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

At Oxford he lived highly respected, and collected and printed the same year all his smaller pieces in 8vo but he did not livelong for, on Sunday evening, Jan. 14, 1753, as he was in the midst of his family, listening to the lesson in the burial service which his lady was reading to him, he was seized with what was called a palsy in the heart, and instantly expired. The accident was so sudden, that his body was cold, and his joints stiff, before it was discovered as he lay upon a couch, and seemed to be asleep, till his daughter, on presenting him with a dish of tea, first perperceived his insensibility. His remains were interred at Christ church, Oxford, and there is an elegant marble monument over him, with an inscription by Dr. Markham, then master of Westminster school and late archbishop of York.

Dr. Berkeley has not been very fortunate in his biographers. An account of him was drawn up by his brother, the Rev. Dr. Robert Berkeley, vicar-general of Cloyne, who died in 1787. This was first inserted in the Biog. Britannica, and many mistakes pointed out, and additions made to it in a subsequent volume of that work. Previously to this, in 1776, an “Account of his Life” was published in a thin octavo volume, at London, which probably was drawn up from family information. Of this a second edition was published in 1784, professedly “with improvements,” but the errors both of the first edition and of the Biog. Brit, which had then appeared, are retained. In 1784 a new edition of the bishop’s entire works was published at Dublin and London, 2 vols. 4to, with the octavo life prefixed. The third vol. of the Biog. Brit, contains some important information from the bishop’s widow (who died 1786) and which we have endeavoured to incorporate. It remains only to be noticed that the romance called the “Adventures of Signer Gaudentio di Lucca,” often attributed to our author, was certainly not his production.

, a native of London, was the youngest son of sir Maurice Berkeley, and brother of John lord Berkeley of Stratton. He was elected probationer fellow of Merton college, Oxford, in 1625, and four years after was admitted M. A. In 1630, he set out on his travels, where he seems to have acquired that knowledge which fitted him for public business, and on his return, became gentleman of the privy-chamber to Charles I. In 1646, he went on some commission to Virginia, of which province he had afterwards the government. He invited many of the royalists to retire thither as a place of security, and hinted in a letter to king Charles I. that it would not be an unfit place as a retreat for his majesty depending, perhaps, more upon the improbability of its being attacked, than on its means of defence. Virginia, however, was not long a place of safety; the parliament sent some ships with a small force, who took possession of the province without difficulty, and removed sir William Berkeley from the government, but suffered him to remain unmolested upon his private estate. In 1660, on the death of colonel Matthews, in consideration of his services, particularly in defending the English from being killed by the natives, and in destroying great numbers of the Indians without losing three of his own men, he was again made governor, and continued in that office until 1676, when, he returned to England, after an absence of thirty years. He died the following year, and was buried July 13, in the parish church of Twickenham. His writings are, “The Lost Lady,” a tragi-comedy, Lond. 1639, foil, and, as the editor of the Biog. Dram, thinks, another play called “Cornelia,” 1662, not printed, but ascribed to a “sir William Bartley.” He wrote also a “Description of Virginia,” fol. In Francis Moryson’s edition of “The Laws of Virginia,” Lond. 1662, fol. the preface informs us that sir William was the author of the best of them.

His power, however, was not always employed to the best purposes. The crusade of Louis VII. was supported by Bernard’s eloquence, who unhappily prevailed to draw numbers to join that monarch in his absurd expedition, which was, in its consequences, pregnant with misery and ruin. In his dispute with the celebrated Abelard, he appears more in character. At a council called at Soissons in 1121, Abelard was’ charged with tritheism, and with having asserted, that God the father was alone Almighty. He was ordered to burn his books, and to recite the symbol of Athanasius, with all which he complied, and was set at liberty: but it was long after this before Bernard took any particular notice of Abelard, having either heard little of the controversy, or not being called upon to deliver his sentiments. Abelard, however, notwithstanding his retractations, persevered in teaching his heresies, and it became, at length, impossible for his errors to escape the observation of the abbot of Clairv.il. Having studied the subject, his first step was to admonish Abeiard in a private conference, but finding that that had no effect, he opposed him in some of his writings, on which Abelard challenged him to dispute the matter at a solemn assembly which was to be held at the city of Sens in 1140. Bernard was at first unwilling to subu-it these important doctrines to a decision which was rather that of personal talent, than of deliberative wisdom, and would have declined appearing, had not his friends represented that his absence might injure the cause. He accordingly met his antagonist, and began to open the case, when Abelard very unexpectedly put an end to the matter by appealing to the pope. Bernard, who afterwards wrote to the same pope an account of Abelard’s conduct, very justly blames him for appealing from judges whom he had himself chosen. Notwithstanding this tippeal, however, Abelard’s sentiments were condemned, and the pope ordered his books to be burned, and himself confined in some monastery; and that of Cluni being chosen, he remained in it until his death about two years after.

, a monk in the tenth century, who was born in the year 923, in the neighbourhood of Annecy, of one of the most illustrious houses of Savoy, rendered himself not more celebrated in the annals of religion than of benevolence, by two hospitable establishments which he formed, and where, for nine hundred years, travellers have found relief from the dangers of passing the Alps in the severe part of the season. Bernard, influenced by pious motives and a love of study, refused in his early years a proposal of marriage to which his parents attached great importance, and embraced the ecclesiastical life. He afterwards was promoted to be archdeacon of Aoste, which includes the places of official and grand-vicar, and consequently gave him considerable weight in the government of the diocese. This he employed in the laudable purposes of converting the wretched inhabitants of the neighbouring mountains, who were idolaters, and made very great progress in ameliorating their manners, as well as religious opinions. Affected at the same time with the dangers and hardships sustained by the French and German pilgrims in travelling to Rome, he resolved to build on the summit of the Alps two hospitia, or hotels, for their reception, one on mount Joux (mons Jcrffis, so called from a temple of Jupiter erected there), and the other, the colonnade of Jove, so called from a colonnade or series of upright stones placed on the snow to point out a safe track. These places of reception were afterwards called, and are still known by the names of the Great and Little St. Bernard. The care of them the founder entrusted to regular canons of the order of St. Augustin, who have continued without interruption to our days, each succession of monks during this long period, zealously performing the duties of hospitality according to the benevolent intentions of St. Bernard. The situation is the most inhospitable by nature that can be conceived even in spring, the cold is extreme; and the whole is covered with snow or ice, whose appearances are varied only by storms and clouds. Their principal monastery on Great St. Bernard, is probably the highest habitation in Europe, being two thousand five hundred toises above the sea. Morning and evening their dogs, trained for the purpose, trace out the weary and perishing traveller, and by their means, many lives are saved, the utmost care being taken to recover them, even when- recovery seems most improbable. After thus establishing these hospitia, Bernard returned to his itinerant labours among the neighbouring countries until his death in May 28, 1008. The Bollandists have published, with notes, two authentic lives of St. Bernard de Menthon, one written by Richard, his successor in the archdeaconry of Aoste y by which it appears that he was neither a Cistertian, nor of the regular canons, as some writers have asserted. The two hospitals possessed considerable property in Savoy, of which they were deprived afterwards, but the establishment still subsists, and the kind and charitable duties of it have lately been performed by secular priests.

, called Father Bernard, or the Poor Priest, was born December 26, 1588, at Dijon, sou of Stephen Bernard, lieut.-gen. of Chalons-sur-Saone. He had a lively imagination and wit, which, joined to a jovial temper, made him a welcome guest in all gay companies. Going to Paris with M. de Bellegarde, governor of Dijon, he gave himself up to public amusements, and all the vanities of the age, making it his business to act comedies for the diversion of such persons of quality as he was acquainted with but at length he grew disgusted with the world, and devoted himself wholly to relieving and comforting the poor. He assisted them by his charities and exhortations to the end of his days, with incredible fervour, stooping and humbling himself to do the meanest offices for them. Father Bernard having persisted in refusing all the benefices offered him by the court, cardinal Richelieu told him one day, that he absolutely insisted on his asking him for something, and left him alone to consider of it. When the cardinal returned half an hour after, Bernard said, “Monseigneur, after much study, I have at last found out a favour to ask of you When I attend any sufferers to the gibbet to assist them in their last moments, we are carried in a cart with so bad a bottom, that we are every moment in danger of falling to the ground. Be pleased, therefore, Monseigneur, to order that some better boards may be put to the cart.” Cardinal Richelieu laughed heartily at this request, and gave orders directly that the cart should be thoroughly repaired. Father Bernard was ever ready to assist the unhappy hy his good offices, for which purpose he one day presented a petition to, a nobleman in place, who being of a Very hasty temper, flew into a violent passion, and said a thousand injurious things of the person for whom the priest interested himself, but Bernard still persisted in his request; at which the nobleman was at last so irritated, that he gave him a box on the ear. Bernard immediately fell at his feet, and, presenting the other ear, said, “Give me a good blow on this also, my lord, and grantmy petition.” The nobleman was so affected by this apparent humility as to grant Bernard’s request. He died March 23, 1641. The French clergy had such a veneration for him as often to solicit that he might be enrolled in the calendar of saints. In 1638 he founded the school of the Thirty-three, so called from the number of years our Saviour passed on earth, and a very excellent seminary. Immediately after his death appeared “Le Testament du reverend pere Bernard, et ses pensdes pieuses,” Paris, 1641, 8vo, and “Le Recit des choses arrivees a la mort du rev. pere Bernard,” same year. The abbé Papillon also quotes a work entitled “Entretiens pendant sa derniere maladie.” His life was written by several authors, by Legauffre, Giry, de la Serre, Gerson, and Lempereur the Jesuit. This last, which was published at Paris, 1708, 12mo, is too full of visions, revelations, and miracles, to afford any just idea of Bernard.

, a learned critic and astronomer, was born at Perry St. Paul, commonly called Pauler’s Perry, near Towcester in Northamptonshire, the 2d of May 1638. He received some part of his education at Northampton but his father dying when he was very young, his mother sent him to an uncle in London, who entered him at Merchant-taylors-school, in 1648 here he continued tillJune 1655, when he was elected scholar of St. John’s college in Oxford, of which also he became afterwards fellow. DuTing his stay at school, he had accumulated an uncommon fund of classical learning, so that when he went to the university, he was a great master of the Greek and Latin tongues, and not unacquainted with the Hebrew. He had also previously acquired a good Latin style, could compose verses well, and often used to divert himself with writing epigrams, but he quitted these juvenile employments when at the university, and applied himself to history, philology, and philosophy, and made himself master of the Hebrew, Syriac, Arabic, and Coptic. He applied himself next to the mathematics, under the famous Dr. J. Wallis. He took the degree of B. A. Feb. the 12th, 1659 that of master, April 16, 1662 and that of B. D. June 9, 1668. Decem,ber following he went to Leyden, to consult several Oriental manuscripts left to that university by Joseph Scaliger and Levinus Warner, and especially the 5th, 6th, and 7th books of Apollonius Pergieus’s conic sections; the Greek text of which is lost, but which are preserved in the Arabic version of that author. This version had been brought from the East by James Golius, and was in the possession of his executor, who, pleased that Mr. Bernard’s chief design in coming to Holland was to examine this manuscript, allowed him the free use of it. He accordingly transcribed these three books, with the diagrams, intending to publish them at Oxford, with a Latin version, and proper commentaries; but was prevented from completing this design. Abraham Echellensis had published a Latin translation of these books in 1661, and Christianus Ravius gave another in 1669: but Dr. Smith remarks, that these two authors, though well skilled in the Arabic language, were entirely ignorant of the mathematics, which made it regretted that Golius died while he was preparing that work for the press; and that Mr. Bernard, who understood both the language and the subject, and was furnished with all the proper helps for such a design, was abandoned by his friends, though they had before urged him to. undertake it. It was, however, at last published by Dr. Halley in 1710.

, an opulent financier of France, was the son of Samuel Bernard, an engraver (mentioned by^trutt), whodied in 1687. He was born in 1651, but how educated, or by what means he raised his fortune, we are nor told Under the ministry of Chamillard he became a farmer general, and accumulated a capital of thirty-three mi i lions, of which he made a very liberal use, but seems to have been proudly aware of the superiority of lender 0ver borrower. When Louis XIV. wanted supplies, Bernard grained them, but always in consequence of his majesty’s applying to him in person. Louis XV. when in need of similar help, sent certain persons to Bernard, whose answer was, that “those who wanted his assistance might at least take the trouble to apply themselves.” He was accordingly presented to the king, who said many flattering things to him, and ordered the courtiers to pay him every mark of respect. Bernard was now called the saviour of the state all the courtiers entertained him in succession he dined with the marshal Noailles, and supped with the duchess of Tallard, and played and lost what they pleased. They sneered at his manners, which were citizen-like, and he lent the millions which they demanded. Bernard, however, was of a benevolent turn the poor of the military order were particularly the subjects of his bounty, and, frequently as they might apply, they never were refused, On his death it was found that he had lent ten millions, of which he never received a farthing in return. In his speculations he was both bold and successful. One day he had asked a person of distinction to dine with him, and had promised to treat him with some excellent mountain, not knowing at that time that his stock was exhausted. After dinner his servant announced this lamentable deficiency, and Bernard, not a little hurt at the unseasonable discovery, immediately dispatched one of his clerks to Holland, with instructions to purchase every drop of mountain in the port of Amsterdam, by which he afterwards gained an immense sum. Of his family, so little was known, that he was supposed to be of Jewish descent, but without any reason. He used to say, that if they would make him a chevalier, his name would no longer hurt their delicate feelings, and accordingly, he received letters of nobility. He then purchased several estates with titles, and among others, those of the counts of Coubert; and during the last years of his life, he was generally called the chevalier Bernard. One of his sons, president of one of the chambers of inquiry in parliament, bore the name of Rieux another was called the count de Coubert, and his grandson, Anne-Gabriel-Henry Bernard, assumed the title of marquis de Boulainvilliers. He married his daughter to Mole, first president, and thus became grandfather to the duchess de Cosse-Brissac and his family, by these revolutions, became allied to the great names of Biron, Duroure, and Boulainvilliers. Bernard was the friend of the keeper of the seals, Chauvelin, and remained faithful to him when disgraced. It is said that he was, or in his old age became superstitious, and fancied his life connected with that of a black fowl, of which he took great care, convinced that its death would be the prelude to his own. He lived, however, to the advanced age of eightyeight, dying in 1739. Another account informs us, that the greater part of his thirty-three millions was dissipated within ten years after his death, and that one of his sons, who was president of the parliament of Paris, died a bankrupt. Such vicissitudes are too common in all ages to excite much surprize.

, so called from Castel Bolognese in the Romania, where he was born in 1495, distinguished himself for his admirable skill in engraving on precious stones. After having resided for several years with Alphonso duke of Ferrara, where his works excited universal admiration, he went to Rome, and attached himself to the cardinal Hyppolito de Medicis, whose friendship he preferred to the brilliant offers made by Charles V. who was very desirous of his residing in Spain. At Rome, Bernard executed some medals in honour of Clement VII. of such exquisite beauty, as to meet with the applause even of his rivals. Among the chefsd'oeuvre which he left, are two engravings on crystal, which have been particularly noticed by connoisseurs. The subjects are the “Fall of Phaeton,” and “Tityus with the vulture,” from designs by Michael Angelo, both which were thought to approach to the perfection of the ancients. Enriched by the patronage of cardinal de Medicis, and esteemed by all who knew him, he passed his latter days in a charming retreat, at Faenza, which he had enriched with a fine collection of pictures, and where he died in 1555.

, usually called major Bernardi, an adventurer of whom there is a very prolix, but not very interesting account in the Biographia Britannica, was born at Evesham, in 1657, and was descended from an honourable family which had flourished at Lucca in Italy, from the year 1097. His grandfather Philip, a count of the Roman empire, lived in England as resident from Genoa twenty-eight years, and married a native of this country. His father Francis succeeded to this office but, taking disgust at some measures adopted by the senate of Genoa, resigned, and retiring to Evesham, amused himself with gardening, on which he spent a considerable sum of money, and set a good example in that science to the town. John, his son, the subject of this article, of a spirited and restless temper, having received some harsh usage from his father, at the age of thirteen ran away to avoid his severity, and perhaps without any determinate purpose. He retained, notwithstanding, several friends, and was for some time supported by them, but their friendship appears to have gone little farther for soon after he enlisted as a common soldier in the service of the prince of Orange. In this station he showed uncommon talents and bravery, and in a short time obtained a captain’s commission in the service of the States. In April 1677, he married a Dutch lady of good family, with whom he enjoyed much conjugal happiness for eleven years. The English regiments in the Dutch service being recalled by James II. very few of them, but among those few was Bernard!, would obey the summons, and of course, he could not sign the association, into which the prince of Orange wished the regiments to enter. He thus lost his favour, and having no other alternative, and probably wishing for no other, he followed the abdicated James II. into Ireland who, soon after, sent him on some commission into Scotland, from whence, as the ruin of his master now became inevitable, he once more retired to Holland. Venturing, however, to appear in London in 1695, he was committed to Newgate March 25, 1696, on suspicion of being an abettor of the plot to assassinate king William, and although sufficient evidence could not be brought to prove the fact, he was sentenced and continued in prison by the express decree of six successive parliaments, with five other persons, where he remained for more than forty years. As this was a circumstance wholly without a precedent, it has been supposed that there must have been something in his character particularly dangerous, to induce four sovereigns and six parliaments to protract his confinement, without either legally condemning or pardoning him.

, on account of her being one of the earliest female writers in England, is entitled to some notice in this work, although the most painful research has discovered very little of her personal history. She is frequently called Juliana Barnes, but Berners was her more proper name. She was an Essex lady, and, according to Mr. Ballard, was probably born at Roding in that county, about the beginning of the fifteenth century being the daughter of sir James Berners of Berners Roding, and sister of Richard lord Berners. If, however, as is generally agreed, sir James Berners was her father, her birth could have been very little after 1388 for in that year sir James Berners was beheaded, as an enemy to the public, together with other favourites and corrupt ministers of king Richard the second. The education of Juliana seems to have been the very best which that age could afford, and her attainments were such, that she is celebrated by various authors for her uncommon learning and her other accomplishments, which rendered her every way capable and deserving of the office she bore which was that of pfioress of Sopewell nunnery. This was a cell to, and very near St. Alban’s, -end a good part of the shell of it is still standing. Here she lived in high esteem, and flourished, according to Bale, Tanner, and Ballard, about the year 1460 but if what we have said concerning her birth be the true account, she must have flourished somewhat earlier. She was a very beautiful lady, of great spirit, and loved masculine exercises, such as hawking, hunting, &c. With these sports she used to recreate herself, and so thoroughly was she skilled in them, that she wrote treatises of hawking, hunting, and heraldry. “From an abbess disposed to turn author,” says Mr. Warton, “we might more reasonably have expected a manual of meditations for the closet, or select rules for making salves, or distilling strong waters. But the diversions of the field were not thought inconsistent with the character of a religious lady of this eminent rank, who resembled an abbot in respect of exercising an extensive manerial jurisdiction, and who hawked and hunted in common with other ladies of distinction.” So well esteemed were Juliana Berners’s treatises, and indeed so popular were the subjects on which they were written, that they were published in the veryinfancy of the art of printing. The first edition is said to have been printed at St. Alban’s, in 1481. It was certainly printed at the same place in 1486, in a small folio; and again, at Westminster, by W. de Worde, in 1496, in 4to. Among Cryne’s books in the Bodleian library, there is a black letter copy of this work, “imprynted at London in Paul’s Churchyarde by me Hary Tab.” It was again printed, with wooden cuts, by William Copland, without date, and entitled, “The boke of Hawkyng, Hunting, Fishing, with all the properties and medecynes that are necessary to be kept.” Here the tract on Armory is omitted, which seems to have been first inserted that the work might contain a complete course of education for a gentleman. The same title is in W. Powel’s edition, 1550. The last impression of it was in 4to, at London, in 1595, under the following title, “The gentleman’s academic or the book of St. Albans containing three most exact and excellent books; the first of Hawking, the second of all the proper terms of Hunting, and the last of Armory; all compiled by Juliana Barnes, in the year from the incarnation of Christ, 1486. And now reduced into better method by G. M.” This editor is certainly mistaken in saying that the whole work was composed in 1486. Juliana Berners could scarcely have been living at that time and even if she was not then dead, the book must have been written by her in a more early period of life. It is said, indeed, in the Colophon at the end of the St. Alban’s edition, “And here now endith the Boke of blasyng of armys, translatyt and compylyt togedyr at Saynt Albons the yere from thyncaruacyon of our Lorde Jhesu Crist MCCCCLXXXVI.” But all we can justly infer from hence is, that that part of the work which relates to heraldry was not drawn up by Juliana Berners. It is observable, that though the whole treatise is usually ascribed to her, her name is only subjoined to the book on hawking and hunting and that what relates to the biasing of arms contains no more than abstracts from a performance of Nicholas Upton, written about 1441. It is highly probable, therefore, that this latter part, if it was compiled so late as in 1486, was added by another hand and, indeed, if Juliana Berners was the daughter of sir James Berners, there can be no doubt about the matter. That part of our abbess’s work which relates to hunting, is written in rhyme. It is spoken in her own person in which, being otherwise a woman of authority, she assumes the title of Uame. Mr. Warton suspects the whole to be a translation from the French or Latin. The barbarism of the times strongly appears in the indelicate expressions which Juliana Berners often uses, and which are equally incompatible with her sex and profession. The book on armory begins with the following curious piece of sacred heraldry “Of the offspring of the gentilman Jafeth, come Habraham, Moyses, Aron, and the profettys and also the kyng of the right lyne of Mary, of whom that gentilman Jhesus was borne, very God and man; after his manhode kynge of the land of Jude and of Jues, gentilman by his modre Mary, prince of cote armure, &c.” The most diligent inquirers have not been able to determine the exact period of Juliana Berners’s decease but from what is mentioned above, it is probable that she died sooner than lias commonly been imagined.

, called by some writers Berna or Bernia, was one of the most celebrated Italian poets of the sixteenth century. He was born about the conclusion of the fifteenth, at Lamporecchio, in that part of Tuscany called Val-di-Nievole, of a noble but impoverished family of Florence. In his nineteenth year he went to Koine, to his relation cardinal Bibiena, who according to his own account, did him neither good nor harm. He was then obliged to take the office of secretary to Giberti, bishop of Verona, who was datary to pope Leo X. On this he assumed the ecclesiastical habit, in hopes of sharing some of that prelate’s patronage, but the mean and dull employment of his office of secretary, and for which he was ill paid, was very unsuitable to his disposition. There was at Rome what he liked better, a society or academy of young ecclesiastics as gay as himself, and lovers of wit and poetry like himself, who, no doubt in order to point out their taste for wine, and their thoughtless habits, were called Vignajuoli, vinedressers. To this belonged Mauro, Casa, Firenzuola, Capilupij and many others. In their meetings they laughed at every thing, and made verses and witticisms on the most grave and solemn subjects. The compositions Berni contributed on these occasions, were so superior to the others, that verses composed in the same style began to be called “La poesia Bernesca.”

Berni’s character was in all respects a singular one, but in few deserving imitation. His morals as well as his writings were of the licentious cast, and as to his manners, indolence seemed to predominate. He had no pleasure in music, dancing, gaming, or hunting: his sole delight was, in having nothing to do, and stretching himself at full length on his bed. His chief exercise was to eat a little, and then compose himself to sleep, and after sleep to eat again. He observed neither days nor almanacks and his servants were ordered to bring him no news whether good or bad. That he was not, however, so entirely devoted to indolence, as we might, from the character which he has chosen to give of himself, be induced to believe, sufficiently appears from his numerous writings, and particularly from his having reformed and new-modelled the extensive poem of “Orlando Innamorato” of the count Bojardo. This work he is said to have undertaken in competition with the “Orlando Furioso” of Ariosto, which has given occasion to accuse Berni of presumption and of ignorance; but Berni was too well acquainted with the nature of his own talents, calculated only for the burlesque and ridiculous, to suppose that he could rival Ariosto. He has, however, both in this and in other parts of his writings, shewn that he could occasionally elevate his style; and the introductory verses to each canto of the Orlando Innamorato, which are generally his own composition, are not the least admired nor the least valuable parts of the work. That the alterations of Berni raised the poem of Bojardo into more general notice, may be conjectured from the various editions of the reformed work, which issued from the press soon, after its first appearance, and which are yet sought after with avidity. Some of these editions are, that of Venice, 1541,4to; of Milan, 1542, 8vo and Venice, with additions, 1545, 4to which last is in great request. There are two very correct modern editions that of Naples, but dated Florence, 1725, and that by Molini, Paris, 1768, 4 vols. 12mo. Berni’s other works are, 1. “Rime burlesche,” often reprinted with those of Casa, Mauro, Molza, and other poets of the same class. The first edition is that of Venice, 1538, 8vo. Another valuable edition is that of Grazzini, called Lasca, in 2 vols. Florence, 1548, and 1555, 8vo. This last volume is the most rare, being printed only once, and the other twice. 2. “La Catrina, atto scenico rusticale,” Florence, 1567, 8vo, written in the common dialect of the peasantry of Tuscany, like the “Nencia” of Barberhio, the “Cecco” of Varlongo, &c. It “was afterwards printed in a collection of comedies of the sixteenth century, Naples, 1731, 8vo. 3.” Carmina,“or Latin poems, to be found in the” Carmina quinque Etruscorura poetarum,“Florence, 1562, 8vo, and in the” Carmina illustrium poetarum Italorum," ibid, 1719, 8vo.

, called the Cavalier Ber­NiN, and by some styled the modern Michael Angelo, because he united the knowledge and practice of painting, statuary, and architecture, owes his extensive reputation prinqipally to his excellence in the latter, branch. His father Peter Bernini, left Tuscany when young, and went to Rome to study painting and sculpture. Having acquired considerable skill in both, he removed to Naples, and practised with great success. There in, 15.98, his son, the subject of this memoir, was born, and from his earliest years discovered a surprising capacity for the fine arts, having at the age of eight executed a head in marble, which was considered as a prodigy. His father, desirous of cultivating so promising a genius, brought him to Rome, and imparted to him a taste for the great masters, which he never altogether lost, although in the sequel he did not follow their track. The pope expressed a desire to see this extraordinary child who had astonished the artists, and when introduced, asked him if he knew how to sketch a head, “Whose head” said Bernini. “You know then how to draw any let it be that of St. Paul,” replied the pope.' The boy performed the task before him in about half an hour, and the pope, enchanted with the specimen, recommended him warmly to cardinal Barberini, that celebrated patron of the arts. “Direct his studies,” added his holiness, “and he will become the Michael Angelo of the age.” About the same time, happening to be in St. Peter’s church, with Annibal Carrache, and some other celebrated artists, Carrache, looking to the cupola, said it would be very desirable to find a man of genius great enough to form and erect two objects in the middle, and at the end of that temple, which should correspond to its dimensions.“The young Bernini instantly exclaimed with enthusiasm,” Would I were that man," little thinking that one day he was to fulfil Carrache’s wish.

His success in the mean time was great, and Gregory XV. who succeeded Paul V. being equally struck with his merit, created him a knight; but it was left for cardinal Barberini, when he came to the pontificate, to complete Bernini’s good fortune. Immediately after that event he said to Bernini, “If you are happy to see me pope, I am more proud yet that you live under my pontificate,” and from that time began to employ him in designs for embellishing Rome, and gave him a pension of three hundred crowns per month. Without altogether quitting statuary, therefore, Bernini now employed his talents on architecture, and recollecting Carrache’s wish, he designed the canopy for the principal altar, called the confessional of St. Peter, supported by four wreathed columns, enriched with figures and ornaments of exquisite taste. When this magnificent work was completed, in about nine years, the pope rewarded him with six thousand crowns, besides increasing his pensions, and extending his liberality to Bernini’s brothers. Another work of his was the fountain of Barcaccia, which has been praised more than it merits, at least it is inferior to that of the Barberini palace.

Bernini now began his operations on the Louvre, but he did not see, as has been reported, Perrault’s celebrated colonnade, the design of which was not presented to the king until after his departure, nor was it finished until live years after, so that the surprize with which it is said to have struck him, and the liberal praise he bestowed upon it, to which Voltaire has given currency in his poems, are founded on a mistake. During Bernini’s five months residence at Paris, he laid the foundation, from his own design, of the colonnade of the Louvre, which was to join it to the Tuileries by a gallery but as this could have been executed only by destroying all that had been already built, Perrault’s plan was afterwards^adopted: In the mean time, he made a bust of Louis XIV. who frequently sat to him, and took pleasure in his conversation, which sometimes appears to have been rather familiar. One day after his majesty had sat a whole hour, the artist, delighted with so great an honour, exclaimed “A miracle a great monarch, young, and a Frenchman, has sat quiet for an hour” Another time, wishing to see more of the king’s forehead, he put back the curis of hair which covered the place, and said, “Your majesty can shew your face to all the world;” and the courtiers, always intent upon some frivolous compliment, made a fashion of this disposition of the hair, which they called “la coeffure a la Bernin”

, a learned Italian, was born at Lucca, Dec. 23, 1686. He entered when sixteen into the congregation, called the Mother of God at Naples, and prosecuted his studies with success and perseverance. On his return to Lucca he acquired great reputation as a general scholar and preacher, and in 1717, taught rhetoric at Naples. The marquis cie Vasto having appointed him to be his librarian, he increased the collection with a number of curious books, of which he had an accurate knowledge, and also greatly enlarged the library of his convent. He introduced among his brethren a taste for polite literature, and t brined a colony of Arcadians. In 1739, he settled finally at Rome, where he was appointed successively vice-rector, assistant-general, and historian of his order. He was one of the most distinguished members of the society of the Arcadians at Home, and of many other societies. He died at Rome, of an apoplexy, March 23, 1752. Mazzuihelli has given a catalogue of twentyfour works published by him, and of twenty-one that remain in manuscript. Among these we^may notice, I. “La Caduta de' decemviri clella Roman a republica per la funzione della serenissima republica di Lucca,” Lucca, 1717. 2. “Canzone per le vittorie coritro il Turco del principe Eugenio,” ibid, without date, 4to. 3. The lives of several of the Arcadians, printed in the prose memoirs of that academy, under his academic name of Nicasio Poriniano. 4. Translations into the Italian of several French authors and poetical pieces in various collections. 5. We owe to him chiefly an important bibliographical work, “Catalogo della iibreria Capponi, con annotazioni in diversi luoghi,” Rome, 1747, 4to. It is the more necessary to notice this work, because the editor Giorgi, who has given very little of his own, does not once mention Berti' name. Among his unpublished works is one of the biographical kind, “Memorie degli scrittori Lucchesi,” a collection of the lives of the writers of Lucca. It being well known, as early as 1716, that this was ready for the press, Mazzuchelii, who had waited very patiently for what was likely to be of so much service to himself, at length, in 1739, took the liberty to inquire of Berti the cause of a delay so unusual. Berti answered that the difficulties he had met -with had obliged him to re- write his work, and dispose it in a new order that the names were ranged according to the families the most ancient families had been replaced by new ones in the various offices of dignity in that little republic, and the new heads and all, their relations were not very fond of being reminded that their ancestors were physicians, men of learning, and “people of that sort.”

, a famous Augustine monk, born May 28, 1696, at Serravezza, a small village in Tuscany, was called to Rome by his superiors, and obtained the title of assistant-general of Italy, and the place of prefect of the papal library. His great proficiency in theological studies procured him these distinctions, and appeared to advantage in his grand work, “De disciplinis theologicis,” printed at Rome in 8 vols. 4to. He here adopts the sentiments of St. Augustine in their utmost rigour, after the example of Bellelli his brother- monk. The archbishop of Vienna [Salmon], or rather the Jesuits who managed him, published under his name in 1744, two pieces against the two Augustine theologues, inveighing against them as being too severely Augustine. The first is entitled, “Ba'ianismus redivivus in scriptis pp. Bellelli et Berti,” in 4to. The second bore this title “Jansenismus redivivus in scriptis pp. Bellelli et Berti,” in 4to. At the same time father Berti was accused to pope Benedict XIV. as a disciple of Ba'ius and of Jansenitis. The prudent pontiff, without returning any answer to the accusers, advised Berti to defend himself; which he accordingly did in a work of two vols. 4to, 1749. In this apology, rather long, though learned and lively, he laid down the difference there is between Jansenism and Augustinianism. After this piece Berti brought out several others, the principal of which is an ecclesiastical history in Latin, in 7 vols. 4to: it made however but little way out of Italy, by reason of the dryness of the historian, and of his prejudices in favour of exploded tenets. He speaks of the pope, both in his theology and in his history, as the absolute monarch of kingdoms and empires, and that all other princes are but his lieutenants. Berti wrote also dissertations, dialogues, panegyrics, academical discourses, and some Italian poems, which are by no means his best productions. An edition in folio of all his works has been printed at Venice. He died at the age of 70, May 26, 1766, at Pisa, whither he had been called by Francis I. grand duke of Tuscany.

, of the oratory, was born at Aix in Provence, in 1710, and died Nov. 15, 1783. He is known by two works which at the time made some noise among the naturalists one is entitled, “Physique des cometes,” 1760, 12mo; the other, “Physique des corps animus,” 1755, 12mo. The author had cultivated the sciences with success; and in person had a striking resemblance to pere Malebranche. His character appears to have been very excellent. Of all the men of learning in Paris, he was the most obliging, and strangers were always desirous of a recommendation to Bertier, as a sure means of being introduced to the most celebrated characters, and to every object of curiosity. In philosophy he was a Cartesian long after that system had been given up. Louis XV. called him, on this account, le pere aux tourbillons. He was the author of some other works besides those above mentioned, but they are not in much repute.

Bertius was the author of a great many works, which may be divided into two classes, theological and geographical the former, which were the cause of all his misfortunes, are now forgotten, but the latter are still read or consulted. The most in demand is his “Theatrum Geographic veterum,” 2 vols. fol. 1618 and 1619, yet this collection, of which Bertius was only the editor, and not a very careful editor, seems to have enjoyed more reputation than it deserves. The first volume is entirely composed of Ptolomey’s Geography, in Greek and Latia, reprinted from an edition published about fourteen years before by Montanus, and commonly called Mercator’s edition, and Bertius has only added some various readings from a manuscript in the Palatine library, with which Sylburgius had furnished him; but on the other hand, he has neglected to correct a great many errors in Montanus’s edition. The second volume contains Antoninus’s Itinerary, and the works of other geographers, without a single note from his own pen. His other geographical works are, 1. “Commentariorum rerum Germanicarum libri tres,” Amsterdam, 1616, 4to, and 1635, 12mo. 2. “Notitia ehorographica episcopatuum Gallix,” Paris, 1625, fol. 3. “Breviarium orbis terrarum,” Leipsic, 1662, 12mo. This is added at the end of Cluverius’s Introduction to universal Geography, Amst. 1676, 4to. 4. “Imperium Caroli M. et vicinae regiones, Paris, fol. a map, which has been since added to Hondius’s Atlas. 5.” Variae orbis universae et ejus partium tabula?, &c.“oblong 4to. 6.” De aggeribus et pontibus hactenus ad mare extructis digestum novum,“Paris, 1629. Bertius was also editor of” Illustrium et clarorum virorum epistolae selectiores," Leyden, 1617, 8vo, and wrote prefaces to various editions of books.

, minister, and professor of Hebrew at Geneva, at Frankenthal, and at Lausanne, was born at Thouars in Poitou, in 1531, of a reputable family, allied to the house of la Trimouille, and escaped the massacre of St. Bartholomew by flying to Cahors and afterwards to Geneva. He died at Lausanne in 1594. He gave to the world, 1. “A dissertation on the Republic of the Hebrews,” Geneva, 1580 again at Leyden in 1641, 8vo, written with precision and method. 2. “A revision of the French Bible of Geneva, according to the Hebrew text,” Geneva, 1588. He corrected that version (by Calvin and Olivetan) in a great number of places; but in others he has too closely followed the authority of the Rabbins, and not sufficiently that of the old interpreters. It is the Bible still in use among the Calvinists. 3. A new edition of the “Thesaurus linguae sanctae” of Pagninus. 4. “A parallel of the Hebrew Tongue with the Arabic.” 5. “Lucubrationes Frankendalenses,” 1685, or expJanations on difficult passages of the New Testament, so called because written at Frankenthal.

, an ingenious Swiss writer, long known by his labours in various branches of philosophy and literature, and especially in natural history and political and rural economy, was born at Orbe in Swisserland, in 1712. In 1739 he was pastor of that village, and in 1744 preacher at Bern, whence he was called by the late king of Poland, to preside at a board of commerce, agriculture, and useful arts, the operations of which (and, if we are not mistaken, its very existence) were suppressed by the subsequent troubles of that unhappy country. He was also a member of the academies of Stockholm, Berlin, Florence, Lyons, &c. His principal works are, 1. “Sermons prononcés a Berne a l‘occasion de la decouverte d’une CoiTspiration centre Petat,” 1749, 8vo. Two of these are by Bertrand, the third by J. J. Altmann. 2. “Memoires sur la Structure interieure de la Terre,” 1752, 8vo. 3. “Essais sur les usages des montagnes, avec un lettre sur la Nil,” 1754, 4to a work which Denina styles excellent. His object is to prove that divine wisdom is strongly manifested in the creation of mountains and that they are not, as many authors have asserted, imperfections of the terrestrial globe, much less the effects of a ruined world. This he proves with considerable skill, but in some respects is rather fanciful. 4. “Memoires pour servir a s’instruire des tremblements de terre de la Suisse, principalement pour l'annee 1755, avec quatre Sermons prononcées a cette occasion,” 1756, 8vo. 5. The same “Memoires,” published separately, 1757, 8vo, and much enlarged, a work embracing all that was known before on the subject, and enriched with many candid and able illustrations by the author. 6. “Le Philanthrope,” 1758, 2 vols. 12mo, 7. “Recherches sur les langues anciennes et modernes de la Suisse, et principalement du pays de Vaud,” 1758, 8vo. 8. A translation of Derham’s Astro-theology and of Bullinger’s Confession of Faith, both in 1760. 9. “Museum,” 1763. 10. “Dictionnaire Universel des Fossiles propres, etdes Fossils accidentels,” 1763, 2 vols. 8vo. 11.“Recueil de divers traités sur l'histoire naturelle de la Terre etdes Fossiles,” 1766, 4to. 12. “Morale de l'Evangile,” 1775, 7 vols. 8vo. 13. “Le Thevenon, ou les Journees de la Montagne, 1777, 12mo, 1780, 2 vols. 8vo. 14.” Essai philosophique et moral sur le Plaisir,“1778, 12mo, an excellent work, which, from the account given of it in the Monthly Review, seems highly deserving of a translation. 15.” Le solitaire du Mont-Jure, recreations d'un philosophe," 1782, 12mo. The time of this writer’s death is not ascertained, but he was considerably advanced in years at the period of this last publication.

