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

Enter either the ID of an entry, or one or more words to find. The first match in each paragraph is shown; click on the line of text to see the full paragraph.

Currently only Chalmers’ Biographical Dictionary is indexed, terms are not stemmed, and diacritical marks are retained.

Sharp had a servant, one Carmichael, who by his cruelties had rendered himself particularly odious to

Sharp had a servant, one Carmichael, who by his cruelties had rendered himself particularly odious to the presbyterians. Nine men formed the resolution, in 1679, of waylaying him in Magus-moor, about three miles from St. Andrew’s. While they were waiting for this man, the primate himself appeared in a coach with his daughter, and the assassins immediately considered this as a fit opportunity to rid the world of such a monster of perfidy and cruelty, and accordingly dispatched him with their swords, with every aggravation of barbarity, regardless of the tears and intreaties of his daughter. Such is the account given by all historians of the murder of Sharp; and that he fell by the hands of fanatics whom he persecuted, is certain. A tradition, however, has been preserved in different families descended from him, which may here be mentioned. The primate had, in the plenitude of his archiepiscopal authority, taken notice of a criminal amour carried on between a nobleman high in office and a lady of some fashion who lived within his diocese. This interference was in that licentious age deemed very impertinent; and the archbishop’s descendants believe that the proud peer instigated the deluded rabble to murder their ancestor. Such a tradition, however, is contrary to all historical testimony, and all historians have been particularly desirous to prove that the meeting with the assassins was purely accidental.

of the church of England, he had considered the necessity of inquiring into the characters of those who might be candidates for benefices in the disposal of the seal.

In 1667, he took the degree of M. A. and was ordained both deacon and priest. In the same year, he was recommended by the celebrated Dr. Henry More, as domestic chaplain to sir Heneage Finch, then attorney-general to four of whose sons he was tutor two of whom, having afterwards entered into orders, he successively collated, when archbishop of York, to the rich prebend of Wetwang in his cathedral. At the opening of the Sheldonian theatre in July 1669, he was incorporated M. A. with several other Cambridge gentlemen, whom the fame of that intended solemnity had brought to Oxford. In 1672, sir Heneage Finch obtained for him from the king, the archdeaconry of Berkshire, vacant by the promotion of Dr. Mews to the see of Bath and Wells. In the same year, sir Heneage was appointed lord keeper of the great seal, when he gave an eminent proof of the confidence which he placed in the judgment and integrity of his chaplain. Attached to the interests of the church of England, he had considered the necessity of inquiring into the characters of those who might be candidates for benefices in the disposal of the seal. But the many avocations of his high office prevented his personal attention to this point: he therefore addressed his chaplain to this effect: “The greatest difficulty I apprehend in the execution of my office, is the patronage of ecclesiastical preferments. God is my witness, that I would not knowingly prefer an unworthy person; but as my course of life and studies has lain another way, I cannot think myself so good a judge of the merits of such suitors as you are. I therefore charge it upon your conscience, as you will answer it to Almighty God, that upon every such occasion, you make the best inquiry, and give me the best advice you can, that I may never bestow any favour upon an undeserving man; which, if you neglect to do, the guilt will be entirely yours, and I shall deliver my soul.” This trust, so solemnly committed to his care, Dr. Sharp faithfully discharged and his advice was no less faithfully followed by his patron, so long as he continued in office and never was a conscientious disposal of church preferment of more importance than in the dissolute reign of Charles II.

In the reign of James, he was one of those distinguished preachers, who vindicated with boldness the reformed religion, and exposed

In the reign of James, he was one of those distinguished preachers, who vindicated with boldness the reformed religion, and exposed with success the errors of popery. On May 2, 1686, he delivered in his church of St. Giles’s, a memorable discourse, in which he expressed a contempt of those who could be converted by any arguments in favour of the Romish faith. It was therefore considered as a reflection not only upon those courtiers who had conformed to that religion, but even upon the king himself; and he accordingly experienced the resentment of James and his party. On June 17 following, a mandate was issued to Compton, bishop of London, to suspend the obnoxious preacher; but Compton was too firm to the protestant interest to obey so tyrannical a command. He wrote a letter to lord Sunderlaud, which he requested might be communicated to the king. In this letter, he said “that the only power he had over Sharp, was as his judge; and that he could not in that capacity condemn him, without the forms of law.” He added, " Sharp was so willing to give his majesty all reasonable satisfaction, that he made him the bearer of the letter/' But to this no answer was returned, nor was Sharp admitted. The bishop therefore recommended Sharp to desist from the exercise of his function: and prevailed on him to write a petition to the king, in which he expressed his sorrow for constructions that were offensive, and promised to be more guarded for the future. But the petition was not admitted to be read. It had been resolved indeed to humiliate Compton, as well as to punish Sharp. For, because the mild prelate refused to condemn him uncited, unheard, undefended, untried, he was himself suspended by that ecclesiastical commission, which suspended also Sharp; and was another example of the vengeance which arbitrary power determined to execute on those who had the courage to oppose it.

, in his “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” vol. VI. They were communicated to him by Mr. Gough, who purchased them in ms. at the sale of Mr. Ralph Thoresby’s Museum,

Dr. Sharp, during his suspension, resided at his deanery at Norwich. He there amused his leisure hours in collecting coins, of which, as well British, Saxon, and English, as Greek and Roman, he then and afterwards amassed sufficient to furnish a choice and valuable cabinet. To his researches of this kind, the learned and the curious are indebted for his ingenious and accurate “Remarks on the English, Scots, and Irish money,” which he communicated in 16.98-9 to Mr. Ralph Thoresby; in an introductory letter to whom he acknowledges his partiality to the study of antiquity, but modestly fears that he made that a business, which should be only a recreation. Part of these “Remarks” were published by Mr. Ives in his “Select Papers,” but the whole by Mr. Nichols, in 1785, in his “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica,” vol. VI. They were communicated to him by Mr. Gough, who purchased them in ms. at the sale of Mr. Ralph Thoresby’s Museum, in 1764.

The merit of dean Sharp was now in the highest estimation, and upon the deprivation of those bishops who refused the oaths to William and Mary, he was considered as

The merit of dean Sharp was now in the highest estimation, and upon the deprivation of those bishops who refused the oaths to William and Mary, he was considered as a proper person to succeed to one of the vacant sees. But neither the favour of his majesty, nor the persuasion of his friends, could prevail on him Ho accept the offer. He declined the promotion, not from any scruple of conscience, but from a delicacy of feeling; for he entertained a particular esteem for the prelates who were deprived. This refusal, however, which reflects equal honour on his disinterestedness and on his sensibility, displeased the king. But his friend, Dr. Tillotson, the day after his nomination to the see of Canterbury, waited on him, and proposed an expedient, by which he might accede, without violating his resolution, to the kind intention of his majesty. This was, that he should promise to accept the see of York, when it should become vacant, and that he should ground his present refusal on his wish to be preferred to his native county. To this he agreed, and Dr. Tillotson acquainted the king with what had passed; when his majesty signified his approbation of Dr. Sharp’s intention. In a few days afterwards, Lamplugh, the archbishop of York, died, and Sharp was consecrated in his room, July 5, 1691. His elevation to this dignity, says Thoresby, the historian of Leeds, was not only to the comfort and honour of his native county and family, but to the universal satisfaction and joy of the whole nation.

insist on the primitive Wilson’s acceptance of it: whose modesty had before declined the honour, and who could not even now receive it, without saying, “he was forced

In 1693, he visited his diocese, when he found the collegiate church of Southwell in the greatest confusion, its government neglected, and its members in distraction and animosity. By the wisdom and moderation of his excellent “Injunctions,” he restored it to its former decency, order, and hospitality. In 1697, as metropolitan he represented to the king, that the see of Sodor and Man had continued vacant four years, with which his majesty perhaps might not be acquainted; that, of necessity, it ought to be filled; and that the patron of the bishopric should be reminded, that any further delay would preclude his nomination. The isle of Man was greatly indebted to the archbishop for this remonstrance, as it occasioned the earl of Derby, the patron of the see, to insist on the primitive Wilson’s acceptance of it: whose modesty had before declined the honour, and who could not even now receive it, without saying, “he was forced into the bishopric.

was sworn one of her privy council, and was appointed lord almoner. In 1705, he Concurred with those who apprehended the church to be in danger; but their opinions,

On the accession of queen Anne, the archbishop was sworn one of her privy council, and was appointed lord almoner. In 1705, he Concurred with those who apprehended the church to be in danger; but their opinions, however zealously defended, when they became the subject of parliamentary debate, were discountenanced by a great majority; and the church was declared to be “in a most safe and flourishing condition.” In 1706, he was nominated one of the commissioners for treating of the union between England and Scotland. He is said to have been appointed merely out of respect to his dignity; but would not be present, even once, at the treaty. In the affair of Sacheverell, on which the opinions of men were so much divided, in 1709, he joined with those peers, who expressed the most contemptuous opinion of the sermon, bat did not > think the preacher guilty of a misdemeanour and who entered their protest against the sentence of the majority. He afterwards opposed the intended promotion of Swift to an English mitre, in this remarkable caution to the queen, "that her majesty should be sure that the man whom she

, “to recommend deserving clergymen for the crown-preferments.” Among the many distinguished divines who, on rarious occasions, had been indebted to his interest, were

In 1712, archbishop Sharp perceived his health to decline, and was recommended to try the benefit of the Bath waters, but his recovery soon appeared hopeless. Not long before his death, he procured sir William Dawes to be appointed his successor, merely from his good opinion of him, “that he would be diligent in executing the duties of his office.” In the reign of queen Anne, the greatest attention was always paid to his recommendation, and in that of William, also, he had been joined with several other disinterested prelates, in a commission from his majesty, “to recommend deserving clergymen for the crown-preferments.” Among the many distinguished divines who, on rarious occasions, had been indebted to his interest, were his particular friend Tillotson, the bishops Bull, Beveridge, Wilson, Potter, and Gibson; Dr. Prideaux, though he himself thought otherwise, and Dr. Mills.

ages, as one of the greatest ornaments of this country. He was that faithful and vigilant governor, who promoted the diligent clergy of his own diocese to the dignities

The character of Sharp, says Mr. Todd, whose accurate and well-arranged memoir we have followed, affords one of the best examples that can challenge imitation, whether he is considered as a man, as a scholar, as a divine, or as a diocesan. His amiable disposition and unshaken integrity, his distinguished learning and extensive charity, will transmil his name to latest ages, as one of the greatest ornaments of this country. He was that faithful and vigilant governor, who promoted the diligent clergy of his own diocese to the dignities in his cathedral: who conferred, indeed, on the deserving whatever was in his own gift, without the least regard to political opinions and partv interest; who enforced the laudable injunction of residence to the prebendaries of York, Southwell, and Rippon: who, in all respects, promoted by true discipline the decency of the church, as “by sound doctrine he exhorted and convinced the gainsayers.

Dr. Thomas Sharp left three sons, John, who after various promotions became also archdeacon of Northumberland,

Dr. Thomas Sharp left three sons, John, who after various promotions became also archdeacon of Northumberland, and a prebendary of Durham, and died in 1792. He had the merit of arranging and establishing lord Crew’s noble charity for sick and lame seamen at Bamborough, and conducted the institution with the greatest care and humanity. Dr. Sharp’s other sons were William, many years an eminent surgeon in London, who died in Is 10, aged eightyone, and Granville, the subject of the next article.

h from which he had before rescued him. Mr. Sharp instantly went to the prison, and found the negro, who in sickness and misery had been discarded by his master, sent

, eminent as a Christian, a scholar, and a gentleman, one of the sons of Dr. Thomas Sharp, and grandson to the archbishop, was born in 1734. He was educated for the bar, but did not practise at it. When he quitted the legal profession, he obtained a place in the ordnance office, which he resigned at the commencement of the American war; of the principles of which he did not approve. He now took chambers in the Temple, and devoted himself to a life of study; at the same time, laying himself out for public utility. He first became known to the public in the case of a poor and friendless negro, of the name of Somerset. This person had been brought from the West Indies to England, and falling into bad health, was abandoned by his master, and turned into the streets, either to die, or to gain a miserable support by precarious charity. In this destitute state, almost, it is said, on the point of expiring on the pavement of one of the public streets of London, Mr. Sharp chanced to see him. He instantly had him removed to St. Bartholomew’s hospital, attended personally to his wants, and in a short time had the happiness to see him restored to health. Mr. Sharp now clothed him, and procured him comfortable employment in the service of a lady. Two years had elapsed, and the circumstance almost, and the name of the poor negro, had escaped the memory of his benefactor, when Mr. Sharp received a letter from a person, signing himself Somerset, confined in the Poultry Compter, stating no cause for his commitment, but intreating his interference to save him from a greater calamity even than the death from which he had before rescued him. Mr. Sharp instantly went to the prison, and found the negro, who in sickness and misery had been discarded by his master, sent to prison as a runaway slave. Mr. Siiarp went immediately to the lord major, William Nash, esq. who caused the parties to be brought before him; when, after a long hearing, the upright magistrate decided that the master had no property in the person of the negro, in this country, and gave the negro his liberty. The master instantly collared him, in the presence of Mr. Sharp and the lord mayor, and insisted on his right to keep him as his property. Mr. Sharp now claimed the protection of the English law, caused the master to be taken into custody, and exhibited articles of peace against him for an assault and battery. After various legal proceedings, supported by him with most undaunted spirit, the twelve judges unanimously concurred in an opinion that the master had acted criminally. Thus did Mr. Sharp emancipate for ever the race of blacks from a state of slavery, while on British ground, and in fact banished slavery from Great Britain. Such an incident could not fail deeply to impress a benevolent mind; and slavery, in every shape and country, became the object of his unceasing hostility. In 17G9, he published a work, entitled “A Representation of the injustice and dangerous tendency of toleratinaSlavery, or of admitting the least claim of private property in the persons of men in England. 7 ' Having succeeded in the case of an individual negro, he interested himself in the condition of the many others who were seen wandering about the streets of London, and at his own expence collected a number of them, whom he sent back to Africa, where they termed a colony on the river Sierra Leone. He performed a still more essential service to humanity, by becoming the institutor of the” Society for the abolition of the Slave trade;“which, after contending against a vast mass of opposition, at length succeeded, as far as this country was concerned, and it is hoped will soon be universal. Similar principles led Mr. Sharp to use his endeavours to restrain the practice of marine impressment; and a citizen of London having been carried off by a press-warrant, Mr. Sharp obtained a habeas corpus from the court of king’s bench, to bring him back from a vessel at the Nore; and by his arguments obliged the court to liberate him. His political principles led him to become the warm advocate of” parliamentary reform,“and he published” A Declaration of the people’s natural right to a share in the legislature, which is the fundamental principle of the British constitution of state." In this he proposed to restore the ancient tithing$, hundreds, &c. and the whole body of the people were to form a national militia, each thousand to constitute a regiment, the alderman or magistrate to be the colonel; and each hundred to constitute a company, the constable of each fo.r the time being to be their captain. So many of the thousands to be summoned once in every year, by their magistrate, as would have a right to vote in their respective hundreds, before the constable, in the choice of their part of the representative legislature. After stating that the division of this kingdom into tithings and hundreds was instituted by the immortal Alfred, he endeavours to prove that such a division is consistent with the most perfect state of liberty that man is capable of enioying, and yet fully competent to answer all the purposes of mutual defence, to secure the due execution of the laws, and maintain public peace. Mr. Sharp was educated in the principles of the established church, and through life shewed a warm attachment to them. This led him to recommend an episcopal church in America; and he introduced the first bishops from that country to the archbishop of Canterbury for consecration.

of the great doctrine in question, the divinity of Christ, no impartial reader, I think, can doubt, who is at all acquainted with the original language of the New Testament.

Mr. Sharp wrote, besides the works already mentioned 1. “Remarks on several very important Prophecies in five Parts. I. Remarks on the 13th, 14th, 15th, and 16th Verses in the seventh Chapter of Isaiah; in answer to Dr. Williams’s Critical Dissertation on the same subject; II. A Dissertation on the nature and style of Prophetical Writings, intended to illustrate the foregoing Remarks III. A Dissertation on Isaiah vii. 8 IV. On Gen. xlix. 10; V. Answer to some of the principal Arguments used by Dr. Williams in Defence of his Critical Dissertation,” 1768, 8vo. 2. “A Representation of the injustice and dangerous tendency of tolerating Slavery, &c.” with some other tracts in support of his opinions. 3. “Remarks on the Encroachments on the Riyer Thames, near Durham Yard,1771, 8vo. 4. “Remarks on the Opinions of some of the most celebrated writers on Crown Law, respecting the due distinction between Manslaughter and Murder; being an attempt to shew tiiat the plea of sudden anger cannot remove the imputation and guilt of murder, when a mortal wound is wilfully given with a weapon: that the indulgence allowed by the courts to voluntary manslaughter in rencounters, and in sudden affrays and duels, is indiscriminate, and without foundation in law: and that impunity in such cases of voluntary manslaughter is one of the principal causes of the continuance and present increase of the base and disgraceful practice of duelling. To which are added, some thoughts on the particular case of the gentlemen of the army, when involved in such disagreeable private differences. With a prefatory address to the reader, concerning the depravity and folly of modern men of honour, falsely so called; including a short account of the principles and designs of the work,1773, 8vo. 5. “Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek of the New Testament; containing many new proofs of the Divinity of Christ, from passages which are wrongly translated in the common English Version. To which is added a plain matter-of-fact argument for the Divinitv of Christ, by the Editor,” Durhiin, '798, 8vo. The first twenty pages of this important, critical, and theological work, appeared in t797, in the second fasciculus of the “Museum Oxoniense,” published by Dr. Burgess, the present very excellent bishop of St. David’s. A Supplement to the Remarks was, at the same time, promised in the third fasciculus of the Museum. “But,” says Dr. Burgess, “as many learned friends concurred with the editor in thinking that the Remarks contain a very valuable accession to the evidences of Christ’s divinity, he was unwilling to detain the Supplement, which exemplifies the rules of the Remarks, any longer from the public; and has, therefore, prevailed on Mr. Sharp to permit him to publish it with the Remarks. He earnestly recommends them both to Mr. Wakeneiu’s must deliberate consideration. To Mr. Sharp’s Remarks and Supplement he has subjoined a plain historical proof of the divinity or Cnrist, iounded on Chnst’s own testimony of himself, attested and, interpreted by his living witnesses and enemies, the Jews; on the evidence of his trial and crucifixion; and on the most explicit declarations of the apostles after the resurrection of Christ. What appeared to him on a former occasion (in a sermon on the divinity of Christ, 1792, second edition), to be a substantial and unanswerable argument, he has, in this little exercise on the subject, endeavoured to render an easy and popular proof of our Saviour’s divinity. It was printed separately for the use of the unlearned part of his parishioners; and is subjoined to this treatise for the convenience of other unlearned readers, and such as have not much considered the subject.” A second edition of the “Remarks” was published in 1804, with the following letter to Mr. Sharp prefixed: “Dear sir, I have great pleasure in presenting you with a new edition of your valuable tract. That you have very happily and decisively applied your rule of construction to the correction of the common English version of the New Testament, and to the perfect establishment of the great doctrine in question, the divinity of Christ, no impartial reader, I think, can doubt, who is at all acquainted with the original language of the New Testament. I say decisively applied, because I suppose, in all remote and written testimony, the weight of evidence must ultimately depend on the grammatical analogy of the language in which it is recorded. I call the rule yours; for, though it was acknowledged and applied by Bege and others to some of the texts alluded to by you, yet never so prominently, because singly, or so effectually, as in your remarks, In the addition to the former edition, I wished to excite the attention of a learned and declared enemy to the doctrine of our Saviour’s divinity; but he is no more and J do not know that he even expressed, or has left behind him, any opinion on the subject, or that any other Socinian has undertaken to canvass the principles of your Remarks. The public has, however, lately seen an ample and learned confirmation of your rule, drawn from a very minute, laborious, and candid examination of the Greek and Latin fathers, in ‘Six Letters addressed to Granville Sharp, Esq. respecting his Remarks on the Uses of the Definitive Article in the Greek Text of the New Testament. London, 1802.’ I have taken some pains to improve the plain argument for Christ’s divinity, which I before subjoined to your Remarks. In this edition I have prefixed to it a table of evidences by Dr. Whitby, which I hope the younger part of your readers will find useful to them in pursuing the different branches of this most important subject; and you, J think, will not disapprove, because it is conducive to the principal purpose of your tract.” Bishop Burgess afterwards adverted, in a note on his primary charge, to a weak attack on Mr. Granville Sharp, in a publication entiled “Six more Letters, &c. by Gregory Blunt, esq.1803. Of this Dr. Burgess says with great truth, “These letters are very well calculated to mislead the unlearned reader, by abstract questions, gratuitous assertions, and hypothetical examples, but communicate nothing on the score of authority, which bears any comparison with the unanimous consent of the Greek fathers; and nothing at all which has any pretence to grammatical observation.” In the latter part of 1812, Mr. Sharp demonstrated that his faculties retained their full vigour, by an elaborate illustration of the LXVIIIth Psalm, relative to the Hill of Bashan, and the calling together of the Jews.

outhful mistake, which rendered his continuance at the seminary uneasy to himself and his relations, who becoming acquainted with the late Principal Blackwell, then

, D. D. F. R. and A. Ss. master of the Temple, and chaplain in ordinary to his majesty, was born in Yorkshire in 1713, and, after passing some time at the grammar-school of Hull, came to Westminster, where he studied under the celebrated Dr. Freind. While here, he fell into a youthful mistake, which rendered his continuance at the seminary uneasy to himself and his relations, who becoming acquainted with the late Principal Blackwell, then at London, they settled Mr. Sharpe with him in the summer of 1731. Mr. Blackwell was at that time Professor of Greek in the Marischal College of Aberdeen, and was publishing his “Enquiry into the Life and Writings of Homer,” so that Mr. Sharpe’s friends judged he might have a fair opportunity of making a considerable proficiency in the Greek language under a person so eniinently skilled in it. Mr. Sharpe was boarded in his house four years without stirring out of Scotland; and after he had finished his studies, returned to England, and in a few years entered into orders. When Dr. Seeker was promoted to the deanery of St. Paul’s, Mr. Sharpe was appointed minister of the Broad -way chapel, St. James’s, in which he continued till the death of Dr. Nicholls, of the Temple, when, on account of his great learning, he was declared the Doctor’s successor, and in this station he was at his death, which happened at the Temple-house, Jan. 8, 1771. The Doctor never was married. His abilities and attainments in every kind of useful knowledge were conspicuous, and his skill in the Oriental languages extensive and uncommon.

Thomas Hyde, S. T. P. separatim edidit,“1767. Some of the prints in this were etched by Dr. Sharpe, who had a good talent in that branch of art, and sometimes, for

His works were, 1. “A Review of the Controversy about the meaning of Demoniacs in the New Testament,1738. 2. ' A Defence of the late Dr. Clarke, against the reply of Sieur L. P. Thummig,“1744. 3.” Two Dissertations, the first upon the origin of languages, the second upon the original powers of letters, with a Hebrew Lexicon,“1751. 4.” A Dissertation on the Latin Tongue,“1751. 5.” An Argument in defence of Christianity, taken from the concessions of the most ancient adversaries,“1755. 6.” An Introduction to Universal History, translated from the Latin of Baron Holberg,“1758. 7.” A second argument in defence of Christianity, taken from the ancient prophecies,“1762. 8.” The rise and fall of the holy city and temple of Jerusalem,“1764. 9.” The want of universality no objection to the Christian religion,“1765. 10.” Syntagma Dissertationum quas olim auctor doctissirnus Thomas Hyde, S. T. P. separatim edidit,“1767. Some of the prints in this were etched by Dr. Sharpe, who had a good talent in that branch of art, and sometimes, for his amusement, took likenesses of singular persons, and engraved them. Cole speaks of” an admirable etching“by him, of a country farmer asleep in a chair. He was a tenant of the Temple estate, and so very lethargic as to fall asleep in the chair when he was waiting for Dr. Sharpe’s receipt for his rent. 11.” The origin and structure of the Greek tongue,“1768. 12.” A Letter to the Right Rev. the Bishop of Oxford, containing remarks upon some strictures made by Archbishop Seeker on Merrick’s Annotations on the Psalms,“1769. 13.” The advantages of a Religious Education, a sermon preached at the Asylum,“1770. These publications are incontestable evidences of the abilities and application of the learned author, who also carried on an extensive literary correspondence with many eminent scholars both of his own and other countries, particularly Dr. Sykes and Dr. Hunt. Two volumes of his original letters are now before us, the one entitled * c From the time I went abroad,” which appears to have been in 1752; the other “Concerning the Latin and Hebrew Dissertations.” There are few particulars of a biographical kind in them, but abundant proof of the facility with which he could enter upon learned discussions without apparent preparation. After his death a volume of his “Sermons” was published by the Rev. Joseph Robertson in 1772.

deputy botanical lecturer. To this office he was appointed by Dr. Sibthorp, the botanical professor, who was then upon the eve of setting out upon his travels in Greece,

, an eminent naturalist, the younger of two sons of the rev. Timothy Shaw, was born Dec. 10, 1751, at Bienon in Buckinghamshire, of which place his father was vicar. His propensity for the studies which rendered him distinguished, discovered itself at the early age of four years; when, entering into no such amusements as those with which children are generally delighted, he entertained himself with books, or wandered by the sides of ditches, catching insects, and taking them home with him, where he would spend all his leisure time in watching their motions and examining: their structure. He was educated entirely by his father; and as the precocity of his intellect gave him an aptitude for acquiring whatever it was wished that he should acquire, he was, to the credit of the preceptor as well as the pupil, abundantly qualified at the age of little more than thirteen, to enter upon a course of academical studies. In 1765 he was entered at Magdalen -hall, Oxford, where he was no less distinguished by the regularity of his conduct than by an uncommonly diligent application to his studies. On May 24, 1769, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and on May ^6, 1772, to that of master of arts. That he might assist his father in his clerical duties, he took orders, and was ordained deacon in 1774, at Buckden, by Green, bishop of Lincoln, and performed regularly the duty at Stoke and Buckland, two chapels, each three miles apart from Bierton, the mother-church. As his predilection for natural science never forsook him, and feeling a stronger inclination for studies more connected with it than parochial duties and theological acquirements, he laid aside the clerical habit, and went to Edinburgh, where he engaged in a course of reading, and qualified himself for a profession more congenial with his favourite pursuit. Having directed his views to medicine, he attended for three years the lectures of Black and Cullen, and other eminent professors, and then returned to Oxford, where he obtained an appointment by which he acquired much celebrity, viz. deputy botanical lecturer. To this office he was appointed by Dr. Sibthorp, the botanical professor, who was then upon the eve of setting out upon his travels in Greece, &c. Upon the death of Dr. Sibthorp, Dr. Shaw was a candidate for the vacant chair of the professor of botany; and so high did the votes of the members of the university run in his favour, that he would have succeeded in his wishes, had it not been discovered that the statute relating to that professorship enacted that no person in orders should be deemed eligible. On October 17, 1787, he was admitted to the degrees of bachelor and doctor of medicine. It appears from the catalogue of of Oxford graduates that when he took these degrees he had removed his name from Magdalen-hall to Magdalencollege. In this year Dr. Shaw removed to London, where he practised as a physician. In 1788 some gentlemen, distinguished for their attachment to the study of, and eminent for their acquirements in natural history, established a society for the advancement of this science, under the name of the Linmean Society. Dr. (now sir James) Smith was elevated to the chair of president of this society, and Dr. Shaw was appointed one of the vice-presidents. Among the Linnsean transactions appear the following articles, contributed by Dr. Shaw: “Description of the Stylephorus cordatus, a new fish.” “Description of the Cancer stagnalis of Linnaeus.” “Remarks on Scolopendra electrica, and Scolopendra subterranea.” “A Note to Mr. Kirby’s Description of the new species of Hirudo.” “Account of a minute Ichneumon.” “Description of a species of Mycteria,” “Description of the Mus Bursarius, and Tubularia magnifica.

y, illustrative of the accessions which had been made to natural science by the discoveries of those who had attempted to explore the undefined shores of New Holland.

