient in this place to add, that although this controversy is believed to have created in Congreve some distaste to the stage, yet he afterwards brought on another comedy, entitled “The Way of the World;” of which it gave so just a picture, that the world seemed resolved not to bear it. This completed the disgust of our author to the theatre; upon which the celebrated critic Dennis, though not very famous for either, said with equal wit and taste, “That Mr. Congreve quitted the stage early, and that comedy left it with him.” This play, however, recovered its rank, and is still a favourite with the town. He amused himself afterwards with composing original poems and translations, which he collected in a volume, and published in 1710, when Swift describes him as “never free from the gout,” and “almost blind,” yet amusing himself with writing a “Taller.” He had a taste for music as well as poetry; as appears from his “Hymn to Harmony in honour of St. Cecilia’s day, 1701,” set by Mr. John Eccles, his great friend, to whom he was also obliged for composing several of his songs. His early acquaintance with the great had procured him an easy and independent station in life, and this freed him from all obligations of courting the public favour any longer. He was still under the tie of gratitude to his illustrious patrons; and as he never missed an opportunity of paying his compliments to them, so on the other hand he always shewed great regard to persons of a less exalted station, who had been serviceable to him on his entrance into public life. He wrote an epilogue for his old friend Southerne’s tragedy of Oroonoko; and we learn from Dryden himself, how much he was obliged to his assistance in the translation of Virgil. He contributed also the eleventh satire to the translation of “Juvenal,” published by that great poet, and wrote some excellent verses on the translation of Persius, written by Dryden alone.

The greater part of the last twenty years of his life was spent in ease and retirement; but towards the end of it, he was much afflicted with gout, which brought on a gradual decay. It was for this, that in the summer of 1728, he went to Bath for the benefit of the waters, where he had the misfortune to be overturned in his chariot; from which time he complained of a pain in his side, which was supposed to arise from some inward bruise. Upon his return to London, his health declined more and more; and he died at his house in Surry-street in the Strand, Jan. 19, 1729. On the 26th, his corpse lay in state in the Jerusalem chamber; whence the same evening it was carried with great solemnity into Henry Vllth’s chapel at Westminster, and afterwards interred in the abbey. The pall was supported by the duke of Bridgewater, earl of Godolphin, lord Cobham, lord Wilmington, the hon. George Berkeley, esq. and brigadier-general Churchill; and colonel Congreve followed as chief mourner. Some time after, a neat and elegant monument was erected to his memory*, 'y^ Henrietta duchess of Marlborough, to whom he be­* It is remarkable that on this mo- thinking that he was one of his counritmient he is s>ai<] to he only fifty-six trymen (an Irishman). Jacob only,

time, neither the time of his birth was now known to be the truth, that he was

It has been observed of Congreve, that no man ever passed through life with more ease and less envy than he. No change of ministries affected him in the least, nor was he ever removed from any post that was given him, except to a better. His place in the Custom House, and his office of secretary in Jamaica, are said to have brought him in upwards of 1200l. per annum; and though he lived suitably to such a fortune, yet by his economy he raised from thence a competent estate. He was always upon ^ood terms with the wits of his time, and never involved ii/ any of their quarrels, nor did he receive from any of them the least mark of distaste or dissatisfaction. On the contrary, they were solicitous for his approbation, and received it as the highest sanction of merit. Addison testified his personal regard for him, and his high esteem of his writings, in many instances. Steele considered him as his patron upon one occasion, in dedicating his Miscellanies to him, and was desirous of submitting to him as an umpire on another, in the address prefixed to Addison s “Drummer.” Even Pope, though jealous, it is said, of his poetical character, has honoured him with the highest testimony of deference and esteem in the postscript to his translation of Homer’s Iliad, and he preserved a high respect for him. About two years after his death, in a conversation with Tonson the bookseller, who happened to mention Congreve, Pope said with a sigh, “Ay, Mr. Tonson, Congreve was ultimus Romanorum * /”

“Congreve,” says Dr. Johnson, " has merit of the highest kind he is an original writer, who borrowed neither the models orf his plot, nor the manner of his dialogue. Of his plays I cannot speak distinctly, for since I inspected them many years have passed; but what remains upon my memory is, that his characters are commonly fictitious and artificial, with very little of nature, and not much of life. He formed a peculiar idea of comic excellence, which he supposed to consist in gay remarks and unexpected answers; but that which he endeavoured, he seldom failed of performing. His scenes exhibit not much of humour, imagery, or passion his personages are a kind of intellectual gladiators every sentence is to ward or strike; the contest of smartness is never intermitted his wit is a meteor playing to and fro with alternate corruscations. His comedies have therefore, in some degree, the operation of tragedies; they surprise rather than divert, and raise admiration oftener than merriment. But they are the works of a mind replete with images, and quick in combination. Of his miscellaneous poetry I cannot say any thing very favourable. The powers of Congreve seem to desert him when he leaves the stage, as Antaeus was no longer strong than he could touch the ground. It cannot be observed without wonder, that a mind so vigorous and fertile in dramatic compositions, should on any other occasion discover nothing but impotence and poverty. He has in these little pieces neither elevation of fancy, selection of language, nor skill in versification; yet if I were required to select from the whole mass of English poetry the most poetical paragraph, I know not what 1 could prefer, to an exclamation in ‘ The Mourning Bride:’

Alm. It was a fancy‘d noise; for all is hush’d.

Alm. It was thy fear, or else some transient wind

"The ‘ Birth of the Muse’ is a miserable fiction. One good line it has, which was borrowed from Dryden of his irregular poems, that to Mrs. Arabella Hunt seems to be the best: his * Ode for Cecilia’s Day,‘ however, has some lines which Pope had in his mind when he wrote his own. His Imitations of Horace are feebly paraphrastical, and the additions which he makes are of little value. He sometimes retains what were more properly omitted, as when he talks of vervain and gums to propitiate Venus. Of his translations, the ’ Satire of Juvenal 1 was written very early, and may therefore be forgiven, though it have not the massiness and vigour of the original. In all his versions strength and sprightliness are wanting: his Hymn to Venus, from Homer, is perhaps the best. His lines are weakened with expletives, and his rhymes are frequently imperfect.

“His petty poems are seldom worth the cost of criticism sometimes the thoughts are false, and sometimes common. In his * Verses on Lady Gethin,‘ the latter part is an imitation of Dryden’s ’ Ode on Mrs. Killigrew;‘ and * Doris,’ that has been so lavishly flattered by Steele, has indeed some lively stanzas, but the expression might be mended; and the most striking part of the character had been already shewn in * Love for Love.‘ His ’ Art of Pleasing‘ is founded on a vulgar but perhaps impracticable principle, and the stateness of the sense is not concealed by any novelty of illustration or elegance of diction. This tissue of poetry, from which he seems to have hoped a lasting name, is totally neglected, and known only as it is appended to his plays. While comedy or while tragedy is regarded, his plays are likely to be read; but, except what relates to the stage, I know not that he has ever written a stanza that is sung, or a couplet that is quoted. The general character of his ’ Miscellanies’ is, that they shew little wit and little virtue. Yet to him it must be confessed that we are indebted for the correction of a national error, and the cure of our Pindaric madness. He first taught the English writers that PinJar’s odes were regular; and though certainly he had not the fire requisite for the higher species of lyric poetry, he has shewn us that enthusiasm has its rules, and that in mere confusion there is neither grace nor greatness.” We will conclude our account of Congreve, with the character given of him by Voltaire; who has not failed to do justice to high merit, at the same time that he has freely animadverted on him, for a foolish piece of affectation. “He raised the glory of comedy,” says Voltaire, “to a greater height than any English writer before or since his time. He wrote only a few plays, but they are excellent in their kind. The laws of the drama are strictly observed in them. They abound with characters, all which are shadowed with the utmost delicacy; and we meet with not so much as one low or coarse jest. The language is every where that of men of fashion, but their actions are those of knaves; a proof, that he was perfectly well acquainted with human nature, and frequented what we call polite company. He was infirm, and come to the verge of life when I knew him. Mr. Congreve had one defect, which was his entertaining too mean an idea of his first profession, that of a writer; though it was to this he owed his fame and fortune. He spoke of his works as of trifles that were beneath him; and hinted to me, in our first conversation, that I should visit him upon no other foot than that of a gentleman, who led a life of plainness and simplicity. I answered, that had he been so unfortunate as to be a mere gentleman, I should never have come to see him; and I was very much disgusted at so unseasonable a piece of vanity.”

, a physician and learned writer, was descended of an ancient family in Ireland, and born in the county of Kerry about 1666. His family being of the popish religion, he was not educated regularly in the grammar-schools or university, but was assisted by private tutors, and when he grew up, applied himself to the study of physic. About 1686 he went to France, and resided for some time in the university of Montpelier; and from thence to Paris, where he distinguished himself in his profession, particularly in the branches of anatomy and chemistry. He professed himself desirous of travelling; and as there were two sons of the high chancellor of Poland then on the point of returning to their own country, it was thought expedient that they should take that long journey under the care and inspection of Connor. He accordingly conducted them very safely to Venice, where, having an opportunity of curing the honourable William Legge, afterwards earl of Dartmouth, of a fever, he accompanied him to Padua; whence he went through Tyrol, Bavaria, and Austria, down the Danube, to Vienna; and after having made some stay at the court of the emperor Leopold, passed through Moravia and Silesia to Cracow, and thence in eight days to Warsaw. He was well received at the court of king John Sobieski, and was afterwards made his physician, a, very extraordinary preferment for a young man of only twenty-eight. But his reputation in the court of Poland was raised by the judgment he made of the duchess of Radzevil’s distemper, which the physicians of the court pronounced to be an ague, from which she might easily be recovered by the bark; and Connor insisted, that she had an abscess in her liver, and that her case was desperate. As this lady was the king’s only sister, his prediction made a great noise, more especially when it was justified by the event; for she not only died within a month, but, upon the opening of her body, the doctor’s opinion of her malady was fully verified. Great as Connor’s fame was in Poland, he did not propose to remain longer there than was requisite to finish his inquiries into the natural history, and other curiosities of that kingdom; and foreseeing the king’s decease, and that he had no prospects of advantage afterwards, he resolved to quit that country, and to return to England, for which a very advantageous opportunity occurred. The king had an only daughter, the princess Teresa Cunigunda, who hud espoused the Elector of Bavaria by proxy in August 1694. As she was to make a journey from Warsaw to Brussels, of near 1000 miles, and in the midst of winter, it was thought necessary that she should be attended by a physician. Connor procured himself to be nominated to that employment; and, after reaching Brussels, took leave of the princess, set out for Holland^ and thence to England, where he arrived in Feb. 1695.

He staid some short time at London, and then went to Oxford, where he read public lectures upon the animal ceconomy. In his travels through Italy, he had conversed with Malpighi, Bellini, Redi, and other celebrated persons, of whose abilities he availed himself; and he now explained the new discoveries in anatomy, chemistry, and physic, in, so clear and judicious a manner, that his reputation was soon raised to a considerable height. It was increased by printing, during his residence at Oxford, some learned and accurate dissertations in Latin, under the following general title, “Dissertationes medico-physicee.” Many curious questions are discussed, and curious facts related, in these dissertations, which discover their author to have been a man of much thought and observation, as well as of great reading and general knowledge. He returned in the summer of 1695 to London, where he read lectures as he had done at Oxford; and became soon after a member of the Royal Society, and also of the college of physicians. In. 1696 he went to Cambridge, and read lectures there; and upon his return to London was honoured with a letter from the bishop of Pleskof, in which was contained the case of his old master the king of Poland. His advice was desired upon it; but before he could send it, the news came of that monarch’s death.

In 1697 he published his “Evangelium medici: sen medicina mystica de suspensis naturae legions, sive de miraculis, reliquisque Ev tut j2i?uoi memoratis, quse medicae indagini subjici possunt.” This little treatise, containing 16 sections only, was reprinted within the year, and procured the author a mixed reputation. Some admired his ingenuity, but his orthodoxy and religion were called in question by others, as he attempts in this work to account for the miracles of the Bible upon natural principles.

The Polish election, upon the death of Sobieski, having a strong influence upon the general system of affairs in Europe, and being a common topic of discourse at that time, induced many considerable persons to seek the acquaintance of Connor, that they might learn from him the state of that kingdom: which being little known, he was desired to publish what he knew of the Polish nation and country. In compliance with this request, he wrote “The History of Poland, in several letters,” &c. The two volumes, of which this work consists, were published separately: and the last evidently bears many marks of precipitation, but the information was new and interesting. Connor would probably have become eminent in his profession; but in the flower of his age, and just as he began to reap the fruits of his learning, study, and travels, he was attacked by a fever, which after a short illness carried him off, Oct. 1698, when he was little more than 32 years of age. He had, us we observed hefore, been bred in the Romish religion; but had embraced that of the church of England upon his first coming over from Holland. It has nevertheless been a matter of doubt, in what communion he died; but from his funeral sermon preached by Dr. Hayley, rector of St. Giles’s in the Fields, where he was interred, it has been inferred that, according to every appearance, he died in the protestant profession.

, was a mathematician and philosopher of Samos, who flourished about the 130th olympiad, being a contemporary and friend of Archimedes, to whom Conon communicated his writings, and sent him some problems, which Archimedes received with approbation, saying they ought to be published while Conon was living, for he comprehended them with ease, and could give a proper demonstration of them. At another time he laments the loss of Conon, thus admiring his genius: “How many theorems in geometry,” says he, “which at first seemed impossible, would in time have been brought to perfection! Alas 1 Conon, though he invented many, with which he enriched geometry, had not time to perfect them, but left many in the dark, being prevented by death.” He had an uncommon skill in mathematics, joined to an extraordinary patience and application. This is farther confirmed by a letter sent to Archimedes by a friend of Conon’s. “Having heard of Conon’s death, with whose friendship I was honoured, and with whom you kept an intimate correspondence; as he was thoroughly versed in geometry, I greatly lament the loss of a sincere friend, and a person of surprising knowledge in mathematics. I then determined to send to you, as I had before done to him, a theorem in geometry, hitherto observed by no one.”