, an eminent cardinal, was born in 1575, at the chateau de Serilli, near Troyesin Champagne, of a noble family, and. having embraced the ecclesiastical state, distinguished himself early in life by his piety and his learning. He got great reputation in the famous conference of Fontainbleau, where du Perron contended with du Plessis-Mornay, called the pope of the Huguenots. He was sent by Henry IV. to whom he was chaplain, into Spain, for the purpose of bringing some Carmelites to Paris, and it was by his means that this order flourished so much in France. Some time afterwards he founded the Congregation of the Oratory of France, of which he was the first general. This new institution was approved by a bull of pope Paul V. in 1613, and has always been reckoned by the catholics a great service done to the church. In that gregation, according to the expression of Bossuet, the members obey without dependance, and govern without commanding; their whole time is divided between study and prayer. Their piety is liberal and enlightened, their knowledge useful, and almost always modest. Urban VIII. rewarded the merit of Berulle by a cardinal’s hat. Henry IV. and Louis XIII. vainly strove to make him accept of considerable bishoprics on Louis’s telling him that he should employ the solicitation of a more powerful advocate than himself (meaning the pope) to prevail upon him to accept the bishopric of Leon, he said, “that if his majesty continued to press him, he should be obliged to quit his kingdom.” This cardinal came over with Henrietta Maria, queen of Charles I. to England, as her confessor, to the court of which he endeared himself by the sanctity of his morals, and the extreme propriety of his behaviour, although his errand had afterwards its weight in encreasing the fatal unpopularity of the royal family. He died suddenly, Oct. 2, 1629, aged fifty-five, while he was celebrating the sacrament, and had just repeated the words, “bane igitur obiationem,” which gave occasion to the following distich:

, a celebrated English actor, was born in Tothill-street, Westminster, 1635; and, after having left school, is said to have been put apprentice to a bookseller. The particulars, however, relating to the early part of his life, are not ascertained. It is generally thought that he made his first appearance on the stage in 1656, at the opera-house in Charter-house-yard, under the direction of sir William Davenant, and continued to perform here till the restoration, when king Charles grained patents to two companies, the one called the king’s cornpa ly, and the other the duke’s. The former acted at the theatre royal in Drury-lane, and the latter at the theatre in Lincoln’s-Inn-fields. Betterton went over to Paris, at the command of king Charles II. to take a view of the French scenery, and at his return made such improvements as added greatly to the lustre of the English stage. For several years both companies acted with the highest applause, and the taste for dramatic entertainments was never stronger than whilst these two companies played . The two companies were however at length united; though the time of this union is not precisely known, Gildon placing it in 1682, and Cibber in 1684. But however this may be, it was in this united company that Mr. 'Betterton first shone forth with the greatest degree of lustre for, having survived the famous actors upon whose model he had formed himself, he was now at liberty to display his genius in its full extent. His merit as an actor cannot now be very accurately displayed, and much of the following passage from Gibber’s Apology, seems to be mere stage-cant and declamation. Cibber says, “Betterton was an actor, as Shakspeare was an author, both without competitors, formed for the mutual assistance and illustration of each other’s genius! How Shakspeare wrote, all men who have a taste for nature may read and know; but with what higher rapture would he still be read, could they conceive how Betterton played him! Then might they know the one was born alone to speak what the other only knew to write! Pity it is that the momentary beauties, flowing from an harmonious elocution, cannot, like those of poetry, be their own record! that the animated graces of the player can live no longer than the instant breath and motion that present them, or at best can but faintly glimmer through the memory or imperfect attestation of a few surviving spectators! Could how Betterton spoke be as easily known as what he spoke, then might you see the muse of Shakspeare in her triumph, with all her beauties in her best array, rising into real life, and charming her beholders. But alas! since all this is so far out of the reach of description, how shall I shew you Betterton? Should I therefore tell you that all the Othellos, Hamlets, Hotspurs, Macbeths, and Brutuses, you have seen since his time, have fallen short of him, this still would give you no idea of his particular excellence. Let us see then what a particular comparison may do, whether that may yet draw him nearer to you? You have seen a Hamlet perhaps, who, on the first appearance of his father’s spirit, has thrown himself into all the straining vociferation requisite to express rage and fury; and the house has thundered with applause, though the misguided actor was all the while (as Shakspeare terms it) tearing a passion into rags. I am the more bold to offer you this particular instance, because the late Mr. Addison, while I sat by him to see this scene acted, made the same observation asking me, with some surprise, if I thought Hamlet should be in so violent a passion with the ghost, which, though it might have astonished, had not provoked him? For you may observe, that in this beautiful speech, the passion never rises beyond an almost breathless astonishment, or an impatience, limited by a filial reverence, to inquire into the suspected wrongs that may have raised nim from his peaceful tomb and a desire to know what a spirit so seemingly distrest might wish or enjoin a sorrowful son to execute towards his future quiet in the grave. This was the light into which Betterton threw this scene; which he opened with a pause of mute amazement! Then rising slowly to a solemn, trembling voice, he made the ghost equally terrible to the spectator as to himself. And in the descriptive part of the natural emotions which the ghastlyvision gave him, the boldness tit‘ his expostulation was still governed by decency manly, but not braving his voice never rising into that seeming outrage, or wild deli an ce, of what he naturally revered. But, alas to preserve this medium between mouthing, and meaning too little, to keep the attention more pleasingly awake by a ’tempered spirit, than by mere vehemence of voice, is, of all the master strokes of an actor, the most difficult to reach. In. this none have equalled Betterton. He that feels not himself the passion he would raise, will talk to a sleeping audience. But this was” never the fault of Be item n. A farther excellence in him was, that he could vary iiis spirit to the different characters he acted. Those wild impatient starts, that fierce and flashing fire which he threw into Hotspur, never came from the unruffled temper of his Brutus (for I have more than once seen a Brutus as warm as Hotspur): when the Betterton Brutus was provoked in his dispute with Cassius, his spirits flew out of his eyes his steady looks alone supplied that terror which he disdained an intemperance in his voice should rise to. Thus, with a settled dignity of contempt, like an unheeding rock, he repelled upon himself the foam of Cassius; not but in some part of this scene, where he reproaches Cassius, his temper is not under this suppression, but opens into that warmth which becomes a man of virtue; yet this is that hasty spark of anger, which Brutus himself endeavours to excuse. But with whatever strength of nature we see the poet shew at once the philosopher and the hero, yet the image of the actor’s excellence will be still imperfect to you, unless language could put colours in our words to paint the voice with. The most that a Vandyck can arrive at is, to make his portraits of great persons seem to think a Shakspeare goes farther yet, and tells you what his pictures thought; a BetU-rton steps beyond them both, and calls them from the grave to breathe, and be themselves again in feature, speech, and motion, at once united and gratifies at once-your eye, your ear, your understanding. From these various excel lenci s, Betterton had so full a possession of the esteem and regard of his auditors, that, upon his entrance into every scene, he seemed to seize upon the eyes and ears of the giddy and inadvertent. To have talked or looked another way, would have been thought insensibility or ignorance. In all his soliloquies of moment, the strongest intelligence of attitude and aspect drew you into such an impatient gaze and eager expectation, that you almost imbibed the sentiment with your eye,' before the er could reach it."

, in Latin Beverlacius, archbishop of York in the eighth century, was born of a noble family among the English Saxons, at Harpham, a small town in Northumberland. He was first a monk, and afterwards abbot of the monastery of St. Hilda. He was instructed in the learned languages by Theodore, archbishop of Canterbury, and was justly esteemed one of the best scholars of his time. Alfred of Beverly, who wrote his life, pretends that he studied at Oxford, and took there the degree of master of arts; but bishop Godwin assures us this cannot be true, because such distinction of degrees was not then known at Oxford, nor any where else. Our abbot’s merit recommended him to the favour of Alfred, king of Northumberland, who, in the year 685, advanced him to the see of Hagustald, or Hexham, and, upon the death of archbishop Bosa in 687, translated him to that of York. This prelate was tutor to the famous Bede, and lived in the strictest friendship with Acca, and other AngloSaxon doctors, several of whom he put upon writing comments on the scriptures. He likewise founded, in 704, a college at Beverly for secular priests. After he had governed the see of York thirty-four years, being tired with the tumults and confusions of the church, he divested himself of the episcopal character, and retired to Beverly; and four years after died May 7, 721. The day of his death was appointed a festival by a synod held at London in 1416. Bede, and other monkish writers, ascribe several miracles to him. Between three and four hundred years after his death, his body was taken up by Alfric, archbishop of York, and placed in a shrine richly adorned with silver, gold, and precious stones. Bromton relates, that William the conqueror, when he ravaged Northumberland with a numerous army, spared Beverly alone, out of a religious veneration for St. John of that place. This prelate wrote some pieces, 1. “Pro Luca exponendo;” an essay towards an exposition of St. Luke, addressed to Bede. 2. “Homiliee in Evangelia.” 3. Epistolae ad Hildara Abbatissam.“4.” Epistolse ad Herebaldum, Andenum, et Bertinum.“- -Pits mentions another John of Beverly, so called from the place of his nativity, who was a Carmelite monk in the fourteenth century, and a very learned man, and doctor and professor of divinity at Oxford. He flourished about 1390, in the reign of Richard II. and wrote, 1.” Questiones in magistrum sententiarum“in four books. 2.” Disputationes ordinariae" in one book.

, a learned Italian of the seventeenth century, was born at Lucca, May 5, 1629. In classical learning he made such progress, that, when only fifteen, he wrote notes and comments on the principal poets of the Augustan age, which drew the notice and approbation of the learned. In his sixteenth year, he went to Rome and entered the congregation of the regular clerks, called the congregation of the “Mother of God.” After completing his theological studies, he taught divinity for four years, at the end of which he was invited to Lucca to be professor of rhetoric. From the salary of this place he was enabled to maintain his aged father and family, and would not afterwards accept of any promotion from his congregation, that his studies might not be interrupted by affairs of business. He corresponded with many illustrious personages of his time, and among others with Christina, queen of Sweden, who often requested of him copies of his sermons and poems. The facility with which he wrote appears by his translation of the Eneid, which he says, in the preface, he completed in thirteen months. He died of a malignant fever, Oct. 24, 1686. He left a great many works, of which his biographer, Fabroni, has given a minute catalogue. The principal are 1. “Saeculum niveum Roma virginea et Dies niveus,” three small Latin collections on the same subject, “De nivibus Exquilinis, sive de sacris nivibus,” Rome, 1650, 1651, and

, a musician eminently skilled in the knowledge of practical composition, flourished towards the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign. He was of Welch extraction, and had been educated under Tallis, upon whose recommendation it was that in 1589 he was sworn in gentleman extraordinary of the chapel; from whence he was expelled in 1637, it being discovered that he adhered to the Romish communion. He was also organist of Bristol cathedral, but forfeited that employment at the same time with his place in the chapel. Child, afterwards doctor, was his scholar. He has composed sundry services, and a few anthems. Before Bevin’s time the precepts for the composition of canons was known to few. Tallis, Bird, Waterhouse, and Farmer, were eminently skilled in this most abstruse part of musical practice. Every canon, as given to the public, was a kind of enigma. Compositions of this kind were sometimes exhibited in the form of a cross, sometimes in that of a circle there is now extant one resembling a horizontal sun-dial, and the resolution, (as it was called) of a canon, which was the resolving it into its elements, and reducing it into score, was deemed a work of almost as great difficulty as the original compoition. But Bevin, with a view to the improvement of students, generously communicated the result of many years study and experience in a treatise which is highly commended by all who have taken occasion to speak of it. This book was published in 1631, 4to, and dedicated to Goodman bishop of Gloucester, with the following title: “A briefe and short instruction of the Art of Musicke, to teach how to make discant of all proportions that are in use; very necessary for all such as are desirous to attain to knowledge in the art; and may, by practice, if they sing, soone be able to compose three, four, and five parts, and also to compose all sorts of canons that are usuall, by these directions of two or three parts in one upon the plain song.” The rules contained in this book for composition in general are very brief; but for the composition of canons there are in it a great variety of examples of almost all the possible forms in which it is capable of being constructed, even to the extent of sixty parts.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was born at Remiremont, in the month of March 1748, and died at Paris, Feb. 15, 1784. He was first canon, and afterwards grand -chanter of St. Chapelle, at Paris. From his infancy he had a turn for the study of natural history, and assisted Buffon in the latter volumes of his great work on that subject. He published 1. “Systeme de la Fermentation,” 1773, 8vo. 2. “Catechisme d'Agriculture, ou Bibliotheque des gens de la campagne,” 1773, 12mo. 3. “Oraison funebre d'Anne Charlotte de Lorraine, abbesse de Remiremont,” 1773, 4to. 4. “Histoire de Lorraine,” 1777, 8vo, a work to which he is said to have been indebted for his ecclesiastical promotions. One volume only appeared, giving an account of the earliest state of Lorraine, its antiquities, &c. with its literary history, and the lives of the eminent men that add a lustre to its annals. He wrote also, “Observation particuliere sur le Myriade,” and “Materiaux pour l'histoire naturelle des Salines de Lorraine,” both which were printed in Neufchateau’s “Conservateur,” vol. II. In the same collection are twenty-five letters from Buffon to the abbé Bexon. It remains to be noticed, that as he called himself in his first publication Scipio Bexon, by way of concealment, some biographers have supposed that to be his real name.

, a voluminous author, was born April 1578, at Antwerp, of a family originally of Bergeu-op-Zoom, and had his education among the Jesuits. He went afterwards to study philosophy at Louvain, and had scarcely assumed the ecclesiastic dress in order to pursue his divinity course in that university, when he was appointed professor of poetry and rhetoric in the college of Vaulx. He had, some time after, a living near Louvain, and taught philosophy in a house of regular canons in the same neighbourhood. In 1605 he was called to Antwerp, where he had the charge of the school, and some promotion in the church. He died there June 7, 1627. Foppen has given a long list of his works, the principal of which seem to be 1. “Apophthegmata Christianorum,” Antwerp, 1608, 8vo. 2. “Biblia sacra variarum translationum,” Antwerp, 1616, 3 vols. fol. 3. “Promptuaarium morale super evangelia communia, et particularia qusedam festorum totius anni,” 1613, 8vo, and often reprinted. 4. “Magnum Theatrum vitae humanae.” Referring our readers to Freytag for a more minute account of this vast compilation, it may be sufficient to add, that Conrad Lycosthenes left the materials for it, and Theodore Swinger or Zwinger having put them in order with some additions with which his course of reading had furnished him, published three editions of them the first in 1 vol. fol. 1565, the second in 3 vols. fol. 1571, and the third in. 4 vols. fol. all at Basil, 1586. James Swinger went on improving and adding to this work, which was at last taken up by Beyerlinck, whose edition appeared after his death, Cologne, 1631, enlarged to 8 vols. folio; and it was reprinted in the same form at Lyons, 1678, and at Venice, 1707. It is a mass of theology, history, politics, philosophy, &c. in alphabetical order, containing all the knowledge of the times upon the various subjects, and we may add, all the ignorance and superstitions.

In 1588 his wife died, and although now seventy years old, he married, a few months after, a young woman whom he called his Shunamite. His health and spirits were wonderfully preserved for many years after this, nor did he discontinue his lectures until 1600. He lived five years after this, considerably weakened by age and infirmities, retaining the memory of things long past, but almost totally deprived of that faculty in continuing a conversation. At intervals, however, he evinced his steady adherence to the religion to which he said he had been early called, lamented the years he had passed in folly and dissipation, and gave many suitable and affecting exhortations to his friends. He died Oct. 13, 1605, in the eighty-seventh year of his age.

Beza’s zeal was much tempered in his latter days and when, during an interview with Henry IV. in 1599, in a Tillage of Savoy near Geneva, that prince asked him what he could do for him, Beza expressed no wish but to see peace restored in France. His last will bears the same sentiments, with much expression of regret for his early errors. Beza was an elegant writer, and a man of great learning. His long life, and the enthusiasm with which he inspired his followers, made him be called the Phenix of his age. As a divine, controversialist, and on many occasions, as a negociator, he displayed great abilities, and a faithful adherence to his principles. His numerous writings are now perhaps but little consulted, and his translation of the Psalms into French verse, which was begun by Marot, are no longer in use in the reformed churches but as a promoter of literature, he still deserves high praise, on account of the great diligence and success with which he superintended the college of Geneva for forty years of his life. When on one occasion the misfortunes of the times rendered it necessary to dismiss two of the professors, for whose maintenance there were no longer any funds, Beza, then at the age of seventy, supplied both their places, and gave lectures for more than two years. He was in fact the founder of that college which for the last two centuries has produced so many eminent men; he prescribed its statutes, and left his successors an example which may be said to have descended to our own times. Bayle’s account of Beza, in his usual rambling style, is principally taken from the Latin life published in 1606 by Antonius Fayus, or La Faye. Noel Taillepied, Bolsec, and a doctor of the Sorbonne, named Lainge, or Laingeus, have also written lives of this reformer. Other authorities will be subjoined in the note.

, called IL Frari, a painter and sculptor of Modena, has the reputation of having been the master of Corregio, but never arrived at the fame of his pupil. There is one of his pictures in the church of St. Francis in Modena, by which it appears that he possessed a certain degree of mellowness, though his line is too dry, and the eyes of his figures want the roundness of nature, like those of Cimabue. He died in 1510, two years before the merit of Corregio began to be acknowledged.

, called by Fabroni Blanchius, a religious of the order of the Minorites, was bora Oct. 2, 1686. For some years he taught philosophy and theology, and was afterwards provincial of his order in the Roman province, visitor of that of Bologna, one of the counsellors of the inquisition at Rome, and an examiner of the Roman clergy. He died Jan. 18, 1758. Amidst all these graver employments, he found leisure to indulge his taste for the belles lettres, and especially dramatic poetry, which procured him admission into the academy of the Arcadjans. His works were published under his assumed name of Farnabio Gioachino Annutini, a childish anagram of Fra Giovanni Antonio Bianchi. They are, principally, 1. “Tragedie sacre e morali,” four in number, one upon the history of sir Thomas More, and all in prose, Bologna, 1725, 8vo. 2. Other tragedies “La Dina,” “II Demetrio,” &c. published separately from 1734 to 1738. 3. “De‘ vizj e dei diflfeti del moderno teatro, e del modo di corregerli e d’emendarli, ragionamenti vi,” Rome, 17.53. In this, which he published under his academic name, Lauriso Tragiense, he defends the opinion of Maffei against that of Concilia, who had published a dissertation “De spectaculis theatralibus,” in which he maintained that dramatic exhibitions were unfriendly to religion and morals, an opinion which has not been confined, as usually said, to the puritans or methodists of England. 4. “Delia poteste e polizia deila Chiesa, trattati due contro le nuove opinion! di Pietro Giannone,” Rome, 1745 1751, 5 vols. 4to, a voluminous work in vindication of the temporal power of the pope, which had been attacked by Giannone in his History of Naples, and by Bossuet, whose principles Giannone adopted. He wrote some tragedies and comedies, which do not appear to have been printed, and left many other works in manuscript, which Fabroni has enumerated.

In 1686 he returned to his own country, and was very active in re-founding the academy of the Aletophili, or lovers of truth, recommending to them more attention to mathematical studies, and to assist them, he presented the society with the instruments which Montanari had bequeathed for him; but this academy entirely depended on his presence, and on his return to Rome two years after, gradually dissolved. Settled after this at Rome, he became connected with the most eminent men of his time, and enriched his stores of knowledge, by an acquaintance with Greek, Hebrew, and French. Antiquities likewise became one of his favourite pursuits. He often passed whole days among the splendid ruins of Rome, assisted at every research, and digging among them, visited all the museums, and made elegant and correct drawings of all the monuments of antiquity. On the death of Innocent XI. cardinal Ottoboni, his protector, being chosen pope by the name of Alexander VIII. continued to interest himself in the fortune of Bianchini, gave him a canonry in the church of St. Mary Rotunda, appointed him guardian and librarian to cardinal Peter Ottoboni his nephew, gave him two pensions, and would have promoted him yet farther, if he had lived, and if Bianchini would have taken orders but he had not made up his mind to take deacon’s orders until 1699, and never would proceed farther. On the death of Alexander VIII. in 1691, the cardinal, his nephew, continued his kindness, and besides bestowing a canonry on him in the cfiurch of St. Lawrence in Damaso, invited him to reside in his palace. Clement XI. who was elected pope in 1700, bestowed on him, the year following, the title of chamberlain of honour, authorized him to wear that dress of a prelate called the mantellone, and assigned him apartments in the palace of Monte-Cavallo.

, an Italian scholar of the last century, was born at Prato in Tuscany, Nov. 18, 1685. He had but just finished his education at Florence, when he was admitted a member of the academy of the Apatisti, and two years after, of that of Florence, nor was he more than twenty when he became known to and associated with the principal literati of that city. He went afterwards to Pisa, and studied philosophy and mathematics under Alexander Marchetti, the translator of Lucretius, and there he received the degree of doctor of laws, and the order of priesthood. There also the bishop of Prato appointed him to give public lectures on the works of the fathers, in the course of which he became particularly attached to those of St. Bernard and the bishop of Pistoia gave him the living of St. Peter at Ajolo, where he made himself very popular. Such also was his literary fame, that besides the academies we have mentioned, he was admitted a member of the Inlecundi of Prato, the Innominati of Bra in Piedmont, of the Rinvigoriti of Foligno, the Arcadians of Rome, the Columbarian society, and the della Crusca. His life was exemplary, his character loyal and ingenuous, although somewhat reserved. He loved retirement, yet was of a placid humour, and enjoyed effusions of wit but in his latter years he fell into a state of melancholy, aggravated by bodily disorder, which terminated in his death Feb. 17, 1749. His two most considerable works, were, 1. “De‘ gran duchi di Toscana della real casa de’ Medici,” Venice, 1741, fol. an account of the ancient sovereigns of Florence, as patrons of literature and the arts, but containing little new matter. 2. “Della satira Italiana, trattato,” Massa, 1714, 4to. Florence, 1729, 4to a critical work highly esteemed in Italy. To the second edition the author has annexed an Kalian dissertation, on the hypocrisy of men of letters, in which he exposes what would be called in this country the arts of puffing, which his biographer remarks, have made very gieat progress since his time. 3. “La Cantica de Cantici di Salomone tradotta in versi Toscani con annotazioni,” Venice, 1735. Various other small pieces of criticism, bibliography, &c. from his pen are inserted in the academical collections, particularly “Prose Fiorentine,” Venice, 1754, 4to.

, a celebrated Italian philosopher and physician, was born at Bologna, Sept. 30, 1717. After having studied physic with great diligence and success, he was in his nineteenth year appointed medical assistant in one of the hospitals, and after four years, was, in 1742, admitted to the degree of doctor. In 1743 and 1744 he published a valuable translation into Italian of Winslow’s Anatomy, 6 vols. 8vo. In the last mentioned year, his reputation induced the landgrave of Hesse-Darmstadt, prince and bishop of Augsburgh, to give him an invitation to reside with him, which Bianconi accepted, and remained there for six years. During this time he published “Due lettere di Fisica,” &c. Venice, 1746, 4to, addressed to the celebrated marquis MafFei, and wrote in French an “Essay on Electricity,” addressed to another learned friend, count Algarotti. He also began, in French, “Journal des nouveautes litteraires d' Italic,” printed at Leipsie, but with Amsterdam on the title, 1748, 1749, 8vo, which he continued to the end of a third volume. In 1730, he went to the court of Dresden, with a strong recommendation from pope Benedict XIV. to Augustus III. king of Poland, who received him into his confidence, and appointed him his aulic counsellor, and in 1760 sent him to France on a political affair of considerable delicacy, which he transacted with skill and satisfaction to his employer. In 1764, his majesty appointed him his resident minister at the court of Rome, where he felt his literary taste revive with its usual keenness, and was a contributor to various literary Journals. That of the “Effemeridi letterarie di Roma” owed its rise principally to him, and for sometime, its fame to his contributions. It was in this he wrote his eloges on Lupacchini, Piranesi, and Mengs, which last was published separately, with additions, in 1780. In his twelve Italian letters on the history of Cornelius Celsus, printed at Rome in 1779, he restores that celebrated physician to the age of Augustus, contrary to the common opinion, and to that of Tirasboschi (to whom they were addressed), who places him in what is called the silver age. He was projecting a magnificent edition of Celsus, a life of Petrarch, and some other literary undertakings, when he died suddenly at Perugia, Jan. 1, 1781, universally regretted. He left ready for the press, a work in Italian and French, on the circus of Caracalla, which was magnificently printed at Rome in 1790, with nineteen beautiful engravings.

, called one of the wise men of Greece, was born at Priene, a small town of Caria, abqut 570 B. C. He was in great repute in Greece, under the reigns of Halyattes and Croesus, kings of Lydia. Though born to great riches, he lived without splendour, expending his fortune in relieving the needy, and although esteemed the most eloquent orator of his time, he desired to reap no other advantage from this talent, than that of glory to his country. In his pleadings he shewed such discrimination, as never to undertake any cause which he did not think just. It was usual to say of a good cause that it was one which Bias would have undertaken, yet we are not told by what means he knew that a cause was good before it was tried. On one occasion, certain pirates brought several young women to sell as slaves at Priene. Bias purchased them, and maintained them, until he had an opportunity to return them to their friends. This generous action could not fail to increase his popularity, and made him be styled “the prince of the wise men.”

, a noted Socinian writer, was born in 1615, at Wotton-under-Edge, in Gloucestershire. He was educated at the free-school in that town and, being a promising youth, was noticed by George lord Berkeley, who made him an allowance of 10l. a year. While at this school, he translated Virgil’s eclogues, and the two first satires of Juvenal, into English verse, both which were printed at London in 1634, in 8vo. In 1634 he was sent to Oxford, and entered at Magdalen-hall. June 23, 1683, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and soon after was invited to be master of the school of his native place, but declined it. May 20, 1691, he took his degree of master of arts; and the magistrates of Gloucester having chosen him master of the free-school of St. Mary de Crypt in that city, he went and settled there, and was much esteemed for his diligence. Falling, however, into some opinions concerning the Trinity, different from those commonly received, and having expressed his thoughts with too much freedom, he was accused of heresy: and being summoned before the magistrates, he exhibited in writing a confession, which not being thought satisfactory, he was obliged to make another more explicit than the former. When ha had fully considered this doctrine, he comprised it in twelve arguments drawn, as he pretended, froai the Scripture wherein the commonly-received opinion, touching the deity of the Holy Spirit, is attempted to be refuted . An acquaintance who had a copy of them, having shewed them, to the magistrates of Gloucester, and to the parliament committee then residing there, he was committed, Dec. 2, 1645, to the common gaol, till the parliament should take cognizance of the matter. However, an eminent person in Gloucester procured his enlargement, by giving security for his appearance when the parliament should send for him. June 1616, archbishop Usher, passing through Gloucester in his way to London, had a conference with our author, and endeavoured, but in vain, to convince him of his errors. Six months after he had been set at liberty he was summoned to appear at Westminster, and the parliament appointed a committee to examine him before whom he freely confessed, that he did not acknowledge the commonly-received notion of the divinity of the Holy Ghost, but, however, was ready to hear what could be opposed to him, and, if he could not make out his opinion to be true, honestly to own his error. But being wearied with tedious and expensive delays, he wrote a letter to sir Henry Vane, a member of the committee, requesting him either to procure his discharge, or to make a report of his case to the house of commons. The result of this was, his being committed to the custody of one of their officers, which restraint continued the five years following. He was at length referred to the assembly of divines then sitting at Westminster, before whom he often appeared, and gave them in writing his twelve arguments, which were published the same year. Upon their publication, he was summoned to appear at the bar of the house of commons; where being asked, “Whether he owned this treatise, and the opinions therein” he answered in the affirmative. Upon which he was committed to prison, and the house ordered, Sept. 6, 1747, that the book should be called in and burnt by the hangman, and the author be examined by the committee of plundered ministers. But Mr. Biddle drew a greater storm upon himself by two tracts he published in 1648, “A confession of faith touching the Holy Trinity according to the Scripture” and “The testimonies of Irenaeus, Justin Martyr, Tertullian, Novatianusy Theophilus, Origen, also of Arnobius, Lactantius, Eusebius, Hilary, and Brightman, concerning that one God, and the persons of the Holy Trinity, together with observations on the same.” As soon as they were published, the assembly of divines solicited the parliament, and procured an ordinance, inflicting death upon those that held opinions contrary to the received doctrine about the Trinity, and severe penalties upon those who differed in lesser matters. Biddle, however, escaped by a dissension in the parliament, part of which was joined by the army; many of whom, both officers and soldiers, being liable to the severities of the ordinance above-mentioned, it therefore from that time lay unregarded for several years. Biddle had now more liberty allowed him by his keepers who suffered him, upon security given, to go into Staffordshire, where he lived some time with a justice of peace, who entertained him with great hospitality, and at his death left him a legacy. Serjeant John Bradshaw, president of the council of state, having got intelligence of this indulgence granted him, caused him to be recalled, and more strictly confined. In this confinement he spent his whole substance, and was reduced to great indigence, till he was employed by Roger Daniel of London, to correct an impression of the Septuagint Bible, which that printer was about to publish and this gained him for some time a comfortable subsistence.

In 1654 the parliament published a general act of oblivion, when Biddle was restored to his liberty. This he improved among those friends he had gained in London, in meeting together every Sunday for expounding the Scripture, and discoursing thereupon; by which means his opinions concerning the unity of God, Christ his only son, and his holy spirit, were so propagated, that the presbyterian ministers became highly offended. The same year he published his “Twofold scripture catechism,” which was ably answered by Dr. Owen in his “Vindicise Evangelicae,” Oxford, 1655; but a copy coming into the hands of some of the members of Cromwell’s parliament, meeting Sept. 3, 1654, a complaint was made against it in the house of commons. Upon this, the author being brought to the bar, and asked “Whether he wrote that book?” answered by asking, “Whether it seemed reasonable, that one brought before a judgment seat as a criminal, should accuse himself?” After some debates and resolutions, he was, Dec. 13, committed close prisoner to the Gatehouse. A bill likewise was ordered to be brought in for punishing him but, after about six months imprisonment, he obtained his liberty at the court of king’s bench, by due course of law. About a year after, another no less formidable danger overtook him, by his engaging in a dispute with one Griffin, an anabaptist teacher. Many of Griffin’s congregation having embraced Biddle' s opinions concerning the Trinity, he thought the best way to stop the spreading of such errors would be openly to confute his tenets. For this purpose he challenges Biddle to a public disputation at his meeting in the Stone chapel in St. Paul’s cathedral, on this question, “Whether Jesus Christ be the most high, or almighty God?” Biddle would have declined the dispute, but was obliged to accept of it and the two antagonists having met amidst a ifumerous audience, Griffin repeats the question, asking “if any man there did deny that Christ was God most high” to which Biddle resolutely answered, “I do deny it” and by this open profession gave his adversaries the opportunity of a positive and clear accusation, which they soon laid hold of. But Griffin being baffled, the disputation was deferred till another day, when Biddle was to take his turn of proving the negative of the question. Meanwhile, Griffin and his party, not thinking themselves a match for our author, accused him of fresh blasphemies, and procured an order from the protector to apprehend him, July the 3d (being the day before the intended second disputation), and to commit him to the Compter. He was afterwards sent to Newgate, and ordered to be tried for his life the next sessions, on the ordinance against blasphemy. However, the protector not chusing to have him either condemned or absolved, took him out of the hands of the law, and detained him in prison; till at length, being wearied with receiving petitions for and against him, he banished him to St. Mary’s castle, in the isle of Scilly y where he was sent Oct. 1655. During this exile, he employed himself in studying several intricate matters, particularly the Revelation of St. John, and after his return to London, published an essay towards explaining it. In 1658, the protector, through the intercession of many friends, suffered a writ of habeas corpus to be granted out of the king’s bench, whereby the prisoner was brought back, and, nothing being laid to his charge, was set at liberty. Upon his return to London, he became pastor of an independent meeting but did not continue long in town for, Cromwell dying Sept. 3, 1658, his son Richard called a parliament, consisting chiefly of presbyterians, whom, of all men, Biddle most dreaded he therefore retired privately into the country. This parliament being soon dissolved, he returned to his former employment till the restoration of king Charles the Second, when the liberty of dissenters was taken away, and their meetings punished as seditious. Biddle then restrained himself from public to more private assemblies, but, June 1, 1662, he was seized in his lodging, where he and some few of his friends had met for divine worship, and was, with them, carried before a justice of peace, who committed them all to prison, where they lay till the recorder took security for their answering to the charge brought against them at the next session. But the court not being then able to find a statute whereon to form, any criminal indictment, they were referred to the session following, and proceeded against at common law; each of the hearers was fined 20l. Biddle, 100l., and to lie in prison till paid. By his confinement, however, he contracted a disease which put an end to his life, Sept. 22, 1662, in the 47th year of his age. He was buried in the cemetery near Old Bethlem, in Moorfields and a monument was erected over his grave, with an inscription. His life was published in Latin at London, 1682, by Mr. Farrington, of the Inner Temple, who gives him a high character for piety and morals, and by the Rev. Joshua Toulmin, in 1789, 8vo, who styles him the Father of the English Unitarians.

2. “Progres des Allemands dans les belles-lettres,” 1752 and 1768, 8vo. 3. “Amusemens dramatiques,” Leyden, 1768, 2 vols. 12mo, of no great merit. 4. “Lettres familieres,” 1763, and “Erudition universelle,” 1768, 4 vols. both translated into English by Dr. Hooper. The baron also conducted for about three years a periodical publication called “The Hermit/' and is by some the reputed author of the” Memoirs of the duchess of Hanover, spouse to George I." which is more generally attributed to baron. Polnitz.

, and not de la Vigne, as he is generally called by writers who have occasion to name him [for it is thus he gives his own name in his “Roman des Oiseaux”], was born of a noble family of the diocese of Bayeux, about 1428. He was chaplain to king John, and followed that prince into England after the battle of Poletiers. Being at Rochefort in 1459, he began a poem on the chace, entitled “Le Roman des Oiseaux,” which he finished on his return to France. This he did at the command of the king for the instruction of his son Philip duke of Burgundy. The abbé Goujet attributes this poem to Gaston de Foix, from its being printed at the end of the “Miroir de la Chasse” by that prince, but greatly different from the manuscripts. Gaston’s work printed by Trepperel at Paris, fol. without a date, and again in 1520, consists of two parts, the first Gaston’s, and the second by Bigne. Bigne is supposed, from some passages in his work, to have been alive in 1475. The personages in this poem, or romance, are allegorical, and dispute which species of the chace has the pre-eminence, appealing to the king, who, after having advised with his counsellors, wisdom, reason, and truth, (not very usually called in) sends away the disputants perfectly satisfied. The style is easy, and the author’s quaintness will be agreeable to the lovers of early poetry.

, known under the name of Maitre Adam, a joiner at Nevers, about the close of the reign of Louis XIII. and the beginning of that of Louis XIV. was called by the poets of his time Le Virgile au rabot. He made verses amidst his tools and his bottles. Cardinal Richelieu and the duke of Orleans settled pensions on him, and Corneille was among his panegyrists. His “Chevilles,” 1644, 4to; his “Villebrequin,” 1663; his “Rabot,” in 12mo, &c. had a great run. Among a considerable number of dull frivolities we meet with some happy lines. He died in 1662 at Nevers, which he never could be brought to quit for a lodging at Versailles. He had a just notion of greatness, and was capable of feeling and inspiring the charms of friendship. An epicurean without libertinism, and a stoic without supersition, he so associated these two sects as to have it said, that if Epicurus and Zeno had lived in his time, he would have brought them to drink together. He stuck to his mediocrity in order to preserve his happiness. The poets his contemporaries were his friends, and not envious of his fame. Mainard says, that the muses ought never to be seated but on tabourets made by the hand of this poetical joiner. St. Amand proved that he understood the art of poetry as well as that of making boxes. The duke de St. Aignan tells him, in some very agreeable lines, that, by his verses and his name, he is the first of men. Such praises were probably offered in ridicule; but Billaut knew how to make the most of his friends, and is said to have tried the sincerity of their friendship with very little ceremony. A new edition of his works was published in 1806, 12mo, Paris, and the year before a comedy was acted on the Paris stage, with some success, called “Chevilles de Maitre Adam.” Two poetical tradesmen, in his time, endeavoured to rival him, but without success, Ragueneau, a pastry-cook, and Reault, a locksmith. Each addressed a sonnet to him that of the pastrycook concludes with a point quite in character:

, the writer of several tracts on theological subjects, and author of that laborious performance, “Origines ecclesiastic, or the Antiquities of the Christian church,” was the son of Mr. Francis Bingham, a respectable inhabitant of Wakefield in Yorkshire, where our author was born in September, 1668. He learned the first rudiments of grammar at a school in the same town, and on the 26th of May 1684, was admitted a member of University college in Oxford. There he applied with persevering industry to those studies which are generally considered as most laborious. Though he by no means neglected the writers of Greece or Rome, yet he employed most of his time in studying the writings of the fathers. How earnestly he devoted himself to these abstruse inquiries, he had an early opportunity of giving an honourable testimony, which will presently be mentioned more at large. He took the degree of B. A. in 1688, and on the 1st of July 1689 was elected fellow of the above-mentioned college. His election to this fellowship was attended with some flattering marks of honour and distinction. On the 23d of June, 1691, he was created M. A. about four years after which a circumstance occurred which eventually occasioned him to leave the university. Being called on to preach before that learned body, he would not let slip the opportunity it gave him of evincing publicly his intimate acquaintance with the opinions and doctrines of the fathers, and at the same time of displaying the zeal with which he was resolved to defend their tenets concerning the Trinity, in opposition to the attacks of men in much more conspicuous stations than himself. Having heard what he conceived to be a very erroneous statement of that subject delivered by a leading man from the pulpit at St. Mary’s, he thought it his duty on this occasion to point out to his hearers what the fathers had asserted to be the ecclesiastical notion of the term person. In pursuance of this determination he delivered a very long discourse on the 28th of October, 1695, from the famous words of the apostle, “There are three that bear record in heaven, &c.” This sermon, though containing nothing more than an elaborate defence of the term person, in opposition to the explanation which he had lately heard, drew a heavy censure on the preacher from the ruling members of the university, charging him with having asserted doctrines false, impious, and heretical, contrary to those of the catholic church. This censure was followed by other charges in the public prints, viz. those of Arianism, Tritheism and the heresy of Valentinus Gentilis. These matters ran so high, that he found himself under the necessity of resigning his fellowship, and of withdrawing from the university the former of which took place on the 23d of November 1695. How wholly unmerited these accusations were, not only appears from the sermon itself, now in the possession of the writer of this article, but also from the whole tenor of his life and writings, constantly shewing himself in both a zealous defender of what- is called the orthodox notion of the Trinity. However, that such a censure was passed, is most certain, as well from domestic tradition, as from the mention which is repeatedly made of it in the manuscript papers of our author but we are assured that no traces thereof are now to be found in the books of the university.

About this time our author was presented, without any solicitation on his part, by the famous Dr. Radcliffe, to the rectory of Headbourne- Worthy, a living valued at that time at about one hundred pounds a year situated near Winchester. Within a few months after his settling in this country, being called on to preach at a visitation held in the cathedral of Winchester, on the 12th of May, 1696, he seized that opportunity of pursuing the subject which he had begun at Oxford, and of exculpating himself from those charges which had been brought against him. How little our divine had deserved those imputations in the opinion of his brethren, before whom he preached, may in some degree be judged from his having been, at no greater distance of time than the 16th of September, 1697, again appointed to preach before them on a similar occasion. He then brought to a conclusion what he wished farther to say on that subject, his manner of treating which had exposed him to the censure of the university and having done so, he prepared to commit his three sermons to the press. Why this intention was not fulfilled cannot be gathered from any of his papers, though there exists among them a long preface to the sermon preached at Oxford, explaining and justifying his motives for having preached and published it; and a second preface annexed to the first of those preached at Winton, in which he dedicates the two visitation sermons to the clergy of the deanery before whom they were delivered; wherein he tells them, that he has been induced to do so not only from the subject contained in them being such as was their immediate concern, but also that he might have an opportunity of giving a more full account of the motives and circumstances which had occasioned him to write or to publish them.

We have seen that it has been objected to Dr. Birch, that he was sometimes too minute in his publications, and that he. did not always exercise, with due severity, the power of selection. The charge must be confessed not to be totally groundless. But it may be alleged in our author’s favour, that a man who has a deep and extensive acquintance with a subject, often sees a connection and importance in some smaller circumstances, which may not immediately be discerned by others and, on that account, may have reasons for inserting them, that will escape the notice of superficial minds. The same circumstance is noticed in the following character of Dr. Birch by one of our predecessors in this Dictionary, Dr. Heathcote, who knew Dr. Birch well, and consorted with him, for the last thirteen years of his life. Dr. Heathcote “believes him to have been an honest, humane, and generous man warm and zealous in his attachments to persons and principle, but of universal benevolence, and ever ready to promote the happiness of all men. He was cheerful, lively, and spirited, in the highest degree; and, notwithstanding the labours and drudgery he went through in his historical pursuits, no man mixed more in company but he was a very early riser, and thus had done the business of a morning before others had begun it. He was not a man of learning, properly so called he understood the Latin and French languages, not critically, but very well of the Greek he knew very little. He was, however, a man of great general knowledge, and excelled particularly in modern history. As a collector and compiler, he was in the main judicious in the choice of his materials but was sometimes too minute in uninteresting details, and did not always exercise, with due severity, the power of selection. He had a favourite position, that we could not be possessed of too many facts and he never departed from, it, though it was often urged to him, that facts, which admit of no reasoning, and tend to no edification, which can only serve to encumber, and, as it were, smother useful intelligence, had better be consigned to oblivion, than recorded. And indeed, in this very way of biographical compilation, we have always been of opinion, that, if it were less fashionable to relate particulars of every man, which are common to almost all men, we should be equally knowing, and our libraries would be by far less crowded. In his manners, Dr. Birch was simple and unaffected; very communicative, and forward to assist in any useful undertaking; and of a spirit perfectly disinterested, and (as his friends used to tell him) too inattentive to his own emolument.”

, or Bryckinton, or Brickington, so called from Birchington, in the isle of Thanet, where he was born, was a Benedictine monk, belonging to the church of Canterbury, into which order he entered about the year 1382. He wrote a history of the archbishops of Canterbury to the year 1368, which forms the first article in the first volume of Wharton’s Anglia Sacra, who copied it from the ms. in the Lambeth library. Other historical Mss. in the same library are attributed to him, but remain unpublished. He is supposed to have died in 1407.