Dr. Shaw’s fame, which had already beamed forth in Oxford, now began to shine with effulgence in London; for about this time he was becoming popular as a lecturer, and admired as an author. His lectures at the Leverian Museum, both before and after that rich and incomparable collection was removed from Leicester-house, never failed to attract a numerous and scientific audience. An elegant production, entitled “The Naturalist’s Miscellany,” made its appearance in 1789: this work was published monthly, in numbers, and had extended at the time of the decease of Dr. Shaw as far as No. 286. A posthumous number, with an index, closed this beautiful and extensive production, which comprises, in one thousand and sixty-four plates, figures of the more curious and remarkable productions of the three kingdoms of Nature, more particularly of the animal kingdom, with descriptions in English and Latin. In this year also Dr. Shaw was elected a Fellow of the Royal Society, an honour which few among its members have better deserved, and none ever more justly prized. A periodical work appears to have been projected by him in 1790, entitled “Speculum Linnseum, or Linnsean Zoology,” 4to: one number only appeared. A vacancy happening in the British Museum in 1791, Dr. Shaw became a candidate for the office of a librarian upon that great national establishment; and his eminent qualifications procured him the appointment of assistant keeper of the Natural History. The melancholy scenes and the disagreeable effluvia of a sick chamber, had given him a disgust for the practice of a profession whose studies he had pursued with considerable ardour and delight. Upon this appointment, therefore, he resigned with cheerfulness whatever prospects he might have had as a physician, for the narrow income of an office which afforded him the most enlarged opportunities of prosecuting his researches into that science to which he was most devoted. Between the years 1792 and 1796 appeared “Musei Leveriani explicatio Anglica et Latina, opera et studio Georgii Shaw, M.D. R.S.S. Adduntur figurae eleganter sculptse et coloratas. Irnpensis Jacobi Parkinson.” In 1794 a splendid publication was undertaken by Dr. Shaw, in conjunction with sir James Smith and Mr. Sowerby, illustrative of the accessions which had been made to natural science by the discoveries of those who had attempted to explore the undefined shores of New Holland. The animals peculiar to that country were described by Dr. Shaw, in a work published in one volume 4to, entitled “The Zoology of New Holland;” the beautiful and accurate figures which adorned it were delineated by Mr. Sowerby: the botanical part, which formed another portion of this work, was written by sir James Smith, and published under the title of “The Botany of New Holland.” Sixty large and beautiful prints, published by J. Miller, the celebrated editor of the Gardener’s Dictionary, under the title of “Various subjects in Natural History, wherein are delineated Birds, Animals, and many curious Plants,” not meeting with a quick sale, from want of letter-press containing descriptions of the plates, Dr. Shaw was applied to, to supply the deficiency. This work was published in 1796, under the following title: “Cimelia Physica: Figures of rare and curious Quadrupeds, Birds, &c. together with several most elegant Plants, engraved and coloured from the subjects themselves: with descriptions by Geo. Shaw, M. D. F. R. S.” This, and the Museum Leverianum, are amongst the most magnificent publications England has produced.

f natural history, the objects of which had become exceedingly numerous by the discoveries of those, who through love of enterpnze, or stimulated by commerce, ventured

From the extended state of natural history, the objects of which had become exceedingly numerous by the discoveries of those, who through love of enterpnze, or stimulated by commerce, ventured to traverse the globe in search of new regions, it became desirable that a work should be accomplished which should give, in a systematic, yet a popular form, the description and history of those numerous beings, among which man holds so elevated a place, and which, equally with himself, have proceeded from the grand source of creative power and goodness. The verbosity and the reveries of BufTon rendered his, otherwise valuable, work uselessly extensive; and the systematic brevity of Linnæus was too dry for any but philosophers. To give a systematic history of the animal kingdom, free from the redundancies of the one, and more inviting to the general reader than the philosophic production of the other, was a comprehensive and arduous undertaking, which Dr. Shaw ventured to attempt, and had, with an ability which will for ever render him illustrious amongst his countrymen, nearly completed. This work was entitled “General Zoology, or Natural History, with plates from the best authorities, and most select specimens.” Of this celebrated work, Parts I and 2 of the first volume were published in 1800, and from time to time seven more volumes in the life-time of the author. Among his papers was found a ninth volume prepared for the press, which is intended for publication.

hat regards personal merit, or public service, his name will be transmitted to posterity among those who give lustre to their age and country, who do honour to human

As few men have left behind them a character more estimable in every quality that regards personal merit, or public service, his name will be transmitted to posterity among those who give lustre to their age and country, who do honour to human nature by their virtues, and who contribute to the advancement of science and the interests of literature by their superior talents. Endued by nature with considerable intellectual parts, and those improved by assiduous cultivation, he acquired a vast stock of general knowledge. His extensive information was treasured up without confusion, applied in his works with discernment, and communicated to every inquirer with cheerfulness and freedom. At an early period of life he became an excellent scholar. He wrote Latin with facility, with elegance, and with great purity, Upon most subjects of polite literature he manifested in his conversations a critical taste, and a high relish for the productions of genius. Among the relaxations from graver studies, poetical compositions occasionally employed his talents, and the productions of this kind, which are dispersed in his General Zoology, and in Dr. Thornton’s “Temple of Flora,” are equally creditable to his taste and his imagination. He had a prodigious and a most tenacious memory: to such a perfection did he enjoy this faculty, that he could refer persons correctly to almost every author he had read, for any fact that they needed. In trials that have been made upon him in the earlier part of his life, he could repeat the preceding or following line of any one recited from Milton’s Paradise Lost, or the works of Horace. Dr. Shaw’s reputation was great in botany, but still greater in Zoology. Herein posterity will be ever indebted for the services he has rendered this branch of natural history, especially that portion of it which relates to arrangement and description. A clear and correct account of the generic and specific character of animals, the essentials of this science, is the remarkable feature and meritorious character of all his works. Having in the first place strictly attended to these, he then proceeded to give his subjects all the suitable embellishments that extensive erudition, good taste, and a correct memory could bestow. His descriptions, if they were minute, yet they were never trifling; if enlivened by anecdote, and rich in information, it was done with propriety, and without being tedious; they were too, always popular, and at the same time possessing all that the dignity of science required. His hours of amusement were frequently employed upon mechanical contrivances, connected with his philosophical pursuits, or his domestic comforts, in which he shewed great ingenuity in invention, and a delicate neatness in execution. His behaviour was remarkably polite. In his person he was neat, gentlemanlike in his dress, methodical in his habits, in the disposition of his library, his papers, and in the order of every thing that belonged to him. His natural temper was lively, good-humoured, sociable. His conversation was precise, full of information, always amusing, frequently smart and witty. He was universally esteemed by men of science, beloved by a large circle of his friends, and had it not been for a few sarcastic expressions which he had, without any malicious intention, suffered to escape him, he had lived without an enemy. None of those passions which produce so much disquietude and misery amongst mankind, seem ever to have found a place in his bosom. He was frugal in his expences, moderate in his wishes, temperate to an uncommon degree in eating and drinking, and so chaste in his desires, that no one could reproach him with the commission of an indecent action, or the use of an immodest word; nay, such was the delicacy and purity of his mind, that the writer of this memoir has repeatedly heard him assert, thnt he had scrupulously endeavoured to avoid in his writings every expression which a woman would blush to read. Sincerity of heart, innocence of mind, and simplicity of manners, eminent!/ and uniformly marked his whole character. Of his religious sentiments little is known, as he was remarkably reserved upon all subjects connected with his personal conduct and opinions. He however sufficiently shewed in his conversation, and by performing the public duties of religion in his attendance upon the service of the Church of England, that his notions were, in this respect, serious and pious.

himself and his family were afflicted with the plague, being infected by some relations from London, who came from thence to avoid it. He buried two friends, two children,

From Whatton he removed to Cotes, a small village near Loughborough, and during his stay there both himself and his family were afflicted with the plague, being infected by some relations from London, who came from thence to avoid it. He buried two friends, two children, and a servant, of that distemper, during the progress of which he and his wife attended each other, and he himself was forced to bury the dead in his own garden. Towards the latter end of the year 1666, he removed to Asliby de la Zouch, and was chosen in 1668 to be sole school-master of the free-school there, the revenue of which he procured to be increased for himself and his successors, and by his interest with the gentlemen in the neighbourhood, was enabled to re-build the school and school-house: he also obtained a licence from archbishop Sheldon to teach school in any part of his province; and Dr. Fuller, bishop of Lincoln, in whose diocese the school was situated, granted him the same upon such terms as to subscription as Mr. Shaw chose. This school, his piety, learning, and temper, soon raised into such reputation, that the number of his scholars increased in so great a degree, that he had often 160 boys or more under his care. Many of these afterwards became distinguished characters in the three professions of law, physic, and divinity.

n ornament to his profession, and a benefactor to his country. Besides bishop Fuller abovementioned, who said that he was glad to have so worthy a man in his diocese

He died Jan. 22, 1696, in the 59th year of his age, leaving behind him the character of an upright, modest, sensible, aud moderate man, an ornament to his profession, and a benefactor to his country. Besides bishop Fuller abovementioned, who said that he was glad to have so worthy a man in his diocese upon any terms, he appears to have been highly respected by Dr. Barlow, the subsequent bishop of Lincoln, and lived likewise on friendly terms with the vicar of Ashby de la Zouch. When toleration was granted to the dissenters, he licensed his school for a place of worship, but contrived that the meetings should be between church, hours, and attended the church at the usual periods with his whole school and many of his congregation. He wrote several religious tracts, particularly “Immanuel;” “The True Christian 1 s Test,” “The voice of one crying in the wilderness, &c;” and a Latin grammar, and an epitome of the same; with, what may seem very odd in one of his character, two comedies, 'the one called “Words made visible, or Grammar and Rhetoric,1679, 8vo the other, “The different Humours of Men,1692, 12mo, which were acted by his scholars for their amusement before the neighbours at Christmas.

and afterwards under his successor, the rev. William Bagshaw Stevens, an ingenious poet and scholar, who died in 1800. From this accomplished man, for whom he retained

, the historian of Staffordshire, was son of the rev. Stebbing Shaw, rector of Hartshorn, on the borders of Derbyshire, near Ashby de la Zouch. He was born in 1762, at or near Stone, in Staffordshire; in the neighbourhood of which town, his mother inherited a small landed estate, which descended to this her only child. He was educated at the school of Repton, near Harishorn, first under the rev. Dr. Prior, and afterwards under his successor, the rev. William Bagshaw Stevens, an ingenious poet and scholar, who died in 1800. From this accomplished man, for whom he retained an unabated friendship till death, he early imbibed a warm love of literature. At the close of the month of October, 1780, he became a resident member of Qu.en’s-college, in Cambridge. At this period, his first literary predilections were fixed on English poetry, of which he had caught an enthu iastic fondness from his last master. But even this partiality yielded to his propensity for music; in which his performance on the violin occupied a large portion of his time, and he had already attained considerable excellence. In due time he took his degree of B. A. was elected to a fellowship, and went into orders. Not long afterwards, the intimacy which, for almost half a century, had subsisted between his father and his neighhour, sir Robert Burdett, of Foremark, in which hospitable mansion the son had passed many of his early days, induced him to undertake the superintending care of the present sir Francis, then lately released from Westminster school, at his father’s villa at Ealing. With this pupil, he made a tour to the Highlands of Scotland in the autumn of 1787, of which he kept a diary. This diary, originally composed merely for private amusement, he afterwards inconsiderately published; and thus, it must be confessed, made his first appearance as an author with some disadvantage; luckily, however, the publication was anonymous. In the following year, he made a tour to the West of England, of which he published a more laboured account, with his name. The book was well received; and, though the style is not simple and easy (an attainment which indeed the author never reached), yet it discovered a dawning attention to the history of families and property, to which his industrious researches were afterwards directed with considerable success. In 1789, about the time of the publication of his tour, he obtained admission to the reading-room of the British Museum. His account of the vast stores of topographical and genealogical materials deposited there, fired the imagination of one of his learned friends, who resided in London, and with whom he passed much of his time. To this connection may be ascribed the origin of a periodical publication, entitled “The Topographer,” which commenced in the spring of 1789, and was carried on for more than two years, during which many useful materials towards the Topographical History of the Kingdom were communicated. Amongst other researches, Mr. Shaw spent part of the summer of 1790 in Sussex, and visited very many parishes, and collected a large store of church notes, of which only a small number was exhausted when the work closed. In these perambulations, his own faithful and constantly exercised pencil, enabled him to be doubly useful.

f his second volume, which was in all respects equal to the former. He had now succeeded his father, who died at the close of 1799, in the living of Hartshorn, a village

In 1801 he published the first part of his second volume, which was in all respects equal to the former. He had now succeeded his father, who died at the close of 1799, in the living of Hartshorn, a village rendered remarkable as the birth-place of the celebrated dean Stanhope, whose father enjoyed this preferment. Here he spent the summer, and found some relaxation from his severe studies, in improving his house and garden. But his enjoyments were not uninterrupted. A bilious habit rendered him perpetually subject to slow fevers. The fatigue of exercise in a burning sun now brought on a more fierce attack. He recovered, however, and returned to London in the winter of 1801, and went on with his work. But it was soon perceived that his constitution had received an alarming shock. Early in the spring he found himself unfit for his usual occupations. A new attack of a dreadful and lamentable fever ensued but from this too he was at length restored. All application to books was now prohibited and in June or July it was deemed advisable for him to pay a visit to the Kentish coast, attended by his only relation, an affectionate half-sister, the daughter of his father by a second wife. They went first to Ramsgate, and thence removed to the more quiet seclusion of Sandgate, near Hythe. Here he passed the autumn, and was so well that he joined some friends in a few days expedition to the opposite coast, and visited Boulogne. Towards the end of October 1802 his disorder suddenly returned with more violence than before. After a struggle of ten days, it was deemed right to remove him to London for better advice, where he died on the 28th, aged forty-one, deeply lamented by all vvho knew him, and leaving a chasm in the department of literature which he had embraced, not easy to be supplied

tion; and the improvements wero made, and the edition prepared for the press, by the author himself, who expressly presented the work, with these additions, alterations,

, a celebrated traveller, son of Mr. Gabriel Shaw, was born at Kenda!, in Westmorland, about 1692. He received his education at the grammar-school of that place; was admitted of Queen’s-college, Oxford, Oct. 5, 1711, where he took the degree of B. A. July 5, 1716; M. A. Jan. 16, 1719; went into orders, and was appointed chaplain to the English factory at Algiers. In this station he continued several years, and thence took opportunities of travelling into several parts. During his absence he was chosen fellow of his college, March J 6, 1727 and at his return in 1733 took the degree of doctor in divinity, July 5, 1734, and in the same year was elected F. R. S. He published the first edition of his “Travels” at Oxford in 1738, and bestowed on the university some natural curiosities, and some ancient coins and busts (three of which are engraved among the “Marmora Oxoniensia”) which he had collected in his travels. On the death of Dr. Felton in 1740, he was nominated by his college principal of St. Edmund-hall, which he raised from a ruinous condition by his munificence; and was presented at the same time to the vicarage of Bramley in Hants. He was also regius professor of Greek at Oxford till his death, which happened Aug. 15, 1751. He was buried in Bramley church, where a monument was erected to his memory, with an inscription written by his friend Dr. Browne, provost of Queen’s-college, Oxford. His “Travels” were translated into French, and printed in 1743, 4to, with several notes and emendations communicated by the author. Dr. Richard Pocock, afterwards bishop of Ossory, having attacked those “Travels” in his “Description of the East,” our author published a supplement, by way of vindication, in 1746. In the preface, to the “Supplement” he -says, the intent and design of it is partly to vindicate the Book of Travels from some objections that have been raised against it by the author of “The Description of the East, &c.” He published <c A farther vindication of the Book of Travels, and the Supplement to it, in a Letter to the Right reverend Robert Clayton, D. D. lord bishop of Clogher.“This letter consists of six folio pages, and bears date in 1747. After the doctor’s death, an improved edition of his book came out in 1757, under the title of” Travels or Observations relating to several parts of Barbary and the Levant, illustrated with cuts. The second edition, with great improvements. By Thomas Shaw, D. D. F. R. S. regius professor of Greek, and principal of St. Edmund Hall, in the university of Oxford." The contents of the supplement are interwoven in this edition; and the improvements wero made, and the edition prepared for the press, by the author himself, who expressly presented the work, with these additions, alterations, and improvements, to the public, as an essay towards restoring the ancient geography, and placing in a proper light the natural and sometimes civil history of those countries where he travelled. The Sliawia in botany received its name in honour of Dr. Shaw, who has given a catalogue, in alphabetica order, accompanied with rude plates, of the rarer plants observed by him in Barbary, Egypt, and Arabia. The species amount to 632, and the catalogue is enriched witli several synonyms, as well as occasional descriptions and remarks. His dried specimens are preserved at Oxford. The orthography of the name is attended with difficulty to foreigners, our w being as unmanageable to them, as their multiplied consonants are to us. Some of them blunder into Schawia, Shaavia, or Shavia. Perhaps the latter might be tolerated, were it not for the ludicrous ambiguity of Shavius itself, applied by facetious Oxonians to the above famous traveller and his namesakes.

soon released. This was followed by “Letters on the English Nation, by Battista Angeloni, a Jesuit, who resided many years in London. Translated from the original Italian

In 1739 he attracted the attention of the public, we are told, by an epitaph to the memory of Thomas Coster, esq. member for Bristol; in which it has been observed, “that he has contrived to raise emotions of pity, grief, and indignation, to a very high degree.” How far these lines are calculated to produce such an effect the reader may judge. The next year he published a pamphlet on the Bristol waters; but from this period we hear no more of him until 1752, when he was at Paris, and there obtained the title of Doctor, if he obtained it at all. Until this time he appears to have lived in obscurity, but at an age when vigorous exertion usually subsides, he seems to have resolved to place himself in a conspicuous situation whatever hazard might attend it, and commenced a public writer with a high degree of intrepidity and virulence. In 1754 he began this career with “The Marriage Act,” a political novel, in which he treated the legislature with such freedom, that it occasioned his being taken into custody, from whence, however, he was soon released. This was followed by “Letters on the English Nation, by Battista Angeloni, a Jesuit, who resided many years in London. Translated from the original Italian by the author of the Marriage Act,1755, 2 vols. 8vo. It is perhaps unnecessary to say that the author and translator were the same person, and that the imposition was immediately detected by the similarity of language, and virulent abuse of the establishment in church and state to that which pervades the “Marriage Act.” But his most celebrated performances were a series of “Letters to the People of England,” written in a style vigorous and energetic, though slovenly and careless, yet well calculated to make an impression on common readers; and they were accordingly read with avidity, and circulated with diligence. They had a very considerable effect on the minds of the people, and galled the ministry, who seem to have been at first too eager to punish the author. On the publication of the “Third Letter,” we find warrants dated March 4th and 8th, 1756, issued by lord Holdernesse, to take up both Scott the publisher and the author. This prosecution, however, seems to have been dropped and the culprit proceeded for some time unmolested, “having declared (says one of his answerers) that he would write himself into a post or into the pillory, in the last of which he at length succeeded.” On Jan. 12, 1758, a general warrant was signed by lord Holdernesse, to search for the author, printer, and publishers of a wicked, audacious, and treasonable libel, entitled “A sixth Letter to the People of England.” At this juncture government seems to have been effectually roused: for having received information that a seventh letter was printing, by virtue of another warrant dated Jan. 23, all the copies were seized and entirely suppressed. In Easter Term an information was filed against him by Mr. Pratt, then attorney-genera], afterwards lord Camden; and on June 17th, the information was tried, and the author found guilty. On Nov. 28th following, he received sentence, by which he was fined five pounds, ordered to stand in the pillory Dec. 5, at Charing Cross, to be confined three years, and to give security for his good behaviour for seven years, himself in 500l. and two others in 150l. each.

ide the profits. The care and expences attending the publication were to be wholly Dr. Shebbeare' s, who caused it to be handsomely printed in 4to, with a Tory preface,

On the day appointed he was exhibited on the pillory; but the under sheriff, a Mr. Beardmore, himself a political writer, and Shebbeare’s coadjutor in the “Monitor,” a paper of the same tendency with the “Letters,” &c. permitted him merely to stand on the platform of the pillory, tmconfined and at his ease, with a servant in livery (an Irish chairman equipped for the occasion) holding an umbrella over his head. For this wilful perversion of the sentence, Mr. Beardmore was fined 50l. and suffered two months imprisonment. Some time before Shebbeare was tried for the publication already mentioned, the duchess of Queensbury as heir of Lord Clarendon, obtained an injunction to stop the publication of the continuation of that nobleman’s history; a copy of which had got into the hands of Francis Gwyn, esq. between whom and the doctor there had been an agreement to publish it and equally divide the profits. The care and expences attending the publication were to be wholly Dr. Shebbeare' s, who caused it to be handsomely printed in 4to, with a Tory preface, containing frequent reflections on, and allusions to, recent events, and living characters, which gave it the appearance rather of a temporary pamphlet than of a work calculated for posterity. On the injunction being obtained, Dr. Shebbeare was under the necessity of applying to the aid of law to recover the money expended by him in printing, amounting to more than 500l., of which more than half had been wasted on his side in the courts of law and equity*.

ch also he has introduced living characters. He died Aug. 1, 1788, leaving, we are told, among those who knew him best, the character of a benevolent man, which, from

His publications, satirical, political, and medical, amount, it is said, to thirty-four, besides a novel called “Lydia, or Filial Piety,” in which also he has introduced living characters. He died Aug. 1, 1788, leaving, we are told, among those who knew him best, the character of a benevolent man, which, from the affectionate manner in which he speaks of his relations, he probably deserved. His character, in other respects, cannot be held up to admiration.

glish clergyman, was born in the village of Linton in Craven, Yorkshire, March 18, 1740. His father, who, having no trade or profession, lived upon and farmed his own

, a learned English clergyman, was born in the village of Linton in Craven, Yorkshire, March 18, 1740. His father, who, having no trade or profession, lived upon and farmed his own estate, was a rery sensible and intelligent man, so far superior to those among whom he lived, and so disinterested in the application of his talents, that he was highly popular and useful in his native village. His mother was a woman of very superior understanding. He was educated at the grammarschool of the parish; and in 176 1 was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where his singular facility in the acquirement of philosophical knowledge quickly became so conspicuous, that, at a time when other under-graduates find sufficient employment in preparing for their own exercises and examinations, he had no less than six pupils. At this time also he laid the foundation of a lasting friendship with two young men of great promise in the university, John Law and William Paley, both of Christ’s college; the one afterwards bishop of Elphin, the other the late celebrated writer. In St. John’s he lived upon terms of almost equal intimacy with Mr. Arnald, the senior wrangler of his year, whose genius, always eccentric, after a short career of court ambition, sunk in incurable lunacy. His academical exercises also connected him more or less with the late lord Aivanley, the present Mr. baron Graham, and the learned and pious Joseph Milner, afterwards of Hull; all of whom, as well as Law, took their first degrees at the same time with himself. Such a constellation of talent has scarcely been assembled in any single year from that time to the present.