Conon had some disputes with Nicoteles, who wrote against him, and treated him with too much contempt. Apollonius confesses it; though he acknowledges that Colion was not fortunate in his demonstrations. Conon invented a kind of volute, or spiral, different from that of Dynostratus; but because Archimedes explained the properties of it more clearly, the name of the inventor was forgotten, and it was hence called Archimedes’s volute or spiral. As to Conon’s astrological or astronomical knowledge, it may in some measure be gathered from the poem of Catullus, who describes it in the beginning of his. verses on the hair of Berenice, the sister and wife of Ptolomy Euergetes, upon the occasion of Conou having given out that it was changed into a constellation among the stars, to console the queen for the loss, when it was stolen out of the temple, where she had consecrated it to the gods.

, secretary of the French king’s council, was born at Paris 1603. The French Academy, to which he was perpetual secretary, considers him as its father and founder. It was in his house that this illustrious society took its birth in 1629, and continued to assemble till 1634; and he contributed much to render these meetings agreeable by his taste, his affability, and politeness. He therefore deservedly still enjoys a degree of celebrity in the republic of letters, though he does not rank among eminent scholars, being unacquainted with Greek, and knowing but little of Latin. He published some pieces cf no great merit; as, 1. “Letters to Felibien,” Paris, 1681, 12mo. 2. “A treatise on oratorical action,” Paris, 1657, 12mo, reprinted in 1686, under the name of Michel le Faucheur. 3. “Extracts from Martial,” 2 vols. 12mo, and a few other trifles. He died Sept. 23, 1675, at the age of 72. Conrart managed his estate without avarice and without prodigality. He was generous, obliging, and constant in his friendships. He was in habits of intimacy with the principal people in the several departments of the government, who consulted him in the most important afiairs; and, as he had a complete knowledge of the world, they found great resources in his judgment. He kept inviolably the secret of others, as well as his own. Being brought up a protestant, he continued firm to his profession. It is said that he revised the writings of the famous Claude, before they went to press. Conrart was related to Godeau, afterwards bishop of Vence, who, whenever he came to town, lodged at his house: several men of letters came there also, for the sake of conversing with the abbe: and this was the first origin of the academy.

, one of the eminent publicists of Germany, and one of the most illustrious ornaments of the German schools, was born at Embden Nov. 3, 1606, and was educated at Leyden, where he made himself acquainted with the whole circle of sciences, but chiefly applied to theology and medicine; and during his residence here, is said to have been supported by Matthias Overbek, a Dutch merchant, and by G. Calixtus, one of the professors. His eminent attainments soon procured him distinction; and he was appointed professor, first of natural philosophy, and afterwards of medicine, in the university of Brunswick. Turning his attention to the study of history and policy, he became so famous in these branches of knowledge, as to attract the attention of princes. Christina, queen of Sweden, who professed to be a general patroness of learned men, invited Conringius to her court, and upon his arrival received him with the highest marks of respect. The offer of a liberal appointment could not, however, induce him to relinquish the academic life, and after a short time he returned to Juliers. But his uncommon talents for deciding intricate questions on policy were not long suffered to lie dormant. The elector Palatine, the elector of Mentz, the duke of Brunswick, the emperor of Germany, and Louis XIV. of France, all consulted and conferred upon him honours and rewards. And, if universal learning, sound judgment, and indefatigable application, can entitle a man to respect, Conringius merited all the distinction he obtained. The great extent of his abilities and learning appears from the number and variety of his literary productions. His polemic writings prove him to have been deeply read in theology. His medical knowledge appears from his “Introduction to the medical art,” and his “Comparison of the medical practice of the ancient Egyptians, and the modern Paracelsians.” The numerous treatises which he has left on the Germanic institution, and other subjects of policy and law, evince the depth and accuracy of his juridical learning. His book, “De hermerica Medicina,” and his “Antiquitates academicae,” discover a correct acquaintance with the history of philosophy. It is to be regretted, that this great man was never able wholly to disengage himself from the prepossession in favour of the Aristotelian philosophy, which he imbibed in his youth. Although he had the good sense to correct the more barren parts of his philosophy, and was not ignorant that his system was in some particulars defective, he still looked up to the Stagyrite as the best guide in the pursuit of truth. It was owing to his partiality for ancient philosophy, particularly for that of Aristotle, that Conringius was a violent opponent of the Cartesian system. He died Dec. 12, 1681. His works were published entire in six volumes folio, Brunswick, 1730, which renders it unnecessary to specify his separate publications. Bibliographers place a considerable value on his “Bibliotheca Augusta,” Helmstadt, 1661, 4to, an account of the library of the duke of Brunswick, in the castle of Wolfenbuttle, which then contained 2000 Mss. and 116,000 printed volumes. The history of literature is yet more illustrated by his “De antiquitatibus academicis dissertationes septem,” the best edition of which is that of Gottingen, 1739, 4to, edited by Heuman, in all respects a most valuable work. Of Conringius’s enthusiasm in the cause of learning, and his love of eminent literary characters, we have a singular instance, quoted by Dr, Douglas, from Pechlinus’s “Observationes Physico-mediciK.” It is there said, on the authority of his son-in-law, that Conringius, when labouring under an ague, was cured, without the help of medicines, merely by the joy he felt from a conversation with the learned Meibomius.

, an English poet of the 16th century, is said to have been born, or at least descended from a family of that name, in Yorkshire, and was for some time educated at Oxford, but took his bachelor’s degree at St. John’s college, Cambridge, in 1579. Edmund Bolton, in his “Hypercritica,” says, “Noble Henry Constable was a great master of the English tongue; nor had any gentleman of our nation a more pure, quick, or higher delivery of conceit: witness, among all other, that sonnet of his before his Majesty’s Lepanto.” He was the author of “Diana, or the excellent conceitful sonnets of H. C. augmented with divers quatorzains of honorable and learned personages, divided into eight decads,” 1594, 8vo. Of these sonnets Mr. Ellis has given three specimens, but which he thinks can hardly entitle him to be denominated “the first sonneteer of his time.” The most striking of his productions is that entitled “The Shepheard’s song of Venus and Adonis,” which is elegantly and harmoniously expressed. Mr. Malone, who reprinted it in the notes to the 10th volume of his Shakspeare, p. 74, thinks it preceded Shakspeare’s poem on the same subject, which it far excels, at least in taste and natural touches. Of his life, no memorials have been discovered. Dr. Birch, in his Memoirs of queen Elizabeth, thought him to be the same Henry Constable, who was a zealous Roman Catholic, and whose religion seems to have obliged him to live in a state of banishment from England. Sir E. Brydges is inclined to the same opinion. Constable afterwards came privately to London, but was soon discovered, and imprisoned in the Tower of London, whence he was released in the latter end of the year 1604. There was another of the name in the early part of the 16th century, a John Constable, the son of Roger Constable, who was born in London, and educated under the celebrated William Lilye. From thence he was sent to Byham Hall, opposite Merlon college, Oxford, where, in 1515, he took the degree of M.A. and was accounted at that time an excellent poet and rhetorician. He obtained some preferment, but of that, or of his subsequent history, we have no account. He published, in Latin, “Querela veritatis,”and “Epigrammata,” 1520, 4to. Like Henry Constable, he was of the Roman Catholic persuasion.

, usually called the Great, is memorable for having been the first emperor of the Romans who established Christianity by the civil power, and was born at Naissus, a town of Dardania, 272. The emperor Constantius Chlorus was his father; and was the only one of those who shared the empire at that time, that did not persecute the Christians. His mother Helena was a woman of low extraction, and the mistress of Constantius, as some say; as others, the wife, but never acknowledged publicly: and it is certain, that she never possessed the title of empress, till it was bestowed on her by her son, after the decease of his father. Constantine was a very promising youth, and gave many proofs of his conduct and courage which however began to display themselves more openly a little before the death of his father; for, being detained at the court of Galerius as an hostage, and discerning that Galerius and his colleagues intended to seize upon that part of the empire which belonged to his father, now near his end, he made his escape, and went to England, where Constantius then was. When he arrived there, he found Constantius upon his death-bed, who nevertheless was glad to see him, and named him for his successor. Constantius died at York in 306, and Constantine was immediately proclaimed emperor by the soldiers. Galerius at first would not allow him to take any other title than that of Csesar, which did not hinder him from reigning in England, Gaul, and Spain: but having gained several victories over the Germans and Barbarians, he took the title of Augustus in 308, with the consent of Galerius himself. Some time after, he marched into Italy, with an army of 40,000 men, against the emperor Muxentius, who had almost made desolate the city of Rome by his cruelties; and after several successful engagements, finally subdued him. Eusebius relates, that Constantine had protested to him, that he had seen in that expedition a luminous body in the heavens, in the shape of a cross, with this inscription, Tola vixat, “By this thou shall conquer:” and that Jesus Christ himself appeared to him afterwards in a dream, and ordered him to erect a standard cross-like; which, after his victory, he did in the midst of the city of Rome, and caused the following words to be inscribed on it: “By this salutary sign, which is the emblem of real power, I have delivered your city from the dominion of tyrants, and have restored the senate and people of Rome to their ancient dignity and splendour.” This, which is one of the most striking events in ecclesiastical history, has also been one of the most contested. Gibbon endeavours to explain it thus: While (says this historian) his anxiety for the approaching day, which must decide the fate of the empire, was suspended by a short and interrupted slumber, the venerable form of Christ, and the well-known symbol of his religion, might forcibly offer themselves to the active fancy of a prince who reverenced the name, and had perhaps secretly implored the power of the God of the Christians; and with regard to the credit due to Eusebius, be thinks Eusebius sensible, that the recent discovery of this marvellous anecdote would excite some surprize and distrust amongst the most pious of his readers. Much has certainly been said against the credibility of this story by authors less prejudiced against the Christian religion than Gibbon. By some the whole is regarded as a fiction, a stratagem and political device of Constantine, yet it is related by Eusebius, a grave historian, who declares that he had it from the emperor, who confirmed the narration by an oath. By Fabricius, we are told, that the appearance in the heavens was generally looked upon as a reality, and a miracle: but for his own part, he is inclined to consider it as the result of a natural phenomenon in a solar halo; he accordingly admits of the reality of the phenomenon, but does not suppose it to be properly miraculous. Upon a full and candid review of the evidence, Dr. Lardner seems inclined to doubt the relation given by the emperor, upon whose sole credit the story is recorded, though it was twenty years after the event, when Eusebius wrote his account, during which period he must have heard it frequently from eye-witnesses, if the emperor’s relation were accurate that the appearance was visible to his whole army as well as to himself. The oath of Constantine, on the occasion, with Dr. Lardner, brings the fact into suspicion, and another striking circumstance is that Eusebius does not mention the place where this wonderful sight appeared. Without, however, entering, at present, farther into the discussion, we may observe, that Eusebius has led us to the period, when the sign of the cross began to be made use of by Constantine, among his armies, and at his battles; this was probably the day before the last battle with Maxentius, fought on the 27th of October, 312. About this period, it is admitted, that Constantine became a Christian, and continued so the remainder of his life, taking care also to have his children educated in the same principles. His conversion seems to have been partly owing to his own reflections on the state of things, partly to conversation and discourse with Christians, with whom, the son of Constantius, their friend and favourer, must have been some time acquainted, but perhaps, chiefly to the serious impressions of nis early years, which being once made can never be wholly obliterated. Constantine was however a politician as well as a Christian, and he probably hit upon this method to reconcile the minds of his army to the important change in their religious profession and habits, as well as making use of it as a mean of success in his designs against his enemies, for which purpose he rightly judged, that the standard of the cross, and the mark of it as a device on his soldier’s shields, would be of no small service.

After Constantine had settled the affairs of Rome, he went to Milan, where he celebrated the marriage of his sister with the emperor of the East, Licinius. In this town it was that these two emperors issued out the first edict in favour of the Christian religion, by which they granted liberty of conscience to all their subjects: and a second soon after, by which they permitted the Christians to hold religious assemblies in public, and ordered all the places, where they had been accustomed to assemble, to be given up to them. A war broke out in 314, between Constantine and Licinius, which subjected the Christians to a persecution from the latter; but after a battle or two, in which neither had any reason to triumph, a peace ensued, and things returned to their usual course. Constantine now applied himself entirely to regulate and adjust the affairs of the church. He called councils, heard disputes and settled them, and made laws in favour of the Christians. In 324, another war broke out between these two emperors; the result of which was, that Constantine at length overcame Licinius, and put him to death. He was now sole master of the empire, without any controul, so that the Christians had every thing to hope, and apparently nothing to fear: nor were they disappointed. But the misfortune was, that the Christians were no sooner secure against the assaults of enemies from without, but they fell to quarrelling among themselves. The dispute between Arius and Alexander was agitated at this time; and so very fiercely, that Constantino was forced to call the council of Nice to put an end to it. He assisted at it himself, exhorted the bishops to peace, and would not hear the accusations they had to offer against each other. He banished Arius and the bishops of his party, ordering at the same time his books to be burnt; and made the rest submit to the decision of the council. He had founded innumerable churches throughout the empire, and ordered them to be furnished and adorned with every thing that was necessary. He went afterwards to Jerusalem, to try if he could discover the sepulchre of Jesus Christ; and caused a most magnificent church to be built at Bethlehem. About this time he gave the name of Constantinople to the town of Byzantium, and endowed it with- all the privileges of ancient Rome. After this he laboured more abundantly than ever he had done yet, in aggrandizing the church, and publishing laws against heretics. He wrote to the king of Persia in favour of the Christians, destroyed the heathen temples, built a great many churches, and caused innumerable copies of the Bible to be made. In short, he did so much for religion, that he might be called the head of the church, in things which concerned its exterior policy. The orthodox Christians have nevertheless complained of him a little for listening to the adversaries of Atbanasius, and consenting, as he did, to banish him: yet he would not suffer Arius or his doctrines to be re-established, but religiously and constantly adhered to the decision of the council of Nice.