Our author has also several verses and translations extant, set to music by Mr. Henry Lawes as particularly Anacreon’s ode, called the Lute, translated from the Greek, and to be sung by a bass alone; and an Anniversary on the nuptials of John earl of Bridgwater, 22d July, 1652. He wrote, likewise, a poem on his staying in London after the Act of Banishment for cavaliers and another called the Jolt, made upon Cromwell the protector’s being thrown out of his coach-box in Hyde-Park. He published Mr. Robert Waring’s “Effigies Amoris, sive quid sit Amor efflagitanti responsum,” London, 1649, 12mo, from the original, at the author’s desire, who was willing to be concealed. The third edition was published after the restoration, by William Griffith, of Oxford, with an epistle before it, written by him to sir John Birkenhead wherein he gives the character of that gentleman, as well as of the author. This was the same piece afterwards translated into English by the famous Mr, Norris of Bemerton, and published under the title of “The Picture of Love unveiled.” We meet also with several copies of verses written by this gentleman, and prefixed to the works of the most eminent wits and greatest poets of his time but satire was his principal excellence, and in genuine powers of ridicule he had no superior, at a time when those powers were called forth, and well rewarded by both parties.

, a celebrated Italian scholar of the last century, was born at Florence, Aug. 14, 1674. After finishing his studies, he taught a school, which produced Bottari, the prelate, and some other eminent men. The grand duke Cosmo III. having given him some benefices, he took priest’s orders, and the degree of doctor in the university of Florence, and spent several years in preaching, particularly in the cathedral church of St. Laurence. The chapter, in 1713, appointed him keeper of the Mediceo-Laurentian library, and to this office he was re-elected in 1725, 1729, and 1739, but he could not, with all his endeavours, prevail on the chapter to grant it him for life. While here, however, he began a new course of studies, learned Greek, Hebrew, and other oriental languages, and applied himself particularly to the Tuscan here also he found a very useful patron in Nicolas Panciatichi, a very opulent Florentine nobleman, who received him into his house, where he remained eleven years, and made him his children’s tutor, his librarian, secretary, archivist, &c. and amply rewarded him for his services in all thi’se departments. He was also appointed apostolic prothonotary, synodal examiner at Florence and Fiesola, and reviser of cases of conscience in these dioceses. At length, in 174-1, the grand duke of his own accord made him royal librarian of the Laurentian library, and in 1745, gave him a canonry of St. Laurence. In his place as librarian, he was of essential service to men of letters, and was engaged in many literary undertakings which were interrupted by his death, May 4, 1756. He left a very capital collection of rare editions and manuscripts, which the grand duke purchased and divided between the Laurentian and Magliabechian libraries. Biscioni during his life-time was a man of great reputation, and many writers have spoken highly in his praise. He published very little that could be called original, his writings consisting principally of the notes, commentaries, prefaces, letters, and dissertations, with which he enriched the works of others such as the preface and notes to his edition of the “Prose di Dante Alighieri e di Gio. Boccaccio,” Florence, 1713 1723, 4to his notes on “Menzini’s Satires” his preface and notes on the “Riposo” of Raphael Borghini, Florence, 1730, 4to, &c. &c. The only work he published not of this description, was a vindication of the first edition of the “Canti Carnascialeschi,” against a reprint of that work by the abbé Bracci, entitled “Parere sopra la seconda edizione de' Canti Carnascialeschi e in difesa della prima edizione,” &c. Florence, 1750, 8vo. He had begun the catalogue of the Mediceo- Laurentian library, of which the first volume, containing the oriental manuscripts, was magnificently printed at Florence, 1752, folio, and the rest continued by the canon Giulanelli, many years after, who added the Greek Mss. Biscioni left many notes, critical remarks, &c. on books, a history of the Panciatichi family, and of his own family, and some satires on those who had so long prevented him from being perpetual keeper of the Laurentian library, an injury he seems never to have forgotten.

, late head-master of Merchant Taylors’ school, and a poet of considerable merit, was descended from a respectable family, originally of Worcestershire, and was born in St. John’s street, London, his father’s residence, Sept. 21, O. S. 1731. He was tender and delicate in his constitution, yet gave early indications of uncommon capacity and application, as appears from his having been called, when only nine years old, to construe the Greek Testament for a lad of fourteen, the son of an opulent neighbour. With this promising stock of knowledge, he was sent to Merchant Taylors’ school, June 1743, when between eleven and twelve years of age, and soon evinced a superiority over his fellows which attracted the notice and approbation of his masters. He read with avidity, and composed with success. His first essays, however imperfect, shewed great natural abilities, and an original vein of wit. History and poetry first divided his attention, but the last predominated. He not only acquired that knowledge of the Latin and Greek classics, which is usually obtained in a public seminary, but also became intimately acquainted with the best authors in our own language and some of his writings prove that he had perused Milton, Dryden, Pope, and Swift, at an early age, with much discrimination and critical judgment. In June 1750, he was elected to St. John’s college, Oxford, and admitted a scholar of that society, on the 25th of the same month. During his residence here, he not only corrected his taste by reading with judgment, but also improved his powers by habitual practice in composition. Besides several poetical pieces, with which he supplied his friends, he wrote a great number of college exercis.es, hymns, paraphrases of scripture, translations from the ancients, and imitations of the moderns.

, a French poet and miscellaneous writer, was born at Konigsberg, Nov. 24, 1732, of a family of French refugees, of the protestant religion. After completing his education, he became a clergyman of that communion, and appears to have formed his taste for oratory and poetry from a frequent perusal of the Bible, the style of the historical part of which he much admired. He was a no less warm admirer of Homer. Although a Prussian by birth, he was a Frenchman at heart, and having accustomed himself to the language of his family, he felt a strong desire to reside in what he considered as properly his native country, conceiving at the same time that the best way to procure his naturalization would be through the medium of literary merit. As early as 1762, he published at Berlin a translation of the Iliad, which he called a free translation, and was in fact an abridgment and this served to introduce him to D'Alembert, who recommended him so strongly to the king, Frederick II. that he was admitted into the Berlin academy, received a pension, and afterwards visited France in order to complete his translation of Homer. A first edition had been printed in 1764, 2 vols. 8vo, but the most complete did not appear until 1780, and was followed by the Odyssey in 1785. Such was the reputation of both among his countrymen, that the academy of inscriptions admitted his name on their list of foreign members. Modern French critics, however, have distinguished more correctly between the beauties and defects of this translation. They allow him to have been more successful in his “Joseph,” a poem published first in 1767, and with additions in 1786, and now become almost a classic in France. It was translated into English in 1783, 2 vols. 12mo, but is certainly not likely to become a classic in this country, or where a taste prevails for simplicity and elegance. His “Joseph” was followed by “Les Bataves,” a poem of which some detached parts had appeared in 1773, under the title of “Guillaume de Nassau,” Amsterdam. This was reprinted in 1775, and again in 1796. During the war in 1793, as he attached himself to the French interest, he was struck off the list of the academy of Berlin, and his pension withdrawn but on the peace of Bale, his honours and his pension were restored. If his sovereign punished him thus for acting the Frenchman, he was not more fortunate with his new friends, who imprisoned him because he was a Prussian. On the establishment of the institute, however, Bitaube was chosen of the class of literature and the fine arts but gave a very bad specimen of his taste in translating the “Herman and Dorothea” of Goethe, and comparing that author with Homer, whose works, from this opinion, we should suppose he had studied to very little purpose. Some time before his death, which happened Nov. 22, 1808, he was admitted a member of the legion of honour. His other works were 1. “Examen de la Confession de Foi du Vicaire Savoyard,” 1763, a very liberal expostulation with Rousseau on account of his scepticism. 2. “De l'influence cles Belles-lettres sur la Philosophic,” Berlin, 1767, 8vo; and 3. “Eloge de Corneille,” 1769, 8vo none of which are in the collection of his works published at Paris in 1804, 9 vols. 8vo. Bitaub cannot be ranked among writers eminent for genius, nor is his taste, even in the opinion of his countrymen, of the purest standard; but his works procured him a considerable name, and many of the papers he wrote in the memoirs of the Paris academy discover extensive reading and critical talents. His private character appears to have been irreproachable, and his amiable manners and temper procured him many friends during the revolutionary successions.

So completely trammeled was he in this respect, that, although his friends saw others disingenuous enough to avail themselves of the novelties announced by Dr. Black in his lectures, and therefore repeatedly urged him to publish an account of what he had done; this remained unaccomplished to the last. Dr. Black often began the task, but was so nice in his notions of the manner in which it should be executed, that the pains he took in forming a plan of the work, never failed to affect his health, and oblige him to desist. Indeed, he peculiarly disliked appearing as an author. His inaugural dissertation was the work of duty. His “Experiments on Magnesia, Quicklime, and other alkaline substances,” was necessary to put what he had indicated in his inaugural dissertations on a proper foundation. His “Observations on the more ready Freezing of water that has been boiled,” published in the Philosophical Transactions for 1774, was also called for; and his “Analysis of the Waters of some boiling Springs in Iceland,” made at the request of his friend T. I. Stanley, esq. was read to the royal society of Edinburgh, and published by the council. And these are the only works of his which appeared in print before the publication of his lectures after his death, by professor llobison, in 1803, 2 vols. 4to.

, an eminent English divine, was born in London, 1654, and educated at Catherine-hail, Cambridge. In 1690, he was inducted into the living of South Okenden, Essex, and four years afterwards to the rectory of St. Mary Aldermary, London and was successively chosen lecturer of St. Olave’s, and of St. Dunstan’s in the West. He was likewise appointed chaplain to king William. He preached before the house of commons Jan. 30, 1699, and in his sermon animadverted on Mr. Toland for his asserting in his life of Milton, that Charles I. was not the author of “Icon Basilike,” and for some insinuations against the authenticity' of the holy scriptures which drew him into a controversy with that author. In 1700, he preached a course of sermons at Boyle’s lecture, in the cathedral church of St. Paul, which were afterwards published. In 1707, he was consecrated to the bishopric of Exeter. Burnet, having mentioned him and sir William Dawes as raised to bishoprics, tells us, “that these divines were in themselves men of value and worth; but their notions were all on the other side. They had submitted to the government but they, at least Blackall, seemed to condemn the revolution, and all that had been done pursuant to it.” And it is asserted in an anonymous pamphlet, published in 1705, that he had refused for two years to take the oath of allegiance to king William. But what contributed most to his fame in his life- time was a controversy he had with Mr. (afterwards bishop) Hoadly, which was occasioned by his sermon upon Rom. xiii. 3, 4, entitled, “The Divine Institution of Magistracy, and the gracious design of its institution,” preached before the queen at St. James’s on Tuesday, March 8, 1708, being the anniversary of her majesty’s happy accession to the throne, and published by her majesty’s special command. The next year, 1709, Mr. Hoadly animadverted upon the bishop’s sermon, in a piece, entitled “Some Considerations humbly offered to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter, occasioned by his lordship’s sermon before her majesty, March 8, 1708.” Upon this the bishop published “An Answer to Mr. Hoadly’s Letter,” dated from Bath, May the 10th, 1709. Mr. Hoadly endeavoured to vindicate himself, in “An humble Reply to the right reverend the lord bishop of Exeter’s answer; in which the Considerations offered to his lordship are vindicated, and an apology is added for defending the foundation of the present government,” London, 1709, in 8vo. In this controversy, bishop Blackall defends the High-church, Tory, principles (as they usually are called), of the divine institution of magistracy, and unlimited passive obedience and non-resistance; which Mr. Hoadly opposes. There were several pamphlets written on the side of the bishop against Mr. Hoadly particularly one, entitled, “The best Answer that ever was made, and to which no answer will be made” supposed to be wi'itten by Mr. Lesley, a nonjuring clergyman, and which Mr. Hoadly animadverts upon in the postscript to his humble reply. The wits in the Tatler engaged in this controversy on the side of Hoadly, and with an illiberality not usual in the writers of that paper. He died at Exeter, Nov. 29, 1716, and was interred in the cathedral there. Archbp. Dawes, who had a long and intimate friendship with him, declares, that in his whole conversation he never met with a more perfect pattern of a true Christian life, in all its parts, than in him: so much primitive simplicity and integrity; such constant evenness of mind, and uniform conduct of behaviour; such unaffected and yet most ardent piety towards God such orthodox and steadfast faith in Christ such disinterested and fervent charity to all mankind such profound modesty, humility, and sobriety such an equal mixture of meekness and courage, of cheerfulness and gravity such an exact discharge of all relative duties and in one word, such an indifferency to this lower world and the things of it and such an entire affection and joyous hope and expectation of things above. He says also, that his “manner of preaching was so excellent, easy, clear, judicious, substantial, pious, affecting, and upon all accounts truly useful and edifying, that he universally acquired the reputation of being one of the best preachers of his time.” Felton, in his Classics, commends him as an excellent writer. M. de la Roche, in his memoirs of literature, tells us, that our prelate was one of those English divines, who, when they undertake to treat a subject, dive into the bottom of it, and exhaust the matter. His works were published by archbishop Dawes, in 2 vols. fol. 1723, consisting of Practical discourses on our Saviour’s Sermon on the mount, and on the Lord’s Prayer, together with his sermons preached at Boyle’s lecture, with several others upon particular occasions.

, an eminent surveyor and architect, was born in the borough of Southwark, on the 20th of December, 1750. His father was a respectable tradesman in St. John’s parish, and his mother was a native of Spain. The whole of his grammatical education was derived from a common seminary in the neighbourhood; and at a proper age he was placed under a surveyor of no eminence, but from whom he derived very few advantages in the knowledge of his profession. However, from the natural bent of an ardent mind, he sought the acquaintance of men of genius, several of whom belonged to the Jioyal Academy. Into that academy he was admitted as a student; and in 1773 he was presented with the medal for the best drawing of the inside of St. Stephen’s church in Walbrook. This prize he bore away from many competitors and, at the delivery of it, received a high compliment to his abilities from the late sir Joshua Reynolds, the president. About the same time he entered into business for himself in Southwark, and carried it on for some years with increasing success among his private connections, when an event occurred which brought him into public notice and reputation. An act of parliament had passed in 1779, declaring, that “if any offenders convicted of crimes for which transportation had been usually inflicted, were ordered to solitary imprisonment, accompanied by well regulated labour and religious instruction, it might be the means, under providence, not only of deterring others from the commission of the like crimes, but also of reforming the individuals, and enuring them to the habits of industry.” By this act his majesty was authorised to appoint three persons to be supervisors of the buildings to be erected; and the supervisors were to fix upon any common, heath, or waste, or any other piece of ground, in Middlesex, Essex, Kent, or Surrey, on which should be erected two plain strong edifices, to be called “Penitentiary Houses” one for the confinement and employment of six hundred males, the other of three hundred females. In the same year in which the act was passed, three supervisors were appointed to carry it into execution. These were John Howard, esq George Whatley, esq. and Dr. John Fothergill. This commission however was dissolved, first by the death of Dr. Fothergill, and soon after that event by the resignation of Mr. Howard, who found it not in his power to coalesce with his remaining colleague. Another set of supervisors was therefore appointed in 1781, being sir Gilbert Elliot, bart. sir Charles Bunbury, bart. and Thomas Bowdler, esq. One of the principal objects with these gentlemen was to provide that they should be constructed in the manner most conducive to the ends of solitary confinement, useful labour, and moral reformation. Accordingly, the supervisors proposed premiums for the best plans that should be produced of the penitentiary houses intended to be erected. The highest premium was a hundred guineas, which xvas unanimously assigned to Mr. Blackburn, in the month of March 1782. This preference, as a pecuniary consideration, was a matter of little consequence. The grand advantage that was to be expected from it, with regard to Mr. Blackburn, was, that he should be employed as the architect and surveyor of the buildings proposed. And in fact he was appointed by the supervisors to that office and the plan of a penitentiary house for male offenders was accordingly arranged by him, and proper draughts were made for the use of the workmen; and a great part of the work was actually contracted for by different persons. Yet the designs of government were not carried into execution the circumstances of the times having diverted the attention of public men from this important object nor has it ever since been resumed. Nevertheless, though Mr. Blackburn might in this respect be disappointed of his just expectations, he did not lose his reward, nor was the nation deprived of the benefit arising from his ingenuity. A spirit of erecting prisons in conformity to his plans was immediately excited and many county gaols, and other structures of the same nature, were built under his inspection. Besides the completion of several prisons, Mr. Blackburn was engaged in other designs of a similar nature, when he was arrested by the hand of death, in the fortieth year of his age. He departed this life on the 28th day of October, 1790, at Preston in Lancashire, being on a journey to Scotland, whither he was going at the instance of his grace the duke of Buccleugh, and the lord provost of Glasgow, with a view to the erection of a new gaol in that city. From Preston his remains were removed to London, and interred in the burying-ground of Bunhill-fields.

His next publications were on the subjects of the new style Archdeacon Sharpe’s charges the Jew naturalization-bill a letter to archbishop Herring, on church reformation none of which require much notice. When in 1755, Dr. Law’s notion appeared concerning the soul and the state of death, or what was called “the soul-sleeping system,” Mr. Blackburne adopted, and defended it in a tract entitled “No proof in the Scriptures of an intermediate state of happiness or misery, between death and the resurrection,” and he urged the same opinion in a subsequent tract but as the Confessional is the publication on which his fame principally rests, the history of it is more interesting than any detail of his minor tracts. On Commencement Sunday 1757, Dr. Powell, an eminent tutor of St. John’s college, Cambridge, published a sermon on subscription to the Liturgy and XXXIX articles, in which he maintained that a latitude was allowed to subscribers, even, so far as to admit of the assent and conserit of different persons to different and even opposite opinions, according to their different interpretations of the propositions to be subscribed. Dr. Powell’s casuistry on the subject appeared to Mr. Blackburne so detestable, and so subversive of the principles of good faith among men, that he determined to expose and refute it to the best of his power, and accordingly published “Remarks on the rev. Dr. Powell’s Sermon in defence of Subscriptions, &c.” 1758. His sentiments on the subject of subscriptions are thus explained, in that part of his life which was written by himself. "When he took possession of the living of Richmond, he had been engaged in a way of life that did not give him time or opportunity to reflect upon subjects of that nature with precision; and though, upon taking his first preferment, he determined conscientiously to perform the duties of it, yet he was by no means aware of the difficulties that afterwards embarrassed him in qualifying himself for holding it. He, therefore, then subscribed as directed by law, without scruple, and without apprehending the obligation he laid himself under, according to the form, of giving his assent and consent to the whole system of the church. When the same form was to be subscribed to qualify him. to hold the archdeaconry and prebend, he consulted some of his friends, and particularly Dr. Law (afterwards bishop of Carlisle), who gave him his opinion at large, containing such reasons, as had occurred to himself on the several occasions he had to undergo that discipline. He was likewise referred to Dr. Clarke’s Introduction to his Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity and lastly, to the sixth article of the church of England all which appeared plausible enough to satisfy him, for that time, that with these salvos and modifications, he might safely subscribe to the prescribed forms. Some time afterwards, however, upon a prospect of farther advancement to a considerable preferment, he took occasion to re-consider these arguments, and thought they fell short of giving that satisfaction which an honest man would wish to have, when he pledges his good faith to society in so solemn a form as that prescribed by the 36th canon, enjoining subscription to the articles and liturgical forms of the church of England.

, physician to king William III. and queen Anne, and a very voluminous writer, was son of Mr. Robert Blackmore, an attorney at law. He received the first part of his education at a country school, from whence he was removed to Westminster in the thirteenth year of his age. He was afterwards sent to St. Edmund’shall, in the university of Oxford, where he continued thirteen years. He is said to have been engaged for some time in the profession of a school -master but it is probable he did not long continue in that situation and, says Dr. Johnson, to have been once a schoolmaster, is the only reproach which all the perspicacity of malice, animated by wit, has ever fixed upon his private life. It appears that he travelled afterwards into Italy, and took the degree of doctor in physic, at the university of Padua. He also visited France, Germany, and the Low Countries, and having spent about a year and a half abroad, he returned again to England. On his arrival in London, he engaged in the practice of physic there, and was chosen, fellow of the royal college of physicians. He early discovered his attachment to the principles of the revolution; and this circumstance, together with the eminence which he had attained in his profession, recommended him to the notice and favour of king William. Accordingly, in 1697, he was appointed one of his majesty’s physicians in ordinary he had also a gold medal and chain bestowed on him by that prince, and received from him the honour of knighthood. Upon the king’s death, he was one of the physicians who gave their opinions at the opening of his majesty’s body. When queen Anne ascended the throne, he was appointed one of her physicians, and continued in that station for some time. Sir Richard Blackmore was the author of a variety of pieces both in prose and verse and the generality of his productions had many admirers in his own time for the third edition of his “Prince Arthur, an heroic poem in ten books,” was published in 1696, fol. The following year he also published in folio “King Arthur, an heroic poem, in twelve books.” In 1700 he published in folio, in verse, “A Paraphrase on the book of Job as likewise on the songs of Moses, Deborah, David on four select Psalms some chapters of Isaiah and the third chapter of Habbakuk.” He appears to have been naturally of a very serious turn, and therefore took great offence at the licentious and immoral tendency of many of the productions of his contemporary authors. To pass a censure upon these was the design of his poem, entitled “A Satire upon Wit,” or rather the abuse of it, which was first published in 1700. But this piece was attacked and ridiculed by many different writers, and there seemed to be a kind of confederacy of the wits against him. How much, however, they felt his reproof, appears from the following circumstance. In Tom Brown’s works are upwards of twenty different satirical pieces in verse against Blackmore, said to be written by colonel Codrington, sir Charles Sedley, colonel Blount, sir Samuel Garth, sir Richard Steele, Dr. Smith, Mr. William Burnaby, the earl of Anglesea, the countess of Sandwich, Mr. Manning, Mr. Mildmay, Dr. Drake, colonel Johnson, Mr. Richard Norton, &c. and most of these pieces are particularly levelled at our author’s “Satire upon Wit.” One topic of abuse against Blackmore was, that he lived in Cheapside. He was sometimes called the “Cheapside Knight,” and the “City Bard;” and Garth’s verses, in the collection just cited, are addressed “to the merry Poetaster at Sadlers Hall in Cheapside.” In Gibber’s lives we are also told, that “sir Richard had, by the freedom of his censures on the libertine writers of his age, incurred the heavy displeasure of Dryden, who takes all opportunities to ridicule him, and somewhere says, that he wrote to the rumbling of his chariot-wheels. And as if to be at enmity with Blackmore had been hereditary to our greatest poets, we find Mr. Pope taking up the quarrel where Dryden left it, and persecuting this worthy man with yet a severer degree of satire. Blackmore had been informed by Curl, that Mr. Pope was the author of a Travestie on the first Psalm, which he takes occasion to reprehend in his ‘ Essay on PoJite Learning,’ vol. II. p. 270. He ever considered it as the disgrace of genius, that it should be employed to burlesque any of the sacred compositions, which, as they speak the language of inspiration, tend to awaken the soul to virtue, and inspire it with a sublime devotion.”

On the 16th of November 1713, he began a paper, printed three times a week, called the “Lay Monk.” Only forty numbers of it were published, which, in 1714, were collected into a volume, under the title of the “Lay Monastery.” The Friday’s papers in this collection were written by Hughes, and the rest by sir Richard. In a letter to Mr. Hughes, he declared that he was not determined to the undertaking by a desire of fame or profit, hut from a regard to the public good. In 1716, he published in 2 vols. 8vo, “Essays upon several subjects,” and in 1718, “A collection of poems,” in 1 vol. 8vo. But the work which procured him the greatest reputation, was his “Creation, a philosophical poem, demonstrating the Existence and Providence of a God, in seven books.” This passed through several editions, and was greatly applauded by Mr. Addison. Mr. Locke also formed a very favourable opinion of sir Richard Blackmore; although perhaps he estimated his poetical talents too highly. In 1721, our author published in 12mo, “A new version of the Psalms of David, fitted to the tunes used in churches.” This was recommended by public authority, as proper to be used in the churches and chapels of England, but it does not appear to have been generally adopted. Towards the close of his life, his practice as a physician is said to have declined which might probably arise from the numerous attempts which were made to lessen his reputation. He died on the 8th of October, 1729, in an advanced age; and manifested in his last illness the same fervent piety, which had distinguished him in his life. He was certainly a man of considerable learning and abilities, and a most zealous advocate for the interests of religion and virtue. He wrote, indeed, too much, and was deficient in point of taste nor did he take sufficient time to polish his compositions. But he was far from being destitute of genius; and it is sufficiently manifest, that it was not his dullness, which excited so much animosity against him. Hardly any author has ever been more satirized than sir Richard Blackmore, and yet, so far as we can judge from his writings, there have been few, perhaps none, who have had better intentions. He had very just ideas of the true ends of writing and it would have been happy for the world, if such ideas had been adopted by, and really influenced, authors of more brilliant genius. And though his historical and epic poems exposed him to some degree of ridicule, yet he was far from being a proper object of the extreme contempt with which he was treated. The merit of his poem on Creation, and the excellency of his life, might have procured him better usage. And whatever were the defects of his compositions, he was justly entitled to commendation for the morality of their tendency. He who labours to reform mankind is more deserving of our esteem, than he who would corrupt them, whatever may be the powers of genius possessed by the latter, or whatever reputation his wit may have procured him. The fashion of the times, or the mutual jealousies and animosities of contemporary wits and authors, often occasion great injustice to be done to worthy men and useful writers. But time will, generally, in a great degree, remove such prejudices; and those who form an impartial estimate of the character and various productions of Blackmore, will acknowledge, that as a writer, with all his faults, he had considerable merit; that as a man, he was justly entitled to great applause. For, numerous as his enemies and opponents were, they seem to have been incapable of fixing the least imputation upon his character; and those who personally knew him spoke highly of his virtues. We think it an act of justice to endeavour to remove from a worthy man some part of that load of obloquy with which his memory has been overwhelmed. To this character, from the Biog. Britannica, we may add, that Dr. Johnson has increased the number of those liberal-minded men who have endeavoured to rescue sir Richard Blackmore’s name from the contempt with which it has been treated, and to do justice to his abilities as well as his virtues. To his “Creation” the doctor has given high praise, and has drawn the character of it with singular precision and elegance. From the inaccuracy with which Blackmore in his poems has pronounced the ancient, names of nations or places, Dr. Johnson has inferred, that the thirteen years he spent at the university, seem to have passed with very little attention to the business of the place. A strong testimony, however, to his diligence whilst at Edmund-hall, has lately been produced in the Gentleman’s Magazine, from Turner’s “Book of Providence.” “Dr. Richard Blackmore,” says Turner, “my contemporary and colleague (fellow collegian) at Oxon, now living, and one of the college in London, was, in his first years, one of the most eager and diligent students I ever knew sitting up at his book till twelve, one, two, and sometimes three o'clock in the morning, and then lying down only upon his chairs till prayer-time, till his health broke, and he was constrained by necessity to retire into the country, to repair himself by physic.”

In November 1743, he was elected into the society of All Souls college, and in the November following, he spoke the annual speech in commemoration of archbishop Chichele, the founder, and the other benefactors to that house of learning, and was admitted actual fellow. From this period he divided his time between the university and the Temple, where he took chambers in order to attend the courts: in the former he pursued his academical studies, and, on the 12th of June 1745, commenced B.C. L.; in the latter he applied himself closely to his profession, both in the half, and in his private studies, and on the 28th of November 1746, was called to the bar.

He seemed now arrived at the point he always wished for, and might justly be said to enjoy “otium cum dignitate.” Freed from the attendance at the bar, and what he had still a greater aversion to, in the senate, “where (to use his own expression) amid the rage of contending parties, a man of moderation must expect to meet with no quarter from any side,” although he diligently and conscientiously atcended the duties of the high office he was now placed in, yet the leisure afforded by the legal vacations he dedicated to the private duties of life, which, as the father of a numerous family, he now found himself called upon to exercise, or to literary retirement, and the society of his friends, at his villa, called Priory-place, in Wallingford which he purchased soon after his marriage, though he had for some years before occasionally resided at it. His connection with this town, both from his office of recorder, and his more or less frequent residence there, 'from about 1750, led him to form and promote every plan which could contribute to its benefit or improvement. To his activity it stands indebted for two new turnpike roads through the town; the one opening a communication, by means of a new bridge over the Thames at Shillingford, between Oxford and Reading the other to Wantage through the vale of Berkshire. He was indeed always a great promoter of the improvement of public roads: the new western road over Botley Causeway was projected, and the plan of it entirely conducted by him. He was the more earnest in this design, not merely as a work of general utility and ornament, but as a solid improvement to the estate of a nobleman, in settling whose affairs he had been most laboriously and beneficially employed. To his architectural talents, also, his liberal disposition, his judicious zeal, and his numerous friends, Wallingford owes the rebuilding that handsome fabric, St. Peter’s church. These were his employments in retirement; in London his active mind was never idle, and when not occupied in the duties of his station, he was ever engaged in some scheme of publifc utility. The last of this kind in which, he was concerned, was the act of parliament for providing detached houses of hard labour for convicts, as a substitute for transportation. Of this scheme we have just given some account in the life of Blackburn the architect. It has been put in practice in several counties, but the question as to the beneficial effects of solitary confinement, although frequently agitated, has not been so completely decided as to obviate many objections which have been lately offered.

, an ingenious and very learned writer of the last century, was born August 4, 1701, in the city of Aberdeen. His father, the rev. Mr. Thomas Blackwell, was minister of Paisley in Renfrewshire, from whence he was removed in 1700 to be one of the ministers of Aberdeen. He was afterwards elected professor of divinity in the Marischal college of that city, and in 1717 was presented by his majesty to be principal of the college, in both which offices he continued until his death in 1728. His mother’s name was Johnston, of a good family near Glasgow, and sister to Dr. Johnston, who was many years professor of medicine in the university of Glasgow. Our author received his grammatical education at the grammarschool of Aberdeen, studied Greek and philosophy in the Marischal college there, and took the degree of master of arts in 1718; which, as he was at that time only seventeen years of age, must be regarded as a considerable testimony of his early proficiency in literature. A farther proof of it was his being presented, on the 28th of November 1723, by his majesty king George the First, to the professorship of Greek, in the college in which he had been educated. He was admitted into this office on the 13th of December in the same year; and after that continued to teach the Greek language with great applause. His knowledge of that language was accurate and extensive, and his manner of communicating it perspicuous and engaging. He had a dignity of address which commanded the attention of the students, a steadiness in exacting the prescribed exercises which enforced application, and an enthusiasm for the beauties of the ancients, and utility of classical learning, which excited an ardour of study, and contributed much to diffuse a spirit for Grecian erudition far superior to what had taken place before he was called to the professorship. Together with his lessons in the Greek tongue, he gave, likewise, lessons on some of the Latin classics, chiefly with a view to infuse a relish for their beauties. To his zeal and diligence in discharging the duties of his station, it is probable that the world was, in part, indebted for such men as Campbell, Gerard, Reid, Beattie, Duncan, and the Fordyces, who have appeared with so much eminence in the republic of letters. When the celebrated Dr. Berkeley was engaged in the scheme of establishing an American university in the Summer Islands, Mr. Blackwell was in treaty with him for going out as one of his young professors; but the negociation did not take effect. In 1735 was published at London, in octavo, without the name of the bookseller, and without his own name, our author’s “Enquiry into the Life and Writings of Homer” a work, the great ingenuity and learning of which will be acknowledged by all who have perused it. It was embellished with plates, designed by Gravelot, and executed by different engravers. This we apprehend to be the most esteemed, and it is, in our opinion, the most valuable, of Mr. Blackwell’s performances. The second edition appeared in 1736; and, not long after, he published “Proofs of the Enquiry into Homer’s Life and Writings, translated into English being a key to the Enquiry with a curious frontispiece.” This was a translation of the numerous Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian and French notes which had been subjoined to the original work. In 1748, came out, in London, “Letters concerning Mythology,” in a large octavo, but without the bookseller (Andrew Millar’s) name. On the 7th of October, in the same year, our author was appointed by his late majesty, George II. to be principal of the Marischal college in Aberdeen, and was admitted to the office on the 9th of November following. He continued, also, professor of Greek till his death. He is the only layman ever appointed principal of that college, since the patronage came to the crown, by the forfeiture of the Marischal family in 1716 all the other principals having been ministers of the established church of Scotland. When Robert and Andrew Foulis, printers at Glasgow, intended to publish an edition of Plato, Mr. Blackwell proposed to furnish them with several critical notes for it, together with an account of Plato’s Life and Philosophy but the printers not acceding to the terms which he demanded for this assistance, he promised, by a Latin advertisement in 1751, himself to give an edition of Plato. His design, however, was not carried into execution nor did it appear, from any thing found among his papers after his death, that he had made any considerable progress in the undertaking. On the 3d of March, 1752, he took the degree of doctor of Laws. In the following year, appeared the first volume of his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus,” in 4to. The second volume came out in 1755 and the third, which was posthumous, and left incomplete by the author, was prepared for the press by John Mills, esq. and published in 1764. At the same time, was published the third edition of the two former volumes. This is a proof of the good reception the work met with from the public, though it must be acknowledged that the parade with which it was written, and the peculiarity of the language, exposed it to some severity of censure, particularly to a most acute, and in some respects humourous, criticism by Dr. Johnson, written for the Literary Magazine, and now inserted in Johnson’s works. It cannot be denied that there is a considerable degree of affectation in Dr. Blackwell’s style and manner of composition and, unhappily, this affectation increased in him as he advanced in years. His “Enquiry into the Life of Homer” was not free from it it was still more discernible in his “Letters concerning Mythology” and was most of all apparent in his “Memoirs of the Court of Augustus.” We perceive in his various productions a mixture of pedantry but it is not the sober dull pedantry of the merely recluse scholar. In Dr. Blackwell it assumes a higher form. Together with the display of his erudition, he is ambitious of talking like a man who is not a little acquainted with the world. He is often speaking of life and action, of men and manners; and aims at writing with the freedom and politeness of one who has been much conversant with the public. But; in this he is unsuccessful: for though he was not destitute of genius or fancy, and had a high relish for the beauties of the ancient authors, he never attained that simplicity of taste, which leads to true ease and elegance in composition. It is probable, also, that, like many others at that time, he might be seduced by an injudicious imitation of lord Shaftesbury; a writer, whose faults have been found more easily attainable than his excellences.

, an eminent mathematician, who flourished in the 16th and 17th centuries, was the son of John Blagrave, of Bulmarsh, esq. and was born at Reading, but in what year is not known. He acquired the rudiments of his education at Reading, whence he removed to St. John’s college, Oxford, but soon quitted the university, and retired to Southcote Lodge at Reading, where he devoted his time to study and contemplation. His genius seemed to be turned most to mathematics; and that he might study this science without interruption, he devoted himself to a retired life. He employed himself chiefly in compiling such works as might render speculative mathematics accurate, and the practical parts easy. He accordingly finished some learned and useful works, in all which he proposed to render those sciences more universally understood. He endeavoured to shew the usefulness of such studies, that they were not mere amusements for scholars and speculative persons, but of general advantage, and absolutely indispensable in many of the necessaries and conveniences of life with this view he published the four following works: 1. “A Mathematical Jewel, shewing the making and most excellent use of an instrument so called: the use of which jewel is so abundant, that it leadeth the direct path-way through the whole art of astronomy, cosmography, geography,” &c. 1582, folio. 2. “Of the making and use of the Familiar Staff, so called for that it may be made useful and familiarly to walk with, as for that it performeth the geometrical mensuration of all altitudes,” 1590, 4to. 3. “Astrolabium uranicum generale a necessary and pleasant solace and recreation for navigators in their long journeying containing the use of an instrument, or astrolabe,” &c. 1596, 4to. 4. “The art of Dialling, in two parts.” 1609, 4to.

, a monk of the order of St. Benedict, was born in the county of Fife, in Scotland, in the reign of king Alexander III. and educated with the celebrated sir William Wallace, at the school of Dundee. He then went over to France, where he studied for some time in the university of Paris, and became a monk of the order of St. Benedict. On his return to Scotland, he found his country in great confusion, owing to the death of Alexander III. without issue, and the contests of various competitors for the throne. At first, therefore, he retired to the house of the Benedictines at Dumfermline but when, sir William Wallace was made governor or viceroy of the kingdom in 1294, Blair became his chaplain, and being by this means an eye-witness of most of his actions, he composed the history of his life in Latin verse. Of this a, fragment only is left, which was copied by sir James BaU four out of the Cottonian library, and published in 1705, by sir Robert Sibbald, the celebrated botanist. It appears to have been written in 1327 and what remains is translated in Hume’s “History of the Douglasses.” Blair, the exact period of whose death is uncertain, is sometimes called John, and sometimes Arnold, which latter name he is said to have adopted when he retired into his monastery, and which is also used by sir Robert Sibbald in his “Relationes quaedam Arnoldi Blair monachi de Dumfermelem et Capellani D. Willelmi Wallas Militis. Cum Comment.” Edinb. 1705, 8vo.