er marrying again soon after, the care of his education was left entirely to the conduct of a tutor, who, though himself a mau of learning, had not that happy manner

, duke of Buckinghamshire, a poet and wit of the seventeenth century, was born in 1649, and Was the son of Edmund^ earl of Mulgrave. At nine years of age he lost his father, and his mother marrying again soon after, the care of his education was left entirely to the conduct of a tutor, who, though himself a mau of learning, had not that happy manner of communicating his knowledge by which his pupil could reap any great improvement under him. In consequence of which, when he came to part from his governor, after having travelled with him into France, he quickly discovered, in the course of his conversation with men of genius, that though he had acquired the politer accomplishments of a gentleman, yet that he was still greatly deficient in every part of literature, and those higher excellencies, without which it is impossible to rise to any considerable degree of eminence. He therefore resolved to educate himself, and dedicate for some time a certain number of hours every day to study. Such a purpose, 'says Dr. Johnson, formed at such an age, and successfully prosecuted, delights as it is strange, and instructs as it is real. By this means he very soon acquired a degree of learning which entitled him to the character of a scholar; and his literary acquisitions are the more wonderful, as those years in which they are commonly made were spent by him in the tumult of a military life, or the gaiety of a court. When war was declared against the Dutch, he went at the age of seventeen on board the ship in which princ Rupert and the duke of Albemarle sailed, with the command of the fleet; but by contrariety of winds they were restrained from action. His zeal, however^ for the king’s service was recompensed by the command of one of the independent troops of horse, then raised to protect the coast,

e out in 1672, he went again a volunteer in the ship which the celebrated lord Ossory commanded, and who represented his behaviour so favourably, that he was advanced

Next year he received a summons to parliament, which, as he was then but eighteen years old, the earl of Northumberland censured as at least indecent, and his objection was allowed. When the second Dutch war broke out in 1672, he went again a volunteer in the ship which the celebrated lord Ossory commanded, and who represented his behaviour so favourably, that he was advanced to the command of the Catharine, the best second-rate ship in the navy. He afterwards raised a regiment of foot, and commanded it as colonel. The land forces were sent ashore by prince Rupert: and he lived in the camp very familiarly with Schomberg. He was then appointed colonel of the old Hollaud regiment, together with his own, and had the promise of a garter, which he obtained in his twenty-fifth year. He was likewise made gentleman of the bed-chamber. He afterwards went into the French service, to learn the art of war under Turenne, but staid only a short time. Being by the duke of Monmouth opposed in his pretensions to the first troop of horseguards, he, in return, made Monmouth suspected by the duke of York. He was not long after, when Monmouth fell into disgrace, recompensed with the lieutenancy of Yorkshire, and the government of Hull.

the king himself. These remonstrances, however, were in vain no redress was to be had and the earl, who saw the trap laid for him by his enemies, was compelled to throw

When in 1680, the Moors besieged Tangier, lord Mulgrave was sent to its relief, with two thousand men. And now, says Dr. Johnson, a strange story is told of the danger to which he was intentionally exposed in a leaky ship, to gratify some resentful jealousy of the king. For this jealousy historians assign different causes. Some imagine that the king had discovered an intrigue between lord Mulgrave and one of his mistresses; a*nd others attribute his majesty’s resentment to proposals of marriage, which his lordship was bold enough to make to the princess Anne. It is added, that " be the cause what it would, it is apparent it was intended that lord Mul grave should be lost in the passage; a vessel being provided to carry him over, which had been sent home as unserviceable, and was in so shattered a condition, that the captain of her declared he was afraid to make the voyage. On this his lordship applied, not on)y to the lord high admiral, but to the king himself. These remonstrances, however, were in vain no redress was to be had and the earl, who saw the trap laid for him by his enemies, was compelled to throw himself into almost inevitable danger to avoid the imputation of cowardice, which of all others he had the greatest detestation of. He, however, dissuaded several volunteers of quality from accompanying him in the expedition; only the earl of Plymouth, the king’s natural son, piqued himself on running the same hazard with a man, who, in spite of the ill treatment he met with from the ministry, could so valiantly brave every danger in the service of his father.

g his other works.” Such is the story as compiled by Baker from various authorities, and which those who are accustomed to weigh evidence will probably not think very

Providence, however, defeated this malicious scheme, by giving them remarkably tine weather through the whole voyage, which lasted three weeks; at the termination of which, by the assistance of pumping the whole time to discharge the water, which leaked in very fast, they arrived safe at Tangier. And perhaps there cannot be a more striking instance of innate firmness and magnanimity than in the behaviour of this nobleman during the voyage. For, though he was fully convinced of the hourly dangers they were in, yet was his mind so calm and undisturbed, that he even indulged his passion for the Muses amidst the tumults of the tempestuous elements, and during this voyage composed a poem, which is to be met with among his other works.” Such is the story as compiled by Baker from various authorities, and which those who are accustomed to weigh evidence will probably not think very credible in all its circumstances.

mes, with little power of invention or propriety of sentiment. At his return he found the king kind, who, as Dr. Johnson says, perhaps had never been angry, and he continued

The consequence of this expedition was the retreat of the Moors, and the blowing-up of Tangier. The poem above alluded to was “The Vision,” a licentious one, such as was fashionable in those times, with little power of invention or propriety of sentiment. At his return he found the king kind, who, as Dr. Johnson says, perhaps had never been angry, and he continued a wit and a courtier as before. At the succession of king James, to whom he was intimately known, and by whom he thought himself beloved, he was admitted into the privy council, and made lord chamberlain. He accepted a place in the high commission without knowledge, as he declared after the Revolution, of its illegality. Having few religious scruples, he attended the king at mass, and kneeled with the rest; but had no disposition to receive the Ilomish faith, or to force it upon others; for when the priests, encouraged by his appearances of compliance, attempted to convert him, he told them, as Burnet has recorded, that he was willing to receive instruction, and that he had taken much pains to believe in God who had made the world and all men in it; but that he should not be easily persuaded “that man was quits, and made God again.” A pointed sentence, says Dr. Johnson, is bestoweo^ by successive transmission to the last whom it will fit; this censure of transubstantiation, whatever be its value, was uttered long ago by Anne Askew, one of the first sufferers for the Protestant religion, who, in the time of Henry VIII. was tortured in the Tower; concerning which there is reason to wonder that it was not known to the historian of the Reformation.

osition to the advice of his friends, did quit the kingdom, he appears to have been one of the lords who wrote such letters to the fleet, the army, and all the considerable

In the revolution he acquiesced, though he did not promote it, and when king James, in opposition to the advice of his friends, did quit the kingdom, he appears to have been one of the lords who wrote such letters to the fleet, the army, and all the considerable garrisons in England, as persuaded them to continue in proper order and subjection. To his humanity, direction, and spirited behaviour in council also, his majesty stood indebted for the protection he obtained from the lords in London, upon his being seized and insulted by the populace at Feversham in Kent. There was once a design of associating him in the invitation of the prince of Orange; but the earl of Shrewsbury discouraged the attempt, by declaring that Mulgrave would never concur. This king William afterwards told him and asked what he would have done if the proposal had been made “Sir,” said he, “I would have discovered it to the king whom I then served.” To which king William replied, “I cannot blame you.

On the accession of queen Anne, that princess, who ever bad a great regard for him, loaded him with employments

On the accession of queen Anne, that princess, who ever bad a great regard for him, loaded him with employments and dignities. In April 1702, he was sworn lord privy seal, made lord lieutenant and custos rotulorum for the north riding of Yorkshire, and one of the governors of the Charter-house; and the same year was appointed one of the commissioners to treat of an union between England and Scotland. On the 9th of March, 1703, he was created duke of Normanby, and on the 19th of the same month duke of Buckinghamshire, there being suspected to be somewhere a latent claim to the title of duke, of Buckingham.

In 1710, the whig ministry beginning to give ground, his grace, who was strongly attached to tory principles, joined with Mr. Harley,

In 1710, the whig ministry beginning to give ground, his grace, who was strongly attached to tory principles, joined with Mr. Harley, afterwards earl of Oxford, in such measures as brought about a change in the ministry, shook the power, of the duke and duchess of Marlborough, and introduced Mr. Harley, the earl of Shrewsbury, lord Bolingbroke, &c. into the administration. Her majesty now offered to make him chancellor, which he refused, but in 1711 was appointed steward of her majesty’s household, and president of the council, and on her decease, in 1713, was nominated one of the lords justices in Great Britain, till the arrival of king George I. from Hanover.

directed by his will to be engraved on it. He left only one legitimate son behind him, named Edmund, who died in the bloom of youth. It is observable, that the duke’s

His grace died on the 24th of February, 172O, in the seventy-fifth year of his age, and after lying in state for some days at Buckingham house, was interred with great solemnity in Westminster-abbey, where a handsome monument has since been erected to his memory, with an epitaph written by himself, and directed by his will to be engraved on it. He left only one legitimate son behind him, named Edmund, who died in the bloom of youth. It is observable, that the duke’s three wives wer all widows. The duchess died in 1742. She published a splendid edition of his works in 1723, 2 vols. 4to, which were afterwards reprinted in 1729 and 1740, 2 vols. 8vo. The first contains his poems upon various subjects: the second, his prose works, which consist of historical memoirs, speeches in parliament, characters, dialogues, critical observations, essays, and letters; but the edition of 1729 is castrated, some particulars relating to the revolution in 1723 having given offence.

time entered into holy orders, and afterwards became domestic chaplain to the lord keeper Coventry, who gave him a prebend of Gloucester. The lord keeper had a high

, archbishop of Canterbury, was youngest son of Roger Sheldon of Stanton in Staffordshire, and was born there July 19, 1593. His Christian name was given him at his baptism by Gilbert earl of Shrewsbury, to whom his father was a menial servant, although descended from the ancient family of the Sheldons of Staffordshire. In the latter end of 1613 he was admitted a commoner of Trinity college, Oxford, and took the degree of bachelor of arts Nov. 27, 1617, and that of master, May 20, 1620. In 1622 he was elected fellow of All Souls’ college, and about the same time entered into holy orders, and afterwards became domestic chaplain to the lord keeper Coventry, who gave him a prebend of Gloucester. The lord keeper had a high esteem for him, and employed him^ in various affairs relating both to church and state. Lord Clarendon, who mentions this, adds, that Sheldon was very early looked upon as equal to any preferment the church could yield; and sir Francis Wen man would often say, when Sheldon visited at lord Falkland’s house, that “he was born and bred to be archbishop of Canterbury.” Lord Coventry therefore recommended him to Charles I, as a person well versed in political affairs. He was some time rector of Ickford in Bucks, and presented to the rectory of Newington by archbishop Laud. November 11, 1628, he proceeded bachelor of divinity; and, May 2, 1632, he was presented by the king to the vicarage of Hackney in Middlesex, then void by the promotion of David Dolben to the bishopric of Bangor. On June 25, 1634, he compounded for his degree of doctor of divinity; and in the middle of March 1635, was elected warden of All Souls* college. About the same time he wrote some letters to Mr. Chilling-worth concerning subscription to the thirtynine articles, who had some scruples on that obligation (see Chillingworth). Dr. Sheldon became chaplain in ordinary to his majesty, and was afterwards clerk of the closet, and was intended for master of the Savoy; but the commotions which ensued prevented those promotions. During the rebellion he adhered to the royal cause, and in Feb. 1644- was one of the, king’s chaplains sent by his majesty to attend his commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge, vvUere he argued so earnestly in favour of the church, as to incur the resentment of the parliamentary commissioners, which they afterwards made him feel. In April 1646 he attended the king at Oxford, and was witness to a remarkable vow which his majesty made there, the purport of which was, that when it should please God to re-establish his throne, he would restore to the church all impropriations, lands, &c. which were taken from any episcopal see, cathedral, collegiate church, &c. This vow, which is in the appendix to Echard’s history, was preserved thirteen years under ground by Dr. Sheldon. In August 1647 there passed some letters between Dr. Sheldon and several gentlemen, then prisoners in the Tower of London for the royal cause, who had scruples about applying for their liberty to the usurping powers, if in the king’s opinion such application should seem prejudicial to his majesty’s interest. On submitting this matter to the king, he gave them permission to act as they should think fit.

nd followed his studies until the approach of the restoration. On March 4, 1659-60, Dr. John Palmer, who iiad ^been placed in the wardenship in his room, dying, and

During his majesty’s being at Newmarket that year, and afterwards in the Isle of Wight, Dr. Sheldon attended on him as one of his chaplains. On March 30, 1647-8, he was ejected from his wardenship by the parliament-visitors, and imprisoned with Dr. Hammond, in Oxlord, and other places, that they might not only be no hindrance to the changes going on in the university, but be prevented from attending the king at the Isle of Wight. Dr. Sheldon remained confined above six months, and then the reforming committee set him at liberty, Oct. 24, 1648, on condition that he should never come within five miles of Oxford; that he should not go to the king in the Isle of Wight, and that he should give security to appear before them at fourteen days’ warning, whenever cited. Upon his release he retired to Snelston in Derbyshire, where, at his own expence, and by contributions from his friends, he sent money constantly to the exiled king, and followed his studies until the approach of the restoration. On March 4, 1659-60, Dr. John Palmer, who iiad ^been placed in the wardenship in his room, dying, and there being an immediate prospect of his majesty’s return, there was no election made of a successor, but Dr. Sheldon was restored, though he never took re-possession. On the king’s return he met his majesty at Canterbury, and was soon after made dean of the royal chapel; and upon bishop Juxon’s translation to the see of Canterbury, was made bishop of London, to which he was elected October 9, 1660, and consecrated the 28th of that month. He held the mastership of the Savoy with that bishopric; and the famous conference between the episcopal and presbyterian clergy concerning alterations to be made in the liturgy, in 1661, was held at his loggings in the Savoy, in the course of which he exerted himself much against the presbyterians. Upon archbishop Juxon’s death he was elected to the see of Canterbury Aug. 11, 1663. In 1665, during the time of the plague, he continued at Lambeth, and exerted the utmost benevolence to those who would otherwise have perished in their necessities; and by his letters to all the bishops, procured considerable sums to be returned out of all parts of his province. On December 20, 1667, he was elected chancellor of the university of Oxford, but on the 31st of July, 1669, resigned that office. He died at Lambeth, November 9, 1677, in the eightieth year of his age, and was interred in Croydon church in Surrey, where a monument was erected to his memory by his heir, sir Joseph Sheldon, then lately lord mayor of London, son of his elder brother Ralph Sheldon of Stanton in Staffordshire.

e on his conduct in this respect. The character given of him by Dr. Samuel Parker, bishop of Oxford, who had been his chaplain, seems in a great degree to correspond

Dr. Sheldon’s character has been represented with the discordance that must be expected in the reports of contending parties. It would appear on an impartial view of contemporary authorities, that he was more eminent as a politician than a divine; and that in the former character, resentment of personal injuries, as well as of the more extensive evils brought on the church by the abettors of the usurpation, led him to take a very decided and severe part in the penal laws enacted against the nonconformists. Burnet, with due allowance for his talents and many good qualities, speaks with censure on his conduct in this respect. The character given of him by Dr. Samuel Parker, bishop of Oxford, who had been his chaplain, seems in a great degree to correspond with other authorities, and confirms the general opinion that Sheldon was not precise as a divine.

ith a kind of exultation and joy, ‘Da well, and rejoice/ His advice to young noblemen and gentlemen, who by their parents’ commands resorted daily to him, was always

Parker, in his “Comrnentarii de rebus sui temporis,” tells us, that archbishop Sheldon (t was a man of undoubted piety; but though he was very assiduous at prayers, yet he did not set so great a value on them as others did, nor regarded so much worship as the use of worship, placing the chief point of religion in the practice of a good life. In his daily discourse he cautioned those about him not to deceive themselves with an half religion, nor to think that divine worship was confined within the walls of the church, the principal part of it being without doors, and consisting in being conversant with mankind. If men led an upright, sober, chaste life, then and not till then they might look upon themselves as religious; otherwise it would signify nothing what form of religion bad men followed, or to what church they belonged. Therefore having spoken to this effect, he added with a kind of exultation and joy, ‘Da well, and rejoice/ His advice to young noblemen and gentlemen, who by their parents’ commands resorted daily to him, was always this; ’ Let it be your principal care to become honest men, and afterwards be as devout and religious as you will. No piety will be of any advantage to yourselves or any body else, unless you are honest and moral men/ He had a great aversion to all pretences to extraordinary piety, which covered real dishonesty; but had a sincere affection for those, whose religion was attended with integrity of manners. His worthy notions of religion meeting with an excellent temper in him, gave him that even tranquillity of mind, by which he was still himself, and always the same, in adversity as well as in prosperity; and neither over rated nor despised life, nor feared nor wished for death, but lived agreeably to himself and others."

sterity with the highest honours. On the accession of Charles II. when the members of the university who bad been ejected by the usurping powers, be* gan to restore

It is as a prelate of great munificence that Sheldon will be handed down to posterity with the highest honours. On the accession of Charles II. when the members of the university who bad been ejected by the usurping powers, be* gan to restore the ancient establishments, a design was formed of erecting some building for the acts, exercises, &c. which had formerly been performed in St. Mary’s church, with some inconvenience to the university, and some injury to the church. Certain houses were accordingly purchased, which stood on the site of the present theatre; and in 1664, Sheldon, then archbishop of Canterbury, having contributed [QOOl. the foundation-stone was laid July 26, with great solemnity before the vice chancellor, heads of houses, &c. And when no other benefactors appeared to promote the work, archbishop Sheldon munificently took upon himself the whole expence, which amounted to 12,470l. 1 \s. \\d. and gave also 2000l. to be laid out in estates for repairs, or the surplus to be applied to the establishment of a printing-house. The architect employed was the celebrated sir Christopher Wren, and the building was completed in about five years. It was one of sir Christopher’s first works, and a happy presage of the talents which he afterwards displayed in the metropolis. Nor did the archbishop’s liberality stop here. Mr. Henry Wharton has enumerated the following sums he bestowed on other public purposes: To lord Petre for the purchase of London House, the residence of the bishops of London, 5200l. He abated in his fines for the augmentation of vicarages 1680l. He gave towards the repair of St. Paul’s before the fire 2169l. 17s. lOd. and the repairs of his houses at Fulham, Lambeth, and Croydon, 4500l. To All Souls’ chapel, Trinity college chapel, Christ church, Oxford, and Lichfield cathedral, 450l. When first made bishop, the leases being all expired, he abated in his fines 17,733l. including probably the article of 1680l. above mentioned.

, eldest son of a plain uneducated country gentleman, of Hales-Owen, Shropshire, who farmed his own estate, was born Nov. 18, 1714. He learned to

, eldest son of a plain uneducated country gentleman, of Hales-Owen, Shropshire, who farmed his own estate, was born Nov. 18, 1714. He learned to read of an old dame, commemorated in his poem of the “School-mistress;” and soon received such delight from books, that he was always calling for new entertainment, and expected that, when any of the family went to market, a new book should be brought him, which, when it came, was in fondness carried to bed and laid by him. It is said, that> when his request had been neglected, his mo^ ther wrapped up a piece of wood of the same form, and pacified him for the night. As he grew older, he went for a while to the grammar-school in Hales-Owen, and was placed afterwards with Mr. Crumpton, an eminent schoolmaster at Solihul, where he distinguished himself by the quickness of his progress. When he was young (June 1724) he was deprived of his father; and soon after (August 1726) of his grandfather; and was, with his brother, who died afterwards unmarried, left to the care of his grandmother, who managed the estate. From school he was sent in 1732 to Pembroke-college in Oxford, a society which for half a century had been eminent for English poetry and elegant literature. Here it appears that he found delight and advantage; for he continued his name there ten years, though he took no degree. After the first four years he put on the Civilian’s gown, but without shewing any intention to engage in the profession. About the time when he went to Oxford, the death of his grandmother devolved his affairs to the care of the reverend Mr. Dolman, of Brome in Staffordshire, whose attention he always mentioned with gratitude. At Oxford he amused himself with English poetry; and in 1737, printed at Oxford, for private circulation, a small miscellany of juvenile verses, without his name. He then for a time wandered about, to acquaint himself with life 7 and was sometimes at London, sometimes at Bath, or any place of public resort; but he did not forget his poetry. He published in 1740 his “Judgment of Hercules,” addressed to Mr. Lyttelton, whose interest he supported with great warmth at an election: this was, two years afterwards, followed by the “School-mistress.” Mr. Dolman, to whose care he was indebted for his ease and leisure, died in 1745, and the care of his own fortune now fell upon him. He tried to escape it a while, and lived at his house with his tenants, who were distantly related; but, finding that imperfect possession inconvenient, he took the whole estate into his own hands, more to the improvement of its beauty than the increase of its produce. His delight in rural pleasure was now excited, and his ambition of rural elegance: he began from this time, says Johnson, “to point his prospects, to diversify his surface, to entangle his walks, and to wind his waters; which he did with such judgment and such fancy, as made his little domain the envy of the great, and the admiration of the skilful; a place to be visited by travellers, and copied by designers.” Of these employ* merits Dr. Johnson has perhaps formed a harsh estimate^ yet Shenstone’s affectionate apologist, Mr. Greaves, is obliged to confess that he spent his whole income in adorning the Leasowes, and that it added little to his comfort, the only happiness he felt being confined to the moment of improvement. It i$ said, that, if he had lived a little longer, he would have been assisted by a pension such bounty could not have been ever more properly bestowed and overtures appear to have been made lor that purpose, but they came too late he died at the Leasowes, of a putrid fever, Feb^ 11, 1763 and was buried by the side of his brother in the church-yard of Hales-Owen. He was never married, though it appears that he was twice in love, and Johnson says he might have obtained the lady, whoever she was, to whom his “Pastoral Ballad” was addressed. He is represented by his friend Dod^lev as a man of great tenderness and generosity, kind to all that were within his influence but, if once offended, not easily appeased inattentive to (economy, and careless of his expences; in his person larger than the middle size, with something clumsy in his form; very negligent of his cloaths, and remarkable for wearing his grey hair in a particular manner; for he held that the fashion was no rule of dress, and that every man was to suit his appearance to his natural form. These, says Mr. Greaves, were not precisely his sentiments, though he thought right enough, that every one should, in some degree, consult his particular shape and complexion in adjusting his dress; and that no fashion ought to sanctify what was ungraceful, absurd, or really deformed.

ranslations from the Greek, and some poems and orations which remain in ms. He had a nephew William, who in the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign left England on

, a celebrated Latin poet and linguist, was born at Sugworth, in the parish of Radley, near Abington in Berks, about 1509. He was educated in Corpus Christ! college, Oxford, of which he was admitted probationer fellow in 1528, and completed his degrees in arts in 1533. At that time he was Greek reader in his college, and succeeded Robert Wakefield in the Hebrew professorship of the university of Oxford about 1538. Three years afterwards, by leave from the heads of the university, he began to expound in the public schools the book of Genesis in Hebrew, and would have proceeded through the other books of the Pentateuch, had he not been prevented by death. He died at Agmondesham in Buckinghamshire, in 1542. He was thought to have surpassed Origen for memory, and Ovid for expedition in versifying; it having been but an ordinary matter with him to compose one hundred good verses every day, at vacant hours. Leland cejebrates him in his “Encomia,” and in his “Cygnea Cantio,” in which he calls him “clecus utriusque linguae.” He is praised likewise in White’s “Diacosiomartyrion,” and by Pits. His works are, 1. Summa et synopsis Novi Test, distichis ducentis sexaginta comprehensa,“Strasb. 1556, 8vo, reprinted at London and Oxford. 2.” Hippolytus Ovidianae Phaedrae respondens.“Oxon. 1584. 3.” Vita et epicedion Joannis Claymundi,“a ms. in Corpus college library. He wrote also some translations from the Greek, and some poems and orations which remain in ms. He had a nephew William, who in the beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign left England on account of his adherence to popery, and died at Rome in 1598. He was educated also at Corpus, and had the reputation of a man of learning. He left some Mss. on catholic subjects, and one 4to printed at Rome in 1596, entitled” The literal connexion of the Psalms of our lady’s office, and their confirmation, from the Greek, Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldaic, Arabic, Æthiopic, &c." If acquainted with all these languages, he could have been no common scholar in the sixteenth century.

cond viscount Townshend, and to Wriothesley lord Howland, son of the celebrated patriot lord Russel, who in 1700 became the second duke of Bedford, Sherard made two

, a very learned botanist, was the son of George Sherwood, of Bushby, in Leicestershire. It does not appear at what time or for what reason the alteration in the name was made. He was born in 1659, educated first at Merchant Taylors’ school, and then at St. John’s college, Oxford, where he entered in 1677. He subsequently became a fellow of this college, and took the degree of bachelor of law, December 11, 1683. Being appointed travelling tutor successively, to Charles, afterwards the second viscount Townshend, and to Wriothesley lord Howland, son of the celebrated patriot lord Russel, who in 1700 became the second duke of Bedford, Sherard made two successive tours through Holland, France, Italy, &c. returning from the last, as sir J. Smith thinks, not. much before the year 1700, when his last-mentioned pupil was twenty years old. Dr. Pulteney supposes him to have come back in 1693, led perhaps by the date of Ray’s “Sylloge Stirpium Europaearum,” printed in 1694, to which Sherard communicated a catalogue of plants gathered on mount Jura, Saleve, and the neighbourhood of Geneva. About this time we find he was in Ireland, on a visit to his friend sir Arthur Rawdon, at Moira. Long before either of his foreign journeys he had travelled over various parts of England, and proceeded to Jersey, for the purpose of botanical investigation; and the fruits of hi* discoveries enriched the publications of the illustrious Ray.