It must needs, however, seem extraordinary, that this emperor, who took such a part in the affairs of the Christians, who appeared to be convinced of the truth and divinity of their religion, and was not ignorant of any of its doctrines, should so long defer being initiated into it by the sacrament of baptism. “Whether,” says Dupin, “he thought better not to be baptized till the time of his death, with a view of washing away, and atoning for all his sins at once, with the water of baptism, and being presented pure and unspotted before God, or whatever his reasons were, he never talked of baptism till his last illness.” When that began, he ordered himself to be baptized; and Eusebius of Csesarea relates, that the ceremony was performed upon him by Eusebius bishop of Nicomedia.

He died in 337, aged 66; and divided the empire among his three sons, Constantine, Constantius, and Constans. Eusebius has written the life and acts of this emperor, in which he makes him every thing that is great and good: it is rather a panegyric than a life. Whatever great and good qualities Constantine possessed, he certainly possessed some which were neither great nor good; and it is allowed that he was guilty of many private acts of a very atrocious nature.

, son of Leo the Wise, was born at Constantinople in 905, and ascended the throne at the age of seven years, under the tutelage of his mother Zoe, the 11th of June 911. No sooner had he taken the reins of government in his hand, than he chastised the tyrants of Italy, took Benevento from the Lombards, and drove off, by means of money, the Turks who were pillaging the frontiers of* Epire; but he afterwards allowed himself to be entirely governed by Helena his wife, daughter of Romanus Lecapenes, grand-admiral of the empire. She sold the dignities of the church and the state, burdened the people with taxes, and exercised towards them every species of oppression, while her husband was employing his time in reading, and became as able an architect and as great a painter as he was a bad emperor. Romanus, the son of this indolent prince by his wife Helena, impatient to govern, caused poison to be mingled with some medicine prescribed to him; but Constantine, having rejected the greater part of it, survived till a year afterwards, and died Nov. 9, 959, at the age of 54, after a reign of 48 years. This prince, the patron of learning, and the friend of the learned, left behind him several works which would have done honour to a private person. The principal of them are 1 The Life of the emperor Basil ins the Macedonian, his grandfather, inserted in the collection of Allatius. It is sometimes deficient in point of truth, and savours too much of the panegyrical. 2. Two books of “Themata,” or positions of the provinces and the towns of the empire, published by father Banduri in the “Imperium Orientale,” Leipsic, 1754, folio. We have few works preferable to this for the geography of the middle ages, particularly as to the state and condition of places as they were in his time. 3. A Treatise on the Affairs of the Empire; in the above-mentioned work of Banduri, containing the origin of divers nations, their forces, their progress, their alliances, their revolutions, and the succession of their sovereigns, with other interesting particulars. 4. “De re llustica,” Cambridge, 1704, 8vo. 5. “Excerpta ex Polybio, Diodoro Siculo,” &c. Paris, 1634, 4to. 6. “Excerpta de legatis, Graec. & Lat.” 1648, fol. making a part of the Byzantine historians. 7. “De caeremoniis aulae Byzantines,” Leipsic, 1751, folio. 8. “A Body of Tactics”, 8vo.

, and surnamed the African, was born at Carthage in the eleventh century, and travelled into the east, where he lived thirty years, chiefly at Babylon and Bagdad, studied the medical art, and made himself master of the Arabic and the other oriental languages, and then returned to Carthage; from whence he went into Apulia, and lived at Reggio, and at last became a monk of Monte Casino. He is said to have been the first that brought the Greek and Arabian physic into Italy again. He compiled several books; and has given us a translation of Isaac Israelitus on fevers, out of Arabic into Latin; and another book, which he calls “Loci Communes,” contains the theory and practice of physic, and is chiefly copied from Hali Abbas. After a residence of thirty-nine years at Babylon, he returned to Carthage, but soon fell into such disgrace with his countrymen, whom he suspected of intending to destroy him, that he went to Salernum. Though he was there introduced to duke Rdbert, who wished to retain him about his person, preferring a life of ease and retirement, he entered into a monastery of the Benedictines, St. Agatha, in A versa, where he died in 1087.

, doctor of physic, and professor of the belles lettres in the university of Caen, was born in 1502, and acquired great reputation by his skill in the Greek, Latin, and oriental languages. He lived to 103 years of age, and, it is said, without any failure of powers in either body or mind, died of a pleurisy in 1605, but others have reduced his age to 75. He has left, “A Lexicon, Greek and Latin,” better digested, as some think, than that of Henry Stephens: Stephens ranging the Greek words according to their roots, Constantin in alphabetical order. The first edition, of little value, appeared in 1562, but the best is the secon4, Geneva, 1592, 2 vols. folio. Those of Geneva, 1607, and Leyden, 1637, are only the preceding with new title-pages. His editions, with annotations, of the works of Theophrastus, Dioscorides, Celsus, and Quintus Serenus, gained him much credit. They were published between the years 1554 and 1566, as was also his “Nomenclator insignium Scriptorum, quorum libri extant, vel manuscripti vel impressi,” 8vo.

, an eminent French architect, was born March 11, 1698, at Ivri sur Seine. He studied drawing under the celebrated Watteau, and having occasion afterwards to go into the office of M. Dulin, an architect, he made so great a progress in that art, as to be admitted a member of the academy at the age of twenty-eight. M. Contant had more business than any other architect of his time, if we may judge from the great number of buildings in which he was employed. Among these we may enumerate, the houses of M. Crozat de Tugny, and of M. Crozat de Thiers; the stables of Bissey, where he first tried those brick arches, which even to connoisseurs appear so bold and astonishing the church of Panthemont the royal palace the amphitheatre at St. Cloud; the church of Conde in Flanders La Gouvernance at Lisle the church de la Madelene, which he could not finish. He had a paralytic stroke on the right side, three years before his death; but during his illness, and unable to move his hand, he planned the church of St. Waast at Arras. This beautiful edifice has been as much admired as the church of St. Madelene. This celebrated artist died at Paris, October 1, 1777, aged 79. He left a folio volume of his system of architecture engraved.

, a learned cardinal in the sixteenth century, was one of the illustrious family of that name at Venice, which has produced so many great men. He was ambassador from the republic to the emperor Charles V, and employed in several important negotiations. Paul III. created him cardinal 1535, sent him as legate into Germany, and afterwards to Bologna. Contareni was eminent for his learning, and skill in public affairs. He died 1.542, at Bologna, aged 59. He left several theological works, written in good Latin, and a treatise on the Immortality of the Soul, against Pomponatius, collected in one volume fol. 1571. His most esteemed works are, “De Optimi Antistitis officio,” and his notes on the obscure passages in St. Paul’s epistles.

, a noble Venetian, was born in 1678, and after a suitable education, travelled into most of the countries of Europe, and conciliated the esteem of; all men of letters by the extent of his knowledge and the atniableness of his manners. He wrote some tragedies, printed at Lucca, 1765, which, however, were found more, agreeable in the closet, than interesting on the stage; and his poems are rather unfinished sketches of the metaphysical kind, than genuine productions of the muse. On u visit he made to London, he formed a great intimacy with sir Isaac Newton, who, though very reserved in general, used freely to discourse with him on his discoveries in the several branches of science to which he was so happily devoted. He carried back with him into Italy a heart and a mind entirely English. His works in prose and verse were collected at Venice, 1739, 2 vols. 4to, and his posthumous performances in 1756, 4to. Though the opuscula of the abbe Conti are no more than embryos, as one of the Italian journalists said of them, yet they give a very advantageous idea of their father. They consist of thoughts, reflections, and dialogues on several important subjects. The abbe* died in 1749.

, prince of, the second son of Henry II. prince of Conde, first prince of the blood royal of France, was born in 1629, and appears to have devoted himself to serious studies from his infancy, being at the age of sixteen able to dispute with learned divines on theological topics. It was probably this disposition which inclined his father to devote him to the church, and to procure for him the abbeys of St. Dennis, Cluni, &c. a mode of preferment common in those days. But having the misfortune to lose his father and mother in his infancy, he abandoned his pious pursuits, and engaged in the civil wars on the side which opposed the king; and became above all things attached to theatrical amusements, and even to the company of the players. In his twentyfourth year he married a niece of the cardinal Mazarine, who appears to have in some measure recalled him to his former way of thinking. After the troubles of the kingdom had been composed, and he received into favour, he was made governor of the province of Languedoc, and sent into Catalonia, to co.nmand the royal army as viceroy, where he distinguished himself for bravery and prudence. On his return from his last campaign, he had some conferences with the bishop of Alet, a man of great piety, who effectually revived in him the sentiments of his youth, and from this time the prince lived an example of regularity in religious matters, such as was rare in his family, or in the court. With respect to those of the reformed religion, however, he extended his liberality no farther than the strict letter of the law, and when any of them built churches in his government, contrary to the king’s edicts, he caused them to be demolished, at the same time endeavouring, what was at that time a favourite object, to bring about an union between the catholics and protestants. His wealth he employed in acts of benevolence, and his time in the instruction of his children and dependents in piety and virtue. He died at Pezenas in 1666, in the thirty-seventh year of his age. His “Life and Works” were translated, and published in English, in 1711, 8vo. The latter congist of treatises on the duties of the great; on the obligations of a governor of a province; instructions for various officers under government; and two treatises against plays and shews, with an appendix of the sentiments of the fathers, &c. on the same subject.

, an Italian poet, of an ancient family, was born about the end of the fourteenth, and died at Rimini about the middle of the fifteenth century. We have few particulars of his life. He appears to have been a lawyer by profession, and being at Bologna in 1409, he fell in love with the beauty whom he has celebrated in his verses. There is a collection of his poems, much esteemed, under the title of “La bella Mano,” Paris, 1595, 12mo, with some pieces of poetry by several of the old poets of Tuscany. This collection had been published for the first time at Venice, in 1492, 4to, and the abbe Salvini gave a new edition of it at Florence in 1715, accompanied with prefaces and annotations; but this is not so complete as either the edition of Paris, or that of Verona, 1753, in 4to. He was a professed imitator of Petrarch, but, although not destitute of merit, is greatly inferior to his model.

, an English officer and statesman, the second son of Francis, first lord Conway, was born in 1720, and appeared first in public life in 1741 as one of the knights for the county of Antrim, in the parliament of Ireland; and in the same year was elected for Higham Ferrers, to sit in the ninth parliament of Great Britain. He was afterwards chosen for various other places from 1754 to 1780, when he represented St. Edmund’s Bury. In 1741 he was constituted captain-lieutenant in the “first regiment of foot-guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel; and in April 1746, being then aid-de-camp to the duke of Cumberland, he got the command of the xorty-eighth regiment of foot, and the twenty-ninth in July 1749. He was constituted colonel of the thirteenth regiment of dragoons in December 1751, which he resigned upon being appointed colonel of the first, or royal regiment of dragoons, Septembers, 1759. In January 1756 he was advanced to the rank of major-general; in March 1759, to that of lieutenant-general; in May 1772, to that of general; and in October 12, 1793, to that of field marshal. He served with reputation in his several military capacities, and commanded the British forces in Germany, under prince Ferdinand of Brunswick, in 1761, during the absence of the marquis of Granby. He was one of the grooms of the bed-chamber to George II. and likewise to his present majesty till April 1764, when, at the end of the session of parliament, he resigned that office and his military commands, or, more properly speaking, was dismissed for voting against the ministry in the question of general warrants. His name, however, was continued in the list of the privy counsellors in Ireland; and William, the fourth duke of Devonshire, to whom he had been secretary when the duke was viceroy in Ireland, bequeathed him at his death, in 1764, a legacy of 5000l. on account of his conduct in parliament. On the accession of the Rockingham administration in 1765, he was sworn of the privy council, and appointed joint- secretary of state with the duke of Grafton, which office he resigned in January 1768. In February following, he was appointed colonel of the fourth regiment of dragoons; in October 1774, colonel of the royal regiment of horse-guards; and in October 1772, governor of the island of Jersey. On March 30, 1782, he was appointed commander in chief of his majesty’s forces, which he resigned in December 1783. He died at his seat at Park-place, near Henley upon Thames, July 9, 1795. General Conway was an ingenious man, of considerable abilities, but better calculated to be admired in the private and social circle, than to shine as a great public character. In politics, although we believe conscientious, he was timid and wavering. He had a turn for literature, and some talent for poetry, and, if we mistake not, published, but without his name, one or two political pamphlets. In his old age he aspired to the character of a dramatic writer, producing in 1789, a play, partly from the French, entitled” False Appearances," which was not, however, very successful. His most intimate friend appears to have been the late lord Orford, better known as Horace Walpole, who was his cousin, and addressed to him a considerable part of those letters which form the fifth volume of his lordship’s works. This correspondence commenced in 1 7-1-0, when Walpole was twenty-three years old, and Mr. Couway twenty. They had gone abroad together with the celebrated poet Gray in 1739, had spent three months together at Rheims, and afterwards separated at Geneva. Lord Orford’s letters, although evidently prepared for the press, evince at least a cordial and inviolable friendship for his correspondent, of which also he gave another proof in 3 letter published in defence of general Couway when dismissed from his offices; and a testimony of affection yet more decided, in bequeathing his fine villa of Strawberry Hill to Mrs. Darner, general Con way’s daughter, for her life.