February 12, 1649, he was appointed to command the fleet, in conjunction with col. Deane and col. Popham, and soon after was ordered to sail, with a squadron of men of war, in pursuit of prince Rupert. Blake came before Kinsale in June 1649, where prince Rupert lay in harbour. He kept him in the harbour till the beginning of October; when the prince, despairing of relief by sea, and Cromwell being ready to take the town by land, provisions of all sorts falling short, he resolved to force his way through Blake’s squadron, which he effected with the loss of three of his ships. The prince’s fleet steered their course to Lisbon, where they were protected by the king of Portugal. Blake sent to the king for leave to enter, and coming near with his ships, the castle shot at him; upon which he dropped anchor, and sent a boat to know the reason of this hostility. The captain of the castle answered, he had no orders from the king to let his ships pass: however, the king commanded one of the lords of the court to wait upon Blake, and to desire him not to come in except the weather proved bad, lest some quarrel should happen between him and prince Rupert; the king sent him, at the same time, a large present of fresh provisions. The weather proving bad, Blake sailed up the river into the bay of Wyers, but two miles from the place where prince Rupert’s ships lay; and thence he sent capt. Moulton, to inform the king of the falsities in the prince’s declaration. The king, however, still refusing to allow the admiral to attack prince Rupert, Blake took five of the Brazil fleet richly laden, and at the same time sent notice to him, that unless he ordered the prince’s ships out from his river, he would seize the rest of the Portuguese fleet from America. Sept. 1650 the prince endeavoured to get out of the harbour, but was soon driven in again by Blake, who sent to England nine Portuguese ships bound for Brazil. October following, he and Popham met with a fleet of 23 sail from Brazil for Lisbon, of whom, they sunk the admiral, took the vice-admiral, and 11 other ships, having 10,000 chests of sugar on board. Jn his return home, he met with two ships in search of the prince, whom he followed up the Streights when he took a French man of war, the captain of which had committed hostilities. He sent this prize, reported to be worth a million, into Calais, and followed the prince to the pore of Carthagena, where he lay with the remainder of his fleet. As soon as Blake came to anchor before the fort, he sent a messenger to the Spanish governor, informing him, that an enemy to the state of England was in his port, that the parliament had commanded him to pursue him, and the king of Spain being in amity with the parliament, he desired leave to take all advantages against their enemy. The governor replied, he could not take notice of the difference of any nations or persons amongst themselves, only such as were declared enemies to the king his master; that they came in thither for safety, therefore he could not refuse them protection, and that he would do the like for the admiral. Blake still pressed the governor to permit him to attack the prince, and the Spaniard put him off till he could have orders from Madrid. While the admiral was cruizing in the Mediteranean, prince Rupert got out of Carthagena, and sailed to Malaga. Blake, having notice of his destroying many English ships, followed him and attacking him in the port, burnt and destroyed his whole fleet, two ships only excepted this was in January 1651. In February, Blake took a French man of war of 40 guns, and sent it, with other prizes, to England. Soon after 'he came with his squadron to Plymouth, when he received the thanks of the parliament, and was made warden of the cinque ports. March following, an act passed, whereby colonel Blake, colonel Popham, and colonel Deane, or any two of them, were appointed admirals and generals of the fleet, for the year ensuing. The next service he was put upon, was the reducing the isles of Scilly,- which were held for the king. He sailed in May, with a body of Boo land troops on board. Sir John Grenville, who commanded in those parts for the king, after some small resistance, submitted. He sailed next for Guernsey, which was held for the king, by sir George Carteret. He arrived there in October, and landing what forces he had the very next day, he did every thing in his power in order to make a speedy conquest of the island, which was not completed that year. In the beginning of the next, however, the governor, finding all hopes of relief vain, thought proper to make the best terms he could. For this service Blake had thanks from the parliament, and was elected one of the council of state. March 25, 1652, he was appointed sole admiral for nine months, on the prospect of a Dutch war. The states sent Van Trump with forty-five sail of men of war into the Downs, to insult the English Blake, however, though he had but twentv-three ships, and could expect no succour but from major Bourne, who commanded eight more, yet, being attacked by Van Trump, fought him bravely, and forced him to retreat. This was on the 19th of May, 1652. After this engagement the states seemed inclined to peace but the commonwealth of England demanded such terms as could not be complied with, and therefore both sides prepared to carry on the war with greater vigour. Blake now harassed the enemy by taking their merchant ships, in which he had great success. On the 10th of June, a detachment from his fleet fell upon twenty-six sail of Dutch merchantmen, and took them every one and by the end of June he had sent into port forty prizes. On the 2d of July he sailed, with a strong squadron, northwards. In his course he took a Dutch man of war; and about the latter end of the month, he fell on twelve men of war, convoy to their herring busses, took the whole convoy, 100 of their busses, and dispersed the rest. August 12, he returned into the Downs, with six of the Dutch men of war, and 900 prisoners. Thence he stood over to the coast of Holland, and on Sept. 28th, having discovered the Dutch about noon, though he had only three of his own squadron with him, vice-admiral Penii with his squadron at some distance, and the rest a league or two astern, he bore in among the Dutch fleet, being bravely seconded by Penn and Bourne when three of the enemy’s ships were wholly disabled at the first brunt, and another as she was towing oft* The rear-admiral was taken by captain Mildmay and had not night intervened, it was thought not a single ship of the Dutch fleet would have escaped. On the 29th, about day-break, the English espied the Dutch fleet N.E. two leagues off; the admiral bore up to them, but the enemy having the wind of him, he could not reach them however, he commanded his light frigates to ply as near as they could, and keep firing while the rest bore up after them upon which the Dutch hoisted their sails, and run for it. The English being in want of provisions, returned to the Downs. Blake having been obliged to make large detachments from his fleet Van Trump, who had again the command of the Dutch navy, consisting of eighty men of war, resolved to take this opportunity of attacking him in the Downs, knowing he had not above half his number of ships. He accordingly sailed away to the back of the Goodwin. Blake having intelligence of this, called a council of war, wherein it was resolved to fight, though at so great a disadvantage. The engagement began November 29, about two in the morning, and lasted till near six in the evening. Blake was aboard the Triumph; this ship, the Victory, and the Vanguard, suffered most, having been engaged at one time with twenty of the enemy’s best ships. The admiral finding his ships much disabled, and that the Dutch had the advantage of the wind, drew off his fleet in the night into the Thames, having lost the Garland and Bonaventure, which were taken by the Dutch a small frigate was also burnt, and three sunk and his remaining ships much shattered and disabled Van Trump, however, bought this victory dear, x one of his flag-ships being blown up, all the men drowned, and his own ship and De Kuyter’s both unfit for service till they were repaired. This success invigorated the spirits of the Dutch exceedingly; Van Trump sailed through the channel with a broom at his main-top-mast, to signify that he had swept the seas of English ships. In the mean time, Blake having repaired his fleet, and Monk and Deane being now joined in commission with him, sailed Feb. 8, 1653, from Queensborough, with sixty men of war, which were soon after joined with twenty more from Portsmouth. On the 18th they discovered Van Trump with seventy men of war, and 300 merchant ships under his convoy. Blake, with twelve ships, came up with and engaged the Dutch fleet, and, though grievously wounded in the thigh, continued the fight till night, when the Dutch, who had six men of war sunk and taken, retired. After having put ashore his wounded men at Portsmouth, he followed the enemy, whom he came up with next day, when the fight was renewed, to the loss of the Dutch, who continued retreating towards Boulogne. All the night following Blake continued the pursuit, and, in the morning of the 20th, the two fleets fought again till four in the afternoon, when the wind blowing favourably for the Dutch, they secured themselves on the flats of Dunkirk and Calais. In these three engagements the Dutch lost eleven men of war, thirty merchant ships, and had fifteen hundred men slain. The English lost only one ship, but not fewer men than the enemy. In April Cromwell turned out the parliament, and shortly after assumed the supreme power. The states hoped great advantages from this, but were disappointed Blake said on this occasion to his officers, “It is not for us to mind state affairs, but to keep foreigners from fooling us.” Towards the end of the month Blake and his colleagues, with a fleet of an hundred sail, stood over to the Dutch coast, and forced their fleet to take shelter in the Texel, where, for some time, they were kept by Monk and Deane, while Blake sailed Northward at last Van Trump got out, and drew together a fleet of an hundred and twenty men of war. June 3d, Deane and Monk engaged him off the North Foreland. On the 4th Blake came to their assistance with eighteen fresh ships, by which means a complete victory was gained; and if the Dutch had not again saved themselves on Calais sands, their whole fleet had been sunk or taken. Cromwell having called the parliament, styled the Little Parliament, Blake, Oct. 10, took his seat in the house, where he received their solemn thanks for his many and faithful services. The protector afterwards called a new parliament, consisting of four hundred, 'where Blake sat also, being the representative for his native town of Bridgewater. Dec. 6th he was appointed one of the commissioners of the admiralty. Nov. 1654, Cromwell sent him with a strong fleet into the Mediterranean, with instructions to support the honour of the English flag, and to procure satisfaction for any injuries that might have been done to our merchants. In December Blake came into the road of Cadiz, where he was treated with great respect; a Dutch admiral would not hoist his flag while he was there. The Algerines were so much afraid of him, that they stopped their Sallee rovers, obliged them to deliver up what English prisoners they had on board, and sent them to Blake, in, order to procure his favour. Nevertheless, he came before Algiers on the 10th of March, when he sent an officer on shore to the dey to tell him he had orders to demand satisfaction for the piracies committed on the English, and to insist on the release of all such English captives as were then in the place. To this the dey made answer, that the captures belonging to particular men he could not restore; but, if Mr. Blake pleased, he might redeem what English captives were there at a reasonable price; and, if he thought proper, the Algerines would conclude a peace with him, and for the future offer no acts of hostility to the English. This answer was accompanied with a present of fresh provisions. Blake sailed to Tunis on the same errand. The dey of Tunis sent him a haughty answer. “Here,” said he, “are our castles of Goletta and Porto Ferino, do your worst! do you think we fear your fleet?” On the hearing this, Blake, as his custom was when in a passion, began to curl his whiskers; and, after a short consultation with his officers, bore into the bay of Porto Ferino with his great ships when, coming within musket-shot of the castle, he fired on it so briskly, that in two hours it was rendered defenceless, and the guns on the works along the shore were dismounted, though sixty of them played at a time upon the English. He found nine ships in the road, and ordered every captain, even of his own ship, to man his long boat with choice men, and these to enter the harbour and tire the Tuniseens, while he and his fleet covered them from the castle, by playing continually on it with their cannon. The seamen in their boats boldly assaulted the pirates, and burnt all their ships, with the loss of twenty-five men killed, and forty-eight wounded. This daring action spread the terror of his name throughout Africa and Asia, which had for a long time before been formidable in Europe. He also struck such terror into the piratical state of Tripoly, that he made them glad to strike up a peace with England. These and other exploits raised the glory of the English name so high, that most of the princes and states in Italy thought fit to pay their compliments to the protector, particularly the grand duke of Tuscany, and the republic of Venice, who sent magnificent embassies for that purpose. The war in the mean time was grown pretty hot with Spain and Blake used his utmost efforts to ruin their maritime force in Europe, as Penn had done in the West Indies. But finding himself now in a declining state of health, and fearing the ill consequences which might ensue in case he should die without any colleague to take charge of the fleet, he wrote letters into England, desiring some proper person to be named in commission with him; upon which general Montague sent joint-admiral, with a strong squadron to assist him. Soon after his arrival in the Mediterranean, the two admirals sailed with their whole fleet to block up a Spanish squadron in the bay of Cadiz. At length, in September, being in great want of water, Blake and Montague stood away for the coast of Portugal, leaving captain Stayner with seven ships to look after the enemy. Soon after they were gone, the Spanish plate fleet appeared, but were intercepted by Stayner, who took the vice-admiral and another galleon, which were afterwards burnt by accident, the rear-admiral, with two millions of plate on board, and another ship richly laden. These prizes, together with all the prisoners, were seat into England under general Montague, and Blake alone remained in the Mediterranean till, being informed that another plate fleet had put into Santa Cruz, in the island of Teneriffe, he sailed thither in April 1657, with a fleet of twenty-five men of war. On the 20th he came into the road of Santa Cruz; and though the Spanish governor had timely notice, was a man of courage and conduct, and had disposed all things in the most proper manner, so that he looked upon an attack as what no wise admiral would think practicable yet Blake having summoned him, and received a short answer, was determined to force the place, and to burn the fleet therein; and he performed it in such a manner as appears next to incredible. It is allowed to be one of the most remarkable actions that ever happened at sea. As soon as the news arrived of this extraordinary action, the protector sent to acquaint his second parliament, then sitting, therewith upon which they ordered a public thanksgiving, and directed a diamond ring worth 500l. to be sent to Blake and the thanks of the house was ordered to all the officers and seamen, and to be given them by their admiral. Upon his return to the Mediterranean he cruised some time before Cadiz but finding himself declining fast, resolved to return home. He accordingly sailed for England, but lived not to see again his native land for he died as the fleet was entering Plymouth, the 17th of August 1657, aged 58.His body was conveyed to Westminster abbey, and interred with great pomp in Henry the Seventh’s chapel but removed from thence in 1661, and re-interred in St. Margaret’s church-yard. He was a man of a low stature but of a quick, lively eye, and of a good soldier-like countenance. He was in his person brave beyond example, yet cool in action, and shewed a great deal of military conduct; in the disposition of those desperate attacks which men of a cooler composition have judged rather fortunate thun expedient. He certainly* loved his country with extraordinary ardour, and, as he never meddled with intrigues of state, so whatever government he served, he was solicitous to do his duty. He was upright to a supreme degree, for, notwithstanding the vast sums which passed through his hands, he scarcely left five hundred pounds behind him of his own acquiring. In fine, he was altogether disinterested and unambitious, exposing himseii on all occasions for the benefit of the public and the g-ory of the nation, and not wkh any view to his own private profit or fame. In respect to his personal character, he was pious without affectation, strictly just, and liberal to the utmost extent of his fortune. His officers he treated with the familiarity of friends, and to his sailors he was truly a parent. The state buried him as it was fit: at the public expence a grave was given him, but no tomb; and though he still wants an epitaph, writers of all parties have shewn an eagerness to do his memorv justice. We find it very positively asserted, that captain Benjamin Blake, brother to the general, suffered so many hardships for being a dissenter, in the latter end of the reign of king Charles II. that he found himself under the necessity of selling his patrimony, and transporting himself and his family to Carolina. Another author (though some indeed think it is the same) relates this story of Mr. Humphry Blake, the general’s brother, and tells us, that the family estate was worth tsvo hundred pounds a year, which he was obliged to dispose of, to pay the fines laid upon him for his nonconformity. It is jiowever strange, that every one of the general’s nephevfs an,d nieces, by his sister Susannah, who married a gentleman at Mineheacl, in Somersetshire, should be totally unacquainted with this transaction, and that none of the family should be able to give any account of that matter; and therefore it seems to be justly doubted whether there be any truth in the story, or whether it is only grounded on there being a considerable family of his name settled in that province, one of whom, when it was in private hands, was a lord proprietor.

, an eminent painter, called the French Titian, was born at Paris in 1600. He learned the rudiments of his profession under his uncle Nicholas Bellori, but left him at twen'y years of age with an intention to travel to Italy. He stopped at Lyons in his way thither, where he staid for son e time; and during his residence here reaped both profit and amusement. He passed onto Rome, where he continued about two years. From thence he went to Venice, where he was so much pleased with the works of Titian, Tintoret, and Paul Veronese, that he resolved to follow their manner; and in this he succeeded so far, that at his return to Paris he soon got into high employment being generally esteemed for the novelty, beauty, and force of his pencil. He painted two galleries at Paris, one belonging to the first president, Perrault, and the other to monsieur de Bullion, superintendant of the finances. But his capital pieces are those in the church of Notre Dame, St. Andrew kneeling before the cross, and the Holy Ghost descending. Blanchard was in a likely way of making his fortune; but a fever and an imposthume in the lungs carried him off in his thirty-eighth year. Of all the French painters Blanchard was esteemed the best colourist, having studied this branch with great care in the Venetian school. There are few grand compositions of his; but what he has left of this kind shew him to have had great genius. He was mostly taken up with Madonnas, half-lengths, which prevented his employing himself in subjects of greater extent.

, a lady remarkable both for her knowledge of the Hebrew language, and for a peculiar skilfulness in writing it, was born about the time of the restoration, and was daughter and heir of Mr. Robert Fisher of Long-acre. April 26, 1681, she married Mr. Nathanael Bland (then a linen-draper in London, afterwards lord of the manor of Beeston in Yorkshire), by whom she had six children, who all died in their infancy, excepting one son named Joseph, and a daughter called Martha, who was married to Mr. George Moore of Beeston. She was instructed in the Hebrew language by the lord Van Helmont, which she understood to such a degree of perfection, that she taught it to her son and daughter.

, a painter of great abilities, was born at Alkmaar in 1628, and received his earliest instruction from Arent Tierling but afterwards he was successively the disciple of Peter Scheyenburg and Caesar Van Everdingen. When he had spent some years with those masters, he went to Rome, where, during his continuance in that city, he carefully copied the works of the best masters, and was admitted into the society of Flemish painters called Bentvogels, who gave him the name of Jan Maat (which in Dutch signifies mate or companion), and by that name he is most generally known. His subjects were landscapes, with views of rivers or sea-shores, havens or ports, which he executed with a light free pencil; and in the representation of storms and calms (as nature was always his model) he described those subjects with great truth, exactness, and neatness of handling. The pictures of this master which are most commended are the Italian sea-ports, with vessels lying before them. He possessed a lively imagination; nor was his hand less expeditious than his thoughts; and the connoisseurs agreed in opinion, that if he had bestowed more labour on his pictures than he usually did, so as to finish them more highly, he would certainly have destroyed a great deal of their spirit, force, and effect. His most capital performance is a view of the sea-shore, with the waves retiring at ebb tide; which is described by Houbraken as being wonderfully beautiful and natural. He died in 1670.

, D. D. an eminent Hebrew critic, canon of Christ church, regius professor of Hebrew in the university of Oxford, 1787, and rector of Polshot, was first of Worcester college, where he proceeded M. A. 1753; afterwards fellow of Hertford college, where he took the degree of B. D. 1768, and of D. D. 1787 and was installed Hebrew professor Dec. 7. of that year. He was also some time a Whitehall preacher. He distinguished himself greatly as a scriptural commentator and translator. He published, 1. “A dissertation, by way of enquiry into the true import and application of the Vision related Dan. is. 20 to the end, usually called Daniel’s Prophecy of Seventy Weeks with occasional remarks on Michaelis’s letters to sir John Pringle on the same subject, 1775,” 4to. 2. “Jereiniah and Lamentations, a new translation, with notes critical, philosophical, and explanatory, 1784,” 8vo. 3. “The Sign given to Ahaz, a discourse on Isaiah vii. 14, 15, 16, delivered in the church of St. John, Devizes, at the triennial visitation of Shute, lord bishop of Sarum, July 26, 1786 with a proposed emendation of a passage in his dissertation on Daniel,” 1786, 4to. 4. “Christ the greater glory of the temple, a sermon, preached before the university of Oxford, at Christ church, Nov. 9, 1788,” 4to. J. “Zechariah, a new translation, with notes critical, philosophical, and explanatory and an Appendix, in reply to Dr. Eveleigh’s Sermon on Zechariah i. S 1 1 (to which is added, a new edition, with alterations, of the dissertation on Daniel), 1797,” 4to. In this dissertation on Daniel the study and criticism of this learned divine produced a translation very different from that in the common English Bible, as well as from that of Michaelis. It . is less liable to objection, particularly as it has no recourse to that ingenious but uncertain and unsatisfying method of computation by lunar years; it extends also to those verses of the chapter which Dr. Michaelis seemed to give up as inexplicable, almost in despair of ever attaining a probable solution of the difficulty. The translation of Jeremiah and Lamentations is on the plan of Dr. Lowth’s Isaiah, and does credit to its author both as a translator and a critic. The same may be said respecting the translation of Zechariah and it may be added, that the candour and liberality which Dr. Blayney opposes, in this instance, to the intemperance and acrimony of one of his antagonists, do him great honour. The doctor also took uncommon pains in correcting the text of the edition of the common version of the English Bible, which was printed at the Clarendon press in 1769, 4to. He made a great number of additional references in the margin, and produced the most correct Bible in our language; but, unfortunately, a large part of the impression was soon after burned at the Bible warehouse in Paternoster row, and it is now ranked among the most scarce and valuable editions.

, bishop of Ripen, in Denmark, who was born in 1717, and died in 1773, cultivated the science of botany, particularly with a view to illustrate those passages of Scripture in which plants, &c. are mentioned. In 1767, he published at Copenhagen “Tentamen Phoenicologices sacra, seu dissertatio emblematico-theologica de Palma,” 8vo, a work containing many curious remarks on the palm or date-tree of Palestine and Idumea, which was called the phosnix by the Greeks and most of the eastern nations. It often occurs in the Bible, and the learned author has collected and explained the several passages. This species of palm is the phoenix dactylifera of modern botanists. A third author of the same name, John Erasmus Block, a Danish gardener, published at Copenhagen a treatise on the art of cultivating gardens, under the title “Horticultura Danica,” 1647, 4to.

We now draw near to his death, which corresponded more closely with his principles than his friends and admirers will probably allow. After the death of his wife, he became enamoured of her sister, who, we are told, was a lady of great beauty, wit, good humour, virtue, and discretion, and who is said not to have been insensible on her side, but scrupulous only as to the lawfulness of the thing he proposed, viz. marrying her after her sister. Our author wrote a letter on this subject, in which he states the case as of a third person, and treats it with some ingenuity. It is also said that he applied himself to the archbishop of Canterbury, and other divines, who having decided against his opinion, and the lady consequently becoming inflexible, it threw him into a fit of despair, which ended in a frenzy, so that he shot himself in the head. The wound, however, did not prove inured lately mortal he lived after it some clays and retaining still his passion for that lady, he would receive nothing hut from her hands during that period. He died in the month of August, 1693, and was interred with his family in the church of Ridge, in Hertfordshire. After Mr. Blount’s decease, abundance of his private letters were published in a work called “The Oracles of Reason,” compiled by Mr. Gildon, who in his preface gives seme account of our author, in a letter addressed to a ladv, in which he defends Mr. Blount’s manner of dying, and threatens to follow his example but he lived to change his opinions afterwards. These “Oracles of Reason” were afterwards printed with several of our author’s pieces, under the title of “The miscellaneous works of Charles Blount, esq.” 1695, including all we have mentioned, except the pamphlet respecting king William and queen Mary, which is now extremely scarce. As to his character, he was certainly a man of sense and learning, and could write with much seeming strength, where his arguments were not very cogent. His early dislike to superstition hurried him into dangerous mistakes, and inclined him to believe all revealed religion priestcraft, because some priests made a trade of religion. However, if any credit be due to his writings (and sincerity seems to have been rooted in his temper) he was certainly a Deist; foreigners have classed him among Atheists, which Dr. Campbell, in his life in the Biog. Brit, has taken more pains than necessary to contradict.

, father to the preceding, and a considerable writer in the last century, was descended from a very ancient and honourable family, and born December 15, 1602, at his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount’s, seat at Tittenhanger, in Hertfordshire. He received the first tincture of letters in the free-school of St. Alban’s, where he manifested an unusual quickness of parts, and having qualified himself for the university, was removed to Trinity-college, in Oxford, and entered a gentleman commoner there in 1616, before he was full fourteen years of age. Some years he spent in that learned society, with great reputation and universal respect, not so much on account of his family, by which he was nearly related to the founder, sir Thomas Pope, as from his personal merit. For in his youth he was of a cheerful disposition, a sprightly wit, an easy address, and frank and entertaining in conversation, charmed all who were of his acquaintance, and was justly esteemed as promising a genius as any in the university. In the year 1618 he took the degree of B.A. and soon after left Oxford for Gray’s-inn, where for some time he applied himself to the study of the law, and set out on his travels in the spring of the year 1634, being then lately become of age. He made first the tour of France, part of Spain and Italy, and then passing to Venice, he there contracted an acquaintance with a Janizary, with whom he resolved to pass into the Turkish dominions. With this view he embarked on the 7th of May, 1634, on board a Venetian galley, in which he sailed to Spalatro, and thence continued his journey by land to Constantinople. There he was very kindly received by sir Peter Wich, then our ambassador at the Port. His stay at Constantinople was short, because, having an earnest desire to see Grand Cairo, and meeting with a sudden opportunity, he readily embraced it, and after a peregrination of near two years, returned safely into England, where, in 1636, he printed an account of his travels, London, 1636, 4to, which soon after came to a second edition, and in 1638 to a third, in the same size. It was then printed in 12mo, and reached many editions the title of the eighth runs thus “A Voyage into the Levant, being a brief relation of a Journey lately performed from England by the way of Venice, into Dalmatia, Sclavonia, Bosnia, Hungary, Macedonia, Thessaly, Thrace, Rhodes, and Egypt, unto Grand Cairo; with particular observations concerning the modern condition of the Turks, and other people under that empire. By sir Henry Blount, knight.” This book made him known to the world, and so much noticed, that shortly after, king Charles I. who desired to fill his court with men of parts, appointed him one of the band of pensioners, then composed of gentlemen of the first families in the kingdom. In 1638, his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount, died, and left him the ancient seat of Blount’s hall, in Staffordshire, and a very considerable fortune. On the 21st of March in the succeeding year, the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood. At the first breaking out of the civil war, he, following the example of the elder branches of his illustrious family, who were eminently loyal, attended the king at York, at Oxford, and other places, was present at the battle of Edgehill, and had there (according to a tradition in the family) the honour of taking care of the young princes. Afterwards he quitted his majesty’s service, and returned to London, where he was questioned for his adhering to the king but he being now grown a very wary and dexterous speaker, so well excused himself, by alleging his duty on account of his post, that he escaped all censure, and was thenceforward well received. It appears, however, that he had not the courage to be faithful, or that Ije had seriously repented his loyalty to the king, for he complied with the usurping government so implicitly, that in 1651 he was named on a committee of twenty persons, for inspecting the practice of the law, and remedying its abuses. He declared himself very warmly against tithes, and would willingly have reduced the income of parish ministers to one hundred pounds a year. A man of this opinion must have been very acceptable at that time. His next appearance, however, was more to his credit. He sat with Dr. Hichard Zouch, Dr. William Clarke, Dr. William Turner, civilians, and with several other eminent persons in the court of king’s (then called the upper) bench, in Westminster hall, on the 5th of July, 1654, by virtue of a commission from Oliver Cromwell, for trying Don Pantalion Saa, brother to the Portuguese ambassador, for murder, of which, being found guilty, he was, much to the honour of the justice of this nation, by sentence of that court, adjudged to suffer death, and was executed accordingly, Jn, the same year, by the death of his elder brother Thomas Pope Blount, esq. the estate of Tittenhanger descended to him. His great reputation for general knowledge and uncommon sagacity was the reason that his name was inserted in the list of twenty-one commissioners appointed, November 1, 1655, to consider of the trade and navigation of the commonwealth, and how it might be best encouraged and promoted, in which station he did his country eminent service. But whatever his compliances with the forms of government set up between 1650 and 1660, he was received into favour and confidence on the ling’s restoration, and appointed high sheriff of the county of Hertford, in 1661. He lived after that as an English gentleman, satisfied with the honours he had acquired, and the large estate he possessed, and having passed upwards uf twenty years in this independent state, be died on the 9th of October, 1682, when he wanted but four months of four-score, and was two days afterwards interred in the vault of his family, at Ridge in Hertfordshire. As to what appears from his writings, he seems to have had strong parts, a lively imagination, and, in consequence of these, some very singular opinions. His style was manly, flowing, and less affected than could be expected, considering the times in, and the subjects on, which he wrote. A Latin fragment, published by his son, in his “Oracles of Reason,” better explains his sentiments than all the rest of his works, and demonstrates that he was a man of an irregular way of thinking.

, called in Latin Blondus, or Blundus, a very eminent divine in the thirteenth century, was educated in the university of Oxford, and went afterwards for his improvement to Paris, where he quickly distinguished himself, among many of his learned contemporaries, by the vivacity of his wit. On his return into England, he again settled himself at Oxford, and read divinity lectures there with universal applause. Wood says he was the first that lectured on Aristotle both in Paris and Oxford. The reputation of his learning obtained him also several other preferments, particularly those of prebendary andhancellor in the church of York. In 1232, the archiepiscopal see of Canterbuiy being vacant by the death of Richard Wethershed, and the rejection of two of his successors, Ralph Nevil, bishop of Chichester and chancellor of England, and John, sub-prior of Canterbury, by the pope, Dr. Blount was, by the chapter of Canterbury, elected archbishop. He did not, however, enjoy that dignity; for the pope immediately objected to him, and after a summary inquiry into the validity of his election, declared it void, for several reasons, of which our historians take notice, though very probably Bale has hit upon the true, although not the ostensible cause, namely, that his abilities rendered him obnoxious to the court of Rome, or, as Bale expresses it, that he was more learned than that court wished an archbishop to be.

, a German poet, was born at Rathenau, in the March of Brandenburgh, Nov. 17, 1739. He studied at Brandenburgh, Berlin, and Francfort on the Oder, and appears to have been intended either for the church or the bar, but preferred philosophy and polite literature, which he cultivated with success, under Ramler and Alexander Baumgarten, and afterwards devoted himself to a retired life in his own country. His first publication, “Lyric Poems,” published at Berlin in 1765, procured him very high reputation and was followed, in 1776, by another volume of Idylls and miscellaneous pieces, in a style of poetry, simple, pure, original, and elegant. In 1785 appeared an additional volume, which contributed to support the character he had acquired. In prose he published what were called “Walks,” moral and critical, and a “Dictionary of German proverbs,” Leipsic, 1782, with their explanations and origin. He died at Rathenau, Aug. 28, 1790, leaving the character of an amiable and virtuous man, beloved by all who knew him, and esteemed by his countrymen as one of the best of their modern poets, although perhaps not belonging to the first class.

, a German horticulturist, who came to England about the middle of the seventeenth century, was appointed first superintendant of the physic-garden at Oxford, founded in 1632 by Henry earl of Danby. Some writers call him doctor, and some professor of botany, but he was neither, nor was there any professor, properly so called, before Dillenius. The “Catalogus -Plantarum” in this garden, published at Oxford in 1648, 12mo, was drawn up by Bobart, and is a very favourable proof of his zeal and diligence. Under his care and that of his son, the garden at Oxford continued to flourish for many years. The old man, according to Wood, lived in the gardenhouse, and died there Feb. 4, 1679, aged eighty-one. Mr. Granger relates an anecdote that “on rejoicing days old Bobart used to have his beard tagged with silver.” He left two sons, Jacob and Tillemant, who were both employed in the physi-garden. Jacob, who seems to have been a man of some learning, published the second volume of Morison’s “Oxford history of Plants,” 1699, fol. Of him too, an anecdote is told which implies somewhat of a humourous disposition. He had transformed a dead rat into the feigned figure of a dragon, which imposed upon the learned so far, that “several fine copies of verses were wrote on so rare a subject.” Bobart afterwards owned the cheat but it was preserved for some years, as a master-piece of art. Dr. Pulteney thinks Bobart was alive in 1704; but he appears to have lived considerably longer, as Dr. Abel Evans dedicated “Vertumnus,” a poetical epistle, to him in 1713. A descendant of this family, Tillemant Bobart, is still well known to all who wish for civil treatment and a safe carriage on the road to Oxford.

On the death of his father, being entirely at liberty, and with some little property, to pursue his inclination, he first settled at Florence, where his studies were interrupted only by his pleasures, and some very honourable employments confided to him by his fellow citizens. Among others, one must have been peculiarly gratifying to him. This was his being sent to Padua in 1350, to announce to Petrarch the news of his recall, and the restitution of his father’s property, who had formerly been banished from Florence, and died in exile. Such an errand had a natural tendency to cement their friendship, Some years after, when Boccaccio had spent his little property, partly in purchasing books, and partly in gratifying his taste for pleasure, he found in Petrarch a friend, who, besides assisting his wants, gave him such affectionate and judicious advice as produced a very salutary change in his conduct. Before this, while suffering under the reflections of his follies, in 1361, a friar had persuaded him to renounce the world, and all that could be called profane learning. The fact seems to have been, that Boccaccio, in his Decamerone, which first appeared in 1353, had satirized the licentious lives of the monks, and this friar came to him with a story of his having seen a vision, and being commissioned to warn him of his danger, if he did not renounce his sins, and burn his Decamerone: and Boccaccio was so alarmed, that he actually put on the ecclesiastical habit, (for which, as being a natural son, he was obliged to apply to the pope for a dispensation) and resumed the study of theology; but he soon found that this was too late, and too averse from his habits, and he therefore had recourse to Petrarch, who persuaded him to remove to Certaldo, where he had a small estate, and pursue his literary labours in that retirement.

Of his Italian works in prose, we may notice, 10. “Il Filocopo, owero amorosa fatica, &c.” a romance written by our author when very young, defective in interest, and altogether so in style, when compared with what he wrote afterwards. The first edition of this romance is without place or date the others, which are all rare, are those of Venice, 1472, Florence, 1472, Milan 1476 and 1478, all in fol. Venice, 1514, 4to, and often reprinted during the same century, and twice translated into French, Paris, 1542, fol. &c. 11. “L'Ammorosa Fiammetta,” another romance not much more valuable than the preceding. Fiammetta, as we have already noticed, is the princess Mary of whom he was enamoured, and Pamphile, whose absence she is made deeply to regret, was himself. Whether this was a real or a poetical amour is not very clear. The romance was first published without date or place, in 4to, but is supposed to have appeared at Padua, with a Latin title, and, at the end of the volume, the date of 1472; the second, which has not the place, is dated 1480, 4to, and was followed by others in the sixteenth century at Florence, Venice, &c. and a French and Spanish translation, often reprinted. 12. “L'Urbano,” Florence, 1598, 8vo, translated into French under the title “Urbain le Mescogneu,” Lyons, without date, 4to, black letter, was a piece which Boccaccio is said to have written to divert his melancholy for the death of his friend Petrarch, but Mazzuchelli and other critics consider it as spurious. 13. “Ameto, or Nimfale d'Ameto,” written with a mixture of prose and verse, is supposed to relate to a real adventure concealed under a poetical allegory. It has gone through a great number of editions, Rome and Venice, 1478, 4to; Trevisa, 1479, 4to Venice, 1503, fol. Rome, 1520, 4to; Florence, 1521, 8vo. 14. “II Corbaccio, o sia Laberinto d'Amore,” a very bitter and indecent satire on a female who had given him some offence after his return to Florence. In spite of the licentiousness of this work, the style has recommended it to the curious, but we doubt whether this was the cause of its passing through so many editions: Florence, 1487, 4to, Venice, 1516, 24mo, &c. &c. and a valuable edition, Paris, 1569, 8vo, by Corbinelli, with a preface and notes. Belleforest translated it into French, Paris, 1571, 1573, and there was a second translation or imitation, by Premont, entitled “Songe de Boccace, ou de Labyrinthe d' Amour,” Paris, 1699, &c. in which the editor has abridged so much, and added so much, that it can scarcely be called Boccaccio’s work. 15. “Origine Vitaet costumi di Dante Alighieri,” Rome, 1544, 8vo, Florence, 1576, 8vo. lit this life of Dante we have many anecdotes not elsewhere to be found, but the author upon, the whole inclines too much to the romantic to attend sufficiently to the strict veracity of the biographer yet the purity of the style recommends it, and the affection and sincerity with which he praises Dante, form, perhaps, a curiosity, from one who had the ambition to be placed so near him. This is naturally connected with 16. “Commento sopra la Commedia di Dante Alighieri,” a valuable work, not only for style, but for the many difficult passages of Dante which are admirably illustrated, although it must be confessed they are at the same time intermixed with much matter that has very little connection with the text. It was an abridgement of the lectures which he gave at Florence, when attacked with the disorder which shortened his days, and was not printed until th;e last century. It extends only to the 17th chapter of the Inferno, and forms the two last volumes of the edition of Boccaccio’s prose works (with the exception of the Decameron) published at Naples (with the false title of Florence), in 1724, 5 vols. 8vo. Lastly, we come to his 17. “II Decamerone,” the work on which his fame is permanently established, and which, of all works, it is difficult to characterize in few words. The assertion, that the greater part of the hundred novels which it contains are taken from the ancient French writers of tales, only shows that those who maintain this opinion are not acquainted either with these writers, or with the Decamerone, of which, at most, ten of the stories only are imitated from the French Fabliaux, or taken from the same remote sources, and it is equally unjust to consider them merely as a collection of amorous and licentious stories. The greater part of the poets, indeed, who have stolen from him have stolen only what is of this obnoxious description, and therefore easily brought a reproach on the whole. Boccaccio, in this work, depicts, as on a vast canvass, men of all conditions, all characters and all ages and events of every kind, comic and serious. He exhibits models of every species of eloquence, and carries the purity and elegance of the Italian language to a degree of perfection unknown before his time. Perhaps few works of the kind have ever been so popular. For more than three centuries it has gone through repeated editions, of which an hundred at least may be mentioned, and his biographer very properly asks, what criticism can stand against this fact

In 1750, she set out on her travels through England, Holland, and Italy, and published the result of them in “Letters” on her return. Her personal appearance procured her friends and admirers wherever she went, and when she again took up her residence in France, her house became the rendezvous of the most distinguished men of genius of the age, all of whom she survived. She indeed outlived two ages of literature, the latter of which was shortened by the horrors of revolutionary cruelty, from which by some means she was enabled to escape. She died Aug. 1802, at the very advanced age of ninety-two. In early life she was married to a financier, who left her a very young and beautiful widow. Her private character is represented as exceedingly amiable, and her accomplishments, taste, manners, as of the highest order but modern French critics seem not disposed to allot her so high a rank among the votaries of the muses, as her content poraries did and her works, it must be confessed, have not been of late years in much request, there having been, no edition called for since that of 1770, 3 vols. 8vo, A very indifferent translation of her “Letters concerning England, Holland, and Italy,” was published at London in that year, 2 vols. 12ino.

, a satirical wit, was born at Loretto in 1556, the son of an architect of a Roman family, about the beginning of the seventeenth century. The method he took to indulge his turn for satire, or rather plot of his publications, was the idea that Apollo, holding his courts Oh Parnassus, heard the complaints of the wholeworld, and gave judgment as the case required. He was received into the academies of Italy, where he gained great applause by his political discourses, and his elegant criticisms. The cardinals Borghese and Cajetan having declared themselves his patrons, he published his “News from Parnassus/' and” Apollo’s Secretary,“a continuation which being well received, he proceeded further, and printed his” Pietra di Paragone“wherein he attacks the court of Spain, setting forth their designs against the liberty of Italy, and inveighing particularly against themfor the tyranny they exercised in the kingdom of Naples. The Spaniards complained of him in form, and were determined at any rate to be revenged. Boccalini was frightened, and retired to Venice. Some time after he was murdered in a surprising manner. He lodged with one of his friends, who having got up early one morning, left Boccalini in bed; when a minute after four armed men entered his chamber, and gave him so many blows with bags full of sand that they left him for dead so that his friend, upon his return, found him unable to utter one word. Great search was made at Venice for the authors of this murder and though they were never discovered, yet it was universally believed that they were set to work. by the court of Spain. This story, however, has been called in question by Mazzuchelli, and seems indeed highly improbable at least it can by no means stand upon its present foundation. His attacking the court of Spain in his” Pietra di Paragone,“is said to have been the cause of his murder but another cause, if he really was murdered, must be sought, for he died, by whatever means, Nov. 10, 1613, and the” Pietra“was not published until two years after that event. It appears likewise from one of his letters, that he had kept the manuscript a profound secret, communicating it only to one confidential frienc!, to whom the above letter was written. Besides, the register of the parish in which he died, mentions that on Nov. 10, 1613, the signor Trajan Boccalini died at the age of fiftyseven, of a cholic accompanied with a fever. Apostolo Zeno, vrho mentions this circumstance in his notes on Fontanini’s” Italian Library,“adds, that in a speech publicly delivered at Venice in 1<320, in defence of Trissino, whom. Boccalini had attacked, ample mention rs made of him, who had then been dead seven years, and in terms of severe censure; but not a word was said of his assassination, which could not have then been a secret, nor could there be any reason for concealing it. If indeed he suffered in the manner reported, it formed an exact counterpart of what he records to have happened to Euclid the mathematician. Euclid had demonstrated, as a mathematical problem, that all the lines both of princes’” and private men’s thoughts meet in one centre namely, to pick money out of other men’s pockets and put it into their own and for this he was attacked by some of his hearers who beat him with sand-bags and perhaps, as a foundation for the story, some of Boccalini’s readers may have said that he ought to have been punished in the same manner. Boccal'mi’s works are: 1. “Itagguagli di Parnaso, centuria prima,” Venice, 1612, 4to. “Centuria secxinda,” ibid. 1613, 4to, neither published long enough before his death to have excited much general odium. These two parts were afterwards frequently reprinted in one volume. There is unquestionably in this work, much to make it popular, and mnch to excite hostility. His notions on government, liberty, &c. were too free for his age and country and his treatment of literary characters is frequently captious and unjust, yet the work upon the whole is amusing, and original in its plan. A third part was published by Jerome Briani, of Modena, at Venice, 165O, 8vo, and die whole was translated and published in English, tinder the inspection of Hughes the poet, 1705, lol. 2. “Pietra del Paragone politico,” Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1615, 4to, and often, reprinted in various sizes; that of Amsterdam, 1653, 24mo, is reckoned the best. It has been translated into Latin, French, and English, first in 1626, 4to, and afterwards in Hughes’s edition and into German. This “political touchstone” bears hard on the Spanish monarchy, and may be considered as a supplement to his “News from Parnassus.” 3. “Commentari sopra Cornelio Tacito,” Geneva, 1669, 4to, Cosmopoli (Amsterdam), 1677, 4to, and afterwards in a collection published under the title “La Bilancia politica di tutte le opere di Trajano Boccalini,” &c. with notes and observations by the chevalier Louis du May, at Castellana, 167S, 3 vols. 4to. The first two volumes of this scarce work contain the Tacitus, on which the annotator, not content with being very free in his religious opinions, takes some extraordinary liberties with the text, and therefore they were soon inserted in the Index Expurgatorius. They contain, however, many curious facts which tend to illustrate the political affairs of the time. The third volume is filled with political and historical letters, collected hy Gregorio Leti but although these are signed with Boccalini’s name, they are supposed to have been written by his son, and by the editor Leti, a man not very scrupulous in impositions of this kind. 6. “La Segretaria d'Apollo,” Amst. 1653, 24mo, a sort of continuation of the “Ragguagli,” very much in Boccalini’s manner, but most probably we owe it to the success of his acknowledged works.

, an eminent Italian scholar, was born at Bologna in 1488, of a noble family. In his studies he made uncommon proficiency, and had distinguished himself at the early age of twenty by his very learned work on Plautus. According to the custom of the age, he attached himself to various princes, but at first to the celebrated Albert Pio, count of Carpi. Having become imperial orator at the court of Rome, he obtained by his talents and knowledge of business, the titles of chevalier and count Palatine, and was intrusted with some important functions, such as that of bestowing the degree of doctor, of creating notaries, and even legitimizing natural children. At Bologna he was professor of Greek and Latin, rhetoric and poetry, and was chosen one of the Auziani in 1522. Having acquired a handsome fortune, he built a palace, and in 1546 founded an academy in it, named from himself Academia Bocchiana, or Bocchiale. It was also called Ermatena, agreeable to its device, on which was engraven the two figures of Mercury and Minerva. He also established a printing-office in his house, and he and his academicians employed themselves in correcting the many beautiful editions which they printed. Bocchi was a good Hebrew scholar, and well versed in antiquities and history, particularly that of his own country. The senate of Bologna employed him on writing the history of that city, and bestowed on him the title of Historiographer. Cardinal Sadolet, the two Flaminio’s, John Phil. Achillini, and Lcl. Greg. Giraldi, were among his particular friends, who have all spoken very favourably of him in their works. This last was much attached to him, and it is supposed that he meant to express this attachment by giving him the name of Phileros (loving friend), or Philerote, which is on the title of some of his works. Bocchi died at Bologna, Nov. 6, 1562. He wrote, 1. “Apologia in Plautum, cui accedit vita Ciceronis authore Plutarcho,” Bologn.