Wharton, and the preface in question displays the objects and acquisitions of one of the first rank, who could certainly not long remain in obscurity, the above initials

Botany was ever the prominent pursuit of Sherard in all his journeys. He cultivated the friendship and correspondence of the most able men on the continent, such as Boerhaave, Hermann, Tournefort, Vaillant, Micheli, *&c. He is universally believed to have been the author of a 12mo volume, entitled “Schola Botanica,” published at Amsterdam in 1689, and reprinted in 1691 and 1699. This is a systematic catalogue of the Paris garden. Its preface, dated London, Nov. 1688, is signed S.W. A., which the French writers have interpreted Samuel Wharton, Anglus, under which name the book occurs in Haller’s “Bibliotheca Botanica,” v. I. 643. But as no one ever heard of such a botanist as Wharton, and the preface in question displays the objects and acquisitions of one of the first rank, who could certainly not long remain in obscurity, the above initials are presumed to mean William Sherard, to whom alone indeed, with or without a signature, that preface could belong. Its writer is described as having attended three courses of Tourne fort’s botanical lectures, in 1686, 87, and 88, all which years, he says, he spent at Paris. In the summer of 1688 he describes himself as having passed some time in Holland, collecting specimens of plants from the rich gardens of that country, and getting them named by professor Hermann himself, who allowed him to peruse the manuscript rudiments of his “Paradisus Batavus,” to examine his herbarium, and to compose a Prodromus of that work, which is subjoined to the little volume now under our consideration. All this can apply to Sherard only, who became the editor of Hermann’s book itself, and who in Hs preface, dated from Geneva in 1697, appears under his own name, and speaks of himself as having long enjoyed the friendship and the communications of that eminer>t man, whose judgment and talents he justly commemorates, and of whose various literary performances, as well as of his botanical principles, he gives an account. Dr. Pulteney cpnceives this preface to have been written during a third tour of its author to the continent; but we presume him to have then been with the young lord Rowland, and consequently on his second tour only.

the mediation of Sherard, the sale of his manuscripts and drawings of Parisian plants, to Boerhaave, who published in 1727 the splendid “Botanicon Parisiense.” This

In 1721, Dr. Sherard revisited the continent. Vaillant was now in a declining state of health, and died in May 1722. Previous to his decease he concluded, through the mediation of Sherard, the sale of his manuscripts and drawings of Parisian plants, to Boerhaave, who published in 1727 the splendid “Botanicon Parisiense.” This work, though not free from imperfections in the distribution of its materials, would doubtless have been far less correct, but for the superintendance of Sherard, who passed a summer with Boerhaave in revising the manuscript. Our great botanist had already rendered a more important service to his favourite science, by bringing with him from Germany, in August 1721, the celebrated Dillenius. (See Dillenius.) By a comparison of dates, it appears that Sherard made several visits to the continent. He went from Paris to Holland in 1721, and thence with Dillenius, the same year, to England. He stayed some time with Boerhaave again in 1724, or perhaps 1725. We know not precisely when or where it happened that he was, like Linnæus in Norway, in danger of being shot for a wolf.

ourers left no department of botany unimproved. James Sherard, seven years younger than his brother, who had acquired opulence by medical practice, first as an apothecary,

What principally attached Sherard to Dillenius, was the similarity of their tastes respecting those intricate tribes of vegetables now termed cryptogamic. To these the attention of both had long been directed, and hence originated the cultivation, which this line of botanical study has received, from that period, in England and Germany. This taste, however, was not exclusive; for these friends and fellow labourers left no department of botany unimproved. James Sherard, seven years younger than his brother, who had acquired opulence by medical practice, first as an apothecary, and then as a physician, in London, had a great fondness for the same pursuit, and reared at his country seat at Eltham, a number of exotic plants, from every climate. Hither the more learned subject of our present article frequently resorted. He had acquired affluence by his public appointments, but his style of living was simple and private Devoted to the cultivation of knowledge in himself, and to the diffusion of that of others, he lent his aid to all who required it, without coming forward conspicuously as an author. *He assisted Catesby with information and with money, to bring out his natural history of Carolina, though neither that work, nor the “Hortus Elthamensis” of Dillenius, appeared till some time after his decease, which happened at Eltham Aug. 12, 1728, when he was 69 years of age. He was buried at Eltham Aug. 19. His brother died Feb. 12, 1738-9, aged/72, and is buried in Evington church, near Leicester, with his wife, whose maiden name was Lockwood, by whom he had no children.

The most ostensible and splendid service to botany was rendered by the will of Dr. William Sherard, who left 3000l. for the endowment of the botanical professorship

The most ostensible and splendid service to botany was rendered by the will of Dr. William Sherard, who left 3000l. for the endowment of the botanical professorship at Oxford, besides 500l. which he gave in his life-time for the improvement of the garden. He bequeathed to this establishment his choice botanical library, his ample herbarium, and the manuscript of his “Pinax,” the completion of which he intended should be one of the objects and duties of the new professor. He bequeathed also his books (with the exception of the botanical part) and many curiosities to St. John’s college, Oxford. In 1766, some of his Mss. were presented by Mr. Ellis to the Royal Society.

gate. Mis son, the poet, was born here Sept 18, 1618, and educated by the celebrated Thomas Farnaby, who then taught a school in Goldsmith’s rents. On his removal to

, an English poet, was descended from an antient family of the same name at Stanyhurst, in Lancashire. His grandfather, Henry, appears to have belonged, but in what capacity is not known, to Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and settled in that city, where Edward the father of our poet was born. This Edward went afterwards to London, and became secretary to the first East India company, established by queen Elizabeth’s charter, and in 1613, obtained a reversionary grant of the office of clerk of the ordnance. He was afterwards knighted by Charles I. He married Frances, the second daughter pf John Stanley of Roydon Hall, in Essex, esq. and resided in Goldsmith’s Rents, near Redcross-street, Cripplegate. Mis son, the poet, was born here Sept 18, 1618, and educated by the celebrated Thomas Farnaby, who then taught a school in Goldsmith’s rents. On his removal to Sevenoaks in Kent, in 1636, young Sherburne was educated privately, under the care of Mr. Charles Aleyn, the poetical historian of the battles of Cressy and Poictiers, who had been one of Farnaby’s ushers. On the death of Aleyn in 1640, his pupil being intended for the army, was sent to complete his education abroad, and had travelled in France and part of Italy, when his father’s illness obliged him to return. After his father’s death in 1641, he succeeded to the clerkship of his majesty’s ordnance, the reversion of which had been procured for him in 1638,- but the rebellion prevented his retaining it long. Being a Roman catholic, and firmly attached to the king, he was ejected by a warrant of the house of Lords in April or May 1642, and harassed by a long and expensive confinement in the custody of the usher of the black rod.

On his release he determined to follow the fortunes of his royal master, who made him commissary-general of the artillery, in which post

On his release he determined to follow the fortunes of his royal master, who made him commissary-general of the artillery, in which post he witnessed the battle of Edge-hill, and afterwards attended the king at Oxford, where he was created master of arts, Dec. 20, 1642. Here he took such opportunities as his office permitted of pursuing his studies, and did not leave Oxford untilJune 1646, when it was surrendered to the parliamentary forces. He then went to London, and was entertained by a near relation, John Povey, esq. at his chambers in the Middle Temple. Being plundered of all his property, and what is ever most dear* to a man of learning, his ample library, he would probably have sunk under his accumulated sufferings, had he not met with his kinsman, Thomas Stanley, esq. father of the learned Thomas Stanley, esq. who was a sufferer in the same cause, and secreted near the same place. But some degree of toleration must have been extended to him soon after, as in 1648, he published his translation of Seneca’s “Medea,” and in the same year, Seneca’s answer to Lucilius’s question “Why good men suffer misfortunes, seeing there is a divine providence?” In 1651, he published his “Poems and Translations,” with a Latin dedication to Mr. Stanley; and when sir George Savile, afterwards marquis of Halifax, returned from his travels about that time, he appointed Mr. Sherburne superintendant of his affairs; and by the recommendation of his mother, kidy Savile, he was afterwards made travelling tutor to her nephew, sir John Coventry. With this gentleman he visited various parts of the continent, from March 1654 to October 1659. On the restoration, sir Anthony Ashley Cooper, afterwards lord Shaftesbury, put another into his place in the ordnance, but on Mr. Sherburne’s application to tlve House of Peers, it was restored to him, although its emoluments were soon greatly retrenched.

from his place in the ordnance, as a suspected papist, but these were ineffectual; and his majesty, who appears to have been satisfied with his character and conduct,

During the commotions excited by the popish plot, attempts were made to remove him from his place in the ordnance, as a suspected papist, but these were ineffectual; and his majesty, who appears to have been satisfied with his character and conduct, conferred on him the honour of knighthood, Jan. 6, 1682, As, however, he could not take the oaths on the revolution, he quitted his public employment, and by this step sacrificed his property to his principles. For some time he lived a retired and probably a comfortable life, but poverty at length induced him to seek relief. In 1696, he presented a supplicatory memorial to the earl of Romney, then master general of the ordnance, and another to the king. In both, he represented, in very earnest but modest language, his long and faithful services, his total loss of fortune in the cause of royalty, his extreme indigence, and his advanced age (he being then upwards of eighty-two years old), and concluded with an humble request that an annual stipend for his support might be granted upon the quarter books of the office. The writer to whom we are indebted for this account has not been able to discover that this request was ever complied with. He adds, that sir Edward was well acquainted with the duties of his station, to the discharge of which he dedicated a long life, and was the principal person concerned in drawing up the “Rules, orders, and instructions” given to the office of ordnance in 1683, which with very few alterations, have been confirmed at the beginning of every reign since, and are those by which the office is now governed.

y that learned critic’s announcing an intention of publishing a new edition of Manilius. Sir Edward, who had formerly translated the first book of that poet into English

To these scanty notices, may be added his acquaintance with Dr. Bent ley, which was occasioned by that learned critic’s announcing an intention of publishing a new edition of Manilius. Sir Edward, who had formerly translated the first book of that poet into English verse, took this opportunity of sending to Bentley his collection of editions and papers belonging to Caspar Gevanius, who had also intended an edition of Manilius, but was prevented by death.

being observed to give early indications of genius, attracted the notice of a friend to his family, who sent him to the college of Dublin, and contributed towards his

, D. D. the intimate friend of Dean Swift, is said by Shield, in Cibber’s “Lives of the Poets,” to have been born about 1684, in the county of Cavan, where, according to the same authority, his parents lived in no very elevated state. They are described as being unable to afford their son the advantages of a liberal education; but he, being observed to give early indications of genius, attracted the notice of a friend to his family, who sent him to the college of Dublin, and contributed towards his support while he remained there. He afterwards entered into orders, and set up a school in Dublin, which long maintained a very high degree of reputation, as well for the attention bestowed on the morals of the scholars, as for their proficiency in literature. So great was the estimation in which this seminary was held, that it is asserted to have produced in some years the sum of one thousand pounds. It does not appear that he had any considerable preferment; but his intimacy with Swift, in 1725, procured for him a living in the south of Ireland, worth about 150l. a year, which he went to take possession of, and, by an act of inadvertence, destroyed all his future expectations of rising in the church; for, being at Corke on the first of August, the anniversary of king George’s birth-day, he preached a sermon, which had for its text, “Sufficient for the day is the evil thereof.” On this being known, he was struck out of the list of chaplains to the lord-lieutenant, and forbidden the castle.

ars; but the air being, as he said, too moist and unwholesome, and being disgusted with some persons who lived there, he sold the school for about 400l. and having soon

This living Dr. Sheridan afterwards changed for that of Dunboyne, which, by the knavery of the farmers and power of the gentlemen of the neighbourhood, fell as low as 80l. per annum. He gave it up for the free school of Cavan, where he might have lived well in so cheap a country on 80l. a year salary, besides his scholars; but the air being, as he said, too moist and unwholesome, and being disgusted with some persons who lived there, he sold the school for about 400l. and having soon spent the money, became infirm in health, and died Sept. 10, 1738, in his fifty-fifth year.

him with kindness as long as he lived. The early part of his education he received from his father, who in 1734 sent him to Westminster school, at a time when he could

, son to the preceding, by his wife Miss Macpherson, daughter of a Scotch gentleman, was born at Quilca in Ireland, the residence of Swift, in 1721. Swift was one of his sponsors, and treated him with kindness as long as he lived. The early part of his education he received from his father, who in 1734 sent him to Westminster school, at a time when he could very ill afford it. Our author was there immediately taken notice of upon examination, and although a mere stranger, was by pure merit elected a king’s scholar. But this maintenance sometimes falling short, his father could not add fourteen pounds to enable his son to finish the year, which if he had done, he would have been removed to a higher class, and in another year would have been elected to Oxford or Cambridge. Being thus obliged to return to Dublin, he was sent to the university there, and took his master’s degree in arts. In 1738 he lost his father, and at that time intended to devote himself to the education of youth, and would immediately after taking his degree have entered upon this office, had he not now conceited that high opinion of the art of oratory from which he never afterwards receded, and in the restoration of which art (for he considered it as lost) he laboured with an uncommon degree of enthusiasm. In order to qualify himself for this undertaking, he fancied that he must himself learn the practice of oratory, and that the stage was the only school. With this last strange notion, he appeared on the theatre in Smock- alley, in January 1743, in the character of Richard III. and met with the greatest encouragement. His career, however, was soon interrupted by a petty squabble, the first of many in which it was his fate to be involved, with Gibber about Cato’s robe. The abusive correspondence which passed on this important occasion was printed in a pamphlet entitled * The Buskin and Sock, being controversial letters between Mr. Thomas Sheridan, tragedian, and Mr. Theophilus Gibber, comedian," 12 mo.

d. Soon after the receipt of this letter Garrick arrived in Dublin, and had a meeting with Sheridan, who repeated the offer, and taking out his watch, which he laid

In Jan. 1744, Mr. Sheridan accepted an engagement at Covent-Garden, and came over to England accordingly. During his residence here, he published proposals, dated Oct. 16, 1744, for printing in 4to the works of his father, but from warn of encouragement or some other reason, the volume never appeared; and when, a few years before hi* death, he was asked where the Mss. w^re, could not recollect their fate. He played in 1744 at Covent-Garden, and in 1745 at Drury-Lane. During this latter season, some injudicious friends endeavoured to set up a rivalship between Sheridan and Garrick, which occasioned a quarrel between them, which was not made up when Sheridan left London. It is curious to observe how Sheridan treated Garrick on this occasion. Having on his return to Dublin undertaken the management of the theatre there, he, wrote to Garrick, informing him, “that he was then sole manager of the Irish stage, and should be very happy to see him in Dublin: that he would give him all advantages and encouragement which he could in reason expect.” He also made an offer to divide all the profits with him, from their united representation, after deducting the incurred expences; but told him at the same time, that he must expect nothing from his friendship, for he owed him none: yet that all the best actor had a right to command, he might be very certain should be granted. Soon after the receipt of this letter Garrick arrived in Dublin, and had a meeting with Sheridan, who repeated the offer, and taking out his watch, which he laid on the table, said he would wait a certain number of minutes for his determination Such was Garrick’s situation at this time, that he accepted the terms, which, as well as his acquiescence in the arrogant manner of proposing them, he probably did not recollect with much pleasure, when his own merit and public favour had placed him on a vast height of superiority above his manager.

n the most open and offensive manner, with such of the actresses as would admit of them, while those who would not were perpetually exposed to insult and ill-treatment.

Mr. Sheridan appeared to much more advantage afterwards as a reformer of the manners of the Dublin audience, which he attempted with great spirit. The young and unruly among the male part of the audience, had long claimed a right of coming into the green-room, attending rehearsals, and carrying on gallantries, in the most open and offensive manner, with such of the actresses as would admit of them, while those who would not were perpetually exposed to insult and ill-treatment. These grievances Sheridan determined by degrees to remove, and at last happily effected, though not until he was involved in contests with the most tumultuous audiences, both at the hazard of losing his means of subsistence, and even of losing his life, from the resentment of a set of lawless rioters, who were at length, through an exertion of justice in the magistracy of Dublin in the support of public decency, convinced of their error, or at least of the impracticability of pursuing it any farther with impunity. During the space of about eight years, Mr. Sheridan possessed the office of manager of the theatre royal of Dublin, with all the success both with respect to fame and fortune that could well be expected; till at length he was driven from the stage and its concerns by another of those popular tumults by which managers and performers are daily liable to suffer. In the summer of the year 1754, in which the rancour of political party arose to the greatest height that it had almost ever been known to do in Dublin, Mr. Sheridan unfortunately revived a tragedy, viz. Miller’s “Mahomet.” In this play were many passages respecting liberty, bribery, and corruption, which pleased the anti-courtiers as expressive of their own opinions in regard to certain persons at that time in power, and therefore they insisted on those passages being repeated, a demand which, on the first night of its representation, the actor in whose part most of them occurred, complied with. The absurdity, however, of such repetitions, merely as destroying the effect of the tragedy, having occurred to the manager, the same speeches, when again called for by the audience on the succeeding night, were refused by the actor, and he being obliged to hint the cause of his refusal, the manager became the object of their resentment. On his not appearing to mollify their rage by some kind of apology, they flew out into the most outrageous violence, cul the scenery to pieces with their swords, tore up the benches and boxes, and, in a word, totally despoiled the theatre; concluding with a resolution never more to permit Mr. Sheridan to appear on that stage.

test increase of theatrical strength, he found himself deserted by some of his principal performers, who had engaged themselves at the r>ew house and, at the same time,

In consequence of this tumult he was obliged to place the management of his ravaged playhouse in other hands for the ensuing season, and come himself to England, where he continued till the opening of the winter of the year 1756, when the spirit gf party being in some degree subsided, and Sheridan’s personal opponents somewhat convinced of the impetuous rashness of their proceedings, he returned to his native country, and having preceded his first appearance on the stage by a public apology for such parts of his conduct as might have been considered as exceptionable, he was again received with the highest favour by the audience. But now his reign, which had been thus disturbed by an insurrection at home, was yet to undergo a second shock from an invasion from abroad. Two mighty potentates from England, viz. Mr. Barry and Mr. Woodward, having found means to sound the disposition of the people of Dublin, with whom the former, exclusive of his allowed theatrical merit, had great interest by being their countryman, and finding it the opinion of many that a second theatre in that city would be likely to meet with eocouragenaent, if supported by good performers, immediately raised a large subscription among the nobility and gentry, set artificers to work, erected a new play-house in Crow-street during the summer season, and, having engaged a company selected from the two theatres of London, were ready for opening by the beginning of the ensuing winter. And now, at a time when Mr. Sheridan needed the greatest increase of theatrical strength, he found himself deserted by some of his principal performers, who had engaged themselves at the r>ew house and, at the same time, some valuable auxiliaries which he had engaged from England, among whom were Mr. Theophilus Gibber and Mr. Maddox the wire-dancer, lost their lives in the attempt to come to Ireland, being driven by a storm and cast away on the coast of Scotland. This completed that ruin which had begun to take place, and had been so long impending over his head. He was now compelled entirely to throw up his whole concern with that theatre, and to seek out for some other means of providing for himself and family.

ts, of which, though forfeited, he had not been deprived. Being much censured for this step by those who could not yield a like compliance, he endeavoured to vindicate

, a learned English divine, was born in South wark about 1641, and educated at Eton 1 school, where he distinguished himself by the vigour of his genius and application to his studies. Thence he removed to Peter-house in Cambridge in May 1657, where he took a bachelor of arts degree in 1660, and a master’s in 1665. He now went into holy orders, and officiated as a curate until 1669, when he was preferred to the rectory of St. George’s, Botolph-lane, in London. In this parish he discharged the duties of his function with great zeal, and was esteemed an excellent preacher. In 1673, he.published “A discourse concerning the knowledge of Christ, and our union and communion with him,” which involved him in a controversy with the celebrated nonconformist Dr. John Owen, and with Mr. Vincent Alsop. In 1680, he took the degree of D. D. and about the same time published some pieces against the nonconformists. Soon after he was collated to a prebend of St. Paul’s, was appointed master of the Temple, and had the rectory of Therfield in Hertfordshire. In 1684 he published a pamphlet, entitled “The case of Resistance to the Supreme Powers stated and resolved, according to the doctrine of the holy Scriptures;” and continued to preach the same opinion after the accession of James II. when it was put to the test. He engaged also in the controversy with the papists, which shews that he was not a servile adherent to the king, but conscientious in his notions of regal power. This likewise he shewed at the Revolution, when he refused to take the oaths to William and Mary, and was therefore suspended from all his preferments. During his suspension, he published his celebrated treatise, entitled “A practical discourse on Death,1690, which has passed through at least forty editions, and is indeed the only one of his works now read. But before the expiration of that year, he thought proper to comply with the new government, and taking the oaths, was reinstated in all his preferments, of which, though forfeited, he had not been deprived. Being much censured for this step by those who could not yield a like compliance, he endeavoured to vindicate himself in a piece entitled “The Case of the Allegiance due to the Sovereign Princes stated and resolved, according to Scripture and Reason, and the principles of the Church of England, with a more particular respect to the Oath lately enjoined of Allegiance to their present Majesties king William and queen Mary, 1690,” quarto. This was followed by twelve answers. His design was to lay down such principles as would prove the allegiance due to William and Mary, even supposing them to have no legal right, which the celebrated Mr. Kettlewell could by no means agree with, and therefore wrote, upon another principle, “The duty of Allegiance settled upon its true grounds.” The dispute is perhaps now of little consequence; but Sherlock persisted in preaching his doctrine of non-resistance in the new reign, and had undoubtedly some merit in this kind of consistency, and in rendering that plausible in any degree, which the other nonjurors thought contradictory in every degree. In 1691, he published his “Vindication of the doctrine of the holy and ever blessed Trinity;” but his attempt to explain this mystery was not satisfactory, and involved him in a controversy with Dr. South. What was more mortifying, a fellow of University-college, Oxford, having preached his doctrine in a sermon at St. Mary’s, the university issued a decree, censuring that doctrine as false, impious, and heretical, and warned all persons under their jurisdiction not to preach or maintain any such notions. The controversy being exasperated by this indignity, the king at last interposed, and issued directions “to the archbishops and bishops,” ordaining, that “all preachers should carefully avoid all new terms, and confine themselves to such ways of explanation as have been commonly used in the church.” After this, it is but fair to state Dr. Sherlock’s notion: he thought that there were three eternal minds 9 two of these issuing from the father, but that these three were one by a mutual consciousness in the three to every one of their thoughts. Dr. Sherlock was promoied to the deanery of St. Paul’s in 1691. He died at Hampstead June 19, 1707, in his 67th year; and was interred in the cathedral of St. Paul. He left two sons and two daughters; the eldest of his sons was Dr. Thomas SherLck, bishop of London. Burnet says, that “he was a clear, polite, and a strong writer, but apt to assume too much to himself, and to treat his adversaries with contempt. This created him many enemies, and made him pass for an insolent haughty man.” He was, however, a man of considerable learning and abilities, and conscientious, however mistaken, in those peculiar opinions which engaged him in such frequent controversies with his brethren.

e principal champion and ornament of both church and university.” This was very high praise from one who reflected so little honour on either.