, a learned divine and prelate of the church of England, was born at Pinhoe, near Exeter, on the 31st of January, 1691-2. His father was the rev. John Conybeare, vicar of Pinhoe; and his mother, Grace Wilcocks, was the daughter of a substantial gentleman farmer of that place. At a proper age, he was sent to the free-school of Exeter for grammatical education, where Hallet and Foster, afterwards two eminent dissenting divines, were his contemporaries. On the 23d of February, 1707-8, Mr. Conybeare was admitted a battler of Exeter college, Oxford, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Kennel, afterwards Dr. Kennel, many years rector of Drew’s Teington, Pevon. Mr. Conybeare, on his coming to the university, was, according to the language of that place, chum with Mr. Richard Harding, who was elected fellow of Exeter college in 1709, and died rector of Marwood in Devonshire, in 1782, in the ninety-fifth year of his age. How early our young student obtained the esteem of the learned society with which he was connected, appears from his having been chosen on the 30th of June, 1710, and admitted on the 8th of July following, a probationary fellow of his college, upon sir William Petre’s foundation, in the room of Mr. Daniel Osborrie. When he was proposed as a candidate, it was only with the design of recommending him to future notice; but such was the sense entertained of his extraordinary merit, that he was made the object of immediate election. Mr. Harding used to say, that Mr. Conybeare had every way the advantage of him, excepting in seniority; and that he should have had no chance in a competition with him, if they had both been eligible at the same time. The patronage of Dr. Ilennel, Mr. Conybeare' s worthy tutor, concurred with his own desert, in bringing him forward thus early to academical advantages. On the 17th of July, 1713, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and at the next election of college officers, upon the 30th of June, 1714, he was appointed praelector, or moderator, in philosophy. On the 19th of December following, he received deacon’s orders from the hanclaof Dr. William Talbot, bishop of Oxford; and on the 2rikof May, 1716, he was ordained priest by sir Jonathan Trelawny, bishop of Winchester. On the 16th of April, 1716, he proceeded to the degree of master of arts; soon after which he entered upon the curacy of Fetcham, in Surry, where he continued about a year. He was advised to this change of scene for the benefit of his health, which was always delicate, and had been greatly impaired by the intenseness of his application. Upon his return from Fetcham to Oxford, he became a tutor in his own college, and was much noticed in the university as a preacher. In the beginning of the year 1722, he published a sermon, which he had delivered before the university, on the 24th of December preceding, from Hebrews ii. 4, entitled “The nature, possibility, and certainty of Miracles, &c.” This discourse was so well received, that it went through four editions. Mr. Conybeare was hence encouraged to commit to the press a second sermon, from 1 Corinthians xiii. 12, which he had preached before the university, on the 21st of October, 1724, and the title of which was, “The Mysteries of the Christian Religion credible.” It is probable, that the reputation our author gained by these discourses, recommended him to the notice of the bishop of London (Dr. Gibson), who appointed him one of his majesty’s preachers at Whitehall, upon the first establishment of that institution. The esteem in which his abilities and character were held, procured him, also, the favour of the lord chancellor Macclesfield, who, in May 1724, presented him to the rectory of St. Clement’s in Oxford; a preferment of no great value, but which was convenient to iiim from his constant residence at that place, and from its being compatible with his fellowship. In 1725, he was chosen senior proctor of the university, which office he served in conjunction with Mr. Barnaby Smyth, fellow of Corpus-Christi college, and a scholar of eminence. In the same year, Mr. Conybeare was called upon to preach a visitation sermon before the bishop of Oxford, at whose request it was published, under the title of “The Case of Subscription to Articles of Religion considered,” and obtained no small degree of celebrity, being referred to in the controversy relating to subscription. The position of Mr. Conybeare is, that “every one who subscribes the articles of religion, does thereby engage, not only not to dispute or contradict them; but his subscription amounts to an approbation of, and an assent to, the truth of the doctrines therein contained, in the very sense in which the compilers are supposed to have understood them.” Mr. Conybeare’s next publication was an assize sermon, preached at St. Mary’s, Oxford, in 1727, from Ezra vii. 26, and entitled “The Penal sanctions of laws considered.” This discourse was dedicated by him to the honourable Charles Talbot, at that time solicitor-general, afterwards lord high chancellor of Great Britain, who had honoured our author with the care of his two eldest sons, Mr. Charles Talbot, celebrated by the poet Thomson, and the late earl Talbot, steward of his majesty’s household. On the llth of July, 1728, Mr. Conybeare was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity; and on the 24th of January following, he took his doctor’s degree. In the year 1729, he again appeared from the press, in a sermon that had been preached before the lord mayor and aldermen at St. Paul’s cathedral, and which was entitled ^The Expediency of a Divine Revelation represented.“It was accompanied with a dedication to bishop Talbot, father of the solicitor-general. From Dr. Conybeare’s introduction to this family, and the reputation he had acquired as a divine, it was expected that he would soon have been promoted to some dignity in the church. But the good bishop was taken off before he had a proper opportunity of carrying his benevolent intentions in our author’s favour into execution. In 1730, the headship of Exeter college becoming vacant, by the death of Dr. Hole, Dr. Conybeare was chosen to succeed him. His competitor, on this occasion, was the rev. Mr. Stephens, vicar of St. Andrew’s, Plymouth, a truly worthy clergyxpan, and the author of several ingenious discourses, Nevertheless, as he had retired early from the society, he could not be supposed to carry such weight with him as Dr. Conybeare, who had resided constantly in the college. In this year Dr. Tindal’s famous deistical book had appeared, entitled” Christianity as old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Law of Nature.“This work excited the greatest attention, and drew forth the pens of some of the ablest divines of the kingdom, both in the church of PZngland, and among the protestant dissenters. Bishop Gibson, who had himself engaged in the controversy in his” Pastoral Letters,“encouraged Dr. Conybeare to undertake the task of giving a full and particular answer to Tindal’s production. Accordingly, he published in 1732, his” Defence of Revealed Religion,“Londoq, 8vo, by which he gained great credit to himself, and performed an eminent service to the cause of Christianity. In his dedication to the learned prelate now mentioned, he observes, that if he has not succeeded in his book according to his wishes, he may plead that it was drawn up amidst a variety of interruptions, and under a bad state of health.” This,“says he,” will in some sort excuse the author, though it may detract from the performance.“But Dr. Conybeare’s work did not stand in need of an apology. It is distinguished by the perspicuity of its method, and the strength of its reasoning; and is, indeed, one of the ablest vindications of revelation which England has produced. So well was the work received, that the third edition of it was published in 1733. Dr. Warburton justly styles it one of the best reasoned books in the world. It is likewise recommended by the temper and candour with which it is composed. Dr. Conybeare' s Defence will always maintain its rank, and perhaps be thought to sustain the first place among the four capital answers which Tindal received. The other three were, Foster’s” Usefulness, Truth, and Excellency of the Christian Revelation;“Leland’s” Answer to a late book, entitled Christianity as old as the Creation;“and Mr. Simon Browne’s” Defence of the Religion of Nature and the Christian Revelation."

Though Dr. Conybeare, by his promotion to the headship of Exeter college, had obtained a considerable rank in the university, he did not, by the change of his situation, make any addition to his fortune. Indeed, the emoluments of his new place were so small, that he was much richer as a private fellow and tutor, than as the governor of his college. It may be presumed that this circumstance in part, and still more the reputation he had acquired by his answer to Tindal, induced the bishop of London, who at that time had great influence in the disposal of ecclesiastical preferments, to exert himself more vigorously in our author’s behalf. This the good prelate so effectually did, that on the death of Dr. Bradshaw, bishop of Bristol, and dean Of Christ church, Oxford, in December, 1732, Dr. Conybeare was appointed to succeed him in the latter dignity. Accordingly the doctor was installed dean of that cathedral in the month of January following. On this occasion, he resigned the headship of Exeter college; and not long after, he gave up likewise the rectory of St. Clement’s, in favour of a friend, the rev. Mr. Webber, one of the fellows of Exeter. On the 6th of June, 1733, dean Conybeare married Miss Jemima Juckes, daughter of Mr. William Juckes, of Hoxton-square, near London; and in the same year he published a sermon, which he had preached in the cathedral of St. Peter, Exon, in August 1732, from 2 Peter iii. 16, on the subject of scripturedifficulties. In the beginning of the next year, he had the honour of entertaining the prince of Orange at the deanery of Christ church. The prince, who had come into England to marry the princess royal, being desirous of visiting Oxford, and some of the places adjacent, took up his residence at Dr. Conybeare’s apartments; and how solicitous the dean was to treat his illustrious guest with a proper splendour and dignity, appears from his having received, by the hands of one of her servants, the especial thanks of queen Caroline on the occasion.

When in 1737, Morgan had published his “Moral Philosopher,” the dean had it in contemplation to answer that work, so far as the general scheme of the writer might be thought to deserve it; and he had prepared many materials for this purpose. The design, for what reason we know not, was never carried into execution; and the omission may be regretted, though it must at the same time be acknowledged, that Dr. Morgan was encountered by a number of very able and successful antagonists. It is to the honour of dean Conybeare’s temper, that he expressed his hope, that none of the animadverters on the “Moral Philosopher” would be provoked to imitate his scurrilities. In 1738, the dean was requested to preach the sermon at the annual meeting of the several charity-schools in London, which he did from Galatians vi. 9; and the discourse was published. In 1747, he met with a great domestic affliction, in the loss of his lady, who departed this life on the 29th of Octoher, after their union had subsisted not much longer than fourteen years. When, on the 25th of April, 1749, a day of solemn thanksgiving was held, on account of the treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle, which had been signed on the 18th of October in the preceding year, Dr. Conybeare was fixed upon to preach before the honourable house of commons on this occasion. The subject was, “True Patriotism.”

As Dr. Conybeare was raised early in life to so conspicuous a station as that of the deanery of Christ church, it might have been expected, from his eminent merit and learning, that he would sooner have been called to the higher honours of his profession. But it is to be remembered, that not long after his promotion to the deanery, his good friend, the bishop of London, lost his influence at court; and the lord chancellor Talbot dying in the year 1737, our author had no particular patron to recommend him to royal favour. It was not, therefore, till the latter end of 1750, that he attained the mitre; and this was more owing to his acknowledged abilities and character, than to any personal interposition. On the translation of Dr. Joseph Butler to the see of Durham, Dr. Conybeare was appointed to the bishopric of Bristol, and was consecrated at Lambeth chapel, on the 23d of December. The consecration sermon, which was soon afterwards published, was preached by Francis Webber, D. D. rector of Exeter college. The promotion of Dr. Conybeare to the prelacy, whilst it raised him to the highest order of the church, and enlarged his sphere of usefulness, was injurious to his private fortune. The slender revenues of his bishopric were not equal to the expences which accrued from his necessary residence sometimes at Bristol, and sometimes at London *. Four discourses were published by our author after he became a bishop. The first was the Easter Monday sermon, in 1751, from Proverbs xi. 17, before the

* By a ms letter from Dr. Lyttel- he was bishop, except one fine of six

ton, afterwards bishop of Carlisle, we guineas, which was all he received.

Jearn that bishop Couybeare made no Bishop Newton’s account of this bimore than 350l. clear per annum of shopric is, we believe, much the same, this bishopric, during the whole time lord mayor and aldermen of the city of London, in which the virtue of being merciful was stated and enforced. The second was preached before the house of lords, on the llth of June, in the same year, from Psalm Ixxviii. 72, upon occasion of his majesty’s accession to the throne: the subject treated of, was civil government. The third was from Matthew xviii. 10, 11, in favour of the Irish protestant schools; and the fourth, from James i. 27, was before the sons of the clergy, at Bristol. Both these discourses were printed in 1752. It may be observed, with regard to the twelve single sermons published by our prelate, that they were not vague, declamatory essays, calculated only to answer a present purpose, but judicious and solid compositions, in which important topics were discussed with great perspicuity of method and language, and with equal strength of reasoning; so that it is not a little to be regretted, that they have not been collected together in a volume. Dr. Conybeare did not long enjoy a good state of health, after his being raised to the bishopric of Bristol. He was much afflicted with the gout; and, having languished about a year and a half, was carried off by that disorder at Bath, on the 13th of July, 1755. He was interred in the cathedral church of Bristol, where, some time after his death, an inscription was erected to his memory.

Bishop Conybeare had by his lady five children, three of whom died in their infancy. A daughter and a son survived him. The daughter, Jemima, departed this life at Oxford, on the 14th of March 1785. The son, William, is the present Dr. Conybeare. As our worthy prelate died in but indifferent circumstances, and consequently left behind him a very slender provision for his children, it was proposed by some friends of the family, to publish two volumes of sermons by subscription. The scheme succeeded so well that the number of subscribers amounted to nearly four thousand six hundred persons, many of whom took more than one copy. Such an almost unparalleled subscription can only be accounted for from Dr. Conybeare' s numerous connections, in consequence of his having presided over such a society as that of Christ-church, with the greatest reputation, for twenty- two years and a half; from the general estimation in which his abilities and character were held in the world, among men of all denominations; and from the disinterestedness of his temper in making but a small provision for his family. Besides this, his majesty, king George II. was pleased, in consideration of the bishop’s merits, to bestow upon the family, for the life of miss Jemima Conybeare, a pension, the clear produce of which was about one hundred pounds a year.