, called Clememtone from the vast size of his figure, a distinguished history and portrait painter, was born at Genoa in 1620, and was the disciple of Bernardo Strozzi, an artist of good reputation but he found in himself so strong an ambition to arrive at excellence in his profession, that he left Genoa, and went to Rome and Florence, where he became familiar with Castiglione, there to explore that true sublimity of style, which can only be obtained by a judicious observation of the ancient sculptures and the works of the celebrated modern artists. By the guidance of an excellent genius, and also by a most industrious application to design, he discovered the art of uniting and blending the antique and modern gusto in a style that at once exhibited both gracefulness and strength. His style is more correct and more ideal than that of his master, though inferior in truth of colour. Most of the works of this master (except his portraits, which were lively, natural, and graceful) are in the chapels of Genoa, Pisa, and other cities of Italy, but particularly in Pisa, where is the best of his works, a St. Sebastian in the Certosa.

, or Bochius, a Latin poet, was born at Brussels July 27, 1555, and became so eminent for his poetry, as to be called the Belgic Virgil. Having attached himself to cardinal Radzevil, he studied theology for some time, under the tuition of Bellarmin, afterwards the celebrated cardinal. He then travelled in Italy, Poland, Livonia, Russia, and other countries. The only memorable event that his biographers have recorded of these travels, is, that in his way to Moscow his feet were frozen, and he was thinking of submitting to amputation, when the place where he stopped happening to be surprized by the enemy, he recovered his feet in a most surprising manner, and escaped the danger of losing either them or his liberty. On his return home, he devoted his time to his literary pursuits, especially poetry, and died Jan. 13, 1609. He has left the following pieces 1. “De Belgii principatu.” 2. “Parodia heroica Psahnorum Davidicorum.” 3. “Observationes physicae, ethicae, politics, et historical, in Psalmos.” 4. “Vita Davidis.” 5. “Orationes.” 6. “Poe'mata, &.C.” these poetical pieces, consisting of epigrams, elegies, &c. were collected and printed at Cologne, in 1615, with the addition of some poems by his son, a promising youth, who died in Calabria. It must not be omitted that Booh wrote the verses under the cuts of Verstegan’s absurd book against queen Elizabeth, entitled “Theatrum crudelitatum Hereticorum nostri temporis,” a sort of popish martyrology.

, called also Langhen-Jan, a painter of history and portrait of the Flemish school, was born at Munster, about the year 1610; and removing to Flanders, acquired the art of design and colouring in the school of Jacques Jordaens. He designed well the heads erf his women are generally graceful, and those of his men distinguished by character: his tone of colouring sometimes resembled that of Rubens, but more frequently that of Vandyck. His pictures have great force and harmony, and his skilful management of the chiaro-scuro produces an agreeable effect. An altar-piece at the church of St. James in Ghent, representing the martyrdom of this saint, and a picture of the Annunciation in another church, painted in 1664, are distinguished performances of this master. Descamps mentions another John Van Bockhorst, who was born at Dentekoom in 1661, went when young to London, and was employed by sir Godfrey Kneller on his portraits, and the earl of Pembroke also employed him to paint portraits, history, and battle pieces. He afterwards practised portrait-painting in various parts of Germany, principally at the court of Brandeuburgh and in Cleves, and died in 1724.

After near five years residence in Holland, he obtained leave to return to England to look after his private affairs, but was shortly after remanded back to the Hague. About a year after he came into England again, to communicate some private discoveries to the queen and presently returned to the States for the execution of those councils he had secretly proposed. At length, having succeeded in all his negociations, he obtained his final recal in 1597. After his return, finding his advancement at court obstructed by the jealousies and intrigues of the great men, he retired from the court and all public business, and never could be prevailed with to return and accept of any new employment. His own account of his treatment at this time is too amusing and characteristic to be omitted “I cannot chuse,” says he, “in making report of the principal accidents that have befallen unto me in the course of my life, but record among the rest, that from the very first day 1 had no man more to triend, among the lords of the council, than was the lord treasurer Burleigh for when occasion had been ottered of declaring his conceit, as touching my service, he would always tell the queen (which I received from herself, and some other ear-witnesses) that there was not any man in England so meet as myself to undergo the office of the secretary; and since, his son the present lord treasurer hath signified unto me in private conference, that, when his father first intended to advance him to that place, his purpose was withal to make me his colleague. But the case stood thus in my behalf: Before such time as I returned from the Provinces United, which was in the year 1597, and likewise after my return, the earl of Essex did use me so kindly, both by letters and messages, and other great tokens of his inward favour to me, that, alihough I had no meaning but to settle in my mind my chiefest dependance upon the lord Burleigh, as one that I reputed to be both the best able, and therewithal the most willing, to work my advancement with the queen; yet I know not how the earl, who sought by all devices to divert her love and liking both from the father and the son (but from the son in special), to withdraw my affection from the one and the other, and to win me altogether to depend upon himself, did so often take occasion to entertain the queen with some prodigal speephes of my sufficiency for a secretary, which were ever accompanied with words of disgrace against the present lord treasurer, as neither she herself (of whose favour before I was thoroughly assured) took any great pleasure to prefer me the sooner (for she hated his ambition, and would give little countenance to any of his followers); and both the lord Burleigh and his son waxed jealous of my courses, as if underhand 1 had been induced, by the cunning and kindness of the earl of Essex, to oppose myself against their dealings. And though in very truth they had no solid ground at all of the least alteration in my disposition towards either of them both (for I did greatly respect their persons and places, with a settled resolution to do them any service, as also in my heart I detested to be of any faction whatsoever) yet the now lord treasurer, upon occasion of some talk that I have since had with him of the earl and his actions, hath freely confessed of his own accord to me, that his daily provocations were so bitter and sharp against him, and his comparisons so odious, when he put us in a balance, as he thought thereupon, he had very great reason to use his best means to put any man out of love of raising his fortune, whom the earl with sucn violence, to his extreme prejudice, had endeavoured to dignify. And this, as he affirmed, was all the motive -he had to set himself against me, in whatsoever might redound to the bettering of my state, or increasing my credit and countenance with the queen. When I” had thoroughly now bethought me, first in the earl, of the slender holdfast he had in the queen; of an endless opposition of the chiefest of our statesmen like still to wait upon him; of his perilous, feeble, and uncertain advice, as well in his own, as in all the causes of his friends; and when moreover for myself I had fully considered how very untowardly these two counsellors were affected unto me, (upon whom before in cogitation I had framed all the fabric of my future prosperity); how ill it did concur with my natural disposition, to become, or to be counted a stickler or partaker in any public faction how well I was able, by God’s good blessing, to live of myself, if I could be content with a competent livelihood; how short a time of farther life I was then to expect by the common course of nature when I had, I say, in this manner represented to my thoughts my particular estate, together with the earl’s, I resolved thereupon to possess my soul in peace all the residue of my days; to take my full farewell of state employments; to satisfy my mind with that mediocrity of worldly living that I had of mine own and so to retire me from the court, which was the epilogue and end of all my actions, and endeavours of any important note, till I came to the age of sixty three. Now although after this, by her majesty’s directions, I was often called to the court by the now lord treasurer, then secretary, and required by him, as also divers times since, by order from the king, to serve as an ambassador in France, to go a commissioner from his highness for concluding the truce between Spain and the Provinces, and to negotiate in other very honourable employments yet I would not be removed from my former final resolution insomuch as at length to reduce me the sooner to return to the court, I had an offer made me by the present lord treasurer (for in process of time he saw, as he himself was pleased to tell me more than once, that all my dealing was upright, fair, and direct) that in case I myself were willing unto it, he would make me his associate in the secretary’s office And to the intent I might believe that he intended it bonafide, he would get me out of hand to be sworn of the council. And for the better enabling of my state to maintain such a dignity, whatsoever 1 would ask that might be fit for him to deal in, and for me to enjoy, he woul'd presently solic.t the king to give it passage. All which persuasions notwithstanding, albeit I was often assaulted by him, in regard of my years, and for that I felt myself subject to many indispositions, besides some other reasons, which I reserve unto myself, I have continued still at home my retired course of life, which is now methinks to me as the greatest preferment that the state can afford.“Mr. Camden mentions the affair of sir Thomas’s disappointment in regard to the office of secretary in these words” It raised in him (the earl of Essex) a greater and more apparent discontent, that sir Robert Cecil was chosen secretary in his absence whereas he had some time before recommended sir Thomas Bodley, on the score of his great wisdom and experience in the affairs of the Low Countries, and had run very high in his commendations; but with so much bitterness, and so little reason, disparaged Cecil, that the queen (who had by this time a mean opinion of Essex’s recommendations) was the more inclinable to refuse to make Bodley secretary; neither would she let the lord treasurer join him in commission with his son; both which honours were designed him, till Essex, by too profuse and lavish praises, had rendered him suspected as a creature of his own."

In the same year (1597) he began the munificent work of restoring, or rather founding anew, the public library at Oxford, which was completed in 1599. In his memoirs he has admirably displayed his first thoughts, his first feelings, and his first precautions on this important undertaking. After adverting to the motives which induced him to retire from court and chuse a private life, he goes on thus “Only this I must truly confess of myself, that though I did never yet repent me of those, and some other my often refusals of honourable offers, in respect of emiching my private estate yet somewhat more of late I have blamed myself and my nicety that way, for the love that I bear to my reverend mother the university of Oxon, and to the advancement of her good, by such kind of means, as I have since undertaken. For thus I fell to discourse and debate in my mind tiiat although I might find it fittest for me to keep out of the throng of court contentions, and address my thoughts and deeds to such ends altogether, as I myself could best affect yet withal I was to think, that my duty towards God, the expectation of the world, and my natural inclination, and very morality did require, that I should not wholly so hide those little abilities that 1 had, but that in some measure, in one kind or other, I should do the true part of a profitable member of the state. Whereupon examining exactly for the rest of my life what course I might take, and having sought (as I thought) all the ways to the wood, to select the most proper, I concluded at the last to set up my staff at the library door in Oxon, being thoroughly persuaded, that in my solitude and surcease from the commonwealth affairs, 1 could not busy myself to better purpose, than by reducing that place (which then in every part lay ruined and waste) to the public use of students. For the effecting whereof I found myself furnished, in a competent proportion, of such four kinds of aids, as, unless I had them all, there was no hope of good success. For without some kind of knowledge, as well in the learned and modern tongues, as in sundry other sorts of scholastical literature without some purse-ability to go through with the charge without great store of honourable friends, to further the design and without special good leisure to follow such a work, it could but have proved a vain attempt and inconsiderate. But how well I have sped in all my endeavours, and how full provision I have made for the benefit and ease of all frequenters of the library, that which I have already performed in sight, that which besides I have given for the maintenance of it, and that which hereafter I purpose to add, by way of enlargement of that place (for the project is cast, an. I, whether I live or die, it shall be, God willing, put in full execution), will testify so truly and abundantly for me, as I need not be the publisher of the dignity and worth of my own institution.” Camden, under the year 1598, tells us, that Bodley, being at present unengaged from affairs of state, set himself a task, which would have suited the character of a crowned head, the promotion and encouragement of learning for he began to repair the public library at Oxford, and furnished it with new books. It was set up, he adds, by Humphrey duke of Gloucester, but through the iniquity of the times was, in the reign of Edward VI. stripped of all the books but he (Bodley) having made the choicest collection from all parts of the world of the most valuable books, partly at his own cost, and partly by contributions from others, he first stocked, and afterwards left it so well endowed at his death, that his memory deserves to bear a very lasting date amongst men of worth and letters.“The same author, in his” Britannia,“tells us, duke Humphrey’s library consisted of one hundred and twentynine volumes, procured from Italy at a great expence. His translator adds, that they were valued at above a thousand pounds, and that the duke in 1440 gave one hundred and twenty-six volumes more, and in 1443 a much greater number, besides considerable additions at his death three years after. But, before duke Humphrey’s time, Richard de Bury, alias Aungervil, bishop of Durham, in 1295, gave a great number of books to the university, which were kept in a place for that purpose in the college, now Trinity college, which the monks of Durham had founded in the north suburbs of Oxford; an account whereof may be gathered from a book written by himself, called” Philobiblos, sive de amore librorum, et institutione Bibliothecae.“And after him, in 1320, Thomas Cobham, bishop of Worcester, built another over the old Congregation-house in the north coemetery of St. Mary’s. In 1597, sir Thomas Bodley, taking into his consideration the ruinous condition of duke Humphrey’s library, and resolving to undertake the restoration of it at his own expence, wrote a letter, dated at London, Jan. 23, to Dr. Ravis, dean of Christ church, then vice-chancellor, to be communicated to the university; offering therein to restore the fabric of the said library, and to settle an annual income for the purchase of books, and the support of such officers as might be necessary to take care of it. This letter was received with the greatest satisfaction by the university, and an answer returned, testifying their most grateful acknowledgment and acceptance of his noble offer. On this, sir Thomas immediately set about the work, and in two years time brought it to a good degree of perfection. In 1601, the university had such a sense of his services that he was voted a public benefactor, and his name ordered to be included among the other benefactors repeated in the public prayers. He furnished it with a large collection of books, purchased in foreign countries at a great expence and thi.-, collection in a short time became so greatly enlarged by the generous benefactions of several noblemen, bishops, and others, that neither the shelves nor the room could contain them. &ir Thomas then offering to make a considerable addition to the building, the motion was readily embraced, and, on July 19, 1610, the first stone of the new foundation was laid with great solemnity, the vice-chancellor, Doctors, masters of arts, &c. attending in their proper habits, a speech being made upon the occasion. But sir Thomas Bodley did not live to see this part of his design completed, though he left sufficient means in trust, as he bestowed his. whole estate (his debts, legacies, and funeral charges defrayed) to the noble purposes of this foundation. By this, and the help of other benefactions, in procuring which sir Thomas was very serviceable by his great interest with many eminent persons, the university was enabled to add three other sides to what was already built, forming a noble quadrangle, and spacious rooms for schools of arts. By sir Thomas’s’ will 200l. per annum was settled on the library for ever out of whichhe appointed near forty pounds for the head librarian, ten pounds for the sub-librarian, and eight for the junior. He drew up likewise a body of excellent statutes for the government of the library. In this library is a statue erected to the memory of sir Thomas Bodley, by the earl of Dorset, chancellor of the university, with the following inscription:” Thomas Sackvillus Dorsettia? Comes, Summus Angliae Thesaurarius, et hujus Academise Cancellarius, Thomse Bodleio Equiti Aurato, qui Bibliothecam hanc instituit, honoris causa pie posuit i. e. Thi.mas Sackvile, earl of Dorset, lord high treasurer of England, and chancellor of this university, piously erected this monument to the honour of sir Thomas Bodley, knt. who founded this library.“King James I. we are told, when he came to Oxford in 1605, and, among other edifices, took a view of this famous library, at his departure, in imitation of Alexander, broke out into this speech” If I were not a king, I would be an university man and if it were so that I must be a prisoner, if I might have my wish, 1 would have no other prison than that library, and be chained together with so many good authors." A catalogue of the printed books in the Bodleian library was published in 1674 by Dr. Thomas Hyde, then chief librarian another of the manuscripts was printed in 1697; and a more ample catalogue of the books was printed at Oxford, in 1738, in two volumes, folio.

Thus rebuked, he remained silent for seven years but finding that the directors of the electoral laboratory had recommended him to a great many persons of the court as a good chemist, he lifted up his head, and boldly opposed Richterus and, taking up his pen again, was resolved to redeem the time he had lost; insomuch that in the remaining five years of his life he wrote ahove twenty books, the last of which, entitled “A table of his principles, or a key of his writings,” was published in 1624. He did not long survive it; for, betimes in the morning, Nov. 18 of that year, he called one of his sons, and asked him, “if he also heard that excellent music” To which being answered in the negative, he ordered the door to be set open, that the music might be the better heard. He asked afterwards what o'clock it was and being told it had struck two, he said, “It is not yet my time, my time is three hours hence.” In the interim he was heard to speak these words, “O thou strong God of hosts, deliver me according to thy will O thou crucified Lord Jesus, have mercy upon me, and receive me into thy kingdom.” When it was near six o'clock, he took leave of his wife and sons, and blessed them, and said, “Now I go hence to paradise” then bidding his son turn him, he immediately expired in a deep sigh.

A great number of persons have been inveigled by the visions of this fanatic; among others the famous Quirinus Kahlman in Germany, who says, that he had learned more, being alone in his study, from Boehmen, than he could have learned from all the wise men of that age together: and that we may not be in the dark as to what sort of knowledge this was, he acquaints us, that amidst an infinite number of visions it happened, that being snatched out of his study, he saw thousands of thousands of lights rising round about him. But our author is better known among ou-rselves, where he has hundreds of admirers and no wonder, since, as Dr. Henry More observes, the sect of the Quakers have borrowed a great many of their doctrines from our Teutonic philosopher of whom we shall venture to say, from a perusal of some of his writings, that he possessed the grand arcanum of mysterizing plain truths by an inextricably oenigmatical expression. He has still many disciples in England and we are sorry to add, met with a warm advocate and industrious disciple in the late pious Mr. William Law, who employed many years in preparing an edition and translation of Bcehmen’s works, and which were published after his decease in 2 vols. 4to, to which two others were afterwards added. The titles of these writings will be perhaps sufficient, without entering farther into their merits, or that of their author. 1. Aurora, or the rising of the sun, 1612. 2. Of the three principles, together with an appendix of the threefold life of man, 1619. 3. Of the threefold life of man, 1620. 4. An answer to the forty questions of the soul, propounded by Dr. Walter, &c. ibid. 5. Three books; the first, of the incarnation of Jesus Christ; the second, of the suffering, death, and resurrection of Christ; the third, of the tree of faith, ibid. 6. Of six parts, ibid. 7. Of the heavenly and earthly mysterium, ibid. 8. Of the last times, to P. K. ibid. 9. De signatura rerum, or the signature of all things, 1621. 10. A consolatory book of the four complexions, ibid. 11. An apology to Balthazar Tilken, in two parts, ibid. 12. A consideration upon Esaias Steefel’s book, ibid. 13. Of true repentance, 1622. 14. Of true resignation, ibid. 15. Of regeneration, ibid. 16. Of predestination and election of God; at the end of which is a treatise, entitled, 17. A short compendium of repentance, 1623. 18. The mysterium magnum upon Genesis, ibid. 19. A table of the principles, or key of his writings, to G. F. and J. H. 20. Of the supersensual life, ibid. LM. Of the two testaments of Christ, viz. baptism and the supper of the Lord, ibid. 22. A dialogue between the enlightened and unenlightened soul, ibid. 23. An apology upon the book of true repentance, directed against a pasquil of the principal minister of Gorlitz, called Gregory Rickter, ibid. 24. An epitome of the mysterium magnum, ibid. 25. A table of the divine manifestation, or an exposition of the threefold world, to J. S. V. S. and A. V. F. ibid. The following are without date. 26. Of the errors of the sects of Ezekiel Meths, to A. P. A. or an apology to Esaias Steefel. 27. Of the last judgment. 28. Certain letters to diverse persons, written at diverse times, with certain keys for some hidden words. Besides these our author left unfinished, 29. A little book of divine contemplation. 30. A book of one hundred and seventy-seven theosophic questions. 3 1 The holy weeks, or the prayerbook.

This great man, on all occasions, declared sir Isaac Newton to have been a most accurate observer m cnemistry, as well as in the other branches of natural philosophy. In his lectures he constantly called the immortal Sycltmham, the British Hippocrates.

, professor of medicine in the university of Petersburg, was born at the Hague in 1715. He was the son of James Kaan, and of Margaret, the daughter of Herman Boerhaave. After receiving a good classical education, he went to Leyden, where, applying to the study of medicine under the celebrated Albinus Gaubius, and other masters, he was admitted to the degree of doctor in 1738. He iiad before obtained an honorary medal from the university for his discourse “De gaudiis Alcheimstarum,” though he was more particularly attached to anatomy, which he cultivated with great success. The year following he took the name of Ins uncle Boerhaave. In 1740 he went to Petersburgh, where his talents soon procured him the situation of professor in medicine in the university there, and of one of the members of the imperial academy. By Portal and Blumenbach he is called archiater, or aulic counsellor, and first physician to the empress, confounding him with his brother Herman Kaan B. who about the same time enjoyed that honour. In the course of a severe and tedious illness, from which he with difficulty recovered, he lost his hearing. This happened 1749. He died in 1753. His works are: “Perspiratio dicta Hippocrati, per universum corpus anatomice illustrata,” Lugd. B. 1738, 12mo; in which he shews there is a constant inhalation or absorption, and an exhalation, or perspiration, carried on, not only on the surface of the body, but in all the principal cavities. “Impetum faciens dictum Hippocrati per corpus consentiens, philologice et physiologice illustratum,” Lugd. Bat. 1745, 12mo. la this he treats of the action of the mind upon the body, by the means of the nerves of the fabric and motion of the muscles on the effects of opium, given to a dog, &c. He also gave the anatomy of an elephant, which he had an opportunity of dissecting, and of two monstrous infants, &c.

, a learned and pious writer of the seventeenth century, was the son of William Bogan, gentleman, and born at Little Hempston in Devonshire, about the feast of St. John the Baptist in the year 1625. He became a commoner of St. Alban hall under the tuition of Mr. Ralph Button in Michaelmas term in 1640. He was admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college November the 26th the year following, and left the university when the city of Oxford was garrisoned for the king, and returned after the surrender of it to the parliament. October 21, 1646, he took the degree of bachelor of arts, and was elected probationer fellow of his college the year following. November 19, 1650, he took the degree of master of arts, and became a retired and religious student, and distinguished in the university for his admirable skill in the tongues. At last, having contracted an ill habit of body by his intense application to his studies, he died September 1, 1659, and was interred in the middle of the north cloister belonging to Corpus Christi college, joining to the south side of the chapel there. “At that time and before,” Wood informs us, “the nation being very unsettled, and the university expecting nothing but ruin and dissolution, it pleased Mr. Began to give by his will to the city of Oxford five hundred pounds; whereas hud the nation been otherwise, he would have given that money to his college.” An original picture of him is to be seen in the guild-hall of the city of Oxford. Mr. Wood adds, that he was an excellent tutor, but a zealous puritan and in his Hist. & Antiq. Univers. Oxon. he gives him the character of vir studiosus et lingiiarum peritissimus, a studious person, and well skilled in the languages, in which opinion some learned foreigners who have read his works concur. He wrote, 1. Additions, in four books, to Francis Rous’s “Archaeologioc Atticae,” the fifth edition of which was published at Oxford, 1658, 4to. These additions relate to the customs of the ancient Greeks in marriages, burials, feasts, &c. at the close of which, Mr. Bogan, with great simplicity of manner, gives his reasons for undertaking the work: “The cords,” he says, “which drew me to do it (and drawn I was) were three, such as, twisted together, I could by no means break; viz. l.The importunity of my friend. 2. The necessity of the knowledge of ancient rites and customs for the understanding of authors. And, 3. the hopes which I had by employment (as by an issue) to divert my humour of melancholy another way. The causes why I did it no better are as many, viz. 1. Want of years and judgment, having done the most part of it in my Tyrocinium (when I took more delight in these studies) us appears by the number of the authors which I have cited. 2. Want of health. And, 3. want of time and leisure, being called away by occasions that might not be neglected, and by friends that could not be disobeyed. If yet I have given but little light, and my labour and oil be not all lost, I have as much as I desired myself, and thou hast no more than I owed thee.” 2. “A view of the Threats and Punishments recorded in Scripture alphabetically composed, with some brief observations on sundry texts,” Oxford, 1653, 8vo. 3. “Meditations of the mirth of a Christian Life,” Oxford, 165:3, 8vo. 4. “Help to Prayer both extempore and by a set form as also to Meditation,” &c. Oxford, 1660, 12mo, published after the author’s death by Daniel Agas, fellow of Corpus Christi college. Our author also wrote a large and learned epistle to Mr. Edmund Dickenson, M. A. of Merlon college, prefixed to that gentleman’s book, emitled “Delphi Phcenicizantes, &c.” published at Oxford, 1655, in 8vo. And “Homerus Æfipo/Jw sive comparatio Homeri cum scriptoribus sacris quoad Normam loquendi.” In the preface he declares that it is not his intention to make any comparison between the sacred writers and their opinions and Homer, but only of their idioms and ways of speaking. To this book is added Hesiodus 'Opi^wv; wherein he shews how Hesiod expresses himself very much after the same manner %vith Homer, Oxford, 1658, 8vo. He designed likewise to publish a discourse concerning the Greek particles but he was prevented by sickness from completing it; and another treatise concerning the best use of the Greek and Latin poets. Freytag has bestowed an article on his treatise on Homer’s style.

, a voluminous political and miscellaneous writer of the seventeenth century, was born at Ringsfield, in Suffolk, the only son of Baxter Bohun, who with his ancestors, had been lords of the manor of Westhall, in that county, from the 25th Henry VIII. In 1663, he was admitted fellow-commoner of Queen’s college, Cambridge, and continued there till the latter end of 1666, when the plague obliged him and others to leave the university. In 1675 he was made a justice of peace for Suffolk, and continued in that office till the second of James II. when he was discharged, but was restored to that office in the first of William and Mary. The time of his death is not mentioned, but he was alive in 1700. He wrote, 1. “An Address to the Freemen and Freeholders of the nation, in three parts, being the history of three sessions of parliament in 1678, 1682,and 1683,” 4to. 2. “A Defence of the Declaration of king Charles II. against a pamphlet styled, A just and modest Vindication of the proceedings of the two last Parliaments.” This was printed with and added to the Address. 3. “A Defence of Sir Robert Filmer, against the mistakes and representations of Algernon Sydney, esq. in a paper delivered by him to the sheriffs upon the scaffold on Tower-hill, on Friday, Dec. 7, 1683, before his execution there,” Lond. 1684. 4. “The Justice of Peace’s Calling, a moral essay,” Lond. 1684, 8vo. 5. “A Preface and Conclusion to Sir Robert Filmer’s Patriarcha,” ibid. 1685, 8vo. 6. “A Geographical Dictionary,” ibid. 1688, 8vo. 7. “The History of the Desertion; or an account of all the public affairs of England, from the beginning of Sept. 1688 to Feb. 12 following,” ibid. 1689, 8vo. 8. “An Answer to a piece called The Desertion discussed (by Jeremy Collier),” printed at the end of the “History of the Desertion.” 9. “The Doctrine of Passive Obedience and Non-Resistance no way concerned in the controversies now depending between the Williamites and the Jacobites,” ibid. 1689, 4to. In page 24th is a passage respecting bishop Ken, which Mr. Bohun found to be untrue, and therefore requests that it may be cancelled. 10. “The Life of John Jewell, bishop of Salisbury,” prefixed to a translation of his Apology, 1685. 11. “Three Charges delivered at the general quarter sessions holden at Ipswich, for the county of Suffolk, in 1691, 1692, and 1693,” 4to. 12. “The great Historical, Geographical, and Poetical Dictionary,” Lond. 1694, fol. He also translated Sicurus’ origin of Atheism the Universal Bibliotheque, or account of books for Jan. Feb. and March 1687 Sleidan’s History of the Reformation Puffendorff’s Present State of Germany, and Degory Wheare’s Method of reading History, Lond. 1698, 8vo.

, an eminent French poet, usually called by his countrymen Despreaux, was born on November 1, 1636. His parents were Gilles Boileau, register of the great chamber, and Ann de Nielle, his second wife; but it is uncertain whether he was born at Paris or Crone. In his early years, he was the reverse of those infantine prodigies who often in mature age scarcely attain to mediocrity; on the contrary, he was heavy and taciturn; nor was his taciturnity of that observing kind which denotes sly mischief at the bottom, but the downright barren taciturnity of insipid good-nature. His father, on comparing him with his other children, used to say, “as for this, he is a good-tempered fellow, who will never speak ill of any one.” In his infancy, however, he ap“pears to have been of a very tender constitution, and is said to have undergone the operation for the stone at the age of eight. Through compliance with the wishes of his family, he commenced with being a counsellor; but the tlryness of the Code and Digest soon disgusted him with this profession, which, his eulogist thinks, was a loss to the bar. When M. Dongois, his brother-in-law, register of parliament, took him to his house in order to form him to the style of business, he had a decree to draw up in an important cause, which he composed with enthusiasm, while he dictated it to Boileau with an emphasis which shewed how much he was satisfied with the sublimity of his work; but when he had finished, he perceived that Boileau was fallen asleep, after having written but few words. Transported with anger, he sent him back to his father, assuring him he” would be nothing but a blockhead all the rest of his life." After this he began to study scholastic divinity, which was still less suited to his taste, and at length he became what he himself wished to be a Poet; and, as if to belie, at setting out, his father’s prediction, he commenced at the age of thirty, with satire, which let loose against him the crowd of writers whom he

Boileau knew how to procure a still more powerful protection at court than the duke de Montausier’s, that of Lewis XIV. himself. He lavished upon this monarch praises the more flattering, as they appeared dictated by the public voice, and merely the sincere and warm expression of the nation’s intoxication with respect to its king. To add value to his homage, the artful satirist had the address to make his advantage of the reputation of frankness he had acquired, which served as a passport to those applauses which the poet seemed to bestow in spite of his nature; and he was particularly attentive, while bestowing praises on all those whose interest might either support or injure him, to reserve the first place, beyond comparison, for the monarch. Among other instances, he valued himself, as upon a great stroke of policy, for having contrived to place Monsieur, the king’s brother, by the side of the king himself, in his verses, without hazard of wounding the jealousy of majesty; and for having celebrated the conqueror of Cassel more feebly than the subduer of Flanders. He had however the art, or more properly the merit, along with his inundation of praises, to convey some useful lessons to the sovereign. Lewis XIV. as yet young and greedy of renown, which he mistook for real glory, was making preparations for war with Holland. Colbert, who knew how fatal to the people is the most glorious war, wished to divert the king from his design. He engaged Boileau to second his persuasions, by addressing to Lewis his first epistle, in which te proves that a king’s true greatness consists in rendering his subjects happy, by securing them the blessings of peace. But although this epistle did not answer the intentions of the minister or the poet, yet so much attention to please the monarch, joined to such excellence, did not remain unrecompensed. Boileau was loaded with the king’s favour, admitted at court, and named, in conjunction with Racine, royal historiographer. The two poets seemed closely occupied in writing the history of their patron; they even read several passages of it to the king; but they abstained from giving any of it to the public, in the persuasion that the history of sovereigns, even the most worthy of eulogy, cannot be written during their lives, without running the risk either of losing reputation by flattery, or incurring hazard by truth. It was with repugnance that Boileau had undertaken an office so little suited to his talents and his taste. “When I exercised,” said he, “the trade of a satirist, which I understood pretty well, I was overwhelmed with insults and menaces, and I am now dearly paid for exercising that of historiographer, which I do not understand at all/' Indeed,” far from being dazzled by the favour he enjoyed, he rather felt it as an incumbrance. He often said, that the first sensation his fortune at court inspired in him, was a feeling of melancholy. He thought the bounty of his sovereign purchased too dearly by the Joss of liberty a blessing so intrinsically valuable, which all the empty and fugitive enjoyments of vanity are unable to compensate in the eyes of a philosopher. Boileau endeavoured by degrees to recover this darling liberty, in proportion as age seemed to permit the attempt; and for the last ten or twelve years of his life he entirely dropped his visits to court. “What should I do there?” said he, “I can praise no longer.” He might, however, have found as much matter for his applauses as when he lavished them without the least reserve. While he attended at court^ he maintained a freedom and frankness of speech, especially on topics of literature, which are not common among courtiers. When Lewis asked his opinion of some verses which he had written, he replied, “Nothing, sire, is impossible to your majesty; you wished to make bad verses, and you have succeeded.” He also took part with the persecuted members of the Port-royal; and when one of the courtiers declared that the king was making diligent search after the celebrated Arnauld, in order to put him in the Bastile, Boileau observed, “His majesty is too fortunate; he will not find him:” and when the king asked him, what was the reason why the whole world was running after a preacher named le Tourneux, a disciple of Arnauld, “Your majesty,” he replied, “knows how fond people are of novelty: this is a minister who preaches the gospel.” Boileau appears from various circumstances, to have been no great friend to the Jesuits, whom he offended by his “Epistle on the Love of God,” and by many free speeches. By royal favour, he was admitted unanimously, in 1684, into the French academy, with which he had made very free in his epigrams; and he was also associated to the new academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, of which he appeared to be a fit rnember, by his “Translation of Longinus on the Sublime.” To science, with which he had little acquaintance, he rendered, however, important service by his burlesque “Arret in favour of the university, against an unknown personage called Reason,” which was the means of preventing the establishment of a plan of intolerance in matters of philosophy. His attachment to the ancients, as the true models of literary taste and excellence, occasioned a controversy between him and Perrault concerning the comparative merit of the ancients and moderns, which was prosecuted for some time by epigrams and mutual reproaches, till at length the public began to be tired with their disputes, and a reconciliation was effected by the good offices of their common friends. This controversy laid the foundation of a lasting enmity between Boileau and Fontenelle, who inclined to the party of Perrault. Boileau, however, did not maintain his opinion with the pedantic extravagance of the Daciers; but he happily exercised his wit on the misrepresentations of the noted characters of antiquity, by the fashionable romances of the time, in his dialogue entitled “The Heroes of Romance,” composed in the manner of Lucian. In opposition to the absurd opinions of father Hardouin, that most of the classical productions of ancient Rome had been written by the monks of the thirteenth century, Boileau pleasantly remarks, “I know nothing of all that; but though I am not very partial to the monks, I should not have been sorry to have lived with friar Tibullus, friar Juvenal, Dom Virgil, Dom Cicero, and such kind of folk.” After the death of Racine, Boileau very much retired from court; induced partly by his love of liberty and independence, and partly by his dislike of that adulation which was expected, and for which the dose of Lewis’s reign afforded more scanty materials than its commencement. Separated in a great degree from society, he indulged that austere and misanthropical disposition, from which he was never wholly exempt. His conversation, however, was more mild and gentle than his writings; and, as he used to say of himself, without “nails or claws,” it was enlivened by occasional sallies of pleasantry, and rendered instructive by judicious opinions of authors and their works. He was religious without bigotry; and he abhorred fanaticism and hypocrisy. His circumstances were easy; and his prudent economy has been charged by some with degenerating into avarice. Instances, however, occur of his liberality and beneficence. At the death of Colbert, the pension which he had given to the poet Corneille was suppressed, though he was poor, old, infirm, and dying. Boileau interceded with the king for the restoration of it, and offered to transfer his own to Corneille, telling the monarch that he should be ashamed to receive his bounty while such a man was in want of it. He also bought, at an advanced price, the library of Patru, reduced in his circumstances, and left him in the possession of it till his death. He gave to the poor all the revenues he had received for eight years from a benefice he had enjoyed without performing the duties of it. To indigent men of letters his purse was always open; and at his death he bequeathed almost all his possessions to the poor. Upon the whole, his temper, though naturally austere, was on many occasions kind and benevolent, so that it has been said of him, that he was “cruel only in verse;” and his general character was distinguished by worth and integrity, with some alloys of literary jealousy and injustice. Boileau died of a dropsy in the breast, March 11, 1711, and by his will left almost all his property to the poor. His funeral was attended by a very numerous company, which gave a woman of the lower class occasion to say, “He had many friends then I yet they say that he spoke ill of every body.”

It occurred to one of Boissi’s friends, that it was very extraordinary he should never find him at home. At first he thought the family had changed their lodgings; but, on assuring himself of the contrary, he began to be alarmed. He called several times in one day, and at last burst open the door, when he saw his friend, with his wife and son, extended on the bed, pale and emaciated, scarcely able to utter a sound! The boy lay in the middle, and the husband and wife had their arms thrown over him. The child stretched out his little hands towards his deliverer, and his first word was Bread! It was now the third day that not a morsel of food had entered his lips. The parents lay still in a perfect stupor; they had never heard the bursting open of the door, and felt nothing of the embraces of their agitated friend. Their wasted eyes were directed towards the boy; and the tenderest expressions of pity were in the look with which they had last beheld him, and still saw him dying. Their friend hastened to take measures for their recovery; but could not succeed without difficulty. They thought themselves already far from the troubles of life, and were terrified at being suddenly brought back to them. Void of sense and reflection, they submitted to the attempts that were made to recall them to life. At length a thought occurred to their friend, which happily succeeded. He took the child from their arms, and thus roused the last spark of paternal and maternal tenderness. He gave the child to eat; who, with one hand held his bread, and with the other alternately shook his father and mother. It seemed at once to rekindle the love of life in their hearts, on perceiving that the child had left the bed and their embraces. Nature did her office. Their friend procured them strengthening broths, which he put to their lips with the utmost caution, and did not leave them till every symptom of restored life was fully visible.

, a learned Jesuit, was born at Tillemont, in the Netherlands, Aug. 13, 1596, and at sixteen, a very usual age, entered the society of the Jesuits, and soon became distinguished as a teacher, both in the Netherlands, and in other countries. What entitles him to notice here, is the share he had in that voluminous work, the “Lives of the Saints,” or “Acta Sanctorum.” The history of this work is not uninteresting, although the work itself, otherwise than for occasional consultation, defies time and patience. The design of this vast collection was first projected by father Hesibert Koseweide, a Jesuit of the age of sixty, and consequently too far advanced to execute much of his plan, winch was to extend no farther than eighteen volumes folio, a trifle in those days, had he begun earlier. In 1607, however, he began by printing the manuscript lives of some saints, which he happened to find in the Netherlands; but death put an end to his labours in 1629. It was then entrusted to Bollandus, who was about this time thirty-four years of age, and who removed to Antwerp for the purpose. After examining Roseweide’s collections, he established a general correspondence over all Europe, instructing his friends to search every library, register, or repository of any kind, where information might be found; but becoming soon sensible of the weight of his undertaking, he called in the assistance of another Jesuit, Henschemus of Gueiderland, younger than himself, more healthy, and equally qualified in other respects. With this aid he was enabled in 1641 to publish the tirst two volumes, folio, which contain the lives of the saints of the month of January, the order of the Kalendar having been preferred. Jn 1658 he published those of February; and two years after, his labours still entreasmg, he had another associate, father Daniel Paperbroch, at that time about thirty-two years old, whom he sent with Henschenius to Italy and France to collect manuscripts, but he died before the publication of another volume, Sept. 12, 1665. After his death the work was continued by various hands, called Bollandists, until it amounted to forty-two folio volumes, the last published 1753, which, after all, bring down the lives only to the fourteenth of September. In such an undertaking, much legendary matter must be expected, and many absurdities and fictions. Dupiri allows that Bollandus was more partial to popular traditions than Henschemus and Paperbroch, yet it would appear that they found it difficult to please the taste of the different orders of monks, &c. who were to be edified by the work. Bollandus published separately: 1. “Vita S. Liborii Episcopi,” Antwerp, 1648, 8vo. 2. “Brevis Notitia Italiae,” ibid. 1648. 3. “Breves Notitice triplici status, Ecclesiastici, Monastici et Saecularis,” ibid. 1648.

He returned to France, and applied himself to the Protestants; first at Paris, afterwards at Orleans. He shewed a great desire to be promoted to the ministry, and to be reconciled to the church of Geneva; but the persecution that arose against the Protestants, made him resolve to take up his first religion, and the practice of physic. He went and settled at Autun, and prostituted his wife to the canons of that place; and to ingratiate himself the more with the Papists, exerted a most flaming zeal against the reformed. He changed his habitation often: he lived at Lyons in 1582, as appears by the title of a book, which he caused to be printed then at Paris against Beza, and died there in the same year. The book just mentioned is entitled “The history of the life, doctrine, and behaviour of Theodorus Beza, called the spectable and great minister of Geneva.” This was preceded by the “History of the life, actions, doctrine, constancy, and death of John Calvin, heretofore minister of Geneva,” which was printed at Lyons, in 1577. Both these histories are altogether unworthy of credit, as well because they are written by an author full of resentment, as because they contain facts notoriously false.