In 1714, at which time he took his doctor’s degree in divinity, he succeeded sir William Dawes in the mastership of Katherine-hall, and when appointed vice-chancellor, in his turn, discharged the duties of that office in a manner the most beneficial to the university. In particular he exerted himself in inspecting and bringing into order the public archives, and in the course of this employment acquired such a knowledge of the constitution, history, power, and immunities of the university, as gave his opinion a very great weight in all subsequent disputes. He likewise, during his residence in Katherine-hall, discovered not only very superior abilities with deep and extensive learning, but also much wisdom, policy, and talents for governing. It was in allusion to this political sway, that Dr. Bentley during his disputes at Cambridge, gave Dr. Sherlock the nickname of cardinul Alberom, while about the same time Bentley’s antagonist, Middleton, called Sherlock, “the principal champion and ornament of both church and university.” This was very high praise from one who reflected so little honour on either.

er, as to make it appear that they have no better foundation than the Divination among the heathens “who learnt,” says he, “that art in schools, or under discipline,

In 1724 Collins published his insidious attack, entitled “A Discourse of the Grounds and Reasons of the Christian Religion” in which he endeavours to fix the evidences of it chiefly, if not solely, upon the prophecies of the Old Testament; and then explains these prophecies in such a manner, as to make it appear that they have no better foundation than the Divination among the heathens “who learnt,” says he, “that art in schools, or under discipline, as the Jews did prophesying in the schools and colleges of the prophets.” This work occasioned many pieces to be written upon the subject of prophecy; and, though Sherlock did not enter directly into the controversy, yet he took an opportunity of communicating his sentiments, in six discourses delivered at the Temple church, in April and May 1724, which he published the year after, with this title, “The Use and Intent of Prophecy, in the several ages of the world,” 8vo. In these we have a regular series of prophecies, deduced through the several ages from the beginning, and presented in a connectecj view; together with the various degrees of light distinctly marked out, which were successively communicated in such a manner, as to answer the great end of religion and the designs of providence, till the great events to which they pointed should receive thtir accomplishment. These discourses have been exceedingly admired, and gone through several editions. The fourth, corrected

Scheme of Prophecy;” but that author being dead, was now published, not in answer to him, but to all who call in question, or are offended with, the History of the Fall,

for reforming the lives and manners ters, 1790, 8vo, p. 457. and enlarged, was published in 1744, 8vo; to which are added, “Four Dissertations: I. ‘The Authority of the second Epistie of St. Peter.’ 2. ‘ The Sense of the Ancients before Christ, upon the Circumstances and Consequences of the Fall.’ 3. ‘ The blessing of Judah,’ Gen. xlix. 4. ‘ Christ’s Entry into Jerusalem’.” Three of these dissertations, if we mistake not, accompanied the discourses from their first publication; the fourth was added afterwards. In 1749, Sherlock, then bishop of London, published “An Appendix to the second Dissertation, being a farther enquiry into the Mosaic account of the Fall,” 8vo. An advertisement is prefixed, setting forth, that the dissertation was drawn up some years since, and intended as an examination of the objections made to the History of the Fall by the author of “The Literal Scheme of Prophecy;” but that author being dead, was now published, not in answer to him, but to all who call in question, or are offended with, the History of the Fall, as it stands recorded by Moses. Whether Dr. Middleton, who had ridiculed the “Literal History of the Fall,” considered himself as particularly aimed at here, or whether he acted from other private motives of resentment, which has been asserted, we know not, but he published the year after, 1750, a sharp and satirical “Examination of the Discourses upon Prophecy, with Animadversions upon this Dissertation:” in which he undertakes to explain and affirm these four points: 1. “That the use of Prophecy, as it was taught and practised by Christ, his Apostles, and Evangelists, was drawn entirely from single and separate predictions, gathered by them from the books of the Law and the Prophets, and applied, independently on each other, to the several acts and circumstances of the life of Jesus, as so many proofs of his Divine Mission; and, consequently, that his Lordship’s pretended chain of Antediluvian Prophecies is nothing else but a fanciful conceit which has no connection at all with the evidences of the Gospel.” 2. “That the Bishop’s exposition of his text is forced, unnatural, and inconsistent with the sense of St. Peter, from whose epistle it is taken.” 3. “That the historical Interpretation, which he gives to the account of Fall, is absurd and contradictory to reason; and that the said account cannot be considered under any other character than that of Allegory, Apologue, or Moral Fable.” 4. “That the Oracles of the Heathen World, which his Lordship declares to have been given out by the, Devil, in the form of a Serpent, were all impostures, wholly managed by human craft, without any supernatural aid or interposition whatever.

On tins pro.notion, he had the misfortune to differ with Dr. Herring, then archbishop of Canterbury, who had made his option for the rectory of St. George’s Hanoversquare,

On tins pro.notion, he had the misfortune to differ with Dr. Herring, then archbishop of Canterbury, who had made his option for the rectory of St. George’s Hanoversquare, which being one of the most valuable livings in his diocese, the bishop was very unwilling to relinquish it, and drew up a pamphlet respecting the nature of the archbishop’s options, and resolved to oppose the present claim. The matter, however, was accommodated by his giving up the living of St. Anne’s, Solio, which the archbishop accepted. Dr. Sherlock printed fifty copies of his thoughts on the subject, in 1757, for private distribution, in a folio pamphlet, entitled “The Option; or an Inquiry into the grounds of the claim made by the archbishop, on all consecrated or translated bishops, of the disposal of any preferment belonging to their respective sees that he shall make choice of.” The chief argument of the author, deduced from the registers, &c. of the archbishops, is that the archbishop of Canterbury never had, nor at this tune has a right to an option from a translated bishop; but he allows that the claim on consecrated bishops is well founded, for it is properly a consecration fee, and becomes due ratione consecrationis. Archbishop Herring, to whom he had sent a ms copy, in 1749, reprinted the whole afterwards in 4to, with a short answer in onu page, and distributed it among his friends. Dr Sherlock, however, we see, virtually gave up the point, by giving up the living of St. Anne’s.

of his limbs, and then at times of his speech, insomuch that he could not be understood but by those who were constantly about him. Still the powers of his understanding

Bodily infirmities now began to affect him very much, and, though for three or four years he applied himself to business, and made one general visitation of his diocese in person, yet he was then visited with a severe illness, which deprived him almost first of the use of his limbs, and then at times of his speech, insomuch that he could not be understood but by those who were constantly about him. Still the powers of his understanding and his accustomed cheerfulness continued; and under this weak state of body, in which he lay many years, he revised, corrected, and published, 4 vols. of “Sermons” in 8vo. The last time in which he probably used his pen, was in an affectionate congratulatory letter to his present majesty on his accession, being incapable of waiting on him in person . He He died July 18, 1761, in his eighty-fourth year, and was interred in the church-yard at Fulham, in a vault made for that purpose: where likewise a monument was erected to his memory, with an inscription drawn up by Dr. Nicholls, who succeeded him, in the mastership of the Temple, and speaks thus of his character:

ding the judgment of that august assembly, in opposition to some of the great luminaries of the law, who had at first declared themselves of a different opinion: and

Bishop Sherlock hud acquired mu< h knowleage of the laws and constitution of England, which enabled him to appear with great weight, both as a governor of the church, and a lord of parliament. In cases of ecclesiastical law, brought before the House of Peers, he had sometimes the honour of leading the judgment of that august assembly, in opposition to some of the great luminaries of the law, who had at first declared themselves of a different opinion: and in general when he assisted at the deliberations of that house, he entered freely into many other questions of importance, as appears by his speeches printed in the parliamentary debates.

charters of the Colony of Massachusetts-bay,” 8vo the style of which was much admired even by those who disliked the sentiments. Mr. Mainvvaring, in the introduction

Dr. Shipley gave an early and decided opinion against the coercive measures adopted towards America, to which his friends imputed his receiving no further advancement. In the year 1774 he published “A speech intended to have been spoken on the bill for altering the charters of the Colony of Massachusetts-bay,” 8vo the style of which was much admired even by those who disliked the sentiments. Mr. Mainvvaring, in the introduction to his “Sermons,” p. 28, 8vo, speaks of it in the following terms “If it were allowable for a moment to adopt the poetical creed of the antients, one would almost imagine, that the thoughts of a truly elegant writer were formed by Apollo, and attired by the Graces. It would seem, indeed, that language was at a loss to furnish a garb adapted to their rank and worth; that judgment, fancy, taste, had all combined to adorn them, yet without impairing that divine simplicity for the want of which nothing can compensate.” And in a note on this passage, he says, “Amongst all the productions, antient or modern, it would be difficult to find an instance of more consummate elegance than in a printed Speech intended to be spoken in the House of Lords.” Besides this effort, his lordship during the whole American war, continued to be an opponent of Government; but his character, talents, and manners were always highly respected by men of all parties. His works, consisting of sermons, charges, and parliamentary speeches, were published in 2 vols. 8vo, in 1792.

English troops, which, at that time, were serving in Holland. In 1596 he was one of the adventurers who went against the Spaniards in their settlements in the West

, a celebrated traveller, second son of Thomas Shirley of Weston, in Sussex, was born in 1565. He studied at Hart-hall, Oxford, where he took his bachelor’s decree in 1581, and in the same year was elected probationer fellow of All Souls College. Leaving the university, he spent some time in one of tru 1 inns of court, after which he travelled on the continent, and joined the English troops, which, at that time, were serving in Holland. In 1596 he was one of the adventurers who went against the Spaniards in their settlements in the West Indies; and on his return, the earl of Essex, with whom he was a great favourite, employed him in the wars in Ireland, for his services in which he was knighted. After this he was sent by the queen into Italy, in order to assist the people of Ferrara in their contest with the pope: but finding that before he arrived, peace had been, signed, he proceeded to Venice, and travelled from thence to Persia, where he became a favourite with Shah Abbas, who sent him as his ambassador to England in 1612. By the 'emperor of Germany he was raised to the dignity of count, and by the king of Spain he was appointed admiral of the Levant seas. Such honours excited the jealousy of James I. who ordered him to return, but this he thought proper to disobey, and is supposed to have died in Spain about the year 1630. There is an account of his West Indian expedition in the third volume of Hakluyt’s collection, under the following title: “A true Relation of the Voyage undertaken by Sir Anthony Shirley, Knight, in 1596, intended for the island San Tome, but performed to St. Jago, Dominica, Margarita, along the Coast of Tien a Firma to the Isle of Jamaica, the Bay of Honduras, thirty leagues up Rio Dolce, and homewards by Newfoundland, with the memorable Exploits achieved in all this Voyage.” His travels into Persia are printed separately, and were published in London in 1613, 4to; and his travels over the Caspian sea, and through Russia, were inserted in Purchas’s Pilgrimages.

t to Katherine-hall, Cambridge, where he formed a close attachment with Bancroft, the epigrammatist, who has recorded their friendship in one of his epigrams. At Cambridge,

, an English dramatic writer and poet, was of an antient family, and born about 1594, in the parish of St. Mar) Wool-church, London. He was educated at Merchant-Taylors school, and thence removed to St. John’s college in Oxford; where Laud, then president of that college, had a good opinion of his talents, yet would often tell him, as Wood relates, that “he was an unfit person to take the sacred function upon him, and should never have his consent;” 'because Shirley had then a large mole upon his left cheek, which appeared a great deformity. Afterwards, leaving Oxford without a degree, he went to Katherine-hall, Cambridge, where he formed a close attachment with Bancroft, the epigrammatist, who has recorded their friendship in one of his epigrams. At Cambridge, Wood supposes he took the degree in arts, as he soon after entered into orders, and took a cure at or near St. Alban’s, in Hertfordshire; but, becoming unsettled in his principles, changed his religion for that of Rome, left his living, and taught a grammar school in the town of St. Alban’s. This employment being after some time uneasy to him, he retired to London, lived in Gray’s-inn, and commenced dramatic writer, which recommended him to the patronage of various persons of rank, especially Henrietta Maria, Charles the First’s queen, who made him her servant. His first comedy is dated 1629, after which he wrote nine or ten, between that year and 1637, when he went to Ireland, under the patronage of George earl of Kildare, to whom he dedicated his tragi-comedy of the “Royal Master,” and by whose influence that comedy was acted in the castle at Dublin, before the lord deputy. From Ireland he returned to England in 1638; but Wood says, that when the rebellion broke out, he was obliged to leave London and his family (for he had a wife and children), and, being invited by his patron, William earl of Newcastle, to accompany him in the wars, he attended his lordship. Upon the decline of the king’s cause, he retired to London; where, among other of his friends, he found Thomas Stanley, esq. author of the “Lives of Philosophers,who supported him for the present. The acting of plays being now prohibited, he returned to his old occupation of teaching school, which he carried on in White Friars; and educated many youths, who afterwards proved eminent men. At the Restoration, several of his plays were brought upon the theatre again; and it is probable he subsisted very well, though it does not appear how. In 1666 he was forced, with his second wife Frances, by the great fire in September, from his house near Fleet-street, in the parish of St. Giles’s in the fields, where, being extremely affected with the loss and terror that fire occasioned, they both died within the space of twentv-four hours, and were both interred in the same grave, Oct. the 29th.

There was one Mr. Henry Shirley, a contemporary of our author, who wrote a tragedy called “The Martyred Soldier;” which was often

There was one Mr. Henry Shirley, a contemporary of our author, who wrote a tragedy called “The Martyred Soldier;” which was often acted with applause. It was printed in 1631, and dedicated by the publisher J. K. to sir Kenelm Digby; the author being then dead. More recently there was a William Shirley, who was for some years resident in Portugal, in a public character, as it is supposed. On some disgust, however, or dispute in which he had involved himself there, he returned to England about 1749. He was esteemed well versed in affairs of trade, and the commercial interests and connections of different kingdoms, especially those of Great Britain and Portugal. He was also considered as the author of several letters on those subjects, published in the Daily Gazetteer, and signed Lusitanicus; and wrote a pamphlet, entitled “Observations upon the sentence of the conspirators against the king of Portugal,1755, 8vo. In his poetical capacity, however, Mr. Shirley does not stand in so considerable a light, though several of his plays have been represented on the stage; but others were rejected by Garrick, whom tie abused in the newspapers. He is said to have written for the stage as late as 1777, when he must have been advanced in years; but the time of his death is not specified in our authority.

ed his whole time to mathematical and mechanical pursuits. He was pupil to the celebrated Maclaurin, who perceiving the bent of his genius, encouraged him to prosecute

, an eminent optician, was born in Edinburgh in the year 1710. At the age of ten being left in a state of indigence by the death of both his parents, he was admitted into Heriot’s hospital, where he soon shewed a fine mechanical genius, by constructing for himself a number of curious articles with common knives, or such other instruments as he could procure. Two years after he was removed from the hospital to the high- school, where he so much distinguished himself in classical learning, that his friends thought of qualifying him for a learned profession. After four years spent at the high-school, in 1726 he was entered a student of the university of Edinburgh, where he passed through a regular course of study, took his degree of master of arts, and at the earnest entreaties of his relations, attended the divinity lectures: after which, in 1731, he passed his examination to fit him for a preacher in the church of Scotland. He soon, however, gave up all thoughts of a profession which he found little suited to his talents, and from this period he devoted his whole time to mathematical and mechanical pursuits. He was pupil to the celebrated Maclaurin, who perceiving the bent of his genius, encouraged him to prosecute those particular studies for which he seemed best qualified by nature. Under the eye of his preceptor he began, in 1732, to construct Gregorian telescopes; and, as the professor observed, by attending to the figure of his specula, he was enabled to give them larger apertures, and to carry them to greater perfection, than had ever been done before him.

e time of his death. His eminence as an artist is universally admitted, and he is spoken of by those who knew him from his youth upwards, as a man of virtue and very

Mr. Short was accustomed to visit the place of his nativity once every two or three years during his residence in London, and in the year 1766 he paid his last visit to Scotland. He died at Newington Butts, near London, in June 1768, after a very short illness, in the fifty-eighth year of his age. Mr. Short was a very good general scholar, besides well skilled in optics and mathematics. He was a very useful member of the Royal Society, and wrote a great many excellent papers in the Philosophical Transactions, from 1736 to the time of his death. His eminence as an artist is universally admitted, and he is spoken of by those who knew him from his youth upwards, as a man of virtue and very amiable manners.

te of Tripoly, a strong squadron was sent into those parts under the command of sir John Narborough, who arrived before Tripoly in the spring of the year, and found

, an eminent English admiral, was born near Clay, in Norfolk, about 1650, of parents in middling circumstances, and put apprentice to some mechanic trade, to which he applied himself for som.e time. He is said to have early discovered an inclination for the naval service, and at length went to sea, under the protection of sir Christopher Mynns, as a cabbin-boy, and applying himself very assiduously to the study of navigation, became an able seaman, and quickly arrived at preferment. In 1674, our merchants in the Mediterranean being very much distressed by the piratical state of Tripoly, a strong squadron was sent into those parts under the command of sir John Narborough, who arrived before Tripoly in the spring of the year, and found considerable preparations for defence. Being, according to the nature of his instructions, desirous to try negotiation rather than force, he thought proper to send Shovel, now a lieutenant, to demand satisfaction for what was past, and security for the time to come. Shovel went on shore, and delivered his message with great spirit; but the Dey, despising his youth, treated him with much disrespect, and sent him back with an indefinite answer. Shovel, on his return to the admiral, acquainted him with some remarks he had made on shore. Sir John sent him back with another message, and well furnished him with proper rules for conducting his inquiries and observations. The Dey’s behaviour was worse the second time, which Shovel made a pretence for delaying his departure that he might complete his observations. On his return he assured the admiral it was very practicable to burn the ships in the harbour, notwithstanding their lines and forts: accordingly, in the night of the 4th of March, Shovel, with all the boats in the fleet, filled with combustibles, went boldly into the harbour, and destroyed the vessels in it, after which he returned safe to the fleet, without the loss of a single man; and the Tripolines were so disconcerted at the boldness and success of the attack, as immediately to sue for peace. Of this affair sir John Narborough gave so honourable account in all his letters, that the next year Shovel had the command given him of the Sapphire, a fifth rate; whence he was not long after *e* moved into the James galley, a fourth rate, in which he continued till the death of Charles II. Although he was known to be unfriendly to the arbitrary measures of James II. yet that prince continued to employ him, and he was preferred to the Dover, in which situation he was when the Revolution took place, and heartily concurred in that event. In 1689, he was in the first battle, that of Bantry-bay, in the Edgar, a third-rate; and so distinguished himself by courage and conduct, that when king William came down to Portsmouth, he conferred on him the honour of knighthood. In 1690, he was employed in conveying king YVilr liam and his army into Ireland, who was so highly pleased with his diligence and dexterity, that he did him the honour to deliver him a commission of rear-admiral of the blue with his own hand. Just before the king set out for Holland, in 1692, he made him rear-admiral of the red, at the same time appointing him commander of the squadron that was to convoy him thither. On his return, Shovel joined admiral Russell with the grand fleet, and had a share in the glory of the victory at La Hogue. When it was thought proper that the fleet should be put under command of joint admirals in the succeeding year, he was one; and, as Campbell says, “if there had been nothing more than this joint commission, we might well enough account from thence for the misfortunes which happened in our affairs at sea, during the year 1693.” The joint admirals were of different parties; but as they were all good seamen, and probably meant well to their country, though they did not agree in the manner of serving it, it is most likely, “that, upon mature consideration of the posture things were then in, the order they had received from court, and the condition of the fleet, which was not either half manned or half victualled, the admirals might agree that a cautious execution of the instructions which they had received was a method as safe for the nation, and more so for themselves, than any other they could take.” On this occasion sir Cloudesley Shovel was at first an object of popular odium; but when the affair came to be strictly investigated in parliament, he gave so clear and satisfactory an account of the matter, that it satisfied the people that the commanders were not to blame; and that if there was treachery, it must have originated in persons in office at home. The character of sir Cloude&ley remaining unimpeached, we find him. again at sea, in 1694, under lord Berkley, in the expedition to Camaret-bay, in which he distinguished himself by his dextrous embarkation of the land forces, when they sailed on that unfortunate expedition; as also when, on their return to England, it was deemed necessary to send the fleet again upon the coast of France, to bombard Dieppe, and other places. In 1702 he was sent to bring the spoils of the Spanish and French fleets from Vigo, after the capture of that place by sir George Rooke. In 1703, he commanded the grand fleet up the Streights; where he protected our trade, and did all that was possible to be done for the relief of the protestants then in arms in the Cevenues; and countenanced such of the Italian powers as were inclined to favour the allies. In 1704 he was sent, with a powerful squadron, to join sir George liooke, who commanded a grand fleet in the Mediterranean, and had his share in the action off Malaga. Upon his return he was presented to the queen by prince George, as lord high admiral, and met with a very gracious reception; and was next year employed as commander in chief. In 1705, when k was thought necessary to send both a fleet and army to Spain, sir Cloudesley accepted the command of the fleet jointly with the earls of Peterborough and Monmouth, which sailed to Lisbon, thence to Catalonia, and arrived before Barcelona on the 12th of August and it was chiefly through his activity, in furnishing guns for the batteries, and men ta play them, and assisting with his advice, that the place was taken.

luable emerald ring from his finger, stripped and buried him. This coming to the ears of Mr, Paxton, who was purser of the Arundel, he found out the fellows, declared

After the unsuccessful attempt upon Toulon, in which sir Cloudesley performed all in his power, he bore away for the Streights; and soon after resolved to return home. He left sir Thomas Dilkes at Gibraltar, with nine ships of the line, for the security of the coasts of Italy: and then proceeded with the remainder of the fleet, consisting of ten ships of the line, four fire-ships, a sloop, and a yacht, for England. Oct. 22, he came into the soundings, and had ninety fathom water. About noon he lay-by; but at six in the evening he made sail again, and stood away under his courses, believing, as it is supposed, that he saw the light on St. Agnes, one of the islands of Scilly. Soon after which, several ships of his fleet made the signal of distress, as he himself did; but the admiral’s, and some more, perished with all oil-board. How this accident happened has never been properly accounted for. Sir Cloudesiey Shovel’s body was thrown ashore the next day upon the island of Scilly, where some fishermen took him up; and, having stolen a valuable emerald ring from his finger, stripped and buried him. This coming to the ears of Mr, Paxton, who was purser of the Arundel, he found out the fellows, declared the ring to be sir Cloudesley Shovel’s, and obliged them to discover where they had buried the body; which he took up and carried on-board his own ship to Portsmouth. It was thence conveyed to London; and buried in Westminster-abbey with great solemnity, where a monument (a most tasteless one indeed) was afterwards erected to his memory by the queen’s direction.

assistant to Mr. Vincent Alsop, at the meeting Tothill-fields, Westminster. He was also one of those who established a lecture against popery, which was carried on with

, an eminent and pious divine, was born at Exeter in May 1657, and educated in school learning at his native city, whence, at the age of fourteen he was placed at a dissenting academy at Taunton, and afterwards at another at Newington-green, London. Having gone through the usual course of studies in these seminaries, and having decided in favour of nonconformity, he was encouraged by the celebrated Dr. Manton, to preach as a candidate for the ministry before he was quite twenty years of age. Two years after, in 1679, he received ordination from some dissenting ministers, but in a very private way, and his first settlement appears to have been as assistant to Mr. Vincent Alsop, at the meeting Tothill-fields, Westminster. He was also one of those who established a lecture against popery, which was carried on with good success in a large room in Exchange-alley.

a physician and naturalist, but his reputation is more securely founded on his having been the first who illustrated the antiquities of his native country, in various

We have hitherto considered sir Robert as a physician and naturalist, but his reputation is more securely founded on his having been the first who illustrated the antiquities of his native country, in various learned essays, the titles of which it is unnecessary to give, as the whole were printed in “A collection of several treatises in folio, concerning Scotland as it was of old, and also in later times. By sir Robert Sibbald, M. D.” Edin. 1739. They were, however, at that time sold separately, or bound together. Of all Mr. Gough gives a particular account, and also of his Mss* now in the Advocates’ library. Sir Robert likewise published a piece entitled “The liberty and independency of the kingdom and church of Scotland asserted, from ancient records in three parts,1701, 4to, now very rarely to be met with and “De Gestis Gul. Valise,” Edin. 1705, 8vo. A catalogue of his library was printed at Edinburgh, 1722, in 8vo.

sh botanical harvest. Dr. Sibthorp discovered at Fanar an aged Greek botanist, Dr. Dimitri Argyrami, who had known the Danish traveller Forskall, and who was possessed

On the 20th of March, 1794, Dr. Sibthorp set out from London, on his second tour to Greece. He travelled to Constantinople in the train or' Mr. Listen, ambassador to the Porte, and was attended by Francis Borone, as a botanical assistant. They reached Constantinople on the 19th of May, not without Dr. Sibthorp’s having suffered much from the fatigues of the journey, which had brought on a bilious fever. He^oon recovered his health at Constantinople, where he was joined by his friend Mr. Hawkins from Crete. Towards the end of August they made an excursion into Bithynia, and climbed to the summit of Olympus, from whence they brought a fresh botanical harvest. Dr. Sibthorp discovered at Fanar an aged Greek botanist, Dr. Dimitri Argyrami, who had known the Danish traveller Forskall, and who was possessed of some works of Linnæus.

res, and the domestic economy of that celebrated spot. Here Dr. Sib thorp lost his assistant Borone, who perished by an accidental fall from a window, in his sleep,

Recovered health, and the accession of his friend’s company, caused Dr. Sibthorp to set out with alacrity on his voyage to Greece, on the 9th of September. Passing down the Hellespont, on the 13th, with a light but favourable breeze, they anchored at Koum Cale, in the Troad, spent two days in examining the plains of Troy, and then proceeded to the isles of 1mb ros and Lemnos. On the 25th they anchored at mount Athos, and passed ten days in examining some of the convents and hermitages, with the romantic scenery, and botanical rarities, of that singular spot, on all which Dr. Sibthorp descants at length, with great delight, in his journal. Their departure wafe, for some time, prevented, by a few Barbary pirates hovering on the coast, but they sailed on the 5th of October, and on the 7th landed at Skiatho. From hence, on the llth, they proceeded down the strait of Negropont, and on the 13th passed under the bridge of live arches, which connects that island with the main land of Greece. On the 15th, at noon, they entered the harbour of the Pyraeus, and proceeded to Athens, where the four succeeding weeks were employed in collecting information relative to the present state of the government, the manufactures, and the domestic economy of that celebrated spot. Here Dr. Sib thorp lost his assistant Borone, who perished by an accidental fall from a window, in his sleep, on or about the 20i h of October.

were to be confided. Their judicious choice fell upon the learned president of the Linnsean Society, who has nearly completed the “Prodromus,” and the second volume

We have now to record the posthumous benefits which Dr. Sibthorp has rendered to his beloved science, and which are sufficient to rank him amongst its most illustrious patrons. By his will, dated Ashburton, January 12, 1796, he gives a freehold estate in Oxfordshire to the university of Oxford, for the purpose of first publishing his “Flora Gfaeca,” in 10 folio volumes, with 100 coloured plates in each, and a “Prodromus” of the same work, in 8vo, without plates. His executors, the honourable Thomas Wenman, John Hawkins, and Thomas Platt, esqrs. were to appoint a sufficiently competent editor of these works, to whom the manuscripts, drawings, and specimens, were to be confided. Their judicious choice fell upon the learned president of the Linnsean Society, who has nearly completed the “Prodromus,” and the second volume of the “Flora.” The plan of the former, was drawn out by Dr. Sibthorp, but nothing of the latter, except the figures, was prepared, nor any botanical characters or descriptions whatever. The final determination of the species, the distinctions of such as were new, and all critical remarks, fell to the lot of the editor, who has also revised the references to Dioscorides. When these publications are finished, the fcnnlial sum of 200. is to be paid to a professor of rural oeconomy, who is, under certain limitations^ to be Sherar* dian professor of botany. The remainder of the rents of the estate above mentioned is destined to purchase books for the professor, and the whole of the testator’s collections* with his drawings, and books of natural history, botany, and agriculture, are given to the university. The only work which Dr. Sibthorp published in his life-time is a “Flora Oxoniensis,1794, in one vol. 8vo, which has the merit of being entirely formed on his own personal observation.