Dr. Conybeare’s connection with bishop Gibson, and the Talbot family, has already been mentioned. Amongst his most intimate private friends may be reckoned Dr. Hayter, successively bishop of Norwich and London, Dr. Atwell, and the famous Dr. Rundle (afterwards bishop of Derry.) The latter gentleman is understood to have been instrumental in recommending our author to the notice of the Talbots. There subsisted, likewise, a great intimacy between Dr. Conybeare and Dr. Seeker. When Seeker entered himself a gentleman commoner at Exeter college, with a view of taking a degree at the university of Oxford, Mr. Conybeare was appointed his nominal tutor. The present Dr. William Conybeare enjoys the rectory of St. Botolph’s, Bishopsgate, as an option of archbishop Seeker’s.

Bishop Conybeare’s character appears to have been, in every view of it, respectable and excellent. Whilst he was a firm and faithful adherent to the doctrine and constitution of that church of which he was so great an orna-. ment, he was candid in his sentiments, and friendly in his conduct xvith regard to the protestant dissenters.

, an eminent navigator, and justly thepride of his country in that character, was born at Marton in Cleveland, a village about four miles from Great Ayton, in the county of York, and was baptised there, as appears from the parish register, Nov. 3, 1728. His father, whose name was likewise James, was a day-labourer to Mr. Mewburn, a very respectable farmer, and lived in a small cottage, the walls chiefly of mud, as was generally the case at that time in the northern parts of the kingdom. In 1730, when our navigator was about two years old, his father removed with his family to Great Ayton, and was employed as a hind to the late Thomas Scottowe, esq. having the charge of a considerable farm in that neighbourhood known by the name of Airyholm.

As the father continued long in that trust, captain Cook was employed in assisting him in various kinds of husbandry suited to his years until the age of thirteen, when he was put under the care of Mr. Pullen, a schoolmaster, who taught at Ayton, where he learned arithmetic, bookkeeping, &c. and is said to have shewn a very early genius for figures. About January 1745, at the age of seventeen, his father bound him apprentice to William Saunderson for four years, to learn the grocery and haberdashery business, at Snaith, a populous fishing- town about ten miles from Whitby but after a year and half’s servitude, having contracted a very strong propensity to the sea (owing, probably, to the maritime situation of the place, and the great number of ships almost constantly passing and repassing within sight between London, Shields, and Sunderland), Mr. Sauuderson was willing to indulge him in following the bent of his inclination, and gave up his indentures. While he continued at Snaith, by Mr. Saunderson’s account, he discovered much solidity of judgment, and was remarkably quick in accounts. In July 1746 he was bound apprentice to Mr. J. Walker, of Whitby, for the term of three years, which time he served to his master’s full satisfaction. He first sailed on board the ship Freelove, burthen about 45O tons, chiefly employed in the coal trade from Newcastle to London. In May 1748, Mr. Walker ordered him home to assist in rigging and fitting for sea a fine new ship, named the Three Brothers, about 600 tons burthen. This was designed as a favour to him, as it would greatly contribute to his knowledge in his business. In this vessel he sailed from Whitby in the latter end of June. After two coal voyages, the ship was taken into the service of government, and sent as a transport to Middleburgh, to carry s.ome troops from thence to Dublin. When these were landed, another corps was taken on board, and brought over to Liverpool. From thence the ship proceeded to Deptford, where she was paid oft* in April 1749. The remaining part of the season the vessel was employed in the Norway trade.

In the spring of 1750, Mr. Cook shipped himself as a seaman on board the Maria, belonging to Mr. John Wilkinson, of Wbitby, under the command of captain Gaskin. In her he continued all that year in the Baltic trade. Mr. Walker is of opinion he left this ship in the winter, and sailed the following summer, viz. 1751, in a vessel belonging to. Stockton; but neither the ship’s name, nor that of the owner, is now remembered by Mr. Walker. Early in February 1752, Mr. Walker sent for him, and made him mate of one of his vessels, called the Friendship, about 400 tons burthen. In this station he continued till Ma,y or June 1753, in the coal trade. At that period Mr. Walker made him an offer to go commander of that ship; but he declined it, soon after left her at London, and entered on board his majesty’s ship Eagle, a frigate of 28 or 30 guns, “having a mind,” as he expressed himself to his master, to “try his fortune that way.” Not long after, he applied to Mr. Walker for a letter of recommendation to the captain of the frigate, which was readily granted. On the receipt of this he got some small preferment, which he gratefully acknowledged, and ever remembered. Some time after, the Eagle sailed with ^another frigate on a cruise, in which they were very successful. After this Mr. Walker heard no more of Mr. Cook until August 1758, when he received from him a letter dated Pembroke, before Louisburgb, July 30, 1758, in which he gave a distinct account of our success in that expedition, but does not say what station he then filled.

He received a commission, as lieutenant, on the first day of April 1760; and soon after gave a specimen of those abilities which recommended him to the commands which he executed so highly to his credit, that his name will go down to posterity as one of the most skilful navigators which this country has produced. In 1765 he was with sir William B.urnaby on the Jamaica station; and that officer; having occasion to send dispatches to the governor of Jucatan, relative to the logwood-cutters in the bay of Honduras, lieutenant Cook was selected for that employment; and he performed it in a manner which entitled him to the approbation of the admiral. A relation of this voyage and journey was published in 1769, under the title of “Hemarks on a passage from tin? river Balise in the bay of Honduras, to Merida, the capital of the province of Jucatan, in the Spanish West.-Indies, by lieutenant Cook,” in an 8vo pamphlet.

To a perfect knowledge of all the duties belonging to a sea-life, Mr. Cook had added a. great skill in astronomy, In 1767 the royal society resolved, that it would be proper to send persons into some part of the South Seas, to observe the transit of the planet Venus over the sun’s disk; and by a memorial delivered to his majesty, they recommended the islands of Marquesas de Mencloza, or those ofRotterdam or Amsterdam, as the properest place then known for making such observation. To this memorial a favourable answer was returned; and the Endeavour, a ship built for the coal-trade, was put in commission, and the command of her given to lieutenant Cook. But before the vessel was ready to sail, captain Wallis returned from his voyage, and pointed out Otaheite as a place more proper for the purpose of the expedition than either of those mentioned by the royal society. This alteration was approved of, and our navigator was appointed by that learned body, with Mr. Charles Green, to observe the transit.

On this occasion lieutenant Cook was promoted to be captain, and his commission bore date the 25th of May 1768. He immediately hoisted the pendant, and took command of the ship, in which he sailed down the river on the 30th of July. In this voyage he was accompanied by Joseph Banks, esq. (since sir Joseph, bart. knight of the bath, and president of the royal society) and Dr. Solander. On the 13th of October he arrived at Rio de Janeiro, and on the 13th of April 1769 came to Otaheite, where the transit of Venus was observed in different parts of the island. He staid there until the 13th of July, after which he went in search of several islands, which he discovered. He then proceeded to New Zealand, and on the 10th of October 1770, arrived at Batavia with a vessel almost worn out, and the crew much fatigued and very sickly. The repairs of the ship obliged him to continue at this unhealthy place until the 27th of December, in which time he lost many of his seamen and passengers, and more in the passage to the Cape of Good Hope, which place he reached on the 15th of March 177-1. On the 14-th of April he left the Cape, and the 1st of May anchored at St. Helena, from whence he sailed on the 4th, and came to anchor in the Downs on the 12th of June, after having been absent almost three years, and in that time had experienced every danger to which a voyage of such a length is incident, and in which he had made discoveries equal to those of all the navigators of his country from the time of CoJumbus to the present. The narrative of this expedition was written by Dr. Hawkesworth, who, although the facts contained in it have not been denied, nor the excellence of the composition disputed, was, on its publication, treated with peculiar severity, owing to some opinions on the nature of providence, which Dr, Hawkesworth incautiously advanced, Soon after captain Cook’s return to England, it was resolved to equip two ships to complete the discovery of the southern hemisphere. It had long been a prevailing idea, that the unexplored part contained another continent; and Alexander Dalrymple, esq. a gentleman of great skill and an enterprising spirit, had been very firmly persuaded of its existence. To ascertain the fact was the principal object of this expedition; and that nothing might be omitted that could tend to facilitate the enterprise, two ships were provided, furnished with every necessary which could promote the success of the undertaking. The first of these ships was called the Resolution, under the command of captain Cook; the other, the Adventure, commanded by captain Furneaux. Both of them sailed from Deptfortl on the 9th of April 1772, and arrived at the Cape of Good Hope on the 30th of October. They departed from thence on the 22d of November, and from that time until the 17th of January 1773, continued endeavouring to discover the continent, when they were obliged to relinquish the design, observing the whole sea covered with ice from the direction of S. E. round by the south to west. They then proceeded into the South Seas, and made many other discoveries, and returned to the Cape of Good Hope on the 2 1 st of March 1774, and from thence to England on the 14th of July; having during three years and eighteen days (in which time the voyage was performed) lost but one man by sickness, in captain Cook’s ship; although he had navigated throughout all the climates from fifty-two degrees north to seventy-one degrees south, with a company of an hundred and eighteen men. The relation of this voyage was given to the public by captain Cook himself, and by Mr. George Forster, son of Dr. Forster, who had been appointed by government to accompany him for the purpose of making observations on such natural productions as might be fouud in the course of the navigation; but the publication was superintended by Dr. Douglas, the late bishop of Salisbury.

The want of success which attended captain Cook’s attempt to discover a southern continent, did not discourage another plan being resolved on, which had been recommended some time before. This was no other than the finding out a north-west passage, which the fancy of some chimerical projectors had conceived to be a practicable scheme. The dangers which our navigator had twice braved and escaped from, would have exempted him from being solicited a third time to venture his person in unknown countries, amongst desert islands, inhospitable climates, and in the midst of savages; but, on his opinion being asked concerning the person who would be most proper to execute this design, he once more relinquished the quiet and comforts of domestic life, to engage in scenes of turbulence and confusion, of difficulty and danger. His intrepid spirit and inquisitive mind induced him again to offer his services; and they were accepted without hesitation. The manner in which he had deported himself on former occasions left no room to suppose a fitter man could be selected. He prepared for his departure with the utmost alacrity, and actually sailed in the month of July 1776.

A few months after his departure from England, notwithstanding he was then absent, the Royal Society voted him sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal, as a reward for the account which he had transmitted to that body, of the method taken to preserve the health of the crew of his ship: and sir John Pringle, in an oration pronounced on the 30th of November, observed, “How meritorious that person must appear, xvbo had not only made the most extensive, but the most instructive voyages; who had not only discovered, but surveyed vast tracts of new coasts; who had dispelled the illusion of a terra australis incognita, and fixed the bounds of the habitable earth as well as those of the navigable ocean in the southern hemisphere; but that, however ample a field for praise these circumstances would afford, it was a nobler motive that had prompted the society to notice captain Cook in the honourable manner which had occasioned his then address.” After descanting on the means used on the voyage to preserve the lives of the sailors, he concluded his discourse in these terms “Allow me then, gentlemen, to deliver this medal, with his unperishing name engraven upon it, into the hands of one who will be happy to receive that trust, and to hear that this respectable body never more cordially, nor more meritoriously, bestowed that faithful symbol of their esteem^ and affection. For if Rome decreed the civic crown to him who saved the life of a single citizen, what wreaths are due to that man who, having himself saved many, perpetuates in your transactions the means by which Britain may now, on the most distant voyages, save numbers of her intrepid sons, her mariners; who, braving every danger, have so liberally contributed to the iame, to the opulence, and to the maritime empire of their country?”

It will give pain to every sensible mind to reflect, that this honourable testimony to the merit of our gallant commander never came to his knowledge. While his friends were waiting with the most earnest solicitude for tidings concerning him, and the whole nation expressed an anxious impatience to be informed of his success, advice was received from captain Clerke*, in a letter dated at Kamtshatca, the 8th day of June 177.9; from which and from other accounts, we learnt, that captain Cook was killed oil the 14th of February 1779. His death happened in the following manner; which we shall give in the words of Mr. David Samwell, surgeon of the Discovery.