He died at Rome the 20th of October, according to Bertolot, or the 28th of that month, according to Moroti, in 1674, being seventy-four years of age. He directed himself, that he should be interred in the monastery of his own order, called St. Bernard at the Baths, with the following inscription upon his tomb: “D. O. M. Joannes Bona Pedemontanus, Congreg. Sancti Bernardi Monachus et hujus ecclesiae translate hue titulo S. Salvatoris in Lauro, Primus Presbyter Cardinalis, vivens sibi posuit.” Baillet, Labbe, and Sallo, bestow high praises on his principal work, “De Divina Psalmodia, deque variis ritibus omnium ecclesiarum in psallendis Divinis Officiis,” Rome, 1663, 4to, which includes a complete history of church music, and lias been often celebrated and quoted by musical writers. Yet Dr. Burney, an authority of great importance in questions of this kind, informs us that he was constantly disappointed when he had recourse to it for information, as the author “never mounts to the origin of any use that has been made of music in the church, or acquaints us in what it consisted,” and appears to have profited very little by the information which at that time must have been within his reach. His other distinguished work was “Rerum Liturgicarum, Lib. duo,” Rome, 1671, fol. and often reprinted. The best edition is that by Sala, printed at Turin, in 3 vols. 4to, 1747 1753. In 1755 Sala added another volume of Bona’s select epistles with those of his correspondents. The rest of his works are of the ascetic kind. He carried on a controversy for some time with Mabillon concerning the consecration of leavened or unleavened bread.

, called sometimes Bolognese, from the place of his birth, flourished in the sixteenth century, and is better known as an engraver than as a painter. He is supposed, but without sufficient authority, to have been a scholar of Sabbatini. Some remaining oil-pictures of his, on canvas, which are, in general, weak, and of different styles, make it probable, says Lanzi, that he resolved to be a painter when he had passed youth. There is, however, in the church of St. Stephano, in Bologna, a Purgatory of his, which has great beauties, and is suspected to have been done with the assistance of Sabbatini. As an engraver, he worked from the pictures of Raphael, Julio Romano, and other great masters; and occasionally from his own designs. Mr. Strutt’s opinion is, that excepting one or two subjects, in which he called in the assistance of the point (the use of which, however, he never well understood), his plates are executed chiefly with the graver, in a manner though much varied from that of his tutor, Marc Antonio Raimondi, yet evidently founded upon it, although neither so firm, clear, or masterly. His drawing is often heavy, and the extremities of his figures frequently neglected; the folds of his draperies are seldom well expressed, and the back grounds to his prints, especially his landscapes, are extremely flat and stiff. However, with all these faults (which are not always equally conspicuous), his best prints possess an uncommon share of merit; and though not equal to those of his master, are deservedly held in no small degree of estimation by the greatest collectors. Bonasone has lately found an ingenious and able advocate in George Cumberland, esq. who, in 1793, published “Some Anecdotes” of his life, with a catalogue of his engravings, &c.

, LL. D. was the son of Dennis Bond, esq. of Dorchester, a violent adherent of the republican party in the seventeenth century, and at whose death, a little before that of the protector, the wits said Oliver Cromwell had given the devil Bond for his appearance. Our author was educated under John White, commonly called the patriarch of Dorchester, and was afterwards entered, not of St. John’s college, Cambridge, as Wood reports, but of Catherine-hall, of which he was afterwards chosen fellow, and took the degree of B. A. in 163 1, commenced M. A. in 1635, was nominated LL. D. in 1645, and completed the year following, while he was yet a member of that society. But, although he took his doctor’s degree in law, he was by profession a divine, and had before this preached for some years, first as a lecturer in Exeter, and frequently afterwards before the long parliament at Westminster. In 1643, both he and his tutor, Mr. White, were chosen of the assembly of divines; and when Mr. White took the rectory of Lambeth, Dr. Bond succeeded him as minister of the Savoy, and on Dec. 11, 1645, hfc was made master of the Savoy hospital under the great seal. On the decease of Dr. Eden, master of Trinity-hall, Cambridge, the fellows made choice of the celebrated Selden, and the choice was confirmed by parliament, but he declining the office, Dr. Bond was chosen, chiefly by the authority or interference of parliament, March, 1646. In 1649 he was chosen law professor of Gresham college, and in 1654 was made assistant to the commissioners of Middlesex and Wesminster, for the ejection of scandalous and ignorant ministers; and in 1658 served as vice-chancellor of Cambridge. He held his mastership and law professorship until the restoration, when he was ejected from both for his adherence to the politics by which he had obtained them. He then retired into Dorsetshire, and died at Sandwich in the isle of Purbeck, July 1676. Wood, who has committed several mistakes in his life, corrected by Dr. Ward, gives a list of his works, which are few: 1. “A Door of Hope,” Lond. 1641, 4to. 2. “Holy and Loyal Activity,” Lond. 1641, 4to, and some sermons preached before the long parliament, to whose measures he adhered with great zeal. He appears, however, to have been a man of real learning. Calamy, we know not why, has mentioned his name, without one word of life.

, or Bonifazio, called Veneziano, whom Ridolfi believes to have been a scholar of Palma, but Boschini numbers among the disciples of Titian, and says he followed him as the shadow the body. He is, indeed, often his close imitator, but oftener has a character of his own, a free and creative genius, unborrowed elegance and spirit. The public offices at Venice abound in pictures all his own, and the ducal palace, amongst others, possesses an Expulsion of the Publicans from the Temple, which for copiousness of composition, colour, admirable perspective, might be alone sufficient to make his name immortal, had his own times and record not placed him with Titian and Palma. Lanzi ascribes ta Bonifazio, what he styles the celebrated pictures from the Triumphs of Petrarch, once at Naples in a private collection, and now, he says, in England; it matters little, says Mr. Fuseli, where they are: of powers, such as he ascribes to Bonifazio, those meagre, dry, and worse than Peruginesque performances, can never be the produce. He died in 1553, aged sixty-two.

Upon queen Elizabeth’s accession, Bonner went to meet her at Highgate, with the rest of the bishops; but she looked on him as a man stained with blood, and therefore would shew him no mark of her favour. For some months, however, he remained unmolested; but being called before the privy council on the 30th of May 1359, he refused to take the oath of allegiance and supremacy: for which reason only, as it appears, he was deprived a second time of his bishopric the 29th of June following, and committed to the Marshalsea. After having lived in confinement some years, he died September 5, 1569, and three days after he was buried at midnight, in St. George’s churchyard, Southwark, to prevent any disturbances that might have been made by the citizens, who hated him extremely. He had stood excommunicated several years, and might have been denied Christian burial; but of this no advantage was taken. As to his character, he was a violent, furious, and passionate man, and extremely cruel in his nature; in his person he was very fat and corpulent, the consequence of excessive gluttony, to which he was much addicted. He was a great master of the canon law, being excelled in that faculty by very few of his time, and well skilled in politics, but understood little of divinity. Several pieces were published under his name, of which the following is a list 1. Preface to the Oration of Stephen Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, concerning true Obedience. Printed at London, in Latin, 1534, 1535, and at Hamburgh in 1536, 8vo. Translated into English by Mi-, chael Wood, a zealous Protestant, with a bitter preface to the reader, and a postscript, Roan, 1553, 8vo. It is also inserted in J. Fox’s book of Martyrs. In the preface Bonner speaks much in favour of king Henry the VHIth’s marriage with Ann Boleyn, and against the tyranny exercised by the bishop of Rome in this kingdom. 2. Several letters to the lord Cromwell. 3. A declaration to lord Cromwell, describing to him the evil behaviour of Stephen (bishop of Winchester), with special causes therein contained, wherefore and why he misliked of him. 4. Letter of his about the proceedings at Rome concerning the king’s divorce from Catherine of Arragon. 5. An admonition and advertisement given by the bishop of London to all readers of the Bible in the English tongue. 6. Injunctions given by Bonner, bishop of London, to his clergy (about preaching, with the names of books prohibited). 7. Letter to Mr. Lechmere. 8. Responsum & exhortatio, Lond. 1553, 8vo. Answer and exhortation to the clergy in praise of priesthood: spoken by the author in St. Paul’s cathedral, the 16th October, 1553, after a sermon preached before the clergy, by John Harpesfield. 9. A letter to Mr. Lechmere, 6th September, 1553. 10. Articles to be enquired of in the general visitation of Edmund bishop of London, exercised by him in 1554, in the city and diocese of London, &c. To ridicule them, John Bale, bishop of Ossory, wrote a book, entitled, A declaration of Edmund Bonner’s articles, concerning the clergy of London diocese, whereby that execrable anti-christ is in his right colours revealed, 1554, and 1561, 8vo. 11. A profitable and necessary doctrine, containing an exposition on the Creed, seven Sacraments, ten Commandments, the Pater Noster, Ave Maria, with certain homilies adjoining thereto, for the instruction and information of the diocese of London, Lond. 1554-5, 4to. This book was drawn up by his chaplains John Harpesfield and Henry Pendleton; the former part of it, which is catechism, is mostly taken out of the Institution of a Christian man, set out by king Henry VIII. only varied in some points. 12. Several letters, declarations, arguings, disputes, &c. of his are extant in John Fox’s book of Martyrs, vol. last. 13. His objections against the process of Robert Horn, bishop of Winchester, who had tendered the oath of supremacy to him a second time, are preserved by Mr. Strype in his Annals of the Reformation. The character of bishop Bonner is so familiar to our readers as to require little illustration, or any addition to the preceding account from the former edition of this Dictionary; yet some notice may be taken of the defence set up by the Roman Catholic historians. Dodd, alluding to his cruelties, says, that “Seeing he proceeded according to the statutes then in force, and by the direction of the legislative power, he stands in need of no apology on that score.” But the history of the times proves that Bonner’s character cannot be protected by a reference to the statutes, unless his vindicator can likewise prove that he had no hand in enacting those statutes; and even if this were conceded, his conduct will not appear less atrocious, because, not content with the sentence of the law carried into execution by the accustomed officers, Bonner took frequent opportunities to manifest the cruelty of his disposition by anticipating, or aggravating, the legal punishments. He sometimes whipped the prisoners with his own hands, till he was tired with the violence of the exercise; and on one occasion he tore out the beard of a weaver who refused to relinquish his religion; and that he might give him a specimen of burning, he held his hand to a candle, till the sinews and veins shrunk and burst . The fact is, that Bonner was constitutionally cruel, and delighted in the sufferings he inflicted. Granger very justly says, that “Nature seems to have designed him for an executioner,” and as, wherever he could, he performed the character, how can he be defended by an appeal to the statutes? The most remarkable circumstance in his history is the lenity shown to him after all this bloody career. There seems no reason to think that he would have even been deprived of his bishopric, had he consented to take the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, a circumstance which is surely very extraordinary. His compliance, had he taken, that step, could have been only hypocritical, and what an object it would have been to have seen the duties and power of a protestant prelate intrusted to such a monster, and in that diocese, where so many families preserved the bitter remembrance of his cruelty.

, professor in medicine at the university of Leyden in the latter part of the sixteenth century, was a man of profound erudition, and critically versed in the Greek language. He was born at Ryswick, a small village of Guelderland, and died at Leyden, Sept. 15, 1599, sixty-three years old. Bontius is the inventor of a composition of pills, which, from his name, are called Pilulæ tartareæ Bontii. The Dutch for a long time kept this composition a secret; but they have been analysed by the industry of some physicians, and the ingredients are now well known. He wrote some commentaries on Hippocrates, but published no part of them. He left two sons, both eminent in the medical art, James and Reyner.

, called by some, John, a native of Leyden, was educated in philosophy and medicine under his father, Gerard; and being sent to the East Indies, practised physic at Batavia about the middle of the seventeenth century. On his return to Europe he wrote several valuable works on the diseases and practice of medicine of India, These are, “De conservanda Valetudine, ac dieta sanis in India observandis;” “Methodus modendi, qua oportet in India orientali uti;” “Observationes selectse ex dissectione cadaverum ac autopsia descriptae.” He also published curious observations relating to the botany and natural history of those regions, especially the vegetables used in medicine and diet, in his work entitled “De Medicina Indorum,” in 1642, and afterwards, with Alpinus’s work, “De Medicina Ægyptiorum,” 1718, 4to. He also published “Historia Nat. et Med. Indise orientalis,” 1658, fol. His brother Reyner was many years professor of medicine at Leyden, and rector of the university. He died in 1623.

, a pious and popular dissenting minister of the Baptist persuasion, was born at Blackwell in Derbyshire, May 20, 1734, of poor parents, who were unable to give him any education. He spent a considerable part of his youth in the farming business, and that of the stocking frame, but appears to have during this time read much, and at length began to preach among the sect called the general baptists, throughout the towns and villages in his neighbourhood. In his twenty-third year he married; and this producing a numerous family, he opened a school at Button-Ash field. At this time he held the doctrine of universal redemption, and disliked predestination to such a degree as to ridicule it in a poem (of which he was afterwards ashamed), but he now changed his sentiments and became a zealous Calvinist in that and othei points supposed to constitute the Calvinistic system. The consequence of this change was, an avowal and defence of his new opinions in his first publication, “The Reign of Grace,” in which he was encouraged hy the late rev. Henry Venn, vicar of Huddersfield, who wrote a recommendatory preface to it. It appeared in 1768, and led to a new and important aera in his life, being so much approved by the congregation of particular baptists in Prescot-street, Goodman’s fields, whose pastor was just dead, that they invited Mr. Booth to succeed him. This invitation he accepted, and in Feb. 1769, took possession of his pulpit, after being regularly ordained for the first time. Here he appears for some years to have spent what time he could spare from his public labours in laying in a stock of knowledge; and although he always lamented the want of a regular education, his proficiency, and the extent of his reading were so great as in some measure to redeem his time, and place him on a footing, both as a scholar, preacher, and writer, with the ablest of his brethren. He knew Greek and Latin usefully, if not critically: the Greek Testament he went through nearly fifty times by the simple expedient of reading one chapter every day. General science and literature, history, civil and ecclesiastical, he investigated with acuteness in the ablest writers, English, French, Dutch, and German; and his works show that he particularly excelled in a knowledge of controversial divinity, and of those arguments, pro and con, which were connected with his opinions as a baptist. After exercising his ministry in Prescot-street for nearly thirty-seven years, he died Monday, Jan. 27, 1806, and his memory was honoured by a tablet and inscription in his meeting-house, recording his virtues and the high respect his congregation entertained for him. Besides the work already mentioned, he published, 1. “The Death of Legal Hope, the Life of Evangelical Obedience,” 1770, 12mo. 2. “The Deity of Jesus Christ essential to the Christian Religion,” a translation from Abbadie, and occasioned by the subscription controversy, 1770. 3. “An Apology for the Baptists in refusing communion at the Lord’s Table to Pscdobaptists,” 1778. 4. “Paedobaptism examined, on the principles, concessions, and reasonings of the most learned Psedobaptists,” 1784, and enlarged 1737, 2 vols. a work which his sect consider as unanswerable. He published also some lesser tracts and occasional sermons.

, a celebrated tragic actor, was born in the county palatine of Lancaster, 1681. At the age of nine years he was put to Westminster school, under the tuition of the famous Dr. Busby, where he soon discovered an excellent genius and capacity. He had a peculiar turn for Latin poetry, and had fixed many of the finest passages of the antients so firmly in his memory, that he could repeat them with such propriety of emphasis, and gracefulness of action, as to charm every body who heard him. Thence it was, that when, according to custom, a Latin play was to be acted, one of the first parts was given to young Booth; who performed it in such a manner as gained him universal applause, and particular respect from the doctor. This first gave him an inclination for the stage. His father intended him for the church: but when Barton reached the age of seventeen, and was about to be sent to the university, he stole away from school, and went over to Ireland in 1698, with Mr. Ashbury, master of the company. Here he was soon distinguished greatly by his theatrical abilities, especially in tragedy, for which he seemed to be formed by nature; for he had a grave countenance and a good person, with a fine voice and a manly action. When he had been three seasons in Dublin, in which time he had acquired a great reputation, he resolved to return to England; which he accordingly did in 1701, and was recommended to Mr. Betterton, who behaved to him with great civility, and took him into his company. The first character in which he appeared on the English stage, was that of Maximus, in the tragedy of Valentinian; and it was scarce possible for a young actor to meet with a better reception. The Ambitious Stepmother coming on soon after, he performed the part of Artaban, which added considerably to the reputation he had acquired, and made him esteemed one of the first actors. Nor was his fame less in all the succeeding characters which he attempted; but he shone with greatest lustre in the tragedy of Cato, which was brought on the stage in 1712. “Although Cato (says Mr. Cibber) seems plainly written upon what are called whig principles, yet the tories at that time had sense enough not to take it as the least reflection on their administration; but, on the contrary, seemed to brandish and vaunt their approbation of every sentiment in favour of liberty, which, by a public act of their generosity, was carried so high, that one day while the play was acting, they collected 50 guineas in the boxes, and made a present of them to Booth, with this compliment For his honest opposition to a perpetual dictator, and his dying so bravely in the cause of liberty.” The reputation to which Booth was now arrived seemed to entitle him to a share in the management of the theatre; but this perhaps his merit would never have procured, had it not been through the favour of lord Bolingbroke, who, in 1713, recalling all former licences, procured a new one, in which Booth’s name was added to those of Gibber, Wilks, and Dogget. Dogget, however, was so much offended at this, that he threw up his share, and would not accept of any consideration for it; but Gibber tells us, he only made this a pretence, and that the true reason of his quitting was his dislike to Wilks, whose humour was become insupportable to him. When Booth came to a share in the management of the house, he was in the thirty-third year of his age, and in the highest reputation as an actor: nor did his fame as a player sink by degrees, as sometimes has happened to those who have been most applauded, but increased every day more and more. The health of Booth, however, beginning to decline, he could not act so often as usual; and hence became more evident the public favour towards him, by the crowded audiences his appearance drew, when the intervals of his distemper permitted him to tread the stage: but his constitution broke now very fast, and he was attacked with a complication of distempers, which carried him off, May 10, 1733.

His character as an actor has been celebrated by some of the best judges. Mr. Aaron Hill, a gentleman, who by the share he had in the management of the play-house, could not but have sufficient opportunities of becoming well acquainted with his merit, has given us a very high character of him. “Two advantages (says this gentleman) distinguished him in the strongest light from the rest of his fraternity; he had learning to understand perfectly whatever it was his part to speak, and judgment to know how far it agreed or disagreed with his character. Hence arose a peculiar grace, which was visible to every spectator, though few were at the pains of examining into the cause of their pleasure. He could soften, and slide over with a kind of elegant negligence, the improprieties in a part he acted; while, on the contrary, he would dwell with energy upon the beauties, as if he everted a latent spirit, which had been kept back for such an occasion, that he might alarm, awaken, and transport in those places only where the dignity of his own good sense could be supported by that of his author. A little reflection upon this remarkable quality will teach us to account for that manifest languor, which has sometimes been observed in his action, and which was generally, though I think falsely, imputed to the natural indolence of his temper. For the same reason, though in the customary rounds of his business he would condescend to some parts in comedy, he seldom appeared in any of them with much advantage to his character. The passions which he found in comedy were not strong enough to excite his fire, and what seemed want of qualification, was only absence of impression. He had a talent at discovering the passions, where they lay hid in some celebrated parts, by the injudicious practice of other actors, which when he had discovered, he soon grew able to express: and his secret for attaining this great lesson of the theatre was an adaption of his look to his voice, by which artful imitation of nature, the variations in the sound of his words gave propriety to every change in his countenance. So that it was Mr. Booth’s peculiar felicity to be heard and seen the same whether as the pleased, the grieved, the pitying, the reproachful, or the angry. One would almost be tempted to borrow the aid of a very bold figure, and, to express this excellence the more significantly, beg permission, to affirm, that the blind might have seen him in his voice, and the deaf have heard him in his visage. His gesture, or, as it is commonly called, his action, was but the result and necessary consequence of his dominion over his voice and countenance; for having, by a concurrence of two such causes, impressed his imagination with such a stamp and spirit of passion, he ever obeyed the impulse by a kind of natural dependency, and relaxed or braced successively into all that fine expressiveness, with which he painted what he spoke without restraint or affectation.”

Besides his professional merit, Booth was a man of letters, and an author in more languages than one. He had a taste for poetry, which discovered itself when he was very young, in translations from several Odes of Horace; and in his riper years, he wrote several songs and other original poems, which were very far from injuring his reputation. He was also the author of a mask or dramatic entertainment called “Dido and JEneas,” that was very well received upon the stage; but his best performance was a Latin inscription to the memory of a celebrated actor, Mr. William Smith, one of the greatest men of his profession, and of whom Mr. Booth always spoke in raptures. This short elogy has much strength, beauty, and elegance. In his private life he had many virtues, and few of the failings so common to his profession. He had no envy in his composition, but readily approved, and as readily rewarded, merit, as it was in his power. He was something rough in his manner, and a little hasty in his temper, but very open and free to speak his sentiments, which he always did with an air of sincerity, that procured him as much credit with people at first sight, as he had with those to whom he had been long known. He was kind to all the players whose circumstances were indifferent, and took care not to make them uneasy, either in point of salary or of usage. He was no great speaker in company, but when he did, it was in a grave lofty way, not unlike his pronunciation on the stage. He had a great veneration for his parents while they were living, and was also very useful to his brother and sister after their decease. Booth was twice married; first in 1704, to Miss Frances Barkham, daughter of sir William Barkham, of Norfolk, bart. who died in 1710, without issue; and secondly, to Mrs. Santlowe, an actress, who. survived him forty years, and in 1772, erected a monument to his memory in Westminster abbey. In 1737 she married Mr. Goodyer,a gentleman of fortune in Essex.

, a celebrated French mathematician and natural philosopher, was born at Dax, in the department of the Landes, May 4, 1733. His mother was Maria Theresa de Lacroix, and his father John Anthony Borda, whose ancestors had acquired considerable distinction in the French army. He began his studies in the college of the Barnabites at Dax, where he gave early indications of his future genius. He was a considerable time after put under the charge of the Jesuits of La Fleche, and by his ardour for study and superior talents, frequently carried off the prizes which were held out as the reward of youthful genius. This induced the Jesuits to endeavour to press him into their order, but his attachment to geometry was too powerful to be weakened by their persuasions. He encountered afterwards a more formidable opposition from his father, who was hostile to the prosecution of what he called unprofitable studies, and endeavoured to please him by proposing to enter into the engineer service of the army, where the objects of his profession would necessarily require a knowledge of geometry and physics. His father, however, having eleven children, and being obliged to support two of his sons who were already in the army, was anxious that Charles should look forward to some situation in the magistracy, which might be obtained without much expence and trouble. To these views Borda reluctantly submitted; but after having thus lost some of the most precious years of his youth, a friar, who was a particular friend of his father, obtained, by earnest solicitation, that he should be allowed to devote himself to his favourite science; and, every restraint being now removed, he was in 1753, when only twenty years of age, introduced to D'Alembert, who advised him to remain in the capital, and look forward to a situation in the academy. Borda accordingly entered the light horse, and continuing his mathematical studies, he became professor to his comrades.

In 1756, he laid before the academy a memoir on the motion of projectiles, which was particularly mentioned in the history of its proceedings; and in the same year he was appointed an associate of the academy. In the following year he was called into active service, and was present at the battle of Hastembeck, July 26, 1757, as aid-de-camp to M. de Maillebois. He willingly returned, however, from a species of duty which interrupted the progress of his studies; and, upon his arrival at Paris, he became a candidate for a situation in the engineer service: and such was the estimation in which his talents were held, that he was received without examination, and immediately employed as an inspector of the dock-yards. This new appointment was highly favourable for calling into action the peculiar talents of Borda. It inspired him with a fondness for every thing that related to the naval service: and, what seldom happens to the man of genius, he found himself in a situation in which he was led both by his profession and by his inclination to the same line of study.

, or as he styles himself in Latin, Andreas Perforatus, was a very singular character, and the reputation he acquired among his contemporaries must be considered in a great measure as a proof of the ignorance and credulity of the times. He was born at Pevensey in Sussex about 1500, and was educated at Oxford; but before he had taken a degree, entered among the Carthusians in or near London. He afterwards left them, and studied physic at Oxford; and then travelled over most parts of Europe and Africa. On his return he settled at Winchester, where he practised physic with considerable reputation, and in this capacity he is said to have served Henry VIII. In 1541 and 1542 he was at Montpellier, where he probably took the degree of doctor, in which he was soon after incorporated at Oxford. He lived then for some time at Pevensey, and afterwards returned to Winchester, still observing all the austerities of the order to which he formerly belonged; though he has been accused of many irregularities. It is certain that his character was very odd and whimsical, as appears from the books he wrote; yet he is said to have been a man of great wit and learning, and an “especial physician.” That he was not of consequence eminent enough to rank with the first of his profession, may be inferred from his dying insolvent in the Fleet, April 1549. Bale intimates that he hastened his end by poison on the discovery of his keeping a brothel for his brother bachelors. His works are very various in their subjects; one of the most considerable is intituled, “A book of the introduction of knowledge,” black letter, imprinted by William Coplande, without date. He there professes to teach all languages, the customs and fashions of all countries, and the value of every species of coin. This is a motley piece, partly in verse and partly in prose; and is divided into thirty-nine chapters, before each of which is a wooden cut, representing a man in the habit of some particular country. His well known satire on the Englishman, who, to express the inconstancy and mutability of his fashions, is drawn naked with a cloth and a pair of sheers in his hand, is borrowed from the Venetians, who characterised the French in that manner. Before the 7th chapter is the effigies of the author, under a canopy, with a gown, a laurel on his head, and a book before him. The title of this chapter shews how the author dwelt in Scotland and other islands, and went through and round about Christendom. An edition of this singular work was printed in London in 1542. His “Breviary of Health,” which is a very trifling, coarse, and weak performance, was published in 1.547, and is supposed by Fuller to be the first medical piece written in English. As a specimen of the style, take what follows, which is the beginning of the Prologue, addressed to physicians: “Egregious doctors and maisters of the eximious and arcane science of physicke, of your urbanity exasperate not yourselves against me for making this little volume.” This work, with a second part called the “Extravagants,” was reprinted in 4to, 1575. He was also author of the following; “Compendyouse Regimente, or Dietary of Healthe made in Mounte Pyllor,” an edition of which was printed several years after his death, in 1562. A famous jest book called the “Merrye tales of the madmen of Gotham;” “The historye of the miller of Abingdon and the Cambridge scholars,” the same with that related by Chaucer in his Canterbury Tales; a book of “Prognostics,” and another of Urines, &c. It is said that the phrase “Merry Andrew” is derived from him.

, son to the preceding, was born Feb. 22, 1722, at Iseste in the valley of Ossan inBearn, and at the age of twenty, for his degree of bachelor in the university of Montpellier, where he was then a student, he held a thesis “De sensu generice considerate,” which contains the ground-work of all the publications he afterwards gave. Such early knowledge determined his professors to dispense with several acts usual before admission to practice. In> 1743, he was created M. D. at Montpellier, and two years after succeeded his father, as inspector of the mineral waters, and professor of anatomy. In 1747, he was made corresponding member of the royal academy of Sciences at Paris, whither he soon after went, and where he acquired great reputation. Having taken out his licence in that city in 1754, he was appointed physician to the hopital de la charite. He died of an apoplexy, Nov. 24, 1776. A deep melancholy, occasioned by the flying gout, was the fore-runner of his end. He was found dead in his bed. One of the faculty, jealous of his fame, and who had tried to ruin him by a prosecution, said on the occasion: “I should never have thought he would have died in a horizontal position.” But a witty lady retorted by observing “that death was so much afraid of him, that he was obliged to catch him napping.” The facility with which he exercised his profession, his reluctance to give medicines, and his great confidence in nature, sometimes drew upon him the reproach that he had not much faith in medicine; but his doubts were so much the less blameable, as he was continually occupied in rendering the resources of his art more certain. He never disputed at all towards the latter end of his life, because probably he had disputed much to no purpose in his youth. Nobody knew better how to doubt, and he had little confidence in his own knowledge, and trusted with difficulty to that of others. Seeing the great number of courses of lectures in all branches of science, advertised every day, he observed once to a friend: “Will no one ever give a course of good sense?” As he expressed himself at times with rather too much acerbity on the merits of others, some of his professional brethren have called his own into question. His works, however, sufficiently attest his abilities. The principal are, 1. “Chylificationis historia,” 1742, reprinted at Paris, 1752, 12mo. with his “Recherches sur les Glandes.” He thought he observed a duct passing from the thyroid gland to the trachaea; an opinion which he repeats in another of his works, but without sufficient ground. 3. “Dissertatio physiologica de sensu generice considerate,” Monspelii, 1743, 8 vo; Paris, 1751, with his “Chylificationis historia.” 4. “Lettres contenant des essais sur l'histoire des Eaux minerales du Beam, &c. 1746, 12mo.” In these he treats of the properties of the waters, and of the geography of Beam. 5. “Recherches anatomiques sur la position des Glandes, et sur leur actions,” Paris, 1751, 8vo. 6. “Recherches sur le pouls par raport aux crises,” Paris, 1756, 12mo; in which he has gone much beyond Solano in his discrimination of pulses, and beyond what can be followed in practice. 7. “Recherches sur le tissu mnqueux, et l'organecellulaire,” Paris, 1766, 12mo. Haller accuses him of disingenuity in attributing to himself the discovery of some properties of the cellular membrane, which had been before described by him and others, but allows the work to have, on the whole, considerable merit.

, a celebrated philosopher and mathematician, was born at Naples the 28th of January, 1608. He was professor of philosophy and mathematics in some of the most celebrated universities of Italy, particularly at Florence and Pisa, where he became highly in favour with the princes of the house of Medici. But having been concerned in the revolt of Messina, he was obliged to retire to Rome, where he spent the remainder of his life under the protection of Christina queen of Sweden, who honoured him with her friendship, and by her liberality towards him softened the rigour of his hard fortune. He continued two years in the convent of the regular clergy of St. Pantaleon, called the Pious Schools, where he instructed the youth in mathematical studies. And thi’s study he prosecuted with great diligence for many years afterward, as appears by his correspondence with several ingenious mathematicians of his time, and the frequent mention that has been made of him by others, who have endeavoured to do justice to his memory. He wrote a letter to Mr. John Collins, in which he discovers his great desire and endeavours to promote the improvement of those sciences: he also speaks of his correspondence with, and great affection for, Mr. Henry Oldenburgh, secretary of the royal society; of Dr. Wallis; of the then late learned Mr. Boyle, and lamented the loss sustained by his death to the commonwealth of learning. Mr. Baxter, in his “Enquiry into the Nature of the Human Soul 3” makes frequent use of our author’s book “De Motu Animalium,” and tells us, that he was the first who discovered that the force exerted within the body prodigiously exceeds the weight to be moved without, or that nature employs an immense power to move a small weight. But he acknowledges that Dr. James Keil had shewn that Borelli was mistaken in his calculation of the force of the muscle of the heart; but that he nevertheless ranks him with the most authentic writers, and says he is seldom mistaken: and, having remarked that it is so far from being true, that great things are brought about by small powers, on the contrary, a stupendous power is manifest in the most ordinary operations of nature, he observes that the ingenious Borelli first remarked this in animal motion; and that Dr. Stephen Hales, by a course of experiments in his “Vegetable Statics,” had shewn the same in the force of the ascending sap in vegetables. After a course of unceasing labours, Borelli died at Pantaleon of a pleurisy, the 31st of December 1679, at 72 years of age, leaving the following works: 1. “Delle cagioni dellefebri maligni,” 1649, 12mo. 2. “Euclides restitutus,” &c. Pisa, 1658, 4to. 3. “Apollonii Pergaei conicorum, libri v. vi. & vii. paraphraste Abalphato Aspahanensi nunc primum editi,” &c. Floren. 1661, fol. 4. “Theoriæ Medicorum Planetarum ex causis physicis deductae,” Flor. 1666, 4to. 5. “De Vi Percussionis,” Bologna, 1667, 4to. This piece was reprinted, with his famous treatise “De Motu Animalium,” and that “De Motionibus Naturalibus,” in 1686. 6. “Osservazione intorno alia virtu ineguali degli occhi.” This piece was inserted in the Journal of Rome for the year 1669. 7. “De motionibus naturalibus e gravitate pemlentibus,” Regio Julio, 1670, 4to. 8. “Meteorologia Ætnea,” &c. Regio Julio, 1670, 4to. 9. “Osservazione dell' ecclissi lunare, fatta in Roma,” 1675. Inserted in the Journal of Rome, 1675, p. 34. 10. “Elementaconica Apollonii Pergoei et Archimedis opera nova et breviori methodo demonstrata,” Rome, 1679, 12mo, at the end of the 3d edition, of his Euclides restitutus. 11. “De Motu Animaiium: pars prima, et pars altera,” Romae, 1681, 4to. This was reprinted at Leyden, revised and corrected; to which was added John Bernouilli’s mathematical meditations concerning the motion of the muscles. “12. At Leyden, 1686, in 4to, a more correct and accurate edition, revised by J. Broen, M. D. of Leyden, of his two pieces” De vi percussionis, et de motionibus de gravitate pendentibus,“&c. 13.” De renum usu judicium:“this had been published with Bellini’s book” De structura renum," at Strasburgh, 1664, 8vo.

In 1788 he published his “Vindication of the rights of the Holy See on the kingdom of Naples,” 4to, a work now of little importance, and relating to a dispute which will probably never be revived. On the 30th of March, 1789, he was promoted to the rank of cardinal, and about the same time was appointed prefect of the congregation of the Index; and, what was more analogous to his pursuits, he held the same office in the Propaganda, and in the congregation for the correction of the books of the oriental churches. After these promotions, he continued to be the liberal patron of all who had any connection either with his offices or with his literary pursuits, until Italy was inTaded by the French, when, like the greater part of his colleagues, he was involved in losses and dangers, both with respect to his fortune and to his pursuits. He forfeited all his benefices, and was near witnessing the destruction of all the establishments committed to his care, especially the Propaganda. He was soon, however, extricated from his personal difficulties; and, by his timely measures, the invaluable literary treasures of the Propaganda were also saved. He was allowed a liberal pension from the court of Denmark, and he soon obtained the removal of the establishment of the Propaganda to Padua, a city which, being then under the dominion of the emperor <?f Germany, was thought to be sheltered from robbery. Here he remained till the death of pope Pius VI. after which he repaired, with his colleagues, to Venice, to attend the conclave; and, a new pope being elected, he returned to Rome. When the coronation of the emperor of France was ordered, cardinal Borgia was one of those individuals who were selected by the pope as the companions of his intended journey to Paris, but having caught a, violent cold on his way, he died at Lyons, Nov. 23, 1804. Cardinal Stephen Borgia was not much favoured by nature with respect to person. He was so clumsy, and his motions so much embarrassed, as to have little of the appearance of a person of birth and rank. He was far, also, from being nice in his house or equipage. These little defects, however, were compensated by the superior qualities of his mind. From, the time of Alexander Albani, no Roman cardinal had so many distinguished connections and correspondents in every part of Europe: and a great similarity (elegance of manners excepted) was remarked between the character of that illustrious prelate and his own. The Borgian ms. so called by Michaelis, is a fragment of a Coptic-Greek manuscript, brought by a monk from Egypt, consisting of about twelve leaves, and sent to cardinal Borgia. The whole of it is printed in “Georgii Fragmentum Graeco-Copto-Thebaicum,” Rome, 1789, 4to.

, a painter and engraver, was born at Rome, in 1630, and learned design from Giulio Borgianni his brother; but improved himself by studying the capital performances of the ancient and modern artists, which he was enabled to contemplate every day in his native city. Having had an offer from a nobleman, of travelling with him in a tour through Europe, he willingly accepted it, from a desire of being acquainted with the different customs and manners of different nations. But his progress was stopped by his falling in love with a young woman in Spain, to whom he was afterwards married; and finding his circumstances reduced to a narrow compass, he applied himself to his profession with double diligence, to procure a comfortable support. His endeavours were soon successful; and he was happy enough to find many friends, admirers, and employers, and was accounted one of the best painters in Spain. After the death of his wife, having then no attachment to that country, he returned to Rome, and painted some historical subjects larger than life; but the figures being above his accustomed size, shewed a want of correctness in several of the, members, which made his pictures not quite acceptable to the refined taste of the Roman school. He was, however, engaged in some great works for the chapels and convents, and also to paint portraits, by which he acquired honour, and lived in affluence. He died in 1681, of a broken heart, in consequence of the ill treatment he received, through the envy and villainy of one Celio, a painter, who proved a most malicious competitor, and to whom he had been often preferred, by the best judges of painting at Rome; but he died lamented and pitied by every worthy man of his profession. As an engraver, he is probably best known to many of our readers, for his engravings of the Bible histories, which were painted by Raphael in the Vatican, commonly called “Raphael’s Bible,” small plates, length-ways, dated 1615, which are very slight, and seem to be the hasty productions of his point. Mr. Strutt says, that his most finished etching is “a dead Christ,” a small square plate, the figure greatly foreshortened, and behind appear the two Mary’s and St. John, who is kissing one of the hands of our Saviour. His etchings are, in general, in a bold, free manner, and more finished than usual, when considered as the works of a painter, but in some the drawing is not correct.

During his residence in Bohemia, his active disposition induced him to seek for opportunities of extending knowledge, and of being useful to the world. He took a part in the work, entitled “Portraits of the learned men and artists of Bohemia and Moravia.” He was likewise concerned in the “Literary transactions, or Acta Litteraria, of Bohemia and Moravia,” and the editor of the latter pubr licly acknowledges in the preface, how much Bohemian literature is indebted to him. Prague and Vienna were both without a public cabinet for the use of the students: it was at his instigation that government was induced tq form one, which he assisted by his contributions and his labours. In 1775, he laid the foundation of a literary society, which published several volumes under the title of “Memoirs of a private Society in Bohemia.” His fame reaching the empress Mary Theresa, in 1776, she called him to Vienna to arrange and describe the Imperial collection, and about two years after, he published the splendid work containing the Conchology: in the execution of which he had some assistance. The empress defrayed the expences for a certain number of copies. On the death of this patron the work was discontinued, her successor, the femperor Joseph, not favouring the undertaking. He had likewise the honour of instructing the arch-duchess Maria Anna in natural history, who was partial to this entertaining study; and he formed and arranged for her a neat museum. In 1779, he was raised to the office of actual counsellor of the court-chamber, in the department of the tnines and mint. This office detained him constantly in Vienna, and engaged the chief part of his time.

His free and active genius led him to interest himself in all the occurrences of the times, and to take an active part in all the institutions and plans which professed to enlighten and reform mankind. With these benevolent intentions he formed connexions with the free-masons, whose views in this part of the world occasioned the laws and regulations made against masonry by the emperor Joseph. Under Theresa, this order was obliged to keep itself very secret in Austria; but Joseph, on his coming to the throne, tolerated it, and the baron founded in the Austrian metropolis, a lodge called the “True Concord,” a society of learned men, whose lodge was a place of rendezvous for the literati of the capital. The obstacles these gentlemen found, to the progress of science and useful knowledge, had the tendency to draw their attention to political subjects; and subjects were really discussed here which the church had forbidden to be spoken of, and to which the government was equally averse. At their meetings, dissertations on some subject of history, ethics, or moral philosophy, were read by the members; and commonly something on the history of ancient and modern mysteries and secret societies. These were afterward published in the Diary for Free-masons, for the use of the initiated, and not for public sale. In the winter they met occasionally, and held more public discourses, to which the members of the other lodges were allowed access. Aa most of the learned of Vienna belonged to this lodge, it was very natural to suppose, that many of the dissertations read here, were not quite within the limits of the original plan of the society. It was these dissertations which gave rise to another periodical work, which was continued for some time by the baron, and his brother masons. He was, likewise active in extirpating what he reckoned superstitions of various kinds, which had crept into the other lodges, and equally zealous in giving to these societies such an organization, as might render them useful to the public.

Borrichius died rich, and made a most liberal use of his money. After satisfying his relations (who were all collateral, as he had no family) with bequests to the amount of fifty thousand crowns, he left twenty-six thousand crowns to found a college for poor students, consisting of a house, completely furnished for sixteen students, with library, chemical laboratory, garden, &c. to be called the Medicean college. His principal medical productions consist of observations published in the Acta Haffniensia, and other similar collections, and of the letters sent by him while on his travels, to F. Bartholine, under whom he had been educated. The letters are the most valuable of those published by Bartholine in his “Epistolas Medicse;” but the works by which he acquired his principal celebrity, were “De ortu et progressu Chemise,” published in 1668, 4to; and his “Hermetis Ægyptiorum et Chemicorum sapientia, ab H. Conringio vindicata,” 1674. In this very learned and elaborate work, the author defends the character of the ancient Egyptians against the strictures of Conringius: attributing to them the invention and perfection of chemistry, and even of alchemy; persuading himself that among their secrets they possessed the art of transmuting metals. But either from infatuation, or a desire of victory, he cites several manuscripts, since known to be spurious, as genuine, and some written since the time of our Saviour, as of much higher antiquity. He shews, however, from undoubted authority, that the Egyptians were early acquainted with the medical properties of several of their plants; that they used saline, and even mineral preparations, some of them prepared by chemistry; that incubation, or the method of hatching eggs by artificial beat, was first used by them; in fine, that the art of medicine, invented by them, passed from them to the Grecians. Borrichius was also author of “Conspectus prcestantiorum scriptorum linguæ Latinæ;” 1698, 4to; “Cogitationes de variis linguae Latinas cetatibus,” 1675, 4to; “Analecta philologica, et judicium de lexicis Latinis Graecisque,” 1682, 4to; and various other philological works.