, a strenuous champion for repub-­lican government, who set up Marcus Brutus for his pattern, and died like him in the

, a strenuous champion for repub-­lican government, who set up Marcus Brutus for his pattern, and died like him in the cause of liberty, was second son of Robert, earl of Leicester, by Dorothy, eldest daughter of Henry Percy, earl of Northumberland; and was born about 1617, or as some say, 1622. Of his education, and how he spent the younger part of his life, we know little. It appears that his father, when he went as ambassador to Denmark in 1632, took him with him, when a mere boy, and again in 1636, when he went as ambassador to France. During the rebellion he adhered to the interest of the parliament, in whose army he was a colonel; and was nominated one of the king’s judges, and as some say, sat on the bench, but was not present when sentence was passed, nor: did he sign the warrant for his execution. His admirers, however, assure us that he was far from disapproving of that atrocious act. He was in truth such a zealous republican, that he became a violent enemy to Cromwell, after “he had made himself protector. In June 1659 he was appointed, by the council of state, to go with sir Robert Houeywood, and Bulstrode Whitelocke, esq. commissioners to the Sound, to mediate a peace between the kings of Sweden and Denmark: but Whitelocke observes, that himself was unwilling to undertake that service,” especially,“says he,” to be joined with those that would expect precedency of me, who had been formerly ambassador extraordinary to Sweden alone; and I knew well the over-ruling temper and height of colonel Sidney. I therefore endeavoured to excuse myself, by reason of my old age and infirmities; but the council pressed it upon me:" which at last he evaded. While Sidney was at the court of Denmark, M. Terlon, the French ambassador there, had the 1 confidence to tear out of the university Album this verse; which the colonel, when it was presented to him, had written in it

Lord Molesworth, who relates this in the preface to his spirited Account of Denmark,

Lord Molesworth, who relates this in the preface to his spirited Account of Denmark, observes, that, “though M. Terlon understood not a word of Latin, he was told by others the meaning of the sentence; which he considered as a libel upon the French government, and upon such as was then setting up in Denmark by French assistance or example.

stice Jeffreys, Nov. 1683; and found guilty. After his conviction he sent to the marquis of Halifax, who was his nephew by marriage, a paper to be laid before the king,

At the restoration, Sidney would not personally accept of the oblivion and indemnity generally granted to the whole nation; but continued abroad till 1677, when his father died. He then returned to England, and obtained from the king a particular pardon, upon repeated promises of constant and quiet obedience for the future. Burnet observes, “that he came back when the parliament was pressing the king into the war, the court of France having obtained leave for him to return; and that, upon his doing all he could to divert the people from that war, some took him for a pensioner of France: while he in the mean time declared, to those to whom he durst speak freely, that he knew it was a juggle; that our court was in an entire confidence with France; and had no other design in this show of a war but to raise an army, and keep it beyond sea till it was trained and modelled.” In 1683, he was accused of being concerned in the Rye-house plot; and, after lord Eussel had been examined, was next brought before the king and council. He said, that he would make the best defence he could, if they had any proof against him, but xvould not fortify their evidence by any thing he should say; so that the examination was very short. He was arraigned for high treason before the chief justice Jeffreys, Nov. 1683; and found guilty. After his conviction he sent to the marquis of Halifax, who was his nephew by marriage, a paper to be laid before the king, containing the main points of his defence upon which he appealed to the king, and desired he would review the whole matter but this had no other effect, except only to respite his execution for three weeks. When the warrant for his execution was brought, he told the sheriff, that he would not expostulate any thing upon his own account; for, the world was nothing to him: but he desired it mig^ht be considered, how guilty they were of his blood, who had not returned a fair jury, but one packed, and as directed by the king’s solicitor. He was beheaded on Tower-hill, where he delivered a written paper to the Sheriff, Dec. 7, 1683: but his attainder was reversed in the first year of William and Mary. “The execution of Sidney,” says Hume, “is regarded as one of the greatest blemishes of the reign of Charles II. The evidence against him, it must be confessed, was not legal: and the jury, who condemned him, were, for that reason, very blameable. But that after sentence parsed by a court of judicature, the king should interpose and pardon a man, who, though otherwise possessed of merit, was undoubtedly guilty, who had ever been a most indexible and most inveterate enemy to the royal family, and who lately had even abused the king’s clemency, might be an act of heroic generosity, but can never be regarded as a necessary and indispensable duty.” Burnet, who knew Sidney personally, gives the following character of him: “He was a man of most extraordinary courage; a steady man, even to obstinacy; sincere, but of a rough and boisterous temper, that could not bear contradiction. He seemed to be a Christian, but in a particular form of his own he thought it was to be like a divine philosophy in tue mind but he was against all public worship, and every thing that looked like a church. He was stiff to all republican principles; and such an enemy to every thing that looked like monarchy, that he set himself in a high opposition against Cromwell when he was made protector. He had studied the history of government in all its branches, beyond anv man I ever knew.

y VIII. His father, Henry Sidney, was from his infancy the companion and bosom friend of Edward VI., who conferred upon him the honour of knighthood, constituted him

, a very accomplished English gentleman, and one of the greatest ornaments of the court of queen Elizabeth, was born Nov. 29, 1554, at Penshurst in Kent. He was the grandson of sir William Sidney, knight banneret, and chamberlain and steward of the household to Henry VIII. His father, Henry Sidney, was from his infancy the companion and bosom friend of Edward VI., who conferred upon him the honour of knighthood, constituted him ambassador to France, and afterwards promoted him to several appointments near his person. He was at this time universally beloved and admired, as the most ac^ complished gentleman in the court of the youthful monarch, who expired in his arms. Sir Henry, after this melancholy event, retired to his seat at Penshurst. He afterwards enjoye'd the favour of queen Mary, and gave his son the name of Philip, in compliment to her husband the king of Spain. In Elizabeth’s reign his abilities were more immediately called forth, and proved him a brave soldier, a consummate general, an able counsellor, and a wise legislator, while in private life he was no less estimable as a husband, father, and a friend; firmly attached to the church of England, and adorning his Christian profession by his temperance and exemplary piety. He was lord president of Wales, and for the space of eleven years discharged the administration of lord deputy of Ireland, with extraordinary justice and probity, and left to provincial governors an example of integrity, moderation, and wisdom, which was never surpassed. The mother of Philip Sidney, was Mary, the eldest daughter of the unfortunate duke of Northumberland, a lady no less illustrious and amiable than her husband.

, the celebrated printer, and here was honoured with the friendship of Hubert Languet (See Languet), who was then a resident from the elector of Saxony; and to him he

During this massacre, Mr. Sidney preserved his life, by taking refuge with several of his countrymen, in the house of sir Francis Walsingham, the English ambassador; and when the danger was over, proceeded on his travels, tinder the tutorage of Dr. John Watson, then dean, and afterwards bishop of Winchester, to whom sir Francis Walsingham recommended him. Having left Paris, he pursued his journey through Lorraine, by Strasburgh and Heidelberg, to Franc fort. At the latter place, he lodged at the house of Andrew Wechel, the celebrated printer, and here was honoured with the friendship of Hubert Languet (See Languet), who was then a resident from the elector of Saxony; and to him he was principally indebted for his extensive knowledge of the customs and usages of nations, their interests, governments, and laws, and nothing could be more honourable to a youth of the age of nineteen, than the choice of such a companion and guide. Sidney has gratefully commemorated Languet in some lines in the third book of his “Arcadia.” When they were separated, Languet renewed in his letters the strongest assurances of his regard, intermixed with the most useful and most endearing lessons of advice.

pleasure and instruction from a free and undisguised conversation on topics of learning with persons who professed the religion of the church of Rome. This circumstance

At Vienna, where Mr. Sidney appears to have arrived in 1573, he learned horsemanship, the use of arms, and all those manly and martial exercises which were suitable to his youth and nobleness of birth. He excelled at tilt or tournament, in managing all sorts of weapons, in playing at tennis, in diversions of trial and skill, in music, in all the exercises that suited a noble cavalier, while his person, his aspect, his discourse, his every gesture were embellished with dignity and grace. In 1574, he was at Venice, where his sacred adherence to the precepts of youth guarded him against its dissipations. His biographer thinks it probable that he was not unknown to the celebrated Paul Sarpi. In June 1574, Sidney left Venice and came to Padua, where he applied hiinself with his accustomed diligence to geometry and astronomy, and here he met with the illustrious 7 asso, which his biographer conceives was one of his motives for visiting Padua. On his return to Venice in 1574-, Mr. Sidney derived great pleasure and instruction from a free and undisguised conversation on topics of learning with persons who professed the religion of the church of Rome. This circumstance gave rise to a suspicion among his friends in England, that he was inclined to become a member of that church; but against this he appears to have been sufficiently guarded by his friend Languet, and it was by his persuasion that he desisted from visiting Rome.

hiefs that would have attended the maiv riage. Nor did he lose her majesty’s favour, although others who interfered, were treated with the utmost rigour, particularly

His spirit and sense were afterwards displayed in a manner which reflects high honour upon his character. When in 1579, queen Elizabeth seemed inclined to accede to the proposal of a marriage with the duke of Anjou, which might have endangered the prosperity, religion, and liberty of the nation, Mr. Sidney addressed a letter to her against such a connection, written with unusual elegance of expression as well as force of reasoning, and with uncommon freedom. The delicacy of the subject, and the difficulty of discussing it without offending the queen, he was perfectly aware of, yet his zeal for the welfare of his country, and particularly the protestant religion, would not permit him to be silent; and it is supposed that by this letter he had the honour of averting the mischiefs that would have attended the maiv riage. Nor did he lose her majesty’s favour, although others who interfered, were treated with the utmost rigour, particularly Stubbs, a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn, and Page a printer, whose right hands were cut, the one for writing, and the other for-printing a pamphlet against the match. Camden, the historian, was present at the execution of this savage sentence, one of the greatest blemishes in the reign of Elizabeth.

ises. This challenge was given in the genuine spirit of chivalry in honour of the queen. Among those who gallantly offered themselves as defenders, were Edward Vere,

Among the fashionable amusements in the court of Elizabeth, tournaments were most in vogue. In 1580, Philip earl of Arundel, and sir William Drury his assistant, challenged all comers to try their feats of arms in those exercises. This challenge was given in the genuine spirit of chivalry in honour of the queen. Among those who gallantly offered themselves as defenders, were Edward Vere, earl of Oxford, lord Windsor, Mr. Philip Sidney, and fourteen others. The victory Was adjudged by her majesty to the earl of Oxford. With this earl of Oxford Sidney had afterwards a serious quarrel, having received a personal insult from him. The queen interposed to prevent a duel, with which Sidney was much dissatisfied, and to compose his mind retired to Wilton, the seat of his brother-in-law the earl of Pembroke. In this seat of rural beauty (and not at Houghton-house, as asserted in Gough’s Camden, which was not built until after his death) he planned the design of the “Arcadia.” It has been conjectured that the Ethiopic history of Heliodorus, which had been recently translated into English prose by Thomas Underdowne, suggested that new mode of writing romance which is pursued in this work; but it seems more probable that he derived the plan of his work from the “Arcadia” of Sannazarius, a complete edition of which was printed at Milan in 1504. The persons introduced by the Italian author are shepherds, and their language, manners, and sentiments are such as suit only the innocence and simplicity of pastoral life. This species of composition may be considered as forming the second stage of romance-writing. The heroism and the gallantry, the moral and virtuous turn of the chivalry-romance, were still preserved; but the dragons, the necromancers, the enchanted castles were banished, and some small resemblance to human nature was admitted. Still, however, there was too much of the marvellous in them to please an age which aspired to refinement. The characters were discerned to be strained, the style swollen, the adventures incredible, and the books themselves were voluminous and tedious. With respect to the “Arcadia,” Sidney formed a just estimate when he characterized it as “an idle composition, as a trifle, and triflingly handled.” He appears indeed to have written it chiefly for his sister’s amusement, to whom he sent it in portions as it came from his pen. He never completed the third book, nor was any part of the work printed during his life. It is said he intended to arrange the whole anew* and to have changed the subject by celebrating the prowess and military deeds of king Arthur, The whole, imperfect as he left it, was corrected by his sister’s pen, and carefully perused by others under her direction, so that it was very properly called “The countess of Pembroke’s Arcadia.” It now lies neglected on the shelf, and has almost sunk into oblivion; yet the reception it obtained from the public, having gone through fourteen impressions, and having been translated into the French, Dutch, and other European languages, clearly evinces that it was once held in very high estimation. “There are,” says his biographer, “passages in this work exquisitely beautiful, and useful observations on life and manners, a variety and accurate discrimination of characters, fine sentiments expressed in strong and adequate terms, animated descriptions, equal to any that occur in the ancient or modern poets, sage lessons of morality, and judicious reflexions on government and policy.

only surviving daughter and heir of sir Francis Walsingham, a young lady of great beauty and worth, who is said to have endeared herself to him by those lovely qualities

In 1583 he married Frances, the only surviving daughter and heir of sir Francis Walsingham, a young lady of great beauty and worth, who is said to have endeared herself to him by those lovely qualities which embellish and improve the female character; and about the same time the queen conferred on him the honour of knighthood. She also gave him a sinecure in Wales of the yearly value of 120l. but at what time is uncertain. About 1584 several plots and conspiracies formed against the queen’s person, both at home and abroad, greatly alarmed her. To remove her fears of danger, the nobility and gentry, and indeed men of all degrees and conditions, instituted an association under the direction of the earl of Leicester, binding themselves under the most solemn obligations to prosecute even to death those enemies of their country who should attempt any thing against their sovereign. Of the zeal of sir Philip Sidney at this momentous crisis no doubt can be entertained. While the efforts of Leicester exposed him to the rude censures and severe aspersions of anonymous writers, his nephew took up the pen to vindicate his fame. With this view he composed an answer to a publication, entitled “Leicester’s Commonwealth,” the reputexl author of which was Parsons the noted Jesuit; but sir Philip’s production has not been thought conclusive as to the chief points in dispute, and it remained in ms. until the publication of the Sidney papers in 1746.

ievously oppressed by the cruelties of the duke of Alva, implored the assistance of queen Elizabeth, who promised to send a military force to their relief, and on this

The protestant inhabitants of the Netherlands being grievously oppressed by the cruelties of the duke of Alva, implored the assistance of queen Elizabeth, who promised to send a military force to their relief, and on this occasion indulged the martial disposition of sir Philip Sidney, who was now a privy counsellor, by appointing him governor of Flushing, one of the most important places in the Netherlands. Sir Philip, who entered heartily into the cause of the protestant religion, prepared himself cheerfully to sacrifice his life and fortune in this service, and on his arrival at Flushing, Nov. 18, 1585, was immediately appointed colonel of all the Dutch regiments, and captain of a small band of English soldiers amounting to 300 horse and foot. Not long after, the earl of Leicester was sent, with an army of 5000 foot and 1000 horse, to the United Provinces, as general of the English auxiliaries, and sir Philip, promoted to the office of general of the horse under his uncle, joined himself to this army. It would be foreign to our purpose to recount the different causes which obstructed the success of the auxiliaries, or the mischiefs which arose from dissentions among the commanders. Sir Philip, we are told, attempted by wise counsels to reconcile them. In July 1586, accompanied by the young prince Maurice, he took Axell, a town in Flanders, without the loss of a single man; but on September 22, 1586, having engaged with a convoy sent by the enemy to Zutphen, a strong town in Guelderland, then besieged by the Spaniards, the English troops, far inferior in number to those of the enemy, though they gained a decisive victory, sustained an irreparable loss by the death of sir Philip Sidney. Having one horse shot under him, he mounted a second, and seeing lord Willoughby surrounded by the enemy, and in imminent danger, he rushed forward to rescue him. Having accomplished his purpose, he continued the fight with great spirit, until he received a bullet in the left thigh, which proved fatal.

ty of the soul of man, the prospect of future blessedness, the redemption of mankind by the Messiah, who was promised to the Jews for the salvation of the whole world.

The works of sir Philip Sidney, which we shall but briefly notice, are, 1. The “Arcadia” already mentioned. 2. “Astrophel and Stella,” with sonnets of various noblemen and gentlemen, 1591, 4to. 3. “The Defence of Poesy,1595, 4to, afterwards usually printed with the “Arcadia*” In 1787 Dr. Joseph Warton printed an edition, with “Observations on Poetry and Eloquence from Ben Jonson’s Discoveries,” 8vo. 4. “Sonets,” several of which appeared in Constable’s “Diana,1594, but were afterwards annexed to the “Arcadia,” with “Astrophel and Stella.” 5. “A remedie for Love.” 6. “The Lady of May, a masque,” both generally printed with the “Arcadia.” 7. “Valour anatomized in a fancie,1581, printed at. the end of “Cottoni Posthuma,1672. 8. Various songs and sonnets in “England’s Helicon,” and other collections. 9. “English Version of the Psalms of David,” a ms. 10. A translation of Du Plessis 7 true use of the Christian religion, begun by sir Philip, and finished at his request by Arthur Goiding, 1587 and 1592, 1604 and 1617. Dr 4 Zouch is of opinion that the greatest part of it was by sir Philip. It is pleasing to reflect, adds this biographer, that the most accomplished gentleman and the most complete scholar of his -age, was deeply impressed with a sense of religion, that he delighted in contemplating the doctrines of revelation, the existence of one supreme being, the creation of the world by him, and his providential government of it, the immortality of the soul of man, the prospect of future blessedness, the redemption of mankind by the Messiah, who was promised to the Jews for the salvation of the whole world.

broke, sister of the preceding, manied in 1676, Henry earl of Pembroke; and her eldest son, William, who succeeded to the titles and estates of his father, is the ancestor

, countess of Pembroke, sister of the preceding, manied in 1676, Henry earl of Pembroke; and her eldest son, William, who succeeded to the titles and estates of his father, is the ancestor of the present family. She had received a liberal education, and was distinguished among the literary characters of the age for a highly cuLtivaied mind and superior talents. Congenial qualities and pursuits united her vith her brother sir Pnilip Sidney, in bonds of strict friendship; and, as we have mentioned in his article, he wrote the “Arcadia” for her amusement. To her also Mr. Abraham Fraunce devoted his poetic and literary labours. The countess por 5 sessed a talent for poetical composition, which she assiduously cultivated. She translated from the Hebrew into English verse many of the Psalms, which are said to be preserved in the library at Wilton, and in this was assisted by her brother. She also translated and published “A Discourse ok Life and Death, written in French by Phiiip Mornay, done into English by the countess of Pembroke, dated May 13, 1590, Wilton:” Lond. 1600, 12mo. Likewise, “The Tragedie of Antonie: done into English by the countess of Pembroke,” Lond. 1595, Umo. This little work contains, though not paged, 54 leaves. To these we may add “An Elegy on Sir Philip Sidney,” printed in Spenser’s “Astrophel,1595, and a “Pastoral Dialogue in praise of Astrsea,” i. e. queen Elizabeth, published in Davison’s “Poetical Rapsody,1602. A long poem in six-line stanzas, entitled “The Countesse of Pembroke’s Passion,” occurs among the Sloanian Mss. No. 1303.

ful in all parts of literature, especially in poetry. He married Papianilla, the daughter of Avitus, who, from the office of pretorian prefect in Gaul, was raised to

, a learned ecclesiastic of the fifth century, was descended of an illustrious family, his father and grandfather having been pretorian prefects in Gaul, and was born at Lyons about 430. He was educated with care, performed his studies under the best masters of that time, and became very skilful in all parts of literature, especially in poetry. He married Papianilla, the daughter of Avitus, who, from the office of pretorian prefect in Gaul, was raised to the imperial throne, after the death of Maximus. But Majorianus, whom Leo had taken into a partnership of the empire, forced Avitus to lay down his crown, and came to besiege the city of Lyons, where Sidonius had shut himself up. The city being taken, he fell into the hands of the enemy but the reputation of his great learning softened the barbarity of his enemies, and in return for their lenient treatment of him, he wrote a poem in honour of Majorianus, who was so highly gratified with it as to erect a statue to Sidonius in the city of Rome. The emperor Anthemius was equally pleased with a panegyric which Sidonius wrote in praise of him, and made him governor of Rome, and a patrician; but he soon quitted his secular employment, and obtained preferment in the church, being in 472 chosen, against his will, as reported, bishop of Clermont. He appears however to have been worthy of the station by learning and charity. His liberality indeed was highly conspicuous, and even before he was bishop, he frequently converted his silver plate to the use of the poor. When Clermont was besieged by the Goths, he encouraged the people to stand upon their defence, and would never consent to the surrender of the city; so that, when it was delivered up, he was forced to fly, but was soon restored. Some time after, he was opposed by two factious priests, who deprived him of the government of his church; but he was again re-instated with honour at the end of a year. He died in peace in 487, after he had been bishop fifteen years.

f Piero della Francesca. He was an artist of spirit and expression, and one of the first in Tuscany, who designed the naked with anatomical intelligence, though still

, a Florentine artist, born at Corfcona in 1439, was the scholar of Piero della Francesca. He was an artist of spirit and expression, and one of the first in Tuscany, who designed the naked with anatomical intelligence, though still with some dry ness of manner, and too much adherence to the model: the chief evidence of this is in the Duomo of Orvieto, where in the mixed imagery of final dissolution and infernal punishment, he has scattered original ideas of conception, character, and attitude, in copious variety, though not without remnants of gothic alloy. The angels, who announce the impending doom or scatter plagues, exhibit, with awful simplicity, bold fore-shortenings; whilst the St. Michael presents only the tame heraldic figure of a knight all cased in armour. In the expression of the condemned groups and daemons, he chiefly dwells on the supposed perpetual renewal of the pangs attending on the last struggles of life with death, contrasted with the inexorable scowl or malignant grin of fiends methodizing torture; a horrid feature, reserved by Dante for the last pit of his Inferno. It has been first said by Vasari, who exulted in his relation to Luca, that Michael Angelo, in certain parts of his Last Judgment, adopted something of the conduct and the ideas of his predecessor. This is true, because Michael Angelo could not divest himself of every impression from a work he had so often seen: his originality consisted in giving consequence to the materials of Luca, not in changing them; both drew from the same sources, with the same predilections and prejudices, and differed less in the mode than the extent of their conception.

the Gesu of Cortona, forms and tints of modern grace; and he distinguished himself among the artists who concurred to decorate the pannels of the Sistina, by superior

Luca Signorelli worked at Urbino, Volterra, Arezzo, Florence, and other cities of Italy; and though by far the greater part of his performances be defective in form and union of colour, Wfe meet in some others, especially in the Communion of the Apostles at the Gesu of Cortona, forms and tints of modern grace; and he distinguished himself among the artists who concurred to decorate the pannels of the Sistina, by superior composition.