"Some of the Indians of Ou,why,ee in the night took away the Discovery’s large cutter, which lay swamped at the buoy of one of her anchors: they had carried her off so quietly that we did not miss her till the morning, Sunday, February 14. Captain Clerke lost no time in waiting upon captain Cook to acquaint him with the accident: he returned on board, with orders for the launch and small cutter to go, under the command of the second lieutenant, and lie off the east point of the bay, in order to intercept all canoes that might attempt to get out; and, if he found it necessary, to fire upon them. At the same time, the third lieutenant of the Resolution, with the launch and small cutter, was sent on the same service, to the opposite point of the bay; and the master was dispatched in the large cutter, in pursuit of a double canoe, already under sail, making the best of her way out of the harbour. He soon came up with her, and by firing a few musquets drove heron shore, and the Indians left her: this happened to be the canoe of Omea, a man who bore the title of Orono. He was on board himself, and it would have been fortunate if our people had secured him, for his person

shipnaan with captain Cook in his first ship arrived in England. See Hawkesvoyage, and was appointed by him a worth’s Voyage, vol. iii. p. 395. lieutenant on the deaib of Mr. Hicks, was held as sacred as that of the king. During this time captain Cook was preparing to go ashore himself at the town of Kavaroah, in order to secure the person of Kariopoo, before he should have time to withdraw himself to another part of the island out of our reach. This appeared the most effectual step that could be taken on the present occasion, for the recovery of the boat. It was the measure he had invariably pursued, in similar cases, at other islands in these seas, and it had always been attended with the desired success: in fact, it would be difficult to point out any other mode of proceeding on these emergencies, likely to attain the object in view. We had reason to suppose that the king and his attendants had fled wheu the alarm was first given: in that case, it was captain Cook’s intention to secure the large canoes which were hauled up on the beach. He left the ship about seven o'clock, attended by the lieutenant of marines, a serjeant, corporal, and seven private men: the pinnace’s crew were also armed, and under the command of Mr. Roberts. As they rowed towards the shore, captain Cook ordered the launch to leave her station at the west point of the bay, in order to assist his own boat. This is a circumstance worthy of notice; for it clearly shews, that he was not unapprehensive of meeting with resistance from the natives, or unmindful of the necessary preparation for the safety of himself and his people. I will venture to say, that from the appearance of things just at that time, there was not one, beside himself, who judged that such precaution was absolutely requisite: so little did his conduct on the occasion bear the marks of rashness or a precipitate self-confidence! He landed, with the marines, at the upper end of the town of Kavaroah: the Indians immediately flocked round, as usual, and shewed him the customary marks of respect, by prostrating themselves before him. There were no signs of hostilities, or much alarm among them. Captain Cook, however, did not seem willing to trust to appearances; but was particularly attentive to the disposition of the marines, and to have them kept clear of the crowd. He first inquired for the king’s sons, two youths who were much attached to him, and generally his companions on board. Messengers being sent for them, they soon came lo him; and informing him that their father was asleep, at a house not far -from them, he accompanied them thither, and took the marines along with them. As he passed along, the natives every where prostrated themselves before him, and seemed to have lost no part of that respect they had always shewn to his person. He was joined by several chiefs, among whom was Kanynah, and his brother Koohowrooah. They kept the crowd in order, according to their usual custom; and being ignorant of his intention in coining on shore, frequently asked him, if he wanted any hogs, or other provisions: he told them, that he did not, and that his business was to see the king. When he arrived B.L the house, he ordered some of the Indians to go in and inform Kariopoo, that he waited without to speak with him. They came out two or three times, and instead of returning any answer from the king, presented some pieces of red cloth to him, which made captain Cook suspect that he was not in the house; he therefore desired the lieutenant of marines to go in. The lieutenant found the old man just awaked from sleep, and seemingly alarmed at the message; but he came out without hesitation. Captain Cook took him by the hand, and in a friendly manner asked him to go on board, to which he very readily consented. Thus far matters appeared in a favourable train, and the natives did not seem much alarmed or apprehensive of hostility on our side; at which captain Cook expressed himself a little surprisec), saying, that as the inhabitants of that town appeared innocent of stealing the cutter, he should not molest them, but that he must get the king on board. Kariopoo sat down before his door, and was surrounded by a great crowd: Kanynah and his brother were both very active in keeping order among them. In a little time, however, the Indians were observed arming themselves with long spears, clubs, and daggers, and putting on thick mats, which they use as armour. This hostile appearance increased, and became more alarming, on the arrival of two men in a canoe from the opposite side of the bay, with the news of a chief, called Kareemoo, having been killed by one of the Discovery’s boats, in their passage across: they had also delivered this account to each of the ships. Upon that information, the women, who were sitting upon the beach at their breakfast, and conversing familiarly with our people in the boats, retired, and a confused murmur spread through the crowd. An old priest came to captain Cook, with a cocoa nut in his hand, which he held out to him as a present, at the same time singing very loud. He was often desired to be silent, but in vain: he continued importunate and troublesome, and there was no such thing as getting rid of him or his noise: it seemed as if he meant to divert their attention from his countrymen, who were growing more tumultuous, and arming themselves in every quarter. Captain Cook, being at the same time surrounded by a great crowd, thought his situation rather hazardous: he therefore ordered the lieutenant of marines to march his small party to the water-side, where the boats lay within a few yards of the shore: the Indians readily made a lane for them to pass, and did not offer to interrupt them. The distance they had to go might be fifty or sixty yards; captain Cook followed, having hold of Kariopoo’s hand, who accompanied him very willingly: he was attended by his wife, two sons, and several chiefs. The troublesome old priest followed, making the same savage noise. Keowa, the younger son, went directly into the pinnace, expecting his father to follow; but just as he arrived at the water-side, his wife threw her arms about his neck, and, with the assistance of two chiefs, forced him to sit down by the side of a double canoe. Captain Cook expostulated with them, but to nopurpose they would not suffer the king to proceed telling him he would be put to death if he went on board the ship. Kariopoo, whose conduct seemed entirely resigned to the will of others, hung down his head, and appeared much distressed.

While the king was in this situation, a chief, well known to us, of the name of Coho, was observed near, with au iron dagger, partly concealed under his cloke, seemingly with an intention of stabbing captain Cook, or the lieutenant of marines. The latter proposed to fire at him, but captain Cook would notpermit it. Coho closing upon them, obliged the officer to strike him with his piece, which made him retire. Another Indian laid hold of the Serjeant’s musket, and endeavoured to wrench it from him, but was prevented by the lieutenant’s making a blow at him. Captain Cook, seeing the tumult increase, and the Indians growing more daring and resolute, observed, that if he were to take the king off by force, he could not do it without sacrificing the lives of many of his people. He then paused a little, and was on the point of giving his orders to reimbark, when a man threw a stone at him, which he returned with a discharge of small shot, with which one barrel of his double piece was loaded. The man, having a thick mat before him, received little or no hurt: he brandished his spear, and threatened to dart it at captain Cook, who being still unwilling to take away his life, instead of firing with ball, knocked him down with his musket. He expostulated strongly with the most forward of the crowd, upon their turbulent behaviour. He had given up all thoughts of getting the king on board, as it appeared impracticable; and his care was then only to act on the defensive, and to secure a safe embarkation for his small party, which was closely pressed by a body of several thousand people. Keowa, the king’s son, who was in the pinnace, being alarmed on hearing the first firing, was, at his own entreaty, put on shore again; for even at that time Mr. Roberts, who commanded her, did not apprehend that captain Cook’s person was in any danger, otherwise he would have detained the prince, which no doubt would have been a great check on the Indians. One man was observed, behind a double canoe, in the action of darting his spear at captain Cook; who was forced to fire at him in his own defence, but happened to kill another close to him, equally forward in the tumult: the serjeant, observing that he had missed the man he aimed at, received orders to fire at him, which he did, and killed him. By this time the impetuosity of the Indians was somewhat repressed: they fell back in a body, and seemed staggered; but being pushed on by those behind, they returned to the charge, and poured a volley of stones among the marines, who, without waiting for orders, returned it with a general discharge of musketry, which was instantly followed by a fire from the boats. At this captain Cook was heard to express his astonishment: he waved his hand to the boats, called to them to cease firing, and to come nearer in to receive the marines. Mr. Roberts immediate^ brought the pinnace as close to the shore as he could without grounding, notwithstanding the showers of stones that fell among the people: but Mr. John Williamson, the lieutenant, who commanded in the launch, instead of pulling in to the assistance of captain Cook, withdrew his boat further off, at the moment that every thing seems to have depended upon the timely exertions of those in the boats. By his own account, he mistook the signal: but be that as it may, this circumstance appears to me to have decided the fatal turn of the affair, and to have removed every chance which remained with captain Cook, of escaping with his life. The business of saving the marines out of the water, in consequence of that, fell altogether upon the pinnace; which thereby became so much crowded, that the crew were in a great measure prevented from using their fire-arms, or giving what assistance they otherwise might have done to captain Cook; so that he seems, at the most critical point of time, to have wanted the assistance of both boats, owing to the removal of the launch. For notwithstanding that they kept up a fire on the crowd from the situation to which they removed in that boat, the fatal confusion which ensued on her being withdrawn, to say the least of it, must have prevented the full effect, that the prompt co-operation of the two boats, according to captain Cook’s orders, must have had towards the preservation of himself and his people. At that time it was to the boats alone that captain Cook had to look for his safety; for when the marines had fired, the Indians rushed among them, and forced them into the water, where four of them were killed: their lieutenant was wounded, but fortunately escaped, and was taken up by the pinnace. Captain Cook was then the only one remaining on the rock: he was observed making for the pinnace, holding his left hand against the back of his head, to guard it from the stones, and carrying his musquet under the other arm. An Indian was seen following him, but with caution and timidity: for he stopped once or twice, as if undetermined to proceed. At last he advanced upon him unawares, and with a large club, or common stake, gave him a blow on the back of the head, and then precipitately retreated. The stroke seemed to have stunned captain Cook: he staggered a few paces, then fell on his hand and one knee, and dropped his musquet. As he was rising, and before he could recover his feet, another Indian stabbed him in the back of the neck with an iron dagger. He then fell into a bite of water about knee deep, where others crowded upon him, and endeavoured to keep him under; but struggling very strongly with them, he got his head up, and casting his look towards the pinnace, seemed to solicit assistance. Though the boat was not above five or six yards distant from him, yet from the crowded and confused state of the crew, it seems it was not in their power to save him. The Indians got him under again, but in deeper water: he was, however, able to get his head up once more; and being almost spent in the struggle, he naturally turned to the rock, and was endeavouring to support himself by it, when a savage gave him a blow with a club, and he was seen alive no more. They hauled him up lifeless on the rocks, where they seemed to take a savage pleasure in using every barbarity to his dead body; snatching the daggers out of each other’s hands, to have the horrid satisfaction of piercing the fallen victim of their barbarous rage."

Captain Cook was a married man, and left several children behind him. On each of these his majesty settled a pension of 251. per ann. and 200l. per ann. on his widow. It is remarkable, if true, as reported, that captain Cook was god-father to his wife; and at the very time she was christened, declared that he had determined on the uniou which afterwards took place between them.

To what we have already said of this circumnavigator, we shall add some extracts from the account given of his life and public services by captain King: " He was engaged in most of the busy and active scenes in North America; yet he found time to read Euclid, and supply the deficiencies of an early education. Sir Charles Saunders, at the seige of Quebec, committed to his care services of the first importance. Lord Colville and sir Charles both patronized him; and by their recommendation he was appointed to survey the gulph of St. Laurence and the coasts of Newfoundland. The constitution of his body was robust, inured to labour, and capable of undergoing the severest hardships. His stomach bore, without difficulty, the coarsest and most ungrateful food. Indeed, temperance in him was scarcely a virtue; so great was the indifference with which he submitted to every kind of selfdenial. The qualities of his mind were of the same hardy, vigorous kind with those of his body. His courage was cool and determined, and accompanied with an admirable presence of mind in the moment of danger. His manners were plain and unaffected. His temper might perhaps have been justly blameable, as subject to hastiness and passion, had not these been disarmed by a disposition the most benevolent and humane.

“Such were the outlines of captain Cook’s character; but its most distinguishing feature was that unremitting perseverance in the pursuit of his object, which was not only superior to the opposition of dangers, and the pressure of hardships, but even exempt from the want of ordinary relaxation. Perhaps no science ever received greater accessions frbm the labours of a single man, than geography has done from those of captain Cook. In his first voyage to the South seas he discovered the Society islands; determined the insularity of New Zealand; discovered the straits which separate the two islands, and are called after his name; and made a complete survey of both. He afterwards explored the eastern coast of New Holland, hitherto unknown; an extent of upwards of two thousand miles. In his second expedition he resolved the great problem of a southern continent, having traversed that hemisphere in such a manner as not to leave a possibility of its existence, unless near the pole, and out of the reach of navigation. During this voyage he discovered New Caledonia, the largest island in the Southern Pacific, except New Zealand: the island of Georgia; and an unknown coast, which he named Sandwich land, the Thule of the southern hemisphere: and having twice visited the tropical seas, he settled the situations of the old, and made several new discoveries. But the last voyage is distinguished above all the rest by the extent and importance of its discoveries. Besides several smaller islands in the southern Pacific, he discovered, to the north of the equinoctial line, the groupe called the Sandwich islands; which, from their situation and productions, bid fairer for becoming an object of consequence in the system of European navigation, than any other discovery in the South sea. He afterwards explored what had hitherto remained-unknown of the western coast of America, containing an extent of three thousand five hundred miles; ascertained the proximity of the two great continents of Asia and America; passed the straits between them, and surveyed the coast on each side, to such a height of northern latitude, as to demonstrate the impracticability of a passage, in that hemisphere, from the Atlantic into the Pacific ocean, either by an eastern or a western course. In short, if we except the sea of Amur, and the Japanese archipelago, which still remain imperfectly known to Europeans, he has completed the hydrography of the habitable globe.” Captain King concludes his account of this extraordinary man, whose death cannot be sufficiently lamented, in the following words: “Having given the most faithful account I have been able to collect, both from my own observation and the relations of others, of the death of my ever-honoured friend, and also of his character and services, I shall now leave his memory to the gratitude and admiration of posterity; accepting with a melancholy satisfaction the honour, which the loss of his has procured me, of seeing my name joined with his; and of testifying that affection and respect for his memory, which, whilst ' he lived, it was no less my inclination than my constant study to shew him.”