, an English miscellaneous writer, and poet of considerable merit, was nephew to the preced ng, being the younger son of general George Boscawen, third son of lord Falmouth. He was born August 28, 1752, and was sent to Eton school before he was seven years old, where he obtained the particular notice and favour of the celebrated Dr. Barnard. From school he was removed to Oxford, where he became a gentleman commoner of Exeter college, but left it, as is not unusual with gentlemen intended for the law, without taking a degree. He then studied the law, as a member of the Middle Temple, and the practice of special pleading under Mr. (afterwards judge) Buller: was called to the bar, and for a time went the Western circuit. Nor were his legal studies unfruitful, as he published an excellent work under the title of “A Treatise of Convictions on Penal Statutes; with approved precedents of convictions before justices of the peace, in a variety of cases; particularly under the Game Laws, the Revenue Laws, and the Statutes respecting Manufactures, &c.” 1792, 8vo. He was also appointed one of the commissioners of bankrupts, which situation he held till his death. On Dec. 19, 1785, he was appointed by patent to the situation of a commissioner of the victualling office, in consequence of which, and of his marriage in, April 1786, he soon after quitted the bar. He married Charlotte, second daughter of James Ibbetson, D. D. archdeacon of St. A 1 ban’s, and rector of Bushey. By Mrs. Boscawt'n, who died about seven years before him, he had a numerous family, five of whom, daughters, survived both parents.

, one of the most eminent mathematicians and philosophers of the last century, was born May 11, 17.11, in the city of Ragusa, and studied Latin grammar in the schools of the Jesuits in his native city, where it soon appeared that he was endued with superior talents for the acquisition of learning. In the beginning of his fifteenth year, he had already gone through the grammar classes with applause, and had studied rhetoric for some months, and as it now became necessary to determine on his course of life, having an ardent desire for learning, he thought he could not have a better opportunity of gratifying it, than by entering the society of the Jesuits; and, with the consent of his parents, he petitioned to be, received among them. It was a maxim with the Jesuits to place their most eminent subjects at Rome, as it was of importance for them to make a good figure on that theatre; and as they had formed great expectations from their new pupil, they procured his being called to that city in 1725, where he entered his noviciate with great alacrity. After this noviciate (a space of two years) had passed in the usual probationary exercises, he studied in the schools of rhetoric, became well acquainted with all the classical authors, and cultivated Latin poetry with some taste and zeal.

Father Noceti, another Jesuit, and one of his early preceptors, had composed two excellent poems on the" rainbow and the aurora borealis, which were published in 1747, with learned annotations by Boscovich. His countryman, Benedict Stay, after having published the philosophy of Descartes in Latin verse t attempted the same with regard to the more modern and more true philosophy, and has executed it with wonderful success. The first two volumes of this elegant and accurate work were published in 1755, and 1760, with annotations and supplements by Boscovich. These supplements are short dissertations on the most important parts of physics and mathematics. In these he affords a solution of the problem of the centre of oscillation, to which Huygens had come by a wrong method; confutes Euler, who had imagined that the vis inertiæ was necessary in matter; and refutes the ingenious efforts of Riccati on, the Leibnitzian opinion of the forces called living.

At this time a dispute arose between the little republic of Lucca, and the government of Tuscany, on the subject of draining a lake. A congress of mathematicians was called, and Boscovich repaired to the scene of contention, in order to defend the rights of the petty state. Having waited three months in vain, expecting the commissioners, and amused with repeated hollow promises, he thought it better for the interest of his constituents, to proceed at once to the court of Vienna, which then directed the affairs of Italy. The flames of war had been recently kindled on the continent of Europe, and Boscovich took occasion to celebrate the first successes of the Austrian arms, in a poem, of which the first book was presented to the empress Theresa; but the military genius of Frederic the Great of Prussia soon turned the scale of fortune, and our poet was reduced to silence. More honourably did he employ some leisure in the composition of his immortal work, “Theoria philosophise niituralis reducta ad unicam legem virium in natura existentium,” printed at Vienna, in 1758. This he drew up, it is alledged, in the very short space of thirty days, having collected the materials a considerable time before; yet we must regret the appearance of haste and disorder, which deforms a production of such rare and intrinsic excellence.

At Rome his arrival was welcomed, and he was again consulted on various plans of public improvement. But in the spring of 1764, he was called by the Austrian governor of Milan, to fill the mathematical chair in the university of Pavia. The honours which he received provoked the jealousy of the other professors, who intrigued to undermine his fame. He took tlfe most effectual mode, however, to silence them, by publishing his Dissertations on optics, which exhibit an elegant synthesis and well-devised set of experiments. These essays excited the more attention, as, at this time, the ingenuity of men of science was particularly attracted to the subject, by Dollond’s valuable discovery of achromatic glasses.

The politeness, affability, and insinuating urbanity of manners, which distinguished Mr. Boswell, introduced him into the company of many eminent and learned men, whose acquaintance and friendship he cultivated with the greatest assiduity. In truth, the esteem and approbation of learned men seem to have been one chief object of his literary ambition; and we find him so successful in pursuing his end, that he enumerated some of the greatest men in Scotland among his friends even before he left it for the first time. Notwithstanding Mr. Boswell by his education was intended for the bar, yet he was himself earnestly bent at this period upon obtaining a commission in the guards, and solicited lord Auchinleck’s acquiescence; but returned, however, by his desire, into Scotland, where he received a regular course of instruction in the law, and passed his trials as a civilian at Edinburgh. Still, however, ambitious of displaying himself as one of the “manly hearts who guard the fair,” he visited London a second time in 1762; and, various occurrences delating the purchase of a commission, he was at length persuaded by lord Auchinleck to relinquish his pursuit, and become an advocate at the Scotch bar. In compliance, therefore, with his father’s wishes, he consented to go to Utrecht the ensuing winter, to hear the lectures of an excellent civilian in that university; after which he had permission to make his grand tour of Europe. The year 1763 may be considered the most important epocha in Mr. Boswell’s life, as he had, what he thought a singular felicity, an introduction to Dr. Johnson. This event, so auspicious for Mr. Boswel!, and eventually so fortunate for the public, happened on May 16, 1763. Having continued one winter at Utrecht, during which time he visited several parts of the Netherlands, he commenced his projected travels. Passing from Utrecht into Germany, he pursued his route through Switzerland to Geneva; whence he crossed the Alps into Italy, having visited on his journey Voltaire at Ferney, and Rousseau in the wilds of Neufchatel. Mr. Bosweli continued some time in Italy, where he met and associated with lord Mountstuart, to whom he afterwards dedicated his Theses Juridicae. Having visited the most remarkable cities in Italy, Mr. Bosweli sailed to Corsica, travelled over every part of that island, and obtained the friendship of the illustrious Pasquale de Paoli, in whose palace he resided during his stay at Corsica. He afterwards went to Paris, whence he returned to Scotland in 1766, and soon after became an advocate at the Scotch bar. The celebrated Douglas cause was at that time a subject of general discussion. Mr. Boswell published the “Essence of the Douglas cause;” a pamphlet which contributed to procure Mr. Douglas the popularity which he at that time possessed. In 1768 Mr. Bosweli published his “Account of Corsica, with memoirs of General Paoli.” Of this printed performance Dr. Johnson thus expresses himself: “Your journal is curious and delightful. I know not whether I could name any narrative by which curiosity is better excited or better gratified.” This book has been translated into the German, Dutch, Italian, and French languages; and was received with extraordinary approbation. In the following winter, the theatre-royal at Edinburgh, hitherto restrained by party -spirit, was opened. On this occasion Mr. Bosweli was solicited by David Ross, esq. to write a prologue.‘ The effect of this prologue upon the audience was highly flattering to the author, and beneficial to the manager; as it secured to the latter, by the annihilation of the opposition which had been till that time too successfully’exerted against him, the uninterrupted possession of his patent, which he enjoyed till his death, which happened in September 1790. Mr. Bosweli attended his funeral as chief mourner, and paid the last honours to a man with whom he had spent many a pleasant hour. In 1769, was celebrated at Stratford on Avon the jubilee in honour of Shakspeare. Mr. Boswell. an enthusiastic admirer of the writings of our immortal bard, a. id ever ready to join the festive throng, repaired thither, and appeared at the masquerade ay an armed Corsican chief; a character he was eminently qualified to support. This year he married miss Margaret Montgomery, a lady who, to the advantages of a polite education, united admirable good sense and a brilliant understanding. She was daughter of David Montgomery, esq. related to the illustrious family of Eglintoune, and representative of the antient peerage of Lyle. The death of this amiable woman happened in June 1790. Mr. Boswell has honoured her memory with an affectionate tribute. She left him two sons and three daughters; who, to use Mr. Boswell' s own words, “if they inherit her good qualities, will have no reason to complain of their lot. Dos magna parentum virtus.” In 1782 lord Auchinleck died. In 1783, Mr. Boswell published his celebrated Letter to the People of Scotland; which is thus praised by Johnson in a letter to the author; “I am very much of your opinion your paper contains very considerable knowledge of history and the constitution, very properly produced and applied.” Mr. Boswell communicated the pamphlet to Mr. Pitt, who naturally gave it his approbation. This first letter was followed by a second, in which I.Ii. Bosweil displayed his usual energy and political abilities. In 1785, Mr. Boswell published “A journal of a tour to the Hebrides” with Dr. Johnson; which met a success similar to his entertaining account of Corsica, and to which we owe his life of that illustrious character. This year Mr. Boswell removed to London, and was soon after called to the English bar, but his professional business was interrupted by preparing his most celebrated work, “The life of Samuel Johnson, LL. D.” which was published in 1790, and was received by the world with extraordinary avidity. It is a faithful history of Johnson’s life; and exhibits a most interesting picture of the character of that illustrious mom list, delineated with a masterly hand. The preparation of a second edition of this work was the last literary performance of Mr. Boswell. Mr. Boswell undoubtedly possessed considerable intellectual powers; as he could never have displayed his collection of the witticisms of his friend in so lively a manner as he has done, without having a picturesque imagination, and a turn for poetry as well as humour. He had a considerable share of melancholy in his temperament; and, though the general tenor of his life was gay and active, he frequently experienced an unaccountable depression of spirits. In one of these gloomy moods he wrote a series of essays under the title of “The Hypochondriac,” which appeared in the London Magazine, and end with No. 63 in 1732. These he had thoughts of collecting into a volume, but they would have added little to his reputation, being in general very trifling. Soon after his return from a visit to Auchinleck, he was seized with a disorder which put an end to his life, at his house in Portland-street, on the 19th of June 1795, in the 55th year of his age. Of his own character he gives the following account in his journal of the tour to the Hebrides: “I have given a sketch of Dr. Johnson. His readers may wish to know a little of his fellow-traveller. Think, then, of a gentleman of ancient blood; the pride of which was his predominant passion. He was then in his 33d year, and had been about four years happily married: his inclination was to be a soldier; but his father, a respectable judge, had pressed him into the profession of the law. He had travelled a good deal, and seen many varieties of human life. He had thought more than any body supposed, and had a pretty good stock of general learning and knowledge. He had all Dr. Johnson’s principles, with some degree of relaxation. He had rather too little than too much prudence; and, his imagination being lively, he often said things of which the effect was very different from the intention. He resembled sometimes * The best good maH, with the worstnatured muse.‘ He cannot deny himself the vanity of finishing with the encomium of Dr. Johnson, whose friendly partiality to the companion of this tour represents him as one ’ whose acuteness would help my enquiry, and whose gaiety of conversation, and civility of manners, are sufficient to counteract the inconveniencies of travel, in countries less hospitable than we have passed'.”

, were two eminent Dutch painters and engravers; John was born at Utrecht, in 1610, and was the disciple of Abraham Bloemart, who at the same time instructed Andrew; but to perfect themselves in a good taste of design, they went together to Rome, and resided there for a great many years. The genius of John directed him to the study of landscape, in which he rose almost to the highest perfection, making the style of Claude Lorraine his model; and by many his works are mentioned in competition even with those of Claude. The warmth of his skies, the judicious and regular receding of the objects, and the sweetness of his distances, afford the eye a degree of pleasure, superior to what we feel on viewing the works of almost any other artist. John and Andrew had very different talents, and each of them were admirable in their different way. The former excelled in landscape, the latter inserted the figures, which he designed in the manner of Bamboccio; and those figures are always so well adapted, that every picture seemed only the work of one master. The works of these associate brothers are justly admired through all Europe; they are universally sought for, and purchased at very large prices. Most of his pictures are, for size, between two and five feet long; but in those that are smaller, there is exquisite neatness. They generally express the sunny light of the morning, breaking out from behind woods, hills, or mountains, and diffusing a warm glow over the skies, trees, and the whole face of nature; or else a sun-set, with a lovely tinge in the clouds, every object beautifully partaking of a proper degree of natural illumination. And it is to be observed, that even the different hours of the day are perceptible in his landscapes, from the propriety of the tints which he uses. By some connoisseurs he is censured for having too much of the tawny in his colouring, and that the leafings of his trees are too yellow, approaching to saffron; but this is not a general fault in his pictures, though some of them, accidentally, may justly be liable to that criticism, for he corrected that fault; and many of his pictures are no more tinged with those colours, than truth and beautiful nature will justify; and his colouring obtained for him the distinction which he still possesses, of being called Both of Italy.

, or William Worcester, an ancient English writer, acquainted with history, antiquities, heraldry, physic, and astronomy, was born at Bristol about 1415; his father’s name was Worcester, and his mother’s Botoner, hence he often names himself William Wyrcester, alias Botoner; and hence the error in Pits, and others, of making two distinct persons of the two names. He studied at Hart-hall, Oxford, 1434. He had been exercised in wars above 44 years; and had so faithfully served sir John Fastolff that he left him one of his executors. He wrote many books, the first of which, that was printed, was his translation from the French, of “Cicero de Senectute,” which he addressed to William Wainfleet, bishop of Winchester. He tells us that he presented it to the bishop at Asher [JSsher] August 10, 1475, but received no reward (nullum regardum recepide episcopo). He wrote also “Antiquities of England;” “Abbreviations of the Learned;” “Medicinal collections;” a book of Astrology; another of Astronomy; besides a particular treatise, gratefully preserving the life and deeds of his master, under the title of “Acta Domini Johannis Fastolff;” “the Acts of John duke of Bedford;” “Polyandrium Oxoniensium, or memoirs of Oxford Students;” and other lesser pieces; of which see Tanner Bibl. Brit. p. 115. His “Annals of England” were printed by Hearne at the end of his “Liber Niger Scaccarii,” p. 424 451. His “Itinerary” was published from a ms. not improbably the original, in the library at Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, by Mr. James Nasmith, fellow of the said college, Cantab. 1778, 8vo. Fuller cites a book of Botoner’s, containing all the ancient gentry of the county of Norfolk, long preserved in the county, but not now extant. He also wrote something in poetry, as that htimoroirs ballad in Nasmith’s edition of his Itinerary, called " Comedia a<i Monasterium Hulme/' &c. and a long chronographical epitaph in verse, on the lady Milicent Fastoif; in the possession of Richard Poley, esq. late prothonotary of the common pleas. He is supposed to have died about 1490. The son of this Worcester, among other things, also made a collection of several authentic instruments relating to the English wars and government in France; which he dedicated to king Edward IV. containing a catalogue of the princes, dukes, earls, barons, bannerets, knights, and other persons of eminence, who were of the regent’s court. A copy of this collection, in quarto, was some time in the custody of the late Brian Fairfax, esq. one of the commissioners of the customs.

Among other learned acquaintance of Mr. Bott was Dr. Samuel Clarke, of whom he relates, that he was not only of a cheerful, but of a playful disposition. Once, when Mr. Bott called upon him, he found him swimming upon a table. At another time, when several of them were amusing themselves with diverting tricks, Dr. Clarke, looking out of the window, and seeing a grave blockhead approaching, called out, “Boys, boys, be wise; here comes a fool.” We have heard the like of Dr. Clarke from other quarters, and are not sure that the “grave blockhead” may not have been the most decorous character.

, a law-writer of great reputation in France, was born at Paris, April 16, 1719, of an honourable family. His father, who was also a lawyer, spared no expence in his education. From the age of sixteen he studied jurisprudence with such perseverance and success as to be admitted to a doctor’s degree in 1747. Being employed to prepare the articles on jurisprudence and canon law for the Encyclopaedia, he wrote those on council, decretals, &c. but, for what reason we are not told, they gave offence to the encyclopedists, who became on that account his enemies, and prevented him for some time from attaining the rank of professor, which wag the object of his ambition. Bouchaud, however, consoied himself by cultivating a taste for modem poetry. He translated several of the dramas of Apostolo Zeno into French, and published them in 1758, 2 vols. 12mo, and in 1764 he translated the English novel of “Lady Julia Mandeville.” In the interval between these two, he published “Essai sur la poesie rhythmique,” 1763, which was thought a work of great merit. This was followed by the first of his more professional labours, “Traité de Timpot du vingtieme sur les successions, et de l'impot sur les marchandises chez les Romains,” a very curious history of the taxes which the ancient emperors imposed. In 1766, on the death of M. Hardron, he was elected into the French academy, notwithstanding the opposition of the encyclopedists, whose dislike seems not ill calculated to give us a favourable idea of the soundness of his principles. This was followed by a law professorship, and some years after he was advanced to the professorship of the law of nature and nations in the royal college of France. He was nominated to this by the king in 1774, and was the first professor, it being then founded. On this he wrote in the memoirs of the academy, a curious paper concerning the societies that were formed hy the Roman publicans for the receipt of the taxes. The body of the publicans was taken from the order of knights, and had great influence and credit. They were called by Cicero “the ornament of the capital,” and the “pillars of the state.” Th“knights, though rich, entered into associations, when the taxes of a whole province were farmed out by the senate, because no individual was opulent enough to be responsible for such extensive engagements; and the nature of these societies or associations, and the various conventions, commercial a>id pecuniary engagements, occupations, and offices, to which they gave rise, form the subject of this interesting paper, which was followed by various others on topics of the same nature. In 1777 he published his” Theorie des traits de commerce entre les nations,“the principles of which seem to be founded on justice and reciprocal benefits. In 1784 appeared another curious work on the ancient Roman laws and policy, entitled,” Recherches historiques surla Police des Romains, concernant les grands chemins, les rues, et les marches.“His” Commentaire sur les lois des clouze tables," first published in 1767, was reprinted in 1803, with improvements and additions, at the expense of the French government, and he was employed in some treatises intended for the national institute, when he died, Feb. 1, 1804, regretted as aprofound and enlightened law-writer. It is remarkable that in his essay on commercial treaties abovementioned, he contends for our Selden’s Mare Clausum, as the opinion of every man who is not misled by an immoderate zeal for his own country.

, first painter to Louis XV. was born at Paris in 17u6, and was educated under Le Moine, after which he studied at Rome. On his return to Paris, he employed himself on every species of the art, but especially in the light and agreeable. His Infant Jesus sleeping, is finely coloured, and designed with a most flowing contour. The Shepherd asleep on the knees of his shepherdess, is a little landscape of singular merit. Many of his other landscapes are peculiarly happy. His other most noted pieces are pastorals for the manufacture of tapestry, at Beauvais; the muses in the king’s library; the four seasons, in the figure of infants, for the ceiling of the council-room at Fontainbleau; a hunt of tigers, &c. He was usually called the painter of the graces, and the Anacreon of painting; but his works did not justify these high encomiums, and seem to have rather sunk in the estimation of his countrymen. He died of premature old age in 1770.

Of his exemplary conduct in the discharge of his ministerial functions in the western hemisphere, abundant proof is furnished by a work published by him in the year 1797, intituled, “A View of the Causes and Consequences of the American Revolution, in thirteen discourses, preached in North America between the years 17t.3 and 1775.” In the preface to that work, which contains anecdotes and observations respecting the writers and most eminent persons concerned in the American Revolution, he observes, that, “cast as his lot was by Providence, in a situation of difficult duty, in such an hour of danger, it would have been highly reproachful to have slept on his post. Investigations on the important subjects of religion and government, when conducted with sobriety and decorum, can never be unseasonable; but they seem to be particularly called for in times like those in which these discourses were written times when the kings of the earth stood up, and the rulers took counsel against the Lord and against his anointed, saying, Let us break their bonds asunder^ and cast away their cords from us.” He adds, in the words of Bishop Wetenhall’s preface to his Royal Sermons, printed in Ireland in 1695, that his Discourses in America were preached by him “with a sincere intention of conscientiously performing his duty, and approving himself to God, in his station, by doing what lay in him (at a time of exigence) to confirm the wavering, to animate the diffident, to confirm, excite, and advance all in their loyalty and firm adhesion to. his gracious majesty, our present, alone, rightful liege lord and sovereign.” Indeed, these sermons unequivocally demonstrate that their pious author was not to be deterred, by the personal difficulties in which the schism and faction that then pre^ vailed had placed him, from maintaining, with undaunted resolution, those doctrines, political and religious, in which he had been educated.

, comte de St. Saire, where he was born October 21, 1658, of a noble and ancient family, was educated at Juilli, by the rithers of the oratory, and gave proofs of genius and abilities from his childhood. His chief study was history, which he afterwards cultivated assiduously. He died January 23, 1722, at Paris, having been twice married, and left only daughters. He was author of a History of the Arabians, and Mahomet, 12mo, “Memoires sur l'ancien Governement de France; ou 14 lettres sur les anciens Parlemens de France,” 3 vols. 12mo; “Histoire de France jusqu'a Charles VIII.” 3 vols. 12mo; and “l'Etatde la Fiance,” 6 vols. 12mo, in the Dutch edition, and eight in the edition of Trevoux, “Memoire presente a M. le due d‘Orleans, sur l’Administration des Finances,” 2 vols. 12mo “Histoire de la Pairie de France,” 12mo “Dissertations sur la Noblesse de France,” 12mo. Ah his writings on the French history have been collected in 3 vols. fol. They Sire riot written (says M. de Montesquieu) with all the free-. dom and simplicity of the ancient nobility, from which he descended. M. Boulainvilliers left some other works in ms. known to the learned, who have, with great reason, been astonished to find, that he expresses in them his doubts of the most incontestable dogmas of religion, while he blindly gives credit to the reveries of juticial astrology an inconsistency common to many other infjdels. Mosheim informs us that Boulainvilliers was such an admirer of the pernicious opinions of Spinosa, that he formed the design of expounding and illustrating it, as is done wth respect to the doctrines of the gospel in books of piety, accommodated to ordinary capacities. This design he attually executed, but in such a manner as to set the atheim and impiety of Spinosa in a clearer light than they hid ever appeared before. The work was published by lenglet du Fresnoy, who, that it might be bought with avdity, and read without suspicion, called it a Refutation of theErrors of Spinosa, artfully adding some separate pieces, to which this title may, in some measure, he thought applicabk. The whole title runs, “Refutation des Erreurs de Beioit de Spinosa, par M. de Fenelon, archeveque de Cambay, par le Pere Lauri Benedictin, et par M. Le Comte de Bulainvilliers, avec la Vie de Spinosa, ecrite par Jean COerus, minister de l‘Eglise Lutherienne de la Haye, augnsntée de beaucoup de particularites tirees d’une vie manucrite de ce philosophe, fait par un de ses amis,” (Luczs, the atheistical physician), Brussels, 1731, 12mo. The account and defence of Spinosa, given by Boulainviliers, under the pretence of a refutation, take up the greatest part of this book, and are placed first, and not last in order, as the title would insinuate and the volume concludes with what is not in the title, a defence of Spinosa by Iredenburg, and a refutation of that defence by Orobio. a Jew of Amsterdam. It remains to be noticed, that his Life of Mahomet, which he did not live to complete, vas published at London and Amsterdam, in 1730, 8vo and about the same time an English translation of it appeared His letters, also, on the French parliaments, were translated and published at London, 1739, 2 vols.-8vo.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The instrument called the Orrery obtained his name from the following circumstance: Rowley, a mathematical instrument-maker, having got one from Mr. George Graham, the original inventor, to he sent abroad with some of his own instruments, he copied it, and made the first for the earl of Orrery; sir Richard Steele, who knew nothing of Mr. Graham’s machine, thinking to do justice to the first encourager, as well as to the inventor of such a curious instrument, called it an Orrery, and gave Rowley the praise due to Mr. Graham.

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

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

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

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

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

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

, a French antiquary, was born at Lyons, Jan. 28, 1680, of parents who gave him an excellent education. He attached himself at first to jurisprudence, but antiquities and medals soon occupied him entirely. The chancellor de Pontchartrain, the abbe Bignon, Vaillant, Haruouin, admired him for the amiableness of his manners, and the depth of his learning. In 1705 he published some ingenious dissertations upon medals and other monuments, which procured him to be admitted into the academy of inscriptions and belles-lettres, under the title of pupil; and the year following he became perpetual secretary. The French academy too admitted him of their society in 1715, as successor to M. Fenelon. He was made keeper of the royal cabinet of medals in 1719; and the year after he set out for Holland, with the view of augmenting that grand collection. On returning to Paris he devoted the whole of his time to the academy of belles-lettres, to which he contributed a great many memoirs, and the cabinet of medals. He had the inspection of the library in 1745, during the illness of M. Maboul, before which time he resigned the place of secretary to the academy. He died the 10th of September, 1753, aged seventy-four. He was as estimable for the sweetness of his temper as for the depth of his knowledge. Among his works, are: 1. The edition of the first 15 vols. of the “Memoires de l'academie des inscriptions et belleslettres.” The historical panegyrics which embellish these memoirs were printed separately in 2 vols. 12mo. They are ingenious and agreeable; they may contain fewer of those delicate strokes with which the éloges of Fontenelle abound, but perhaps they exceed them in elegance and taste! They are, however, unequal. 2. The second edition of the “Medallic history of Louis XIV.” brought down to his death, 1723, folio. He gives the drawings and impresses of many of them. 3. “The history of the emperor Tetricus illustrated by medals.” 4. Several dissertations on the ancient medals, dispersed for the most part throughout the “Memoires de l'academie des belles-lettres.” 5. He published the “Catalogue of his library,” 1745, fol. which was well chosen, and full of rare and curious books. This catalogue is very much in request among the bibliographers, and sells at a high price. Another was published after his death, Paris, 1753, 8vo. There is also attributed to him a work called the “Yellow Book,” “Livre jaune, contenant quelques conversations sur les logomachies, disputes de mots, abus de termes,” &c. Bale, 1748, 8vo, of which only thirty copies were printed, on what is called vegetable paper.

, a facetious preacher among the dissenters, whose oddities are still traditionary, was born in 1677, at Wakefield, in Yorkshire. His father belonged to a dissenting meeting at Alverthorp, near that town, of which Mr. Peter Naylor, an ejected minister, was pastor. Under his care, and at the free-school at Leeds, he received the first rudiments of learning. He was afterwards sent to an academy kept by Mr. Jollie, at Attercliffe. He began to preach at the early age of eighteen, about the year 1696, when his juvenile figure procured him some rebuffs, which he soon disregarded, and convinced his hearers that he was a boy only in appearance. His conquest over these remarks at this time seems to have formed an aera in his history, as he used to “bless God that from that hour he had never known the fear of man.” He soon after left the academy, and was taken into the family of Mr. Whitaker, who, according to his biographer, checked his ardour, at least so far that he preached but seldom. In 1697 he went to Beverley, where he continued two years, and then became assistant to Dr. Gilpin, at Newcastle-upon-Tyne, and remained there three years, with almost unbounded popularity. He then removed to Stepney, near London, and in 1707 was chosen pastor of a meeting in Fetter-lane, vacant by the death of Mr. Benoni Rowe. After preaching here to a crowded congregation for twenty years, a quarrel took place; about what, his biographer does not inform us; but Mr. Bradbury was immediately invited to succeed the noted Daniel Burgess, in the meeting at New-court, Carey-street, and in less than a fortnight exchanged his former for his latter pulpit, carrying with him such of his Fetter-lane hearers as adhered to him in the late contest. Here he succeeded Daniel Burgess as a wit as well as a divine, and his biographer gravely informs us, that “this pulpit a se*cond time presented a phenomenon as rare as it is beneficial, wit consecrated to the service of serious and eternal truth.” Of this wit, however, Mr. N. Neal, in a letter to Dr. Doddridge, (1749,) gives a different opinion. “I have seen Mr. Bradbury’s sermons, just published, the nonsense and buffoonery of which would make one laugh, if his impious insults over the pious dead did not make one tremble.” After entertaining the public by this species of comic preaching for thirty-two years, he died at Warwick-court, Gray’s-inn, Sept. 9, 1759, aged eighty-two. Of his character it is said, that “had he possessed as much judgment as quickness of wit, and as much temper as zeal, he would have been a man of much greater consideration. His usefulness was much abated after the Sailers’ -hall synod, for though he was warm on the orthodox side, his ill-conducted zeal did much mischief.” Among his other differences of opinion from his brethren, he made it his business in the pulpit to lampoon and satirize the hymns and psalms of Dr. Watts. It is said, indeed, that whentever he gave out one of the former, it was prefaced with “Let us sing one of Watts’s whims.” Among the numerous anecdotes of Tom Bradbury, as he was familiarly called, we shall give only the following, which contains some characteristic features. “Tom generally gave audience at supper-time, and the ceremony was thus conducted. On a little table lay two pocket bibles, one of which was taken up by Bradbury, and the other by his daughter, and each having read a portion, one of the visiting ministers was desired to pray: they then adjourned to supper; after which, Tom entertained the company with ‘ The roast beef of old England,’ which, it is said, he sung better than any man in England.” His printed works amply justify the character usually given of him, that with much zeal he was totally destitute of judgment, and regardless of the dignity of his sacred calling, dwelling perpetually on political topics, and enforcing them in a strain of ridicule totally unfit for the place in which he stood. These works consist of “Fifty-four Sermons,” 1762, in 3 volumes octavo, all of which, except seven, had been printed separately. They are principally of the political kind, and it was justly remarked of them at the time of publication, that " from the great number of satred texts applied to the occasion, one would imagine the bible was written only to confirm, by divine authority, the benefits accruing to this nation from the accession of king William III.

On the death of John Keill, M. D. he was chosen Savilian professor of astronomy in Oxford, Oct. 31, 1721. On this promotion, so agreeable to his taste, he resigned the living of Bridstow, and also the sinecure of Landewy Welfry, and henceforward devoted his time and studies to his beloved science; nor was he sooner known, than distinguished by the friendship of lord Macclesfield, sir Isaac Newton, his colleague in the Savilian professorship, Dr. Halley, and other great mathematicians, astronomers, and patrons of science. In the course of his observations, which were innumerable, he discovered and settled the laws of the alterations of the fixed stars, from the progressive motion of light, combined with the earth’s annual motion about the sun, and the nutation of the earth’s axis, arising from the unequal attraction of the sun and moon on the different parts of the earth. The former of -these effects is called the aberration of the fixed stars, the theory of which he published in 1727; and the latter the nutation of the earth’s axis, the theory of which appeared in 1737: so that in the space of about 10 years, he communicated to the world two of the finest discoveries in modern astronomy; which will for ever make a memorable epoch in the history of that science. In 1730, he succeeded Mr. Whiteside, as lecture-reader of astronomy and experimental philosophy in Oxford: which was a considerable emolument to himself, and which he held till within a year or two of his death, when the ill state of his health made it necessary to resign it. At the decease of Dr. Halley, he was appointed astronomical observator at the royal observatory at Greenwich, February 3, 174-1-2. From letters found amongst his papers, it appears that Dr. Halley was very desirous that our astronomer should succeed him; and in one letter, when he found himself declining, he desires his leave to make interest for him: but he owed this new acquisition chiefly to the friendship of lord Macclesfield, the late president of the royal society. Upoa this promotion he was honoured with the degree of doctor of divinity, by diploma from Oxford.

, president of what was called the “high court of justice” in which Charles I. was condemned to be beheaded, was oue of an antient family in the county of Lancaster, but of a branch seated, some say, at Bradshaw, or Bradshaigh, in Derbyshire, others at Marple, in Cheshire: where he was educated is not recorded; the first notice we have of him is that he studied law in Gray’s-inn, and after being admitted to the bar, had much chamber practice among the partizans of the parliament, to which he was zealously devoted. Lord Clarendon says he was not without parts, but insolent and ambitious. In 1644, he was appointed by the parliament to prosecute lord Macquire and Macmahon, the Irish rebels. In Oct. 1646, he was a joint commissioner of the great seal for six months, by a vote of the house of commons, and in Feb. following, both houses voted him chief justice of Chester. In June of the same year (1647) he was named by parliament one of the counsel to prosecute the loyal judge Jen kins; and was called to the rank of Serjeant Oct. 12, 1648. When the death of the king was determined upon, Bradshaw was one of die few lawyers who could be preraile4 upon to act, and was appointed President, an office which, had he declined, there is some reason to think it would hav$ been difficult to find a substitute. When called upon, Jan, 12, 1648, by the court to take his seat as President^ he affected to make an earnest apology and excuse. Lord Clarendon, says that he seemed much surprized and very resolute tp refuse it, and even required time to consider of it, but next day accepted the office, and soon demonstrated tba.t he was exactly fitted for it, by his contemptuous treatment of his unnappy sovereign, The court then bestowed on him the title of Lord President, without as well as within the court, during the commission and sitting of the court. A retinue of officers was appointed to attend him, going and returning from Westminster-hall; lodgings were provided for him in New Palace-yard; he was to be preceded by a sword and a mace, carried by two gentlemen, and in court he had a guard of two hundred soldiers; he had a chair of crimson velvet in the middle of the court; he wore his hat when his majesty appeared, and was highly offended that his sovereign should not be uncovered in his presence, which was, however, after the first day of the trial, duly enjoined. Besides these pompous honours, he was rewarded for his coarse and brutal behaviour on his majesty’s trial, with the deanery house in Westminster, as his residence; the sum of 3000l. was given him to procure an equipage suitable to his new rank: he received also the seat of the duke of St. Alban’s called Summer-hill, and lord Cottington’s estate in Wiltshire, valued at 1500l. -per annum, with other landed property, amounting in all to about 4000l. per annum, to him and his heirs. He was also made chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster. Those writers, therefore, who represent him as no more accessary to the murder of Charles I. than any other members of the council, or court, must see from these circumstances, which would not otherwise be worth repeating, that the republicans attached the greatest importance to the part he had to perform, and considered it as worthy, not only to be honoured with the most splendid accompaniments, but to be rewarded with the richest gifts and -grants. Bradshaw was in truth a more thorough republican than most of the party, and became obnoxious to Cromwell for disapproving of the latter placing himself at the head of the government. This occasioned frequent disputes between them, ajid Cromwell at length prevailed in depriving him of the office of chief justice of Chester. On the death of Cromwell, when the long parliament was restored, Bradshaw obtained a seat in the council, was elected president, and would have been appointed commissioner of the great seal, but his infirm state of health obliged him to decline the latter. He died Nov. 22, 16.59, declaring, consistently enough with his former principles, that if the king were to be tried and condemned again, he would be the first man that should do it. He was pompously interred in Westminster abbey, from whence his body was taken up, at the restoration) and exposed on the gibbet with those of Cromwell and Ireton. Doubts have been entertained as to this fact, and some have supposed he went abroad and died at Jamaica, because a cannon was found therewith an inscription signifying that his dust was deposited near it. Nothing, however, can be better ascertained than his death in. England.

, an English divine of good parts and learning, the son of Nicholas Brady, an officer in the king’s army in the civil wars of 1641, was born at Bandon, in the county of Cork, Oct. the 28th, 1659; and continued in Ireland till he was 12 years of age. Then he was sent over to England to Westminster-school; and from thence elected stuJent to Christ-church in Oxford. After continuing there about four years, he went to Dublin, where his father resided; at which university he immediately commenced B. A. When he was of due stanuing, his diploma for the degree of D. D. was, on account of his uncommon merit, presented to him by that university while he was in England; and brought over by Dr Pratt, then senior travelling fellow, afterwards provost of that college. His first ecclesiastical preferment was to a prebend in the cathedral of St. Barry, at Cork; to which he was collated by bishop Wettenhal, whose domestic chaplain he was. He was a zealous promoter of the revolution, and in consequence of his zeal suffered for it. In 1690, when the troubles broke out in Ireland, by his interest with king Tatnes as general, M'Carty, he thrice prevented the burning of the town of Bandon, after three several orders given by that prince to destroy it. The same year, having been deputed by the people of Bandon, he went over to England, to petition the parliament for a redress of some grievances they had suffered while king James was in Ireland; and afterwards quitting his preferments in Ireland, he settled in London; where, being celebrated for his abilities in the pulpit, he was elected minister of St. Catherine Cree church, and lecturer of St. Michael’s Wood-street. He afterwards became minister of Richmond in Surry. and Stratford upon Avon in Warwickshire, and at length rector of Clapham in Surry; which last, together with Richmond, he held till his death. His preferments amounted to 600l. a year, but he was so little of an Œconomist as to be obliged to keep a school at Richmond. He was also chaplain to the duke of Ormond’s troop of horse-guards, as he was to their majesties king William and queen Mary. He died May 20, 1726, aged 66, leaving behind him the character of being a person of an agreeable temper, a polite gentleman, an excellent preacher, and a good poet. He has no high rank, however, among poets, and would have long ere now been forgotten in that character, if his name was not so familiar as a translator of the new version of the “Psalms,” in conjunction with Mr. Tate, which version was licensed 1696. He translated also the Æneids of Virgil,“published by subscription in 1726, 4 vols. 8vo,­and a tragedy, called” The Rape, or the Innocent Impos-­tors,“neither performances of much character. His prose works consist of” Sermons," three volumes of which were published by himself in 1704, 1706, and 1713, and three others by his eldest son, who was a clergyman at Tooting, in Surry, London, 1730, 8vo.

, a noted historian and physician of the seventeenth century, was born in the county of Norfolk, and admitted in Caius college in Cambridge, February 20, 1643. He took his degree of bachelor of physic in 1653, and was created doctor in that faculty September 5, 1660, by virtue of the king’s mandatory letters. On the first of December the same year, he was, in pursuance of king Charles’s mandate, elected master of his college, upon the resignation of Dr. Bachcroft. About the year 1670, or as some think not until 1685, he was appointed keeper of the records in the Tower of London; in which office he employed himself in perusing those most valuable monuments in his possession, with a view to his historical works. Some time after, he was chosen regius professor of physic in the university of Cambridge. In 1679, he wrote a letter to Dr. Sydenham, on the influence of the air, &c. which is published among that learned person’s works. But his largest and most considerable performance was, “An Introduction to the old English History,” in which he maintains these three propositions: 1. That the representatives of the commons in parliament, viz. knights, citizens, and burgesses, were not introduced till the forty-ninth of Henry III.; 2. That William, duke of Normandy, made an absolute conquest of the nation; 3. That the succession to the crown of England is hereditary (descending to the nearest of blood), and not elective: And “A complete History of England, from the first entrance of the Romans, unto the end of the reign of king Richard II.” in three vols. fol. about which he was employed several years, and which was printed 1685 and 1700, usually bound in two volumes. In the year 1681 he was chosen one of the representatives for the university of Cambridge, in that parliament which met at Oxford; and again in 1685, in the parliament of king James II. He was likewise physician in ordinary to this king; and, on the twenty -second of October, 1688, was one of those persons who gave in their depositions concerning the birth of the pretended prince of Wales. He died on the nineteenth of August, 1700. He was an accurate writer, and a curious and diligent searcher into our ancient records; but his impartiality has been called in question, particularly by those who contend for the higher antiquity of parliaments, and a larger proportion of popular influence in the constitution. Tyrell wrote his “General History of England,” in opposition to that of Brady. Dr. Gilbert Stuart, who hated all Scotch historians except himself, maintains that Hume executed his History on Brady’s principles; allowing Brady to pdssess an excellent understanding and admirable quickness, Dr. Stuart asserts also, that he was the slave of a faction. Dr. Brady’s other publications were, “An Answer to Mr. Petyt’s Book on Parliaments,” London, 1681, 8vo;- and “An Historical Treatise of Cities and Burghs or Boroughs,” ibid. 1690, fol. reprinted 1704.