Of this artist, who died in 1521, aged eighty- two, a story is told as a proof of

Of this artist, who died in 1521, aged eighty- two, a story is told as a proof of what an absolute command he had over his passions, or rather, it might have been said, over natural affection. He had a son extremely handsome, and a youth of great hopes, who was unfortunately killed at. Cortona. When this son, greatly beloved by him, was brought home, he ordered his corpse to be carried into his painting-room and, having stripped him, immediately drew his picture, without shedding a tear.

bservations on the Abbe* Pluche’s History of the Heavens,” translated from the French of Silhouette, who professes that he was chiefly indebted for them to the second

, a French writer, whose taste for English literature entitles him to a place here, was born at Limoges in 1709, and appears to have been brought up to civil or political life, although he always cultivated a taste for literature. He purchased the office of master of requests, and after having managed the affairs of the duke of Orleans, became comptroller-general and minister of state in 1759. This was a critical time for France, which was carrying on a ruinous war, and the finances were in a very low condition. Silhouette wished to remedy this last evil by retrenchment and ceconomy, but finding that such a plan was only a topic for ridicule, he quitted his post in about nine months, and retired to his estate of Brie-sur-Marne,and devoted his time to study, and his wealth to benevolence. He died in 1767. His works were: 1. “Idee generate du Government Chinois,1729, 4to, 1731, 12mo. 2. “Reflexion politique,” from the Spanish of Balthazar Gracian, 1730, 4to. 3. A translation of Pope’s “Essay on Man,” which the French speak of as faithful, but not elegant. 4. A translation of Bolingbroke’s “Dissertation on Parties.” This is said to have been printed at London in 1739, where, perhaps about this time Silhouette was on a visit. 5 “Lettre sur les transactions pubiiques du Regrie d'Elizabeth,” with some remarks on Rapin’s account of that reign, Amst. 1736, 12mo. 6. A translation of Pope’s “Miscellanies,1741, 2 vols. 12mo. 7. “Traite* mathematique sur le bonheur,1741, 12mo. 8. A translation of Warburton’s “Alliance,1742, 2 vols. 1.2 mo. With Warburton he appears to have corresponded, for in one of Warburton’s letters, printed by Mr. Nichols, we find that celebrated author desiring that a copy of his “Divine Legation” may be sent to M. Silhouette in Franoe. In the “History of the Works of the Learned” also, we find “Observations on the Abbe* Pluche’s History of the Heavens,” translated from the French of Silhouette, who professes that he was chiefly indebted for them to the second volume of the “Divine Legation,” and to some particular remarks communicated to him hy Mr. Warburton. 9. “Epitres morales, Lettres phiiosophiques, et Traits mathematiques,” printed at the Bowyer press, in 1741. 10. “Memoirs des commissaires du roi et de ceux de sa majeste Britamuque stir les possessions et les droits respectifs des deux couronnes en Amerique,” Paris, 1755, 4to. In this he was assisted by M. de la Gahssonniere. 1 1> “Voyage de France, d‘Espagne, de Portugal, et d’ltalie,” a posthumous work, Paris, 1770.

contention, he was obliged to resign the see to Arnulf, the natural son of Lothaire, king of France, who had been formerly deposed from it. This was in 997, and at the

On his rise to the papacy we shall be brief. In 991, Hugh Capet promoted him to the archbishopric of Rheiins; but this elevation was a source of disquiet to him, and after much contention, he was obliged to resign the see to Arnulf, the natural son of Lothaire, king of France, who had been formerly deposed from it. This was in 997, and at the same time Otho III. conferred upon him the archbishopric of Ravenna; and on the death of pope Gregory V, in 999, he was elected to the papal dignity, when he assumed the name of Silvester. The acts of his pontificate were but few, and not at all important. In 1000 he is said to have conferred on Stephen I., king of Hungary, the royal title, with the famous crown, the palladium of that kingdom, and to have constituted him perpetual legate of the holy see, with power to dispose of all ecclesiastical benefices. It was also in this century that the plan of the holy war was formed; and towards the conclusion of it, the signal was given by our learned pontiff, in the first year of his pontificate, in aa epistle, written in the name of the church of Jerusalem, to the church universal throughout the world, in which the European powers are solemnly exhorted to succour and deliver the Christians in Palestine. The pontiff’s exhortations, however, were only regarded by the inhabitants of Pisa.

in the Louvre. Silvestre married Henrietta Selincart, a lady celebrated both for her wit and beauty, who dying in September 1680, he erected a superb monument to her

, a celebrated French engraver, was born August 15, 1621, at Nanci, of a good family, originally Scotch. After his father’s decease, he went to Paris, where Israel Henriet, his mother’s brother, a skilful engraver, gladly received him, and educated him as his own son. He drew ajl the views of Paris and its environs, engraved them with great success, and went twice afterwards to Rome, whence he brought the great number of fine Italian views which he has left us. Louis XIV. being at length informed of this artist’s great genius, employed him to engrave all the royal palaces, conquered places, &c, and appointed him drawing master to the dauphin, allowing him a considerable pension besides, with apartments in the Louvre. Silvestre married Henrietta Selincart, a lady celebrated both for her wit and beauty, who dying in September 1680, he erected a superb monument to her memory in the church of St. Germain l'Auxerrois. He died October 11, 1691, aged seventy.

to surprize, a contrary wind carried his ship to the isle of Pharos. There he nut with an anchorite, who advised him to write tho life of Theoctista, a female saint

, surnamed Metaphrasfes, from his having written the lives of the saints in a diffuse manner, was born of noble parents at Constantinople, in the tenth century, and was well educated, and raised himself by his merit to very high trust under the reigns of Leo, the philosopher, and Constantine Pruphyrogenitus his son. It is said, that when sent on a certain occasion by the emperor to the island of Crete, which the Saracens were about to surprize, a contrary wind carried his ship to the isle of Pharos. There he nut with an anchorite, who advised him to write tho life of Theoctista, a female saint of Lesbos. With this he complied, and we may presume, found some pleasure in the undertaking, as be gradually extended his researches to the lives of an hundred and twenty other saints, which, with respect to style, are not disgraceful to a scholar, but, cardinal Bellarmin says, he describes his saints rather as what they ought to be, than as what they were. There are Latin translations of this work by Lipotian, Surius, and others, but no edition of the original Gveek; and iiis translators are accused of having added much of a fabulous nature. Some other religious tracts of Metaphrastes are extant, and some “Annals.” He died in 976 or 977.

, a learned divine of the sixteenth century, who co-operated in the reformation, was born Nov. 6, 1530, at Cappell,

, a learned divine of the sixteenth century, who co-operated in the reformation, was born Nov. 6, 1530, at Cappell, a village near Zurich in Swisserland. His father, Peter Simler, after having been for many years a member of, and afterwards prior of the L onastery there, embraced the reformed religion, became a preacher of it, and died in 1557. After being educated for some time in his father’s monastery, he went to Zurich in 1544, and studied for two years under the direction of the celebrated Bullinger, who was his god-father. He removed thence to Basil, where he studied rhetoric and mathematics, and afterwards to Strasburgh, where Sturmius, Martyr, Bucer, and others of the reformers resided; but as he had no thoughts at this time of divinity as a profession, he improved himself chiefly in other branches of learning. He continued here about two years, and passed three more in visiting various universities, and hearing the lectures of the most eminent professors. In 1549, he returned home, and with such visible improvement in learning, that Gesner often employed him to lecture to his scholars, both in geometry and astronomy. In 1552 he was appointed to expound in public the New Testament, which he did with so much ability as to be greatly admired by the learned of Zurich, as wt 11 as by the English who had taken refuge there from the Marian persecution. In 1557 he was made deacon; and when Bibliander, on account of his advanced age, was declared emeritus^ Simler was appointed to teach in his place, and was likewise colleague with Peter Martyr, who had a high opinion of him, and on his death in 1563, Simler succeeded him as professor of divinity. He filled this office with great reputation until his constitution became impaired by a hereditary gout, which in his latter years interrupted his studies, and shortened his useful life. He was only forty-five when he died, July 2, 1576. He is represented as a man of a meek, placid, and affectionate temper, and although never rich, always liberal, charitable, and hospitable.

hysician extraordinary to the king, was born March 17, 1750, at Sandwich, in Kent, where his father, who followed the profession of the law, was so respected, that,

, a late learned physician, and physician extraordinary to the king, was born March 17, 1750, at Sandwich, in Kent, where his father, who followed the profession of the law, was so respected, that, at the coronation of their present majesties, he was deputed by the cinque ports one of their barons to support the king’s canopy, according to ancient custom. His mother, whose maiden name was Foart, and whose family was likewise of Sandwich, died when he was an infant. He was educated at a seminary in France, where he not only improved himself in the learned languages, but acquired such a perfect knowledge of the French tongue, as to be able to write and speak it with the same facility as his own. He pursued his medical studies for nearly three years at Edinburgh, and afterwards went to Holland, and studied during a season at Leyden, where he was admitted to the degree of doctor of physic: he chose the measles for the subject of his inaugural discourse, which he inscribed to Cullen, and to Gaubius, both of whom hud shewn him particular regard. After taking his degree at Leyden, he visited and became acquainted with professor Camper in InesKuul, who had at that time one of the finest anatomical museums in Kurope. From thence he proceeded to Aix-lct-Chapelle and the Spa, and afterwards visited different parts of Germany; stopped for some time at the principal universities; and wherever he went cultivated the acquaintance of learned men, especially those of his own profession, in which he was ever anxious to impr >ve himself. At Berne, in Switzerland, he became known to the celebrated Haller, who afterwards ranked him among his friends and correspondents. He came to reside in London towards the close of 1778, being then in his 2Stii year, and was admitted a member of the College of Physicians, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society 1779, and of the Society of Antiquaries 1791, as he had been before of different foreign academies at Nantz, Montpellier, and Madrid: he was afterwards admitted an honorary member of the Literary and Philosophical Society at Manchester, and of the Royal Society of Medicine at Paris, at which place he was elected one of the Associes Etrangers de l‘Ecole de Medicine; and in 1807, Correspondant de la Premiere Classe de I’Institut Imperial. Previous to 1778, he had written an elementary work on Anatomy, which was greatly enlarged and improved in its second edition, 1781: and he had communicated to the Royal Society the History of a curious case, which was afterwards published in their Transactions, “Phil. Trans.” vol. LXIV. He became also the sole editor of the London “Medical Journal;” a work which, after going through several volumes, was resumed under the title of “Medical Facts and Observations’.” these two works have ever been distinguished for their correctness, their judicious arrangement, and their candour. About this time he published an account of the Tape-worm, in which he made known the specific for this disease, purchased by the king of France. This account has been enlarged in a subsequent edition. — He likewise distinguished himself by a practical work on “Consumptions,” which, at the time, became the means of introducing him to considerable practice in pulmonary complaints. In 1780, he was elected physician to the Westminster General Dispensary; a situation he held for many years, and which afforded him ample scope for observation and experience in the knowledge of disease. These opportunities he did not neglect; and though, from his appointment soon after to St. Luke’s Hosr he was led to decline general practice, and to attach himself more particularly to the diseases of th mi-.;, continued to communicate to the publick such facts and remarks as he considered likely to promote the extension of any branch of professional science. With this view, he published some remarks on the treatment of Hydrocephalus internus (“Med. Comment, of Edinburgh, vol. V.”), and in the same work a case of Ulceration of the Œsophagus and Ossification of the Heart. He wrote also an account of a species of Hydrocephalus, which sometimes takes place in cases of Mania (London Med. Journal, vol. VI.) and an account of the Epidemic Catarrh of the year 1788, vol. IX. He had given an account also of the “Life of Dr. William Hunter,” with whom he was personally acquainted, a work abounding in interesting anecdote, and displaying an ingenuous and impartial review of the writings and discoveries of that illustrious anatomist. From the time of his being elected physician to St. Luke’s Hospital to the period of his death, he devoted himself, nearly exclusively, to the care and treatment of Insanity; and his skill in this melancholy department of human disease, became so generally acknowledged, that few, if any, could be considered his superiors. In the year 1803, it was deemed expedient to have recourse to Dr. Simmons, to alleviate the mournful malady of his sovereign, of whom he had the care for nearly six months, assisted by his son: the result was as favourable as the public could have wished; and on taking their leave, his majesty was pleased to confer a public testimony of his approbation, by appointing Dr. Simmons one of his physicians extraordinary, which took place in May 1804. — In the unfortunate relapse, which occurred in 1811, Dr. Simmons again attended; and, in conjunction with the other physicians, suggested those remedies and plans which seemed most likely to effect a cure. In February of that year he resigned the office of physician to St. Luke’s, in a very elegant letter, in which he assigned his age and state of health as the reasons for his resignation. The governors were so sensible of the value of his past services, and the respect due to him, as immediately to elect him a governor of the charity. They also proposed his being one of the committee; and, expressly on his account, created the office of Consulting Physician, in order to have the advantage of his opinion, not merely in the medical arrangement, but in the domestic ceconomy of the hospital. His last illness began on the evening of the 10th. of April, 1813, when he was seized with sickness, and a violent vomiting of bile, accompanied with a prostration of strength so sudden, and so severe, that on the second day of the attack he was barely able to stand; and a dissolution of the powers of life seeming to be rapidly coming on, he prepared for his departure with methodical accuracy, anticipated the event with great calmness, and, on the evening of the 23d of the same month, expired in the arms of his son. He was buried May 2, at Sandwich in Kent, and, according to the directions expressed in his will, his remains were deposited in a vault in the church-yard of St. Clement, next to those of his mother. In private life, Dr. Simmons was punctiliously correct in all his dealings; mild and unassuming in his manners, and of rather retired habits, passing Ins time chiefly in his study and in his professional avocations. He was one of the earliest proprietors of the Roy;d Institution and, in 1806, became an hereditary governor of the British Institution for the promotion of the Fine Arts. He has left one son, who is unmarried, and a widow, to deplore his loss.

hat he might be permitted to remain in Paris; but this being unaccompanied by any advantages, Simon, who had much of an independent spirit, petitioned to go back to

, a French critic and divine of great learning, was born at Dieppe, May 13, 1638, and commenced his studies among the priests of the oratory, whom he quitted for some time, and went to Paris, where he applied himself to divinity, and made a great progress in Oriental learning, for which he had always a particular turn. About the end of 1662, he returned to the oratory and became a priest of it. On the death of father Bourgouin, general of this congregation, some cause of displeasure inclined him to leave them, and join the society of the Jesuits; but from this he was diverted by the persuasions of father Bertad, the superior of the oratory. He was then sent to the college of Juilly, in the diocese of Meaux, to teach philosophy; but other business occurring, he was ordered to go to Paris. In the library of the oratory there was a valuable collection of Oriental books, of which Simon was employed to make a catalogue, which he executed with great skill, and perused at the same time those treasures with great avidity. M. de Lamoignon, first president of the parliament of Paris, meeting with him one day in the library, was so pleased with his conversation, that he requested of Senault, the new general of the oratory, that he might be permitted to remain in Paris; but this being unaccompanied by any advantages, Simon, who had much of an independent spirit, petitioned to go back to Juilly, to teach philosophy, as before. He accordingly arrived there in 1668, and, in 1670, his first publication appeared, a defence of the Jews against the accusation of having murdered a Christian child, “Factum pour les Juifs de Metz,” &c. In the following year, with a view to shew that the opinion of the Greek church is not materially different from that of the church of Rome, with respect to the sacrament, he published “Fides Ecclesiae Orientalis, seu Gabrielis Metropolitae Philadelphiensis opuscula, cum interpretatione Latina et notis,” Paris, 1671, quarto, reprinted 16S6. When the first volume of the “Perpetuity of the faith respecting the Eucharist” appeared, our author, who from his youth was an original, if not always a just thinker, expressed some opinions on that work, and on the subject, which involved him in a controversy with the gentlemen of Port-Royal; and this seems to have laid the foundation of the opposition he afterwards met with from the learned of his own communion. His next publication came out under the name of Recared Simeon (for he often used fictitious names), and was a translation from Leo of Modena, entitled “Ceremonies et Coutumes qui s’observent aujourdui parmi les Juifs,” &c. 1674, 12mo. This was republished in 1681, under the name of the Sieur de Semonville; with the addition of a “Comparison between the ceremonies of the Jews and the discipline of the church.” In this edition, and perhaps in the subsequent ones of 1682 and 1684, the reader will find a great number of parentheses and crotchets, which Bayle thus accounts for: The work having been submitted in ms. to M. Perot, a doctor of the Sorbonne, for examination, he added some passages, which the author being obliged to retain, and yet unwilling that they should pass for his own, inclosed in crotchets; but had afterwards to complain, that the printers, who were not in the secret, had omitted some of these. In 1675, Simon published a “Voyage duMontLiban,” from the Italian of Dandini, with notes; and, about the same time, a “Factum du Prince de Neubourg, abbe de Feschamps, centre les religieux de cette abbay” and, as was usual with him, took an opportunity to attack the Benedictines.

d Testament,” which appeared in 1678, but was immediately suppressed by the Messieurs du Port Royal; who alleged, that it. contained things false and dangerous to religion

But the first work of importance which he published, and that which rendered him most famous, was his “Critical History of the Old Testament,” which appeared in 1678, but was immediately suppressed by the Messieurs du Port Royal; who alleged, that it. contained things false and dangerous to religion and the church. It was reprinted the year after, and was so much admired for excellent learning and admirable criticism, that it became an object of attention to foreigners; and was published, in Latin, at Amsterdam 1681, and in English at London 1682, by R. H. i. e. R. Hampden (son of the celebrated John Harnpden), who, we are told, declared on his death-bed, that father Simon’s works had made him a sceptic.

idgment of his “Critical History of the Old Testament.” In 1686, he published an answer to Le Clerc, who had criticised his work the year before; and, upon Le Clerc’s

In 1684 he published, at Francfort, “Histoire de l'Origine et du Progres des Revenus Ecclesiastiques,” or, “The History of the Rise and Progress of Ecclesiastical Revenues,” under the name of Jerome a Costa. A second edition of it, with great additions, was printed at Francfort, 1709, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1684 he published, at London, “Disquisitiones Criticae de variis per diversa loca et tempora Bibliorum Editionibus,” &c. and in the same year, at the same place, appeared an English translation of it, with this title, “Critical Enquiries into the various editions of the Bible, printed in divers places and at several times, together with animadversions upon a small treatise of Dr. Isaac Vossius concerning the oracles of the Sibyls.” There is his usual display of learning in this piece, which may be considered as an abridgment of his “Critical History of the Old Testament.” In 1686, he published an answer to Le Clerc, who had criticised his work the year before; and, upon Le Clerc’s replying in 1686, another in 1687, both under the name of the Prior of Bolleville, at which place he then resided,

an unfortunate propensity to singularities and novelties of opinion, and too much contempt for those who differed from him, and in this last work he has perhaps unsettled

In 1688 he published at Francfort, under the name of John Reuchlin, “Dissertation Critique sur la Nouvelle Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecc'eYiastiques par Du Pin, &c.” in which he supports with great spirit some principles in his “Critical History of the Old Testament,” which had been controverted by Du Pin. In 1689 came out his “Histoire Critique du Texte du Nouveau Testament,” an English version of which was published the same year at London; in 1690, “Histoire Critique des versions du Nouveau Testament;” in 1693, “Histoire Critique des principaux Commentateurs du Nouveau Testament;” in all which, as indeed in every thing else he wrote, there appears great acuteness, and great learning, with, however, an unfortunate propensity to singularities and novelties of opinion, and too much contempt for those who differed from him, and in this last work he has perhaps unsettled more than he has settled. In 1702 he published a French translation of the New Testament, with critical remarks, in 2 vols. 8vo: which was censured by cardinal de Noailles, and Bossuet, bishop of Meaux. In 1714, was published at Amsterdam, in 2 vols. 12mo, “Nouvelle Bibliotheque Choisie,” or, “A new select library, which points out the good books in various kinds of literature, and tht? use to be made of them;” but this must be reckoned a posthumous work; for Simon died at Dieppe in April 1712, in his seventy-fourth year, and was buried in St. James’s church.

men of Meliceutes, i. e. sweet as honey, and the tearful eye of his muse was proverbial. Dr. Warton, who has an elegant paper in the Adventurer (No. 89) partly on the

He obtained the prize in poetry at the public games when he was eighty years old. According to Suidas, he added four letters to the Greek alphabet: and Pliny assigns to him the eighth string of the lyre; but these claims are disputed by the learned. Among the numerous poetical productions, of which, according to Fabricius, antiquity has made him the author, were his many songs of victory and triumph, for athletic conquerors at the public games. He is likewise said to have gained there, himself, the prize in elegiac poetry, when ^schylus was his competitor. His poetry was so tender and plaintive, that he acquired the cognomen of Meliceutes, i. e. sweet as honey, and the tearful eye of his muse was proverbial. Dr. Warton, who has an elegant paper in the Adventurer (No. 89) partly on the merits of this poet, remarks that he was celebrated by the ancients for the sweetness, correctness, and purity of his style, and his irresistible skill in moving the passions. Dionysius places him among those polished writers, who excel in a smooth volubility, and flow on, like plenteous and perennial rivers, in a course of even and uninterrupted harmony. Addison has an ingenious paper on Simonides’ “Characters of Women,” in the Spectator (No. 209). This considerable fragment of Simonides, preserved by Stobaius, was published in Greek by Kohler, at Gottingen, 1781, 8vo, and he also published the Latin only, in 1789, to which professor Heyne prefixed a letter on the condition of women in ancient Greece. Simonides’s fragments of poetry are in Stephens’s Pindar, 1560, and other editions of the ancient lyric poets.

ce from Bosworth, where he went to lodge at the house of a taylor’s widow, of the name of Swinfield, who had been left with two children, a daughter and a son, by her

Upon this occasion he repaired to Nuneaton, a town at a small distance from Bosworth, where he went to lodge at the house of a taylor’s widow, of the name of Swinfield, who had been left with two children, a daughter and a son, by her husband, of whom the son, who was the younger, being but about two years older than Simpson, had become his intimate friend and companion. And here he continued some time, working at his trade, and improving his knowledge by reading such books as he could procure.

arge solar eclipse, which took place on the llth day of May, 1724. This phenomenon, so awful to many who are ignorant of the cause of it, struck the mind of young Simpson

Among several other circumstances which, long before this, gave occasion to shew our author’s early thirst for knowledge, as well as proving a fresh incitement to acquire it, was that of a large solar eclipse, which took place on the llth day of May, 1724. This phenomenon, so awful to many who are ignorant of the cause of it, struck the mind of young Simpson with a strong curiosity to discover the reason of it, and to be able to predict the like surprising events. It was, however, several years before he could obtain his desire, which at length was gratified by the following accident. After he been some time at Mrs. Swinfield’s, at Nuneaton., a travelling pedlar came that way, and took a lodging at the same house, according to his usual custom. This man, to his profession of an itinerant merchant, had joined the more profitable one of a fortuneteller, which he performed by means of judicial astrology. Every one knows with what regard persons of such a cast are treated by the inhabitants of country villages; it cannot be surprising therefore that an untutored lad of nineteen should look upon this man as a prodigy, and, regardin^ him in this lignt, should endeavour to ingratiate himself into his favour; in which he succeeded so well, that the sage was no less taken with the quick natural parts and genius of his new acquaintance. The pedlar, intending a journey to Bristol fair, left in the hands of young Simpson a i oK! edition of Cocker’s Arithmetic, to which was subjo i.ed a short Appendix on Algebra, and a book tipoa Gemtim s, by Partridge the almanac maker. These books h 11 “‘ perused to so good purpose during the absence of his f’ri<-nd, as to excite his amazement upon his return in consequence of which he set himself about erecting a genethliacal type, in order to a presage of Thomas’s future fortune. The position of the heavens the wizard having very maturely considered,” secundum artem,“pronounced with much confidence, that” within two years time Simpson would turn out a greater man than himself!"

and this was the method of fluxions. But he was altogether at a loss to discover any English author who had written on the subject, except Mr. Hayes; and his work,

It was not long after this, that Simpson, being pretty well qualified to erect a figure himself by the advice of his friend, make an open profession of casting nativities, and was so successful, that he quite neglected weaving, and soon became the oracle of Bosworth and its environs. Scarcely a courtship advanced to. a match, or a bargain to a sale, without the parties previously consulting the infallible Simpson about the consequences. Helping persons to stolen goods he always declared above his match; and that, as to life and death, he had no power. Together witii his astrologv, he had furnished himself with arithmetic, algebra, and geometry, sufficient to qualify him for looking into the “Ladies Diary-” (of which he had afterwards the direction), by which he came to understand, that there was still a higher branch of mathematical knowledge than any he had been yet acquainted with; and this was the method of fluxions. But he was altogether at a loss to discover any English author who had written on the subject, except Mr. Hayes; and his work, being a folio and rather scarce, exceeded his ability of purchasing. An acquaintance, however, lent him Stone’s Fluxions, which is a translation of De l'Hospital’s “Analyse des infinitement petits” and by this one book, and his own penetrn<:; tJents, he was enabled, in a very few years, to compose a much more accurate treatise on that subject tnan any that had before appeared in our language. In the mean time an unfortunate event involved him in a deal of trouble. Having undertaken to raise the devil, in order to answer certain questions to a joung woman, who consulted him respecting her sweetheart, then absent at sea, the credulous girl was so frightened on the appearance of a man from beneath some straw, who represented the devil, that she fell into violent fits, from which she was with difficulty recovered, and which for a considerable time threatened insanity or fatuity. In consequence of this exertion of his art, he was obliged to leave the place, and he removed to Derby, where he remained a few years, working at his trade by day, and instructing pupils in the evening. It would seem that Simpson had an early turn for versifying, both from the circumstance of a song written here in favour of the Cavendish family, on occasion of the parliamentary election at that place, in 1733; and from his first two mathematical questions that were published in the “Ladies Diary,” which were both in a set of verses, not ill written for the occasion. These were printed in the Diary for 1736, and therefore must at latest have been written in 1735. These two questions, being at that time pretty difficult ones, shew the great progress he had even then made in the mathematics; and from an expression in the first of them, viz. where he mentions his residence as being in latitude 52, it appears he was not then come up to London, though he must have done so very soon after.

to hardships for the subsistence of his family, having married the taylor’s widow with two children, who soon brought him two more. He, therefore, came up to London

After, however, he took leave of astrology and its emoluments, he was driven to hardships for the subsistence of his family, having married the taylor’s widow with two children, who soon brought him two more. He, therefore, came up to London in 1735 or 1736, and for some time wrought at his business in Spitalfields, and taught mathematics when he had any spare time. His industry soon became so productive, that he was enabled to bring up his wife and children to settle in London. The number of his scholars increasing, and his abilities becoming in some measure known to the public, he issued proposals for publishing, by subscription, “A new Treatise of Fluxions, wherein the Direct and Inverse Method are demonstrated after a new, clear, and concise manner; with their application to Physics and Astronomy. Also the Doctrine of infinite Series and reverting Senes universally and amply explained; fluxionary and exponential Equations solved,” &c. When he first proposed his intentions of publishing such a work, he did not know of any English book founded on the true principles of fluxions, that contained any thing material, especially the practical part; and, though some progress had been made by several learned and ingenious gentlemen, the principles were nevertheless left obscure and defective, and all that had been done by nny of them in “infinite series” very inconsiderable. The book was not published till 1737, 4to; the author having been frequently interrupted from furnishing the press so fast as he could have wished, through his unavoidable attention to his pupils for his immediate support. In 1740 he published “A Treatise on the Nature and Laws of Chance,” in 4to; to which are annexed full and clear Investigati ns of two important Problems added in the second edition of Mr. De Moivre’s “Book on Chances, and two new Methods for summing of Series.” His next performance was, “Essays on several curious and useful subjects in speculative and mixed Mathematics. Dedicated to Francis Blake, esq. since fellow of the Royal Society, and his very good Friend and Patron,174-0, 4to. Soon after the publication of this book he was chosen a member of the Royal Academy at Stockholm. Our author’s next work appeared in 1742, 8vo, “The Doctrine of Annuities and Reversions deduced from general and evident Principles: with useful Tables, shewing the values of single and joint lives, &c. at different rates of interest,” &c. This, in 1743, was followed by “An Appendix, containing some Remarks on a late Book on the same subject (by Mr. Abr. De Moivre, F. R. S.) with answers to some personal and malignant representations in the Preface thereof.” To this De Moivre never thought fit to reply. In 1743 he published also “Mathematical Dissertations on a variety of Physical and Analytical subjects,” 4to. This work he dedicated to Martin Folkes, esq. president of the Royal Society. His next book was, “A Treatise of Algebra, wherein the fundamental principles are fully and clearly demonstrated, and applied to the solution of a variety of problems.” To which he added, “The Construction of a great number of geometrical Problems, with the method of resolving them numerically.” This work was designed for the use of young beginners; inscribed to William Jones, esq. F. R. S. and printed in 1745, 8vo. A new edition appeared in 1755, with additions and improvements. This is dedicated to James earl of Morton, F. R. S. Mr. Jones being dead; and there was a sixth edition in 1790. His next work was, “Elements of Geometry, with their application to Mensuration of Superficies and Solids, to the determination of Maxima and Minima, and to the construction of a great variety of Geometrical Problems,1747, 8vo, reprinted in 1760, with large alterations and additions, designed for young beginners; particularly for the gentlemen at the king’s academy at Woolwich, and dedicated to Charles Frederick, esq. surveyor-general of the ordnance; and other editions have appeared since*. In 1748 came out his “Trigonometry, Plane and Spherical, with the construction and application of Logarithms,” 8vo. This little book contains several things new and useful. In 1750 appeared in 2 vols. 8vo, “The doctrine and application of Fluxions, containing, besides what is common on the subject, a number of new improvements in the Theory,and the solution of a variety of new and very interesting Problems, in different branches of the Mathematics.” In the preface the author offers this to the world as a new book rather than a second edition of that published in 1737; in which he acknowledges, that, besides errors of the press, there are several obscurities and defects, for want of experience, in his first attempt. This work is dedicated to George earl of Mat-clesfield. In 1752 appeared in 8vo, “Select Exercises for young proficients in Mathematics,” dedicated to John Bacon, esq. F. R. S. His “Miscellaneous Tracts,” printed in 1757, 4to, was his last legacy to the public; a most valuable bequest, whether we consider the dignity and importance of the subjects, or his sublime and accurate manner of treating them. These are inscribed to the earl of Macclesfield, and are ably analyzed in Dr. Hutton’s Dictionary.