We cannot close this article without giving a short sketch of the characters of the different writers by whom the last voyage was given to the world. Among these we ought to reckon the rev. Dr. Douglas, the editor, who, in a grave and dignified style, suitable to the sublimity of a journey or voyage round the globe, has arranged the matter; chastised, no doubt, in some instances, the language of our circumnavigators; and pointed out to the curious and philosophic eye, the benefits that have resulted, and may yet result, from the late discoveries in the great Pacific ocean; and the attempt, though unsuccessful, to explore a northern passage from thence into the Atlantic. Although this gentleman has levelled down the more striking peculiarities of the different writers of these voyages into some appearance of equality, yet a critic can discern in each his proper features. Captain Cook, accurate, minute, and severe, surveys every object with a mathematical eye, ever intent to fix or to discover some truth in astronomy, geography, and navigation. His observations on men and manners, and the produce of countries, are not very subtle or refined, but always sensible and judicious. He speculates in order to establish facts, but does not inquire into facts for the airy purposes of speculation. Captain King has perhaps a greater versatility of genius than captain Cook, as well as a more lively fancy, and a greater variety and extent of knowledge. Agreeably to this character of him, he paints the scenes that fall under his eye, in glowing and various colours. He has less perhaps of the mathematician and navigator in his composition than captain Cook, and more of the author. He himself seems conscious that this is his forte, and wields the pen with alacrity, with ease and satisfaction. The gleanings that were left to his industry by captain Cook, he seems too eager to pick up, to dwell upon, and to amplify. Mr. Anderson is superior to both these writers in variety of knowledge, and subtlety and sublimity of genius. He is versant in languages ancient and modern, in mathematics, in natural history, in natural philosophy, in civil history, in the metaphysics of both morality and theology; yet, as a counterbalance to these brilliant qualities and endowments, he launches forth too much into theory, and is, in some instances, too little constrained by the limits of fact and nature in his speculations. He has found the doctrines of the immortality and the immateriality of the soul among nations, who, in all probability, have not terms to express these, and very few to signify abstracted ideas of any kind. A quick imagination and a subtle intellect can see any thing in any subject, and extend the ideas most familiar to themselves over the boundless variety of the universe.

, Mus.D. an eminent organist and contra-puntist, in the style of our best ecclesiastical composers, whom he had studied, from Tailis to Crofts, Weidon, and Green, a very correct harmonist and good organ player, but with limited powers of invention, was organist of Westminster abbey, and on the dealh of Kelway elected organist of St. Martin’s in the Fields. He long presided at the Crown and Anchor concert, which was originally established for the preservation of the best works of the most eminent masters of old times. It is a curious circumstance, that at this concert of ancient music Handel was regarded as an innovator, and Geminiani thought it an honour to be allowed to dedicate his last concertos to this society. Dr. Pepusch, who established and directed this concert to the time of his death, never allowed Handel any other merit than that of a good practical musician, The irreconcileable enmity between the lovers of old and new music became, from the time of this institution, as violent as the rage between the champions of ancient and modern learning. Dr, Cook, a steady votary of the old masters, died September 1793. He was the son of Benjamin Cook, who kept a music shop in New-street, Covent-garden, and who published by patent, among other things, six concertos for violins, tenor and bass, by Alexander Scarlatti; the chamber symphonies of Porpora, for three instruments; and the two books of lessons by Domenico Scarlatti, in long 4to, of which Rosingrave was the editor. After the decease of Cook, Johnson reprinted Scarlatti’s lessons, with the same title-page and the same errors as had escaped correction in the former edition.

an English artist, was born in 1642. Having a taste for historical painting, he travelled to Italy for the purpose of improving himself in this branch of the art, and studied under Sulvator Rosa; but, on his return to England, met with so little encouragement, that for many years he remained in want and obscurity, and at last was obliged to fly for a murder which he committed on a person who courted one of his mistresses. On his return, when this affair was forgot, his talents gained him notice, and he was employed by king William to repair his cartoons; he likewise finished the equestrian portrait of Charles II. at Chelsea college, painted the choir of New College chapel, Oxford, as it stood before the late repairs, and the staircase at Ranelagh house, besides many other works mentioned by lord Orford. He is also said to have tried portrait painting, but to have given it up, disgusted with the caprices of those who sat to him. He died 18th Nov. 1700.

, preceptor to Edward VI. was born at Giddy, or Gidding-hall, in Essex, about 1506, and descended from sir Thomas Cooke, mayor of London. He was educated probably at Cambridge, as Wood makes no mention of him. However, he was such an eminent master of the whole circle of arts, of such singular piety and goodness, of such uncommon prudence in the management of his own family, that those noble persons who had the charge of king Edward appointed him to instruct that prince in learning, and to form his manners. He lived in exile during the persecution of Mary, but after Elizabeth’s accession returned home, and spent the remainder of his days in peace and honour, at Giddy-hall, where he died in 1576. He was, if Lloyd may be credited, naturally of a reserved temper, and took more pleasure to breed up statesmen than to be one. “Contemplation was his soul, privacy his life, and discourse his element: business was his purgatory, and publicness his torment.” To which may be added what king Edward VI. used to say of his tutors, that Rodolph, the German, spake honestly, Sir John Cheke talked merrily, Dr. Cox solidly, and sir Anthony Cooke weighingly.

Several ingenious sayings of his are recorded; particularly the following: “That there were three objects, before whom he could not do amiss; his prince, his conscience, and his children.” This facetious story is likewise related of him: “A Sussex knight, having spent a great estate at court, and reduced himself to one park and a fine house in it, was yet ambitious to entertain the king (Edward VI.) For that purpose he new painted his gates, with a coat of arms and this motto over them, in large golden letters, Oia Vanitas. Sir Anthony offering to read it, desired to know of the gentleman what he meant by Oia, who told him it stood for omnia.” I wonder,“replied he,” that, having made your omnia so little as you have, you should yet make your vanitas so large."

Sir Anthony Cooke was peculiarly happy in his four daughters, who made so distinguished a figure among the literary ladies of the period in which they lived, and were otherwise so eminent in situation and character, as to require some notice in a work of this description.

, the eldest of these daughters, we mentioned in the article of William Cecil, lord Burleigh, remarking that she was long the faithful wife of that great Statesman; that she was learned in the Greek tongue, and wrote a letter to the University of Cambridge in that language; that she was a patroness of literature; and that she was distinguished by her numerous charities. To this we may now add, that her preceptor was Mr. Lawrence, an eminent Grecian; and she fully answered the care and pains that were taken in her education: but her reading was not confined to the classic writers of Greece only, but extended, likewise, to the ancient Christian fathers, particularly Basil, Cyril, Chrysostom, and Gregory Nazianzen. A piece of Saint Chrysostom’s was translated by her, from the original, into the English language. It was on the 21st of December, 1546, and in the 20th year of her age, that she was married to sir William Cecil. Her death, as we have seen in her husband’s article, was on the 4th of April, 1589. She had an admirable understanding, and is said to have been a good politician. Nor is this at all surprising, considering her intellectual powers, and that, for more than forty and two years, she was the wife of such an illustrious statesman as Lord Burleigh. As an evidence of her political talents, Mr. Ballard has produced a letter written by her, on the 26th of October, 1573, to sir William Fitzwilliams, at that time lord deputy of Ireland. The letter contains some excellent advice; and shews, that she was not only a woman of great good sense, but well acquainted with the world. Five days after her decease, lord Burleigh wrote what he calls a meditation on the death of his lady, which contains several farther particulars concerning her, and is a striking testimony of his affection to her memory.

, third daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, was born about the year 1529, and having enjoyed the same liberal education which was bestowed upon her sisters, was equally happy in improving it, and gained the applause of the most eminent scholars of the age. It was observed by sir John Harrington, that if Madam Vittoria, an Italian lady, deserved to have her name celebrated and transmitted to posterity by Ariosto, for writing some verses, in the manner of an epitaph, upon her husband, after his decease; no less commendation was due to the lady before us, who did as much and more, not only for two husbands, but for her son, daughter, brother, sister, and venerable old friend Mr. Noke of Shottesbrooke, in the Greek, Latin, and English tongues. She was married, first, to sir Thomas Hobby, and accompanied him to France, when he went there as ambassador from queen Elizabeth, and died there July 13, 1566. His disconsolate lady having erected a chapel in the chancel of the church at Bisham, in Berkshire, carefully deposited the remains of her husband, and of his brother, air Philip Hobby, in one tomb together, which she adorned with large inscriptions, in Latin and English verse, of her own composition. She had by sir Thomas Hobby four children, Edward, Elizabeth, Anne, and Thomas Posthumus. It does not appear that she had great comfort in either of her sons; and the youngest in particular, as is manifest from a letter written by her to lord treasurer Burleigh, was guilty of such extravagancies and undutifulness, as gave her much uneasiness. It is evident, from the letter, that she was a woman of uncommon spirit and sense, and an excellent economist. Some years after the decease of sir Thomas Hobby, she married John, lord Russel, son and heir to Francis Russel, earl of Bedford. Her husband dying before his father, in the year 1584, was buried in the abbey church of Westminster, where there is a noble monument erected to his memory, and embellished with inscriptions in Greek, Latin, and English, by this his surviving lady. Her children, by John lord Russel, were one son, who died young in 1580, and two daughters, Anne and Elizabeth. The last of them survived her father but a little time, and is said to have bled to death by the prick of a needle in the forefinger of her left hand. This story has been supported by the figure placed on her monument, which is in the same grate with that of her father; where, on a pedestal of black and white marble made column-wise, in imitation of a Roman altar, may be seen the statue of a young lady seated in a most curiously-wrought osier chair, of the finest polished alabaster, in a very melancholy posture, inclining her head to the right hand, and with the forefinger of her left only extended downwards, to direct us to behold the death’s head underneath her feet, and, as the tradition goes, to signify the disaster that brought her to her end. Mr. Ballard thinks, that if the fact be true, it must be attributed to some gangrene, or other dangerous symptom, occasioned perhaps at first by the pricking of an artery or nerve, which at last brought her to the grave. The matter, however, does not deserve to be reasoned upon; being, in truth, no other than an idle and groundless tale, which very well answers the purpose of amusing the crowd who go to visit the tombs in the Abbey.

Lady Russel translated out of French into English a tract entitled, “A way of reconciliation of a good and learned man, touching the true nature and substance of the body and blood of Christ in the Sacrament.” This work was printed in 1605, and is dedicated to her only daughter, Anne Herbert, wife to Henry lord Herbert, son and heir to Edward earl of Worcester.

The time of lady Russel' s death has not been ascertained. In a letter written by her ta sir Robert Cecil, without date, she complains of her bad health and infirmities, and mentions her having compleated sixty-eight years. She seems to have been buried at Bisham, in Berks, near the remains of her first husband, and in the chapel which she herself had founded. From Birch’s Memoirs of the reign of queen Elizabeth, it appears that lady Russel interested herself in the concerns of her nephew Anthony Bacon, and endeavoured to do him service with the lord treasurer Burleigh. In that work there are some extracts from two of her letters upon this occasion, and a long account of a curious conversation which she had with her nephew, relative to the disputes between him and the treasurer. The fact was, that lord Burleigh was dissatisfied with the connections both of Mr, Anthony and Mr. Francis Bacon, and especially with their attachment to the Earl of Essex, and on these accounts was not favourable to their promotion.

, the fourth daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, was born about the year 1530, and like her sisters became famous for her knowledge in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin tongues, and for her skill in poetry. A short specimen of her talent in. that art has been preserved by sir John Harrington and Dr. Thomas Fuller; but there is some difficulty in determining the occasion upon which the verses were written. Sir John Harrington says, that her design in writing them was to get a kinsman of hers sent to Cornwall, where she inhabited, and to prevent his going beyond sea. Mr. Phillips, in his “Theatrum Poetarum,” asserts that it was her lover. Dr. Fuller, however, with greater appearance of reason, informs us, that her husband being designed by queen Elizabeth ambassador to France in troublesome times, when the employment, always difficult, was then apparently dangerous, his lady wrote these lines to her sister Mildred Cecil, to engage her interest with lord Burleigh for preventing the appointment.

The person to whom Katherine Cooke was married was Henry Killegrevv, esq. a gentleman of good abilities, and who, for the services he performed to his country in the quality of an ambassador, was afterwards knighted. It should seem, therefore, that if Fuller be right in the account he has given of the purpose of the preceding verses, the fair author did not obtain her request. Sir Henry was living in great esteem, in the year 1602; and it appears, from her father’s will, that Lady Killegrevv was alive on the 22d of May, 1576. She was buried in the chancel of the church of St. Thomas the Apostle, in Vintry-yard, London, whiTe is an elegant monument erected to her memory, on which is a pious Latin inscription, composed by herself.

The death of lady Killegrevv was lamented in various epitaphs. Her sister, lady Russel, wrote one, partly in Greek and partly in Latin verse. Three others, in Latin verse, were written by Robert Mason Format), minister of the reformed French church in London, by Andrew Melvin, and by William Chark. Such of our readers as are curious to see these productions, may find them in Ballard. It is generally understood that sir Anthony Cooke had only four daughters; but there is some reason to believe that he had, at least, one more. Camden, Fuller, Lloyd, Bohun, and Strype, concur in mentioning a fifth daughter, whose name, they say, is lost. Nevertheless, they all observe that she was married to sir Ralph Rowlet but this seems doubtful.