Offended with his relations, and disgusted with his countrymen, he had long determined to quit Denmark, and to settle abroad; and after travelling through Germany and Italy, he at length fixed upon Basil: which he preferred, for the wholesomeness of the air, the cheapness of the living, and the celebrity of the university; and irom whence he might hold a correspondence with the astronomers of France, Germany, and Italy. On his return to Denmark he was preparing with the utmost secrecy to transport his library, &c. but was prevented by an unexpected summons from the king, who, in order to retain him, offered him his protection and encouragement, presented him with the island of Huen as a proper retirement, and promised to erect, at his own expence, whatever buildings and apparatus should be found necessary for his astronomical pursuits. He settled upon him likewise a pension of a thousand crowns a year, and gave him a canonry of Roschild, worth two thousand more. Tycho, delighted with this liberality, did not hesitate to accept the king’s offer, but immediately repaired to Huen, Aug. 8, 1576, and was present at the foundation of a magnificent house, which he afterwards called Uranienburgh, or the Castle of the Heavens, and which contained a large suite of apartments, an observatory, and a subterraneous laboratory; and although the king supplied 190,000 rix-dollars, Tycho Brahe did not expend less than the same sum. He afterwards constructed a detached building, which he culled Stiernberg, or the, Mountain of the Stars.

From Hamburgh he went to Brussels, where he continued for the most part till 1648, with sir Henry de Vic, the king’s president; constantly preaching every Sunday, and frequently administering the sacrament. In that year he returned to Ireland; from whence, after having undergone several difficulties, he narrowly escaped in a little bark: all the while he was there, his life was in continual danger. At Limerick he was threatened with death, if he did not suddenly depart the town. At Portumnagh, indeed, he afterwards enjoyed more freedom, and an allowance of the church service, umler the protection of the marquis of Clanrickard: but, at the revolt of Cork, he had a very narrow deliverance; which deliverance, however, troubled Cromwell so, that he declared he would have given a good sum of money for that Irish Canterburv, as he called him. His escape from Ireland is accounted wonderful: for the vessel he was in was closely chased hy two of the parliament frigates, and when they were come so near, that all hopes of escape vanished, on a sudden the wind sunk into a perfect calm, by which it happened wonderfully that his ship got off, while the frigates were unable to proceed at all. During this second time of being abroad, he had many disputes about religion with the learned of all nations, sometimes occasionally, at other times by appointment and formal challenge; and wrote several things in defence of the church of England. He likewise purposed to draw a parallel between the liturgy of the church of England, and the public forms of the protestant churches abroad; and with this view he designed to travel about. But he met with a very unexpected interruption in his first day’s journey: for he no sooner came into the house where he intended to refresh himself, but he was known and called by his name by the hostess. "While the bishop was wondering at his being discovered, she revealed the secret by shewing him his picture, and assured him there were several of them upon the road, that, being known by them, he might be seized; and that her husband, among others, had power to that purpose, which he would certainly make use of if he found him. The bishop saw evidently he was a condemned man, being already hanged in effigy; an'd therefore, making use of this intelligence, prudently withdrew into safer quarters.

Upon the restoration of the church and monarchy, he returned to England, and was from the first designed for higher promotion. Most people imagined it would be the archbishopric of York; but at last he was appointed archbishop of Armagh, to which he was translated upon the 18th of January, 1660-1. The same year he visited his diocese, where he found great disorder; some having committed horrible outrages; and many imbibed very strong prejudices, both against his person and the doctrine and discipline of the church; but, by argument, persuasion, and long suffering, he gained upon them even beyond his own expectation. His biographer affords one instance of his prudence, in turning the edge of the most popular objection of that time against conformity. When the benefices were called over at the visitation, several appeared, and exhibited only such titles as they had received from the late powers. He told them, “they were no legal titles, but in regard he heard well of them, he was willing to make them such to them by institution and induction;” which they thankfully accepted of. But when he desired to see their letters of orders, some had no other but their certificates of ordination by some presbyterian classes, which, he told them, did not qualify them for any preferment in the church. Upon this, the question arose, “Are we not ministers of the gospel r” To which his grace answered, That is not the question; at least, he desired for peace sake, that might not be the question for that time. “I dispute not,” said he, “the value of your ordination, nor those acts you have exercised by virtue of it; what you are, or might be here when there was no law, or in other churches abroad. But we are now to consider ourselves as a national church limited by law, which among other things takes chief care to prescribe about ordination: and I do not know how you could recover the means of the church, if any should refuse to pay you your tithes, if you are not ordained as the law of this church requireth; and I am desirous that she may have your labours, and you such portions of her revenue, as shall be allotted you in a legal and assured way.” By this means he gained such as were of the moderate kind, and wished to be useful. As he was by his station president of the convocation, which met upon the 8th of May, 166 1, so was he also chosen speaker of the house of lords, in the parliament which met at the same time: and so great a value had both houses for him, that they appointed committees to examine what was upon record in their books concerning him and the earl of Strafford, and ordered the scandalous charges against them to be torn out, which was accordingly done. In this parliament many advantages were procured, and more designed, for the church, in which he was very industrious. About this time he had a violent sickness, being a second fit of the palsy, which was very near putting an end to his life; but he recovered. A little before his death, he visited his diocese; and having provided for the repair of his cathedral, and other affairs suitable to his pastoral office, he returned to Dublin about the middle of May 1663. The latter end of June, he was seized with a third fit of the palsy; of which he soon died, being then 70 years old. At this time he had a trial for some part of his temporal estate at Omagh, with sir Audley Mervyn, depending in the court of claims; and there, at the time of hearing, the third fit of the palsy so affected him, that he sunk in the court, was carried out senseless, and never recovered. The cause, however, was determined in his favour.

His various works, published at different times, were reprinted at Dublin in 1677, in one vol. fol. with his Life by the editor, Dr. Vesey, bishop of Limerick. His funeral sermon, with a shorter account of his life, was preached and published by Dr. Jeremy Taylor, bishop of Down and Connor, Dublin, 1663, 4to. His works are chiefly levelled at the Roman catholics and the sectaries, some of both parties, in his opinion, uniting for the destruction of the established government and church. But perhaps the most valuable part of his works is that in which he contended with Hobbes. He argued with great acuteness against Hobbes’s notions on liberty and necessity, and attacked the whole of his system in a piece called the “Catching of the Leviathan,” originally published in 1658, in which he undertakes to demonstrate, out of Hobbes’s own works, that no sincere Hobbist can be a good Christian, or a good Common-wealth’s-man, or reconcile himself to himself. For some time an answer to Milton’s “Defensio populi,” was attributed to archbishop Bramhall, but with what injustice Mr. Todd has lately shewn, in his accurate and valuable Life of Milton.

, the eldest of a family who have made some figure in Swisserland, was a native of Biberach, in Suabia, where he was born in 1533. He imbibed the principles of the reformation from CEcolampadius, and became himself a preacher in various reformed churches. In 1576 the magistracy of Basil bestowed the rank of citizenship on him and his posterity, and in 1581 he was appointed professor of Hebrew in that city. He had studied medicine and law, as well as divinity, but confined himself chiefly to the latter, which he taught for many years at Basil, where he died in 1596. He wrote many funeral discourses, or “consciones funebres,” as they were called, taken from the Old and New Testament, which were printed at Basle, in 1752, and some dialogues in the German language. We have seen only a part of the former, entitled “Consciones Funebres,” Hanov. 1603, 8vo.

, the youngest son of Gerard, and brother to the two preceding, was born at Nieukoop, July 6, 1660, 'and having gone through his divinity course, was chosen minister at Warmont in 1682, whence he was, the following year, invited to Hoorn. He was afterwards called to the Arminian church at the Hague, and some time after that, to Amsterdam, where he died Jan. 13, 1708. He wrote in German a life of St. Paul, 1695, 4to; a funeral oration on Mary queen of England, and a treatise against Leidekker. In 1702 he published a collection of letters, “Clarorum virorum Epistolae centum ineditae de vario eruditionis genere, ex museo Joan. Brandt, G. F. Gerardi filii,” comprising some from Nich. Heinsius, Grotius, Guy Patin, Huet, Rabelais, &c. He wrote also some poems.

, or, as some call him, Sebastian, a German chemist, much addicted to the fanciful researches of the period in which he lived, was born in 1458, and died in May 1521. Leibnitz, in the Melanges de Berlin for 1710, cited by Chaptal, in his “Elements of Chemistry,” vol. III. p. 350, mentions Brandt as a chemist of Hamburg, who, during a course of experiments upon urine, with a view of extracting a fluid proper for converting silver into gold, discovered phosphorus in 1667, or, as others say, in 1669. He communicated his discovery to Kraft, who imparted it to Leibnitz, and, as it is pretended, to Boyle. Leibnitz, says Chaptal, introduced Brandt to the duke of Hanover, before whom he performed the whole operation; and a specimen of it was sent to Huygens, who shewed it to the academy of sciences at Paris. It is said that Kunckel had associated himself with Kraft to purchase the process from Brandt; but Kunckel having been deceived by Kraft, who kept the secret to himself, knowing that urine was made use of, set to work, and discovered a process for making the substance and hence it has been called Kunckel’s phosphorus.

, was second son of sir Richard Bray, one of the privy council to king Henry VI. who lies buried in the north aile of Worcester cathedral, in which county sir Reginald was born. One of this family (which were lords of Braie, or Bray, in Normandy) came with William the Conqueror into England, where they flourished in the counties of Northampton and Warwick; but Edmond, the father of sir Richard, is styled of Eton Bray, in the county of Bedford, which county they had represented in parliament in 18 Ed. I. and 6 Ed. II. In 1 Rich. III. this Reginald had a general pardon granted to him, probably on account of his having taken part with Henry VI. to whose cause he had a personal as well as hereditary attachment being receiver- general to sir Henry Stafford, who married Margaret, countess of Richmond, mother to the earl of Richmond, afterward king Henry VII. and continued in her service after the death of sir Henry, and was put in trust for her dowry, on her marriage to Thomas, earl of Derby. When the duke of Buckingham had concerted with Morton, bishop of Ely (then his prisoner at Brecknock in Wales), the marriage of the earl of Richmond with the princess Elizabeth, eldest daughter of Edward I V. and the earl’s advancement to the throne, the bishop recommended sir Reginald for the transaction of the affair with the countess, telling the duke he had an old friend with her, a man sober, secret, and well-witted, called Reginald Bray, whose prudent policy he had known to have compassed matters of great importance; and accordingly wrote to him in Lancashire, where he then was with the countess, to come to Brecknock with all speed. He readily obeyed the summons, entered heartily into the design, and was very active in carrying it on; and soon engaged sir Giles Daubeney (afterwards lord Daubeney), sir John Ciieney, Richard GuiUbrd, esq. and many other gentlemen of note, to take part with Henry. After the success at Bosworth, he gradually rose into great favour with the king, who eminently distinguished and liberally rewarded his services. His attachment to that prince was sincere and uriremitted; and such were his ptudence and abilities, that he never forfeited the confidence he had acquired, during an attendance of seventeen years on the most suspicious monarch of his time. He was made a knight banneret, probably at the battle of Bosworth; a knight of the bath at the king’s coronation, and afterwards a kni“ht of the garter. In the first year of the kind’s reign he had a grant of the constableship of the castle of Oakham in Rutlandshire, and was appointed joint chie‘ justice, with the lord Fitzwalter, of all the forests south of Trent, and chosen of the privy council. After this he was appointed high-treasurer, chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and nigh steward of the university of Oxford. At the queen’s coronation, the ducliess of Norfolk, &c. sat at one side-table at the other, lady Ferrars, v>f Chartley, lady Bray, &c. At the christening of prince Arthur, sir Reginald bore a rich salt of gold which was given by the earl of Derby. He was amongst the knights bannerets when Henry, the king’s second son, was created duke of York in 1494. In the 7th year of the king, he by indenture covenanted to serve him in his wars beyond sea a whole year, with twelve men, himself accompted, each having his custrell and page, twenty-four demy lances, seventy-seven archers on horseback, two hundred and thirty-one archers, and bil’.es on foot twenty-four. In the 10th year he had a grant for life of the Isle of Wight, castle of Carisbrook, and the manors of Swainston, Brixton, Thorley, and Welow, in that isle, at th^ rent of 308l. 6s. 8rf. Camden mentions the grant of the Isle of Wight at the rent of 300 marks. In June 1497 he was at the battle of Blackheath, when the lord Audley, having joined the Cornish rebels, was taken prisoner; on whose execution and attainder, his manor of Shire Vachery and Crap ley in Surry, with a large estate there, was given to sir Reginald. He received many other marks of the king’s bounty and favour, and died 5th August 1503, possessed of a very great estate; notwithstanding which, and his activity as a minister, under a monarch whose love of, money was the cause of great and just complaints amongst the people, historians call him the father of his country, a sage and grave person, a fervent lover of jusuce, and one who would often admonish the king when he did any thing contrary to justice or equity. That he should do this, and the king still continue his favour, is an ample proof of the sense which his sovereign entertained of his services and abilities. He appears to have taken great delight in architecture, and to have had no small skill in it, as he had a principal concern and direction in building Henry Vllth’s chapel in Westminster-abbey, and in the finishing and bringing to perfection the chapel of St. George at Windsor, to which he was a liberal benefactor in his life-time, and for the completion of which he made farther provision by his will. His arms, crest, and device (R. B.) are exhibited on the cieling of the chapel at Windsor in many places; and in the middle of the south aile is a spacious chapel erected by him, and still called by his name, in which also, by his own particular direction, he was interred, though his executors neglected to erect a tomb for him, as he desired. Perhaps they thought his merit would be the most lasting monument. It is supposed that he is buried under the stone which covers Dr. Waterland; for, on opening the vault for that gentleman, who died in 1740, a leaden coffin, of ancient form and make, was found, which by other appearances also was judged to be that of sir Reginald, and was, by order of the dean, immediately arcned over with great decency. He was of great devotion, according to the piety of the times, and a bountiful friend, in his life-time, to many churches. In one of the letters of the dean and chapter of Westminster, John, abbot of Newminster in Northumberland, addresses him as founder of the monastery of Pipwell (in Northamptonshire); but this must be on account of some donations, as that house was founded by William Boutevileyr in 1143. In 1494, being then high steward of Oxford, he gave 40 marks to repair the church of St. Mary’s, in a window of which were the figures of him and his wife kneeling, their coats of arms on their backs, remaining in 1584. The dean and chapter of Lincoln, in recompence for his services to them, receive him and my lady his wife to be brother and sister of their chapter, and to be partakers of all suffrages, prayers, masses, fastings, almsdeeds, and other good deeds, whatever they be, done in the said church, both in their lives and after their deceases. The prior of the cathedral church of Durham receives him in like manner. In a south window of the priory church of Great Malvern in Worcestershire, were the portraits of Henry VII. Elizabeth his queen, prince Arthur, sir Reginald Bray, John Savage, and Thomas LoveJ), esquires, with their coats of arms on their armour, and the following words underneath:” Orate pro bono statu nobilissimi et excellentissimi Regis Henrici Septimi et Elizabeths Reginse, ac Domini Arthuri Principis filii eorundem, nee not) praedilectissimae consortis suoe, ac suorum trium militum." The portraits of the king and sir Reginald remained in 1774, and are engraved in Mr. Strutt’s View of the Arms and Habits of the English, vol. II, plate 60. The others have been broken and destroyed. He had no issue, and his elder brother John having only one daughter, married to sir William Sandes, afterwards lord Sandes of the Vine, he left the bulk of his fortune to Edmund, eldest son of his younger brother John (for he had two brothers of that name). This Edmund was summoned to parliament in 1530, as baron of Eaton Bray; but his son John lord Bray dying without issue in 1557, the estate was divided amongst six daughters of Edmund. Sir Reginald left very considerable estates to Edward and Reginald, younger brothers of Edmund. From Edward the manor of Shire Vachery and Cranley, above mentioned, has descended to the rev. George Bray, who was owner in 1778. Reginald settled at Barrington in Gloucestershire, where the male line of that branch became extinct about sixty years ago.

, D.D. an eminent learned and pious divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Marton in Shropshire, in 1656, where his parents were persons of good reputation. His infancy discovering promising parts, he was early sent to the school at Oswestry, in the same county, and his close application to school-learning, determining his parents to dedicate him to religion and learning, he was entered of Hart-hall, Oxford. Here he soon made a considerable proficiency in divinity, as well as other studies necessary for the profession for which he was intended: but, labouring under the common disadvantages of a narrow fortune, his circumstances not permitting a longer residence at Oxford, he left the university soon after he had commenced bachelor of arts. Much about this time he entered into holy orders; and the first duty he had was that of a parish near Bridgenorth in Shropshire, his native county, from which curacy he soon removed into Warwickshire, officiating as chaplain in sir Thomas Price’s family, of Park-hall, and had the donative of Lac Marsin given him by sir Thomas, which proved very advantageous; for living now in the neighbourhood of Coieshill, his exemplary behaviour, and distinguished diligence in his calling, introduced him into the acquaintance of Mr. Kettlewell, sir Charles Holt, and the lord Simon Digby. One incident which contributed to establish his character at this juncture, was his preaching the assize sermon at Warwick, on which occasion Mr. Bray, though but young, acquitted himself to the satisfaction of the whole audience, particularly the lord Digby, who was afterwards pleased to honour him with many proofs of his friendship and esteem, recommending him to the worthy and honourable patronage of his brother, the fifth lord Digby, who some time after gave him the vicarage of Over-Whitacre in the same county, since augmented, by his patron’s uncommon generosity, with the great tithes. In 1690, the rectory of Sheldon being vacant, by Mr. Digby Bull’s refusing to take the oaths at the revolution, his lordship presented Mr. Bray to it; which preferment he held till about a quarter of a year before his death, when he resigned it by reason of his advanced age, and the known worth and abilities of his appointed successor, the Rev. Mr. Carpenter. Dec. 12, 1693, he took his master of arts degree in Hart-hall, Oxford. In this parish of Sheldon he composed his “Catechetical Lectures,” a work which met with general approbation and encouragement, and produced to him the sum of 700l. This publication, which drew him out of his rural privacy to London, determined Dr. Compton, bishop of London, to pitch upon him as a proper person to model the infant church of Maryland, and establish it upon a solid foundation. Accordingly, in April 1696, he proposed to Mr. Bray to go, on the terms of having the judicial office of commissary, valued, as was represented to him, at four hundred pounds per annum, conferred upon him, for his support in that service. Mr. Bray, disregarding his own interest, and the great profit which would have arisen from finishing his course of lectures on the plan he had formed, soon determined, in his own mind, that there might be a greater field for doing good in the Plantations, than by his labours here, and no longer demurred to the proposal, than to inquire into the state of the country, and inform himself what was most wanting to excite good ministers to embark in that design, as well as enable them most effectually to promote it. With this view he laid before the bishops the following considerations: That none but the poorer sort of clergy could be persuaded to leave their friends, and change their native country for one so remote; that such persons could not be able sufficiently to supply themselveswith books; that without such a competent provision of books, they could not answer the design of their mission; that a library would be the best encouragement to studious and sober men to undertake the service; and that, as the great inducement to himself to go, would be to do the most good of which he could be capable, he therefore purposed, that if they thought fit to encourage and assist htm in providing parochial libraries for the ministers, he would then accept of the commissary’s office in Maryland. This proposal for parochial libraries being well approved of by the bishops, and due encouragement being promised in the prosecution of the design, both by their lordships and others, he set himself with all possible application to provide missionaries, and to furnish them with libraries, intending, as soon as he should have sent both, to follow after himself. But, upon his accepting of this employment of commissary of Maryland, it fell to his share to solicit at home whatever other matters related to that church, more particularly to the settlement and establishment thereof, which he laboured to promote with unwearied diligence, and spared neither expence or trouble. But, above all, it was his greatest care, to endeavour to send over to Maryland, and the other colonies, pious men, of exemplary lives and conversations, and to furnish those whom he had a hand in sending, with good libraries of necessary and useful bdbks, to render them capable of answering the ends of their mission, and instructing the people in all things ecessary to their salvation. The sense of the clergy and inhabitants, with respect to these'important services, was testified by the solemn letters of thanks, returned him from the assemblies of Maryland, from the vestries of Boston and Baintrie in New England, from Newfoundland, Rhode Island, New York, Philadelphia, North Carolina, Bermudas, and by the acknowledgments of the royal African company, on account of those procured for their factories. About the same time it was, that the secretary of Maryland, sir Thomas Lawrence, with Mr. Bray, waited on the then princess of Denmark, in behalf of that province, humbly to request her gracious acceptance of the governor’s and country’s dutiful respects, in having denominated the metropolis of the province, then but lately built, from her royal highness’s name, Annapolis: and Mr. Bray being soon after favoured with a noble benefaction from the same royal hand, towards his libraries in America, he dedicated the first library in those parts, fixed at Annapolis, and which had books of the choicest kind belonging to it, to the value of four hundred pounds, to her memory, by the title of the Annapolitan Library, which words were inscribed on the several books. Another design was also set on foot, much about the same time, by Dr. Bray, to raise lending libraries in every deanery throughout England and Wales, out of which the neighbouring clergy might borrow the books they had occasion for, and where they might consult upon matters relating to their function, and to learning. Upon this, many lending libraries were founded in several parts of the kingdom, besides above a hundred and fifty parochial ones in Great Britain and the plantations, from ten to fifty pounds value, those in South Britain being afterwards secured to posterity, by an act of parliament passed for that purpose in 1708. Soon after, upon the repeated instances of the governor and some of the country, Mr. Bray was at the charge of taking the degree of doctor of divinity, which, though it might be of some use, as procuring a certain degree of respect, did then but ill comport with his circumstances. He took his degrees of bachelor of divinity, and doctor, together, by accumulation, not of Hart hall where he was entered, but of Magdalen college, Dec. 17, 1696. Soon after, the better to promote his main design of libraries, and to give the missionaries directions in prosecuting their theological studies, he published two books, one entitled, “Bibiiothee* Paroctnalis or, a Scheme of such Theological and other heads, as seem requisite to be perused, or occasionally consulted by the reverend Clergy, together with a catalogue of books, which may be profitably read on each of those points,” &c. The other, “Apostolic Charity, its nature and excellency considered, in a discourse upon Daniel xii. 3. preached at St. Paul’s, at the ordination of some Protestant Missionaries to be sent into the plantations. To which is prefixed, a general view of the English colonies in America, in order to show what provision is wanting for the propagation of Christianity in those parts, together with proposals for the promoting the same r to induce such of the clergy of this kingdom, as are persons of sobriety and abilities, to accept of a mission.” During this interval, viz. in the year 1697, a bill being brought into the house of commons to alienate lands given, to superstitious uses, and to vest them in Greenwich hospital, he preferred a petition to the house, that some share thereof might be appropriated for the propagation of religion in the Plantations, and that the same should be vested in a body politic, to be erected for that purpose; which petition was received very well in the house, and a fourth part of all that should be discovered, after one moiety to the discoverer, was readily and unanimously allotted by the committee for that use, it being thought by far more reasonable, to appropriate some part at least of what was given to superstitious uses, to uses truly pious, than altogether to other, though charitable purposes: but the bill was never suffered to be reported. In the year 1698, failing of a public and settled provision by law, for carrying on the service of the church in Maryland, and the other plantations, he addressed his majesty for a grant of some arrears of taxes due to the crown; and some time after, was obliged to be at the charge and trouble of going over to the king in Holland, to have the grant completed. The recovery of these arrears of taxes was represented as very feasible and very valuable, and also without any grievance *o the subject: but as they proved troublesome to be recovered, so they were scarcely of any value. All designs failing of getting a public fund for the propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts, he thereupon formed a design, of which he then drew the plan, of having a Protestant confregation, pro jide propaganda, by charter from the king, ut this he was obliged to defer till a more favourable opportunity. However, to prepare the way for such a charlet-society, he soon after made it his endeavour, to find worthy persons ready to form a voluntary society, both to carry on the service already begun for the Plantations, and to propagate Christian knowledge as well at home as abroad, hoping afterwards to get such a society incorporated. This he laid before the bishop of London, in the year 1697, and a society was constituted on this plan; and though the design of having them incorporated by charter could not then be brought to bear, yet they still subsisted and acted as a voluntary society. But their number and benefactions at last increasing, a different constitution and more extensive powers appeared necessary for the success of the undertaking: application was therefore made, by Dr. Bray, to his then majesty king William, for his royal charter. The doctor’s petition to his majesty, with other papers relating to the corporation to be erected for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts, was read May 5, 1701; and his majesty’s letters patent, under the great seal of England, for erecting a corporation, by the name of “The Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in foreign parts,” was laid before the society, and read the ninth of June following. He received no advantage all this time from his commissary’s place in Maryland; neither was any allowance made him at home, or preferment give him, to support the charge of living altogether in town, to solicit the establishment and endowment of the church of Maryland, and to provide missionaries for that and all the colonies on the Continent; which, excepting Virginia, lay upon him; all the benefactions that were received being to be laid out to raise them libraries, which also he did faster than money came in to answer the charge. This being observed by some of his friends, they endeavoured to persuade him to lay his design of going abroad aside, and take two good preferments that were then offered him at home, of as good or better value than what was proposed to him in Maryland, viz. that of sub-almoner, and the donative of Aldgate, in the city of London. But he declined all offers that were inconsistent with his going to Maryland, as soon as it should become proper for him to take that voyage. By the year 1699, having waited upwards of two years for the return of the act of religion from Maryland, with such amendments as would render it without exception at the court of England; and it being presumed by his superiors, that it would be requisite the doctor should now hasten over, as well to encourage the passing of that act in their assemblies, as to promote other matters for the service of religion there, it was signified to him from them that they would have him take the opportunity of the first ship; and indeed, the doctor having, by this time, tried all ways he could think of, and done all he was able to do here, to serve those parts, and according to proposal having provided Maryland, as also many other colonies, with a competent number of missionaries, and furnished them with good libraries, to be fixed in the places where they were sent, to remain there for ever, he was himself eager to follow, and did so accordingly, even, in the winter, though he had no allowance made him towards his charge of the voyage, and the service he was to do; but was forced to dispose of his own small effects, and raise money on credit to support him. With this poor encouragement, and thus, on his own provision, he took the voyage, December 16, 1699, and set sail from the Downs the twentieth of the same month; but was driven back into Plymouth-sound on Christmas-eve, and remained in harbour almost all the holydays, where his time was not unusefully spent, in the recovery of a tolerable library there out of dust and rubbish, which was also indebted to him for a benefaction of books and where he left a proposal for taking in subscriptions to make it a sea- port library, for the use of missionaries and sea-chaplains, as well as others. After an extremely tedious and dangerous passage, the doctor arrived at Maryland the twelfth of March, where he applied himself immediately to repair the breach made in the settlement of the parochial clergy; in order to which he consulted, in the first place, the governor, whom he found ready to concur in all proper methods for the re-establishment of their maintenance. Before the next assembly, which was to be in May following, he sent to all the clergy on the western shore, who only could come together in that season, to learn from them the disposition of the people, and to advise with them what was proper to be done, in order to dispose the members of the assembly to re-enact their law next meeting. Soon after he had dismissed their clergy, he made his parochial visitation, as far as it was possible for him at that season; in which, he met with very singular respect from persons of the best condition in the country, which the doctor turned to the advantage of that poor church. During the sessions of the assembly, and whilst the re-establishment of the church was depending, he preachod very proper and seasonable sermons, with a tendency to incline the country to the establishment of the church and clergy; all which were so well received, that he had the thanks of the assembly, by messages from the house. The doctor was providentially on such good term* with the assembly, that they ordered the attorney-general to advise with him in drawing up the bill; and that he himself might be the better advised in that case, he sent for the most experienced clergy within reach, to suggest to him, what they found would be of advantage to them and the church, to be inserted in, or left out of it; by which means the constitution of that church had much the advantage of any in America. It may not be amiss to observe in this place, that as well during the general court or assize, which preceded the assembly, and lasted thirteen days, as during the sessions of the assembly itself, he was under a necessity of entertaining the gentlemen of the province, who universally visited him; a charge, however, which he thought requisite as circumstances then were, that he might strengthen his interest in them, the better to promote the establishment of the clergy’s maintenance. The bill being prepared, passed with a nemiilt contradicente; but it was on all hands declared and confessed, that it was very providential that Dr. Bray came into the country at that juncture. Soon after the assembly was up, the commissary cited the whole clergy of the province to a general visitation at Annapolis, to be held May 22, 1700. At the close of this visitation, the clergy taking into consideration, that the opposition of the Quakers against the establishment of that church would in all probability continue, so as to get the law for its establishment so lately re-enacted, annulled again at home, they entered into debates, whether it would not be of consequence to the preservation and final settlement of that church, that the doctor should be requested to go home with the law, and to solicit the royal assent. It had been before voted, at the passing the bill in the house of burgesses, that he should be desired to request his grace of Canterbury, and the bishop of London, to favour that good law, by obtaining his majesty’s royal assent to it with all convenient speed; and the members who gave him an account of passing their vote, told him withal, that it was the general opinion of the house, that he could be most serviceable by waiting personally on their lordships, rather, than by letters, in which he conld not crowd all that might be necessary to be represented concerning the then state of the church, and the necessity, at that time, of their utmost patronage: and it was in debate, whether this should not be the desire of the assembly; but it was thought too unreasonable a request from them, who were sensible of the great danger and fatigue he had already been at in the service of that province, as they had a few days before acknowledged by a message of thanks from that house. Such were the sentiments of the members of the assembly, as to the necessity of his coming home to solicit the establishment of that church; and the clergy meeting at their visitation, some weeks after, represented to him, as the earnest desire of the more sensible persons throughout the country, as well as of the assembly-men, that he should go over with the law for England; being aware that its opponents would make the utmost efforts against the establishment of that church, by false representations at home of the numbers and riches of their party, and by insinuating, that to impose upon them an established maintenance for the clergy, would be prejudicial to the interest of the province, by obliging so many wealthy traders to remove from thence, the falsity of which, or any other suggestions, they thought him best able to make appear, by the information he had gained from this visitation, There were also many other advantages to the church in those parts, which they proposed by his coming home at that time, upon the consideration of all which he took his voyage soon after. He was no sooner arrived in England, but he found their apprehensions in Maryland'not ill grounded; but the objections raised against the plan, Dr. Bray refuted, by a printed memorial, representing truly the state of the church of Maryland, to the full satisfaction of all to whom it was communicated. The quakers’ opposition to the establishment now depending, was carried by united councils and contributions; but the doctor refuted their specious objections by unanswerable reasons, and placed the affair in such an advantageous light, that his majesty decided, without any appearance of hesitation, in the church’s favour, and gave the royal assent in these remarkable words: “Have the Quakers the benefit of a toleration? let the established church have an established maintenance.” This chargeable and laborious undertaking having swallowed up the doctor’s own small fortune, lord Weymouth generously presented him with a bill of 300l. for his own private use, a, large portion of which the doctor devoted to the advancement of his farther designs. Though he was vested with the character of commissary, yet no share of the revenue proposed was annexed to it; and his generosity even induced him to throw in two sums of fifty pounds each, that were presented to himself in Maryland, towards defraying the charges of their libraries and law. After the return of Dr. Bray from thence in 1701, he published his “Circular Letters to the Clergy of Maryland,” a memorial, representing the present state of religion on the continent of North America, and the acts of his visitation held at Annapolis; for which he had the thanks of the society above mentioned. Not only the bishop of London approved entirely of all these transactions, but also the archbishop of Canterbury declared, that he was well satisfied with the reasons of Dr. Bray’s return from the West Indies, and added, that his mission thither would be of the greatest consequence imaginable to the establishment of religion in those parts. In 1706, he had the donative of St. Botolph without Aldgate offered him again, which he then accepted of, worth about 150l. per annum. In the year 1712, the doctor printed his “Martyrology; or, Papal Usurpation,” in folio. That nothing might be wanting to enrich and adorn the work, he established a correspondence with learned foreigners of the first distinction, and called in the assistance of the most eminent hands. This work consists of some choice and learned treatises of celebrated authors, which were grown very scarce, ranged and digested into as regular an history as the nature of the subject would admit. He proposed to compile a second volume, and had, at no small expence and pains, furnished himself with materials for it; but he was afterwards obliged to lay the prosecution, of his design aside, and bequeathed by will his valuable collection of Martyrological Memoirs, both printed and manuscript, to Sion college. He was, indeed, so great a master of the history of popery, that few authors could be presumed able, with equal accuracy and learning, to trace the origin and growth of those exorbitant claims which are made by the see of Rome. He was happily formed by nature both for the active and for the retired life. Charity to the souls of other men, was wrought up to the highest pitch in his own: every reflection on the dark and forlorn condition of the Indians and negroes, excited in his bosoin the most generous emotions of pity and concern. His voyage to Holland, to solicit king William’s protection and encouragement to his good designs, and the proofs he gave of a public spirit and disinterested zeal, in such a series of generous undertakings, obtained him the esteem of M. d‘Allone of the Hague, a gentleman not more celebrated for his penetration and address in state affairs, than for a pious disposition of mind. An epistolary correspondence commenced very early between him and the doctor upon this subject; the result of which was, that M. d’Allone gave in his life-time a sum to be applied to the conversion of negroes, desiring the doctor to accept the management and disposal of it. But that a standing provision might be inade for this purpose, M. d'Allone bequeathed by will a certain sum, viz. 900 pounds, out of his English estate, to Dr. Bray and his associates, towards erecting a capital fund or stock, for converting the negroes in the British plantations. This was in the year 1723, much about which time Dr. Bray had an extremely dangerous fit of illness, so that his life and recovery were despaired of. In the year 1726, he was employed in composing and printing his “Directorium Missionarium,” his “Primordia Bibliothecaria,” and some other tracts of the like kind. About this time he also wrote a short account of Mr. Rawlet, the author of “The Christian Monitor;” and reprinted the Life of Mr. Gilpin. Some of these were calculated for the use of the mission; and in one he has endeavoured to shew, that civilizing the Indians must be the first step in any successful attempt for their conversion. In his “Primordia Bibliothecaria,” we have several schemes of parochial libraries, and a method laid down to proceed by a gradual progression, from a collection not much exceeding one pound in value, to one of a hundred. His attention to other good works occasioned no discontinuance of this design, the success of which was so much the object of his desires; and accordingly benefactions came in so fast, that he had business enough upon his hands to form the libraries, desired. As trie furnishing the parochial clergy with the means of instruction, would be an effectual method to promote Christian knowledge, so another expedient, manifestly subservient to the same end, would be, he thought, to imprint on the minds of those who are designed for the ministry, previously to their admission, a just sense of its various duties, and their great importance. With a view to this, he reprinted the “Ecclesiastes of Erasmus.” In the year 1727, an acquaintance of Dr. Bray’s made a casual visit to Whitechapel prison; and his representation of the miserable state of the prisoners had such an effect on the doctor, that he immediately applied himself to solicit benefactions in order to relieve them; and he had soon contributions sufficient to provide a quantity of bread, beef, and broth, on Sundays, and now and then on the intermediate days, for this prison and the Borough compter. To temporal, he always subjoined spiritual, provisions; and to enure them to the most distasteful part of their office, the intended missionaries were here employed in reading and preaching. On this occasion that scene of inhumanity was imperfectly discovered, which afterwards some worthy patriots of the house of commons took so much pains to inquire into and redress. Being now far advanced in years, and continually reminded of his approaching change, by the imbecility and decays of old age, he was desirous of enlarging the number of his associates, and adding such to them, ^in whose zeal and integrity he might repose an entire confidence. His inquiry into the state of the gaols, made him acquainted with Mr. (afterwards general) Oglethorpe, who accepted the trust himself, and engaged several others, some of the first rank and distinction, to act with him and the former associates. In short, most of the religious societies and good designs in London, owe grateful acknowledgment to his memory, and are, in a great measure, formed on the plans he projected; particularly the society for the reformation of manners, charity schools, and the society for the relief of poor proselytes, &c. The doctor having thus happily lodged his principal designs in the hands of able managers, departed this life February 15, 1730, in the seventy-third year of his age, leaving issue a son and daughter.

, a painter and engraver, was born at Utrecht in 1620, and went, at an early period, for improvement to Rome, where the society of Flemish painters, called Bentvogels, distinguished him by the appellation of Bartolomeo. Among the superb ruins and beautiful objects, in and about the city, he acquired an elegant taste; and he peculiarly excelled in landscapes, which he enriched with historical subjects. The figures and animals, which he introduced, were elegantly disposed, and executed with spirit and freedom: especially when they were not larger than the small size, in which he usually painted them. His manner, particularly with respect to colouring, gradually improved; hia touch is light and spirited, his tone of colouring very pleasing, his taste altogether of the Roman school, and his pictures are distinguished both by force and delicacy. The draperies of his figures, which are gracefully proportioned and designed, are easy and ornamental, and in his smallest figures, the expression is lively, sensible, and natural. His pictures are exceedingly rare, and highly valued. We have of his etching a set of 24 views, and landscapes, ornamented with ruins, &c. from his own designs. Sir Robert Strange had an excellent small picture of Breenberg’s, a view of the monument of Caecilia Metella, situated near the banks of the Tiber, a few miles distant from Rome. The foreground is beautifully enriched with figures, and the whole painted with great transparency. The sky in particular is penciled with an elegance which exceeds any thing of the kind in the works of Wouwermans. Breenberg died in 1660.

, whom Meister calls the greatest reformer of the Swiss schools which the last century produced, was born at Zurich March 1, 1701, and after going through a course of academical instruction, was admitted into orders in 1720. The space which usually intervenes between the ordination of young ministers and their establishment in a church, he employed principally in the study of the ancient authors, familiarizing himself with their language and sentiments, an employment which, like Zuinglius, he did not think unworthy of the attention of an ecclesiastic. Persius was his favourite poet, whom, he studied so critically as to furnish the president Bouhier with some happy elucidations, which the latter adopted, Breitinguer, however, was not merely a verbal critic, and considered such criticism as useful only in administering to higher pursuits in philosophy and the belles-lettres. The “Bibliotheque Helvetique” which he and Bodmer wrote, shews how criticism and philosophy may mutually assist each other. He formed an intimacy with Bodmer in early life, (see Bodmer), and both began their career as reformers of the language and taste of their country. Breitinguer found a liberal patron in the burgomaster Escher, who himself proved that the study of the Greek language is a powerful counterpoise to a bad taste, and was the person who encouraged Breitinguer principally to produce a new edition of the Septuagint translation. In 1731 he was chosen professor of Hebrew, and in ordeir to facilitate the study of that language to his pupils, he wrote his treatise on the Hebrew idioms. Some time after he was appointed vice-professor of logic and rhetoric, and from that time began the reformation which he thought much wanted in the schools, with a treatise “De eo quod nimium est in studio grammatico,” and a system of logic in Latin and German, which soon took the place of that ofWendelin. He contributed also various papers to the “Tempe Helvetica,” and the “Musaeum Helveticum,” and at the request of the cardinal Quirini drew up an account of a ms. of the Greek psalms which was found in the canons’ library. He published also the “Critical art of Poetry.” His biographer bestows great praise on all those works, and different as the subjects are, assures us that he treated each as if it had been the exclusive object of his attention. His literary acquaintance was also very extensive, and he numbered among his correspondents the cardinals Passionei and Quirini, the president Bouhier, the abbe“Gerbert de St. Blaise, with Iselin, Burmann, Crusius, le Maitre, Vernet, Semler, Ernesti, &c. But he chiefly excelled as a teacher of youth, and especially of those intended for the church, having introduced two regulations, the benefit of which his country amply acknowledges. The one was that young divines should preach, in turn, twice a week, on which occasion the sermon was criticised by the whole body of students, aided also by Breitinguer’s remarks. The other respects an institution or society of Ascetics, as they were called. This was composed of the clergy, who assembled at stated hours, to discuss subjects relative to their profession, and compose sermons, prayers, hymns, &c. Some of them also were employed in visiting the hospitals, others qualified for schoolmasters, and all were to assist the poor with advice or pecuniary aid. Breitinguer also prepared a catechism for the young, on an improved plan, and a little before his death, published” Orationes Carolina? d'Hottinguer,“dedicated to Semlin. He continued his active exertions almost to the last hour of his life, being present at an ecclesiastical council, on Dec. 13, 1776, but on his return was seized with an apoplexy, of which he died the following day. Breitinguer had as much learning as Bodmer, though not as much natural fire; and was an excellent critic. To the works already noticed, we may add his” Diatribe historico-Jiteraria in versus obscurissimos a Persio Satir. I citatos," 1740, 8vo. His edition of the Septuagint, in 4 vols. 4to, wa.t published at Zurich, (TigUnim,) 1730. The text is accurately compiled from the Oxford edition of Grabe: to which are added at the bottom of each page the various readings of the Codex Vaticanus. Nothing is altered except a few typographical errors, and some emendations of Grabe, which did not coincide with the editor’s opinion. The clearness of the type and beauty of the paper recommend it to the reader’s attention; and the care, accuracy, and erudition displayed throughout the work, may entitle it to bear, away the palm even from Grabe’s edition. Such at least is the opinion of Masch.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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