, a poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Braintree in Essex, in 1702 or 1703, where his father was an inn-keeper, and as Pope used to say, a Muggletonian. He was educated at Felsted school, where he made considerable proficiency, but how long he remained here, or what was his destination in life is not known. For some time he appears to have been domesticated in the family of lord Pembroke, who died in 1733, and who probably suggested to him a translation of Hesiod, to which his lordship contributed some notes. Before this nobleman’s death, he came to London in 1722, and became a writer by profession, and a strenuous supporter of revolution-principles, which formed a bond of union between him and Tickell, Philips, Welsted, Steele, Dennis, and others, whose political opinions agreed with his own. He wrote in some of the weekly journals of the time, and was considered as a man of learning and abilities. He is supposed to have attacked Pope from political principles, but it is fully as probable, that, as he was a good Greek scholar, he wished to derive some reputation from proving that Pope, in his translation of Homer, was deficient in that language. In 1725 he published a poem entitled “The Battle of the Poets,” in which Pope, Swift, and some others were treated with much freedom and translated and published in the Daily Journal, 1727, the episode of Thersites, from the second book of the Iliad, to show how much Pope had mistaken his author. For this attack Pope gave him a place in the “Dunciad,” and notices him with equal contempt in his Epistle to Dr. Arbutlmot. In a note likewise he informs us that Cooke “wrote letters at the same time to him, protesting his innocence;” but Cooke’s late biographer, sir Joseph Mawbey, is inclined to doubt this, and rather to believe that he was regardless of Pope’s enmity. In a subsequent edition of “The Battle of the Poets” Cooke notices the Dunciad with becoming spirit, and speaks with little respect of Pope’s “philosophy or dignity of mind, who could be provoked by what a boy writ concerning his translation of Homer, and in verses which gave no long promise of duration.” In 1725 or 172G, Cooke published “The Knights of the Bath,” and “Philander and Cydippe,” both poetical tales; and several other pieces of poetry the former evidently meant to attract the public attention, on the revival, about that time, of the order of the Bath. He wrote soon after “The Triumphs of Love and Honour,” a play; “The Eunuch,” a farce; and “The Mournful Nuptials,” a tragedy; all performed at Drury-lane theatre, but with little success. In 1726 he published an account of the “Life and Writings of Andrew Marvell, esq.” prefixed to an edition of the poetical works of that celebrated politician, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1728 his translation of “Hesiod.” In 1734 he published an edition of Terence, with an English translation, 3 vols. 12mo, and in 1737 “A Translation of Cicero on the Nature of the Gods,” with philosophical, critical, and explanatory notes, to which is added an examination into the astronomy of the ancients, 8vo. In 1741 he encreased his classical reputation by an edition of Virgil, with an interpretation in Latin, and notes in English. In 1742 he published a volume of his original “Poems,” with imitations and translations, and in 1746 undertook a new edition and translation of Plautus, by subscription. Of this he produced in 1754 the first volume, containing a dissertation on the life of Plautus, and a. translation of the comedy of Amphitryon, but although his list of subscribers was very copious, and he went on receiving more, he never completed the work.

He was always, however, employing his pen on temporary subjects, either in poems or pamphlets, and for some time was concerned in the political paper established in opposition to sir Robert Walpole, entitled “The Craftsman;” and at one time, in 1748, was apprehended for some libel against the government, but it does not appear that a prosecution followed. During his latter years he published a variety of single poems, which it would be unnecessary to enumerate, more particularly as they have been long consigned to oblivion; and he also contributed songs and ballads for Vauxhall, long the Parnassus of the minor poets. In 1756 Dr. Leonard Howard, rector of St. George’s, Southwark, published a collection of Ancient Letters, in 2 vols. 4to, but as he had not materials to fill up the second, Cooke, who was his intimate friend, gave him many letters from his correspondents, and some pieces of poetry, with which Howard completed this strange jumble. The letters, however, are in some respects amusing, and show that Cooke was complimented at least, by some persons of eminence, although probably not much respected. Sir Joseph Mawbey had a tragedy of his entitled “Germanicus,” which Garrick refused, and three folio volumes of his Mss. His residence in the latter part of his life was at Lambeth, in a small and insignificant house and garden, of which he used to speak with great pomp, and where he died Dec. 20, 1756, in great poverty. He was buried by a subscription among a few friends, who also contributed to the support of his widow and daughter, neither of whom survived long. His biographer’s account of his morals and religious principles is not very favourable, but it is unnecessary to dwell longer on the merits of an author whose productions it would, perhaps, be impossible to revive.

, earl of Shaftesbury, an eminent statesman of very dubious character, was son of sir John Cooper, of llockborn in the county of Southampton, bart. by Anne, daughter of sir Anthony Ashley of Winborne St. Giles in the county of Dorset, bart. where he was born July 22, 1621. Being a boy of uncommon parts, he was sent to Oxford at the age of fifteen, and admitted a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, under Dr. John Prideaux, the rector of it. He is said to have studied hard there for about two years; and then removed to Lincoln’s inn, where he applied himself with great vigour to the law, and especially that part of it which related to the constitution of the kingdom. He was elected for Tewksbury in Gloucestershire, in the parliament which met at Westminster, April 13, 1640, but was soon dissolved. He seems to have been well affected to the king’s service at the beginning of the civil war: for he repaired to the king at Oxford, offered his assistance, and projected a scheme, not for subduing or conquering his country, but for reducing such as had either deserted or mistaken their duty to his majesty’s obedience. He was afterwards invited to Oxford by a letter from his majesty; but, perceiving that he was not in confidence, that ins behaviour was disliked, and his person in danger, he retired into the parliament quarters, and soon after went up to London, where he was well received by that party “to which,” says Clarendon, “he gave himself up body and soul.” He accepted a commission from the parliament and, raising forces, took Wareham by storm, October 1644, and soon after reduced all the adjacent parts of Dorsetshire. This, and some other actions of the same nature, induced the above-mentioned historian to say that he “became an implacable enemy to the royal family.” The next year he was sheriff of Wiltshire, in 1651 he was of the committee of twenty, appointed to consider of ways and means for reforming the law. He was also one of the members of the convention that met after Cromwell had turned out the long parliament. He was again a member of parliament in 1654, and one of the principal persons who signed that famous protestation, charging the protector with tyranny and arbitrary government; and he always opposed the illegal measures of that usurper to the utmost. When the protector Richard was deposed, and the Rump came again into power, they nominated sir Anthony one of their council of state, and a commissioner for managing the army. He was at that very time engaged in a secret correspondence with the friends of Charles II. and greatiy instrumental in promoting his restoration; which brought him into peril of his life with the powers then in being. He was returned a member for Dorsetshire, in that which was called the healing parliament, which sat in April 1660; and a resolution being taken to restore the constitution, he was named one of the twelve members of the house of commons to carry their invitation to the king. It was in performing this service that he had the misfortune to be overturned in a carriage upon a Dutch road, by which he received a dangerous wound between the ribs, which ulcerated many years after, and was opened when he was chancellor.

Upon the king’s coming over he was sworn of his majesty’s most honourable privy-council. He was also one of the commissioners for the trial of the regicides; and though the Oxford historian is very severe on him on this occasion, yet his advocates are very desirous of proving that he was not any way concerned in betraying or shedding the blood of his sovereign. By letters patent, dated April 20, 1661, he was created barou Ashley of Winborne St. Giles; soon after made chancellor and nnder-treasurer of the exchequer, and then one of the lords commissioners for executing the office of high-treasurer. He was afterwards made lord lieutenant of the county of Dorset; and, April 23, 1672, created baron Cooper of Pawlet in the county of Somerset, and earl of Shaftesbury. November 4 following, he was raised to the post of lord high chancellor of England. He shone particularly in his speeches in parliament; and, if we judge only from those which he made upon swearing in the treasurer Clifford, his successor sir Thomas Osborne, and baron Thurland, we must conclude him to have been a very accomplished orator. The short time he was at the helm was a season of storms and tempests; and it is but doing him justice to say that they could not either affright or distract him. November 9, 1673, he resigned the great seal under very singular circumstances. Soon after the breaking up of the parliament, as Echard relates, the earl was sent for on Sunday morning to court; as was also sir Heneage Finch, attorney-general, to whom the seals were promised. As soon as the earl came he retired with the king into the closet, while the prevailing party waited in triumph to see him return without the purse. His lordship being alone with the king, said, “Sir, I know you intend to give the seals to the attorney-general, but 1 am sure your majesty never intended to dismiss me with contempt.” The king, who could not do an ill-natured thing, replied, “Gods fish, my lord, I will not do it with any circumstance that may look like an affront.” “Then, sir,” said the earl, “I desire your majesty will permit me to carry the seals before you to chapel, and send for them afterwards from my house.” To this his majesty readily consented; and the earl entertained the king with news and diverting stories till the very minute he was to go to chapel, purposely to amuse the courtiers and his successor, who he believed was upon the rack for fear he should prevail upon the king to change his mind. The king and the earl came out of the closet talking together and smiling, and went together to chapel, which greatly surprised, them all: and some ran immediately to tell the duke of York, that all his measures were broken. After sermon the earl went home with the seals, and that evening the king gave them to the attorneygeneral.

After he had thus quitted the court, he continued to make a great figure in parliament: his abilities enabled him to shine, and he was not of a nature to rest. In 1675, the treasurer, Danby, introduced the test-bill into the house of lords, which was vigorously opposed by the earl of Shaftesbury; who, if we may believe Burnet, distinguished himself more in this session than ever he had done before. This dispute occasioned a prorogation; and there ensued a recess of fifteen months. When the parliament met again, Feb. 16, 1677, the duke of Buckingham argued, that it ought to be considered as dissolved: the earl of Shaftesbury was of the same opinion, and maintained it with so much warmth, that, together with the duke before mentioned, the earl of Salisbury, and the lord Wharton, he was sent to the Tower, where he continued thirteen, mouths, though the other lords, upon their submission, were immediately discharged. When he was set at liberty he conducted the opposition to the earl of Danby' s administration with such vigour and dexterity, that it was found impossible to do any thing effectually in parliament, without changing the system which then prevailed. The king, who desired nothing so much as to be easy, resolved to make a change; dismissed all the privy-council at once, and formed a new one. This was declared April 21, 1679; and at the same time the earl of Shaftesbury was appointed lord president. He did not hold this employment longer than October the fifth following. He had drawn upon himself the implacable hatred of the duke of York, by steadily promoting, if not originally inventing, the project of an exclusion bill: and therefore the duke’s party was constantly at work against him. Upon the king’s summoning a parliament to meet at Oxford, March 21, 1681, he joined with several lords in a petition to prevent its meeting there, which, however, failed of success. He was present at that parliament, and strenuously supported the exclusion bill: but the duke soon contrived to make him feel the weight of his resentment. For his lordship was apprehended for high treason, July 2, 1681; and, after being examined by his majesty in council, was committed to the Tower, where he remained upwards of four months. He was at length tried, acquitted, and discharged; yet did not think himself safe, as his enemies were now in the zenith of their power. He thought it high time therefore to seek for some place of retirement, where, being out of their reach, he might wear out the small remainder of his life in peace. It was with this view, November 1682, he embarked for Holland; and arriving safely at Amsterdam, after a dangerous voyage, he took a house there, proposing to live in a manner suitable to his quality. He was visited by persons of the first distinction, and treated with all the deference and respect he could desire. But being soon seized by his old distemper, the gout, it immediately flew into his stomach, and became mortal, so that he expired Jan. 22, 1683, in his 62d year. His body was transported to England, and interred with his ancestors at Winbprne; and in 1732, a noble monument, with a large inscription, was erected by Anthony earl of Shaftesbury, his great grandson.

It was perhaps lord Shaftesbury’s misfortune, that those who were angry with him, have transmitted to posterity the history of the times in which he lived, and of that government in which he had so large a share. Marchmont Needham published a severe pamphlet against him, entitled “A packet of advices and animadversions, sent from London to the men of Shaftesbury, which is of use for all his majesty’s subjects in the three kingdoms,” Lond. 1676; and much of it is transferred verbatim into the account given of him by the Oxford historian. He was also represented as having had the vanity to expect to be chosen king of Poland; and this made way for calling him count Tapsky, alluding to the tap, which had been applied upon the breaking out of the ulcer between his ribs, when he was chancellor. It was also a standing jest with the lower form of wits, to style him Shiftsbury instead of Shaftesbury, The author who relates this, tells us also, that when he was chancellor, one sir Paul Neal watered his mares with rhenish and sugar: that is, entertained his mistresses. In his female connections he was very licentious; and it is recorded, that Charles II. who would both take liberties and bear them, once said to the earl at court, in a vein of raillery and good humour, and in reference only to his amours, “I believe, Shaftesbury, thou art the wickedest fellow in my dominions:” to which, with a low bow and very grave face, the earl replied, “May it please your majesty, of a subject I believe I am;” at which the merry monarch laughed heartily.

His character in the Biog. Britannica is one continued panegyric, from which more recent and impartial writers have made many and heavy deductions, particularly Macpherson and Dalrymple. Referring to these authorities for a character which, involved as it is in the history of the times, might form a volume, we shall conclude this article with some information respecting the various attempts to produce a life of him. The earl himself had written a history of his own times, which, when he was obliged to flee to Holland, he entrusted to the care of Mr. Locke. Unfortunately for the public, when Algernon Sidney was put to death, on a charge of' treason grounded upon papers found in his closet, Mr. Locke, intimidated with the apprehension of a like prosecution, committed lord Shaftesbury’s manuscript to the flames. The professed design of the work was to display to the world the principles and motives by which his enemies had been actuated, and to give a true and impartial account of his own conduct. It began with the reformation, and traced the course of events down to the civil war, with a view of pointing out the defects of the constitution, and of stating what ought farther to be done, in order to strengthen and confirm the liberties of the people. It is understood that the earl was particularly excellent in his characters, some of which, in loose papers, are still in the possession of the family. The largest fragment now remaining is in the early part of the work, where the author has drawn the characters of the principal gentlemen who flourished in the county of Dorset, at the time in which he arrived to man’s estate. From this fragment, a curious extract, giving an account of the hon. William Hastings, of Woodlands in Dorsetshire, was published in the Connoisseur. It affords a striking example of lord Shaftesbury’s talent in characteristic composition; and Mr. Walpole, who in no other respect has spoken favourably of his lordship, has observed, that it is a curious and well-drawn portrait of our ancient English gentry.