At the academy he exerted his faculties to the utmost, in instructing the pupils who were the immediate objects of his duty, as well as others, whom

At the academy he exerted his faculties to the utmost, in instructing the pupils who were the immediate objects of his duty, as well as others, whom the superior officers of the ordnance permitted to be boarded and lodged in hi$ house. In his manner of teaching, he had a peculiar and happy address; a certain dignity and perspicuity, tempered with such a degree of mildness, as engaged both the attention, esteem, and friendship of his scholars; of which the good of the service, as well as of the community, was a necessary consequence.

f that day, particularly Mr. Jones, Mr. Caswell, Dr. Jurin, and Mr. Ditton. With the latter, indeed, who was then mathematical master of Christ’s Hospital, and well

, an eminent mathematician, was the eldest son of Mr. John Simson, of Kirton-hall in Ayrshire, and was born Oct. 14, 1687. Being intended for the church, he was sent to the university of Glasgow in 1701, where he made great progress in classical learning and the sciences, and also contracted a fondness for the study of geometry, although at this time, from a temporary cause, no mathematical lectures were given in the college. Having procured a copy of Euclid’s Elements, with the aid only of a few preliminary explanations from some more advanced students, he soon came to understand them, and laid the foundation of his future eminence. He did not, however, neglect the other sciences then taught in college, but in proceeding through the regular course of academic study, acquired that variety of knowledge which was visible in his conversation throughout life. In the mean time his reputation as a mathematician became so high, that in 1710, when only twenty-two years of age, themembersof the college voluntarily made him an offer of the mathematical chair, in which a vacancy in a short time was expected to take place. From his natural modesty, however, he felt much reluctance, at so early an age to advance abruptly from the state of a student, to that of a professor in the same college, and therefore solicited permission to spend one year at least in London. Being indulged in this, he proceeded to the metropolis, and there diligently employed himself in improving his mathematical knowledge. He also enjoyed the opportunity of forming an acquaintance with some eminent mathematicians of that day, particularly Mr. Jones, Mr. Caswell, Dr. Jurin, and Mr. Ditton. With the latter, indeed, who was then mathematical master of Christ’s Hospital, and well esteemed for his learning, &c. he was more particularly connected. It appears from Mr. Simson’s own account, in his letter, dated London, Nov. 1710, that he expected to have had an assistant in his studies chosen by Mr. Caswell; but, from some mistake, it was omitted, and Mr. Simson himself applied to Mr. Ditton. He went to him not as a scholar (his own words), but to have general information and advice about his mathematical studies. Mr. Caswell afterwards mentioned to Mr. Simson that he meant to have procured Mr. Jones’s assistance, if he had not been engaged.

of Dr. Robert Sinclair, or Sinclare (a descendant or other relative probably of Mr. George Sinclare, who died in that office in 1696), the university, while Mr. Simson

When the vacancy in the professorship of mathematics at Glasgow did occur, in the following year, by the resignation of Dr. Robert Sinclair, or Sinclare (a descendant or other relative probably of Mr. George Sinclare, who died in that office in 1696), the university, while Mr. Simson was still in London, appointed him to fill it; and the minute of election, which is dated March 11, 1711, concluded with this very proper condition, “That they will admit the said Mr. Robert Simson, providing always, that he give satisfactory proof of his skill in mathematics, previous to his admission.” He returned to Glasgow before the ensuing session of the college, and having gone through the form of a trial, by resolving a geometrical problem proposed to him, and also by giving “a satisfactory specimen of his skill in mathematics, and dexterity in reaching geometry and algebra;” having produced also respectable certificates of his knowledge of the science, from Mr. Caswell and others, he was duly admitted professor of mathematics, on the 20th of November of that year.

first occupation necessarily was the arrangement of a proper course of instruction for the students who attended his lectures, in two distinct classes. Accordingly

Mr. Simson, immediately after his admission, entered on the duties of his office; and his first occupation necessarily was the arrangement of a proper course of instruction for the students who attended his lectures, in two distinct classes. Accordingly he prepared elementary sketches of some branches on which there were not suitable treatises in general use. Both from a sense of duty and from inclination, he now directed the whole of his attention to the study of mathematics; and though he had a decided preference for geometry, which continued through life, yet he did not devote himself to it to the exclusion of the other branches of mathematical science, in most of which there is sufficient evidence of his being well skilled. From 1711, he continued near fifty years to teach mathematics to two separate classes, at different hours, five days in the week, during a continued session of seven months. His manner of teaching was uncommonly clear and successful; and among his scholars, several rose to distinction as mathematicians; among which may be mentioned the celebrated names of Dr. Matthew Stewart, professor of mathematics at Edinburgh; the two Rev. Dr. Williamsons, one of whom succeeded Dr. Simson at Glasgow; the Rev. Dr. Trail, formerly professor of mathematics at Aberdeen; Dr. James Moor, Greek professor at Glasgow: and professor Robison, of Edinburgh, with many others of distinguished merit. In 17.58, Dr. Simson, being then seventy-one years of age, found it necessary to employ an assistant in teaching; and in 1761, on his recommendation, the Rev. Dr. Williamson was appointed his assistant and successor.

gow, with some oi tie members of his regular club, and with a variety of other respectable visitors, who wished to cultivate the acquaintance, and enjoy the society

In his disposition, Dr. Simson was both cheerful and sociable; and his conversation, when he was at ease among his friends, was animated and various, enriched with much anecdote, especially of the literary kind, but always unaffected. It was enlivened also by a certain degree of natural humour; and even the slight fits of absence, to which in company he was occasionally liable, contributed to the entertainment of his friends, without diminishing their affection and respect, which his excellent qualities were calculated to inspire. One evening (Friday) in the week he devoted to c!nb, chiefly of his own selection, which met in a tavern in-ar the college. The first p; rr of the evening was employed in playing the game o which he was particularly fond; but, though he tool all trouble in estimatng chances, it was remarki h;it he was often Uimh ces ml. The rest of the evening ua> spent in cheerful conversation and, as he had some taste for music, he did not scruple to amuse his party with a song and it is said that he was rather fond of singing some Greek odes, to which modern music had been adapted. On Saturdays he usually dined in the village of Anderston, then about a mile distant from Glasgow, with some oi tie members of his regular club, and with a variety of other respectable visitors, who wished to cultivate the acquaintance, and enjoy the society of so eminent a person. In the progress of time, from his age and character, it became the wish of his company that every thing in these meetings should be directed by him; and though his authority, growing with his years, was somewhat absolute, yet the good humour with which it was administered, rendered it pleasing to even body He had his own chair and place at table; he gave instructions about the entertainment, regulated the time of break.ng up, and adjusted the expense. These parties, in the years of his severe study, were a desirable and useful relaxation to his mind, and they continued to amuse him till within a few months of his death.

l paternal estate in Ayrshire to the eldest son of his next brother, probably of his brother Thomas, who was professor of medicine in the university of St Andrew’s,

In his person, Dr. Sunson was tall and erect; and his countetance, which was handsome, conveyed a pleasing expression of the superior character of his mind. His manner had always somewhat of the fashion which prevailed in the early part of his life, but was uncommonly graceful. He was seriously indisposed only for a few weeks before his death, and through a very long life had enjoyed a uniform state of good health. He died October I, 1768, when his eighty-first year was almost completed; having bequeathed his small paternal estate in Ayrshire to the eldest son of his next brother, probably of his brother Thomas, who was professor of medicine in the university of St Andrew’s, and who is known by some works of reputation, particularly a “Dissertation on the Nervous System, occasioned by the Dissection of a Brain completely Ossified.

branches of hydrostatics as were of a practical nature: and it has been said he was the first person who suggested the proper method of draining the water from the numerous

, professor of philosophy in the university of Glasgow in the seventeenth century, was the author of several works on mathematical and physical subjects. He was dismissed from his professorship soon after the restoration, on account of his principles, being a strict adherent to the presbyterian form of church government. During the period of his ejectment, he resided about the soutnern and border counties, collecting and affording useful information on the subjects of mining, engineering, &c. and was in particular employed by tue magistrates of Edinburgh on the then new plan for supplying that city with water, &c. Considerable attention seems to have been paid by him to such branches of hydrostatics as were of a practical nature: and it has been said he was the first person who suggested the proper method of draining the water from the numerous coal mines in the south-west of Scotland. When the revolution took place in 1688, and the presbyterian became the established religion of Scotland, Mr. Sinclare was recalled to his professorship, which he held until his death in 1696.

and consequence to his public communications. He is said to have been the first, in Italy at least, who published a kind of political journal under the name of “Memorie

, an Italian annalist, was born in 1613, and was a monk of Parma, where he employed the leisure hours which a monastic life afforded, in writing- the history of his times. The confidence placed in him by political men, and the correspondence to which he had access, enabled him to penetrate into the secret motives and causes of actions and events, and gave an air of authenticity and consequence to his public communications. He is said to have been the first, in Italy at least, who published a kind of political journal under the name of “Memorie recondite,” afterwards collected into volumes. The first two having found their way into France, induced cardinal Mazarine to entertain a very high opinion of the author, and by his persuasion, Louis XIV. invited Siri to Paris. On his arrival, he was preferred to a secular abbey, and quitting his ecclesiastical functions, lived at court in great intimacy and confidence with the king and his ministers, and was made almoner and historiographer to his majesty. There, in 1677, he published the 3d and 4th volumes of his journal, and continued it as far as the eighth, 4to. This, says Baretti, is as valuable a history as any in Italian, though the style and language are but indifferent, and it is very difficult to find all the volumes. The period of time they include is from 1601 to 1640. He published also another work of a similar kind, called “11 Mercurio, owero istoria de' correnti Tempi,” from 1647 to 1682, which extends to fifteen 4to volumes, the two last of which are more difficult to be found than all the rest. The former work, however, is in most estimation on account of the historical documents it contains, which are always useful, whatever colouring an editor may please to give. Siri has not escaped the imputation of venality, especially in his attachment to the French court, yet Le Cierc observes (Bibl. Choisie, vol. IV.) that no French writer dared to speak so freely of the public men of that nation as Siri has done. There is a French translation of the “Memorie recondite,” under the title of “Memoires secrets,” which, Landi says, might have been much improved from Siri’s extensive correspondence with almost all the ministers of Europe, now extant in the Benedictine library of Parma, and among the private archives of Modena. Siri died in 1683, in the seventieth year of his age.

e formed a friendship with the most eminent men of the time, particularly with Bellarmine and Tolet, who were of his own society, and with the cardinal Baronius, D’Ossat,

, a very learned French Jesuit, was the son of a magistrate, and born at Riom, Oct. 12, 1559. At ten years of age he was sent to the college of Billon, in Lower Auvergne, the first seminary which the Jesuits had in France. He entered into the society in 1576, and two years after took the vows. His superiors, discovering his uncommon talents, sent him to Paris; where he taught classical literature two years, and rhetoric three. Two of his pupils were Charles of Valois, duke D‘Angouleme, the natural son of Charles IX., and Francis de Sales. During this time, he acquired a perfect knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages; and formed that style which has been so much esteemed by the learned. It is said that he took Muretus for his model, and never passed a day without reading some pages in his writings; and it is certain that by this, or his natural taste, he became one of the purest Latin writers of his time. In 1586, he began his course of divinity, which lasted four years. He undertook to translate into Latin the works of the Greek fathers, and began to write notes upon Sidonius Apollinaris. In 1590, he was sent for to Rome by the general of the order, Aquaviva, to take upon him the office of his secretary; which he discharged for sixteen years with success, and clothed the sentiments of his employer in very superior language. The study of antiquity was at that time his principal object: he visited libraries, and consulted manuscripts: he contemplated antiques, medals, and inscriptions: and the Italians, though jealous of the honour of their nation, acknowledged his acuteness as an antiquary, and consulted him in many cases of difficulty. At Rome he formed a friendship with the most eminent men of the time, particularly with Bellarmine and Tolet, who were of his own society, and with the cardinal Baronius, D’Ossat, and Du Perron. Baronius was much assisted by him in his “Ecclesiastical Annals,” especially in affairs relating to the Greek history upon which he furnished him with a great number of works, translated from Greek into Latin.

nt to him by fattier Vittelleschi, general of their order: but Louis XIII. would not suffer a person who did so much honour to his kingdom, to leave it; and, in 1637,

Sirmond returned to Paris in 1606; and from that time did not cease to enrich the public with a great number of works, particularly editions of the authors of the middle age, printed by him with great care from original manuscripts discovered by him in the public libraries. Much of his life was employed, and the better part of his reputation depends, on his labours as an editor, which produced correct copies of Geoffrey de Vendome, Ennodius, Flocloard, Fulgentius, Valerian, Sidonius Apollinaris, one of his most valuable editions, Paschasius Radbert, Eugene of Toledo, Jdacius, AJarcellinus, and many others When his reputation> came more generally known, pop.- Urban VIII. had a desire to draw him again to Rome and caused a letter for that purpose 10 be sent to him by fattier Vittelleschi, general of their order: but Louis XIII. would not suffer a person who did so much honour to his kingdom, to leave it; and, in 1637, appointed him his confessor, in the room of father Caussin, which delicate office he accepted with great reluctance, yet demeaned himself with the utmost caution and prudence, never meddling with political affairs, or employing his interest in enriching his relations. In 1643, however, after the death of Louis XIII. he left the court, and resumed his ordinary occupations with the same tranquillity as if he had never quitted his retirement. In 1645, he went to Rome, notwithstanding his great age, for the sake of assisting at the election of a general, upon the death of Vittelleschi, as he had done thirty years before upon the death of Aquaviva; and, after his return to France, resumed his studies. But having engaged in a warm dispute in the college of the Jesuits, the exertion brought on a disorder which carried him off in a few days. He died Oct. 7, 1651, aged ninety- two.

s necessary. His dissertations have passed for a model; by which it were to be wished that every one who writes would form himself. When he treated of one subject, he

The works of which he was author and editor amount to fifteen volumes in folio; five of which, containing his original productions, many of them on controversial points, were printed at the royal printing-house at Paris in 1696, under this title: “Jacobi Sirmondi Opera Varia, nunc primum coilecta, ex ipsius schedis emendatiora, Notis posthumis, Epistolis. et Opusculis aliquibus auctiora.” The following character is given of him by Du Pin “Father Sirmond knew how to join a great delicacy of understanding and the jnstest discernment to a profound and extensive erudition. He understood Greek and Latin in perfection, all the profane authors, history, and whatever goes under the name of belles lettres. He had a very extensive knowledge in ecclesiastical antiquity, and had studied with care all the authors ~A the middle -ige His style is pure, concise, and nervous: yet he affects too much certain expressions of the comic poets. He meditated very much upon what he wrote, and had a particular art of reducing into a note what comprehended a great many things in a very few words. He is exact, judicious, simple; yet never omits any thing that is necessary. His dissertations have passed for a model; by which it were to be wished that every one who writes would form himself. When he treated of one subject, he never said immediately all that he knew of it; but reserved some new arguments always for a reply, like auxiliary troops, to come up and assist, in case of need, the grand body of the battle. He was disinterested, equitable, sincere, moderate, modest, laborious; and by these qualities drew to himself the esteem, not only of the learned, but of all mankind. He has left behind him a reputation which will last for many ages.

care of it to the learned Platina. He published a bull, March 1, 1746, granting indulgences to those who should celebrate the festival of the Immaculate Conception of

, originally called Francis Albisola Della Rovera, is said by some writers to have been the son of a fisherman at Celles, a village live leagues from Savona in the territory of Genoa, but others derive him from a branch of a noble family. He was born in 1413, entered the Franciscan order, took a doctor’s degree at Padua, and taught with reputation in the universities of Bologna, Pavia, Sienna, Florence, and Perugia. After this he became general of the Franciscans, then cardinal through the interest of cardinal Bessarion, and at length pope, August 9, 1471, on the death of Paul II. He immediately armed a fleet against the Turks, and displayed great magnificence and liberality during his whole pontificate. He was almost the founder of, and certainly greatly enriched the Vatican library, and entrusted the care of it to the learned Platina. He published a bull, March 1, 1746, granting indulgences to those who should celebrate the festival of the Immaculate Conception of the Holy Virgin; the first decree of the Roman church concerning that festival. The establishment of the feast of St. Joseph, for which Gerson had taken great pains, is also ascribed to this pope. Historians have reproached him with conniving at the vices of his nephews, being too violent against the Medici family and the Venetians, and having joined in the conspiracy of the Pazzi at Florence. There seems upon the whole to have been little in his character to command the respect of posterity, except his patronage of literature. He died August 13, 1484, aged 71. Before his election to the pontificate, he wrote the following treatises “De Sanguine Christi,” Rome, 1473, fol. scarce “De futuris contigentibus” “De potentia Dei;” “De Conceptione beatse V.irginis,” &c.; a very scarce work is also attributed to him, entitled “Regulne Cuncellariae,1471, 4to, translated into French by Dupinet, 1564, 8vo, and reprinted under the title of “La Banque Romaine,1700, 12mo.

ewarded with his master’s favourite servant-maid for a wife. These were the parents of that pontiff, who, from the instant of his accession to the papacy, even to the

, whose proper names were Felix Peretti, was born in 1521, in the signiory of Montalto his father, Francis Peretti, for his faithful service to a country gentleman, with whom he lived as a gardener, was rewarded with his master’s favourite servant-maid for a wife. These were the parents of that pontiff, who, from the instant of his accession to the papacy, even to the hour of his death, made himself obeyed and feared, not only by his own subjects, but by all who had any concern with him. Though he very early discovered talents and inclination for learning, the poverty of his parents prevented their indulging it; for which reason, at about nine years of age, his father hired him to an inhabitant of the town, to look after his sheep: but his master, being on some occasion disobliged, removed him to a less honourable employment, and gave him the care of his hogs. He was soon released, however, from this degrading occupation: for, in 1531, falling accidentally under the cognizance of father Michael Angelo Selleri, a Franciscan friar, who was going to preach during the Lent season at Ascoli, the friar was so exceedingly struck with his conversation and behaviour, as to recommend him to the fraternity whither he was going. Accordingly, with the unanimous approbation of the community, he was received among them, invested with the habit of a lay -brother, and placed under ft the sacristan, to assist in sweeping the church, lighting the candles, and such little offices; who, in return for his services, was to teach him the responses, and rudiments of grammar."

new friendships at Rome, which were afterwards of signal service to him one with the Colonna family, who thereby became his protectors the other with father Ghisilieri,

With no other tutor, his education commenced, and by a quick comprehension, strong memory, and unwearied application, he made such a surprising progress, that in 1534 he was thought fit to receive the cowl, and enter upon his noviciate; and, in 1535, was admitted to make his profession, being no more than fourteen. He pursued his studies with so much assiduity, that, in 1539, he was accounted equal to the best disputants, and was soon admitted to deacon’s orders. In 1545 he was ordained priest, and assumed the name of father Montalto: the same year, he took his bachelor’s degree, and two years after, his doctor’s; and was appointed to keep a divinity act before the whole chapter of the order, at which time he so effectually recommended himself to cardinal de Carpi, and cultivated so close an intimacy with Bossius his secretary, that they were both of them ever after his steady friends; and, indeed, he had frequent occasions for their interposition on his behalf; for the impetuosity of his temper, and his impatience of contradiction, had already subjected him to several inconveniencies, and in the subsequent part of his life involved him in many more difficulties. While all Italy was delighted with his eloquence, he was perpetuallyembroiled in quarrels with his monastic brethren: he, however, formed two new friendships at Rome, which were afterwards of signal service to him one with the Colonna family, who thereby became his protectors the other with father Ghisilieri, by whose recommendation he was appointed inquisitor-general at Venice, by Paul IV. soon after his accession to the papacy in 1555. But the severity with which he executed his office, was so offensive to a people jealous of their liberties, as the Venetians were, that he was obliged to owe his preservation to a precipitate flight from that city.

aplain and consultor of the inquisition, to attend cardinal Buon Compagnon, afterwards Gregory XIII. who was then legate a latere to Spain. Here Montalto had great honours

After his retreat from Venice, we find him acting in many public affairs at Rome, and as often engaged in disputes with the conventuals of his order; till he was appointed, as chaplain and consultor of the inquisition, to attend cardinal Buon Compagnon, afterwards Gregory XIII. who was then legate a latere to Spain. Here Montalto had great honours paid him: he was offered to be made one of the royal chaplains, with a table and an apartment in the palace, and a very large stipend, if he would stay there; but having centered his views at Rome, he declined accepting these favours, and only asked the honour of bearing the title of his majesty’s chaplain wherever he went." While things were thus circumstanced at Madrid, news was brought of the death of Pius IV. and the elevation of cardinal Alexandrine to the holy see, with the title of Pius V. MontaUo was greatly transported at this news, the new pontiff having ever been his steadyfriend and patron; for this new pope was father Ghisilieri, who had been promoted to the purple by Paul IV. Montalto’s joy at the promotion of his friend was not ill-founded, nor were his expectations disappointed; for Pius V. even in the first week of his pontificate, appointed him general of his order, an office that he executed with his accustomed severity. In 1568 he was made bishop of St. Agatha; and, in 1570, was honoured with a cardinal’s hat and a pension. During this reign he had likewise the chief direction of the papal councils, and particularly was employed to draw up the bull of excommunication against queen Elizabeth.

eater knowledge and experience.” The election being determined in favour of cardinal Buon Compagnon, who assumed the name of Gregory XIII. Montalto did not neglect to

Being now in possession of the purple, he began to aspire to the papacy. With this view “he became humble, patient, and affable; so artfully concealing the natural impetuosity of his temper, that one would have sworn this gentleness and moderation was born with him. There was such a change in his dress, his air, his words, and all his actions, that his nearest friends and acquaintance said, he was not the same man. A greater alteration, or a more absolute victory over his passions, was never seen in any one; nor is there an instance, perhaps, in all history, of a person supporting a fictitious character in so uniform and consistent a manner, or so artfully disguising his foibles and imperfections for such a number of years.” To which may be added, that, while he endeavoured to court the friendship of the ambassadors of every foreign power, he very carefully avoided attaching himself to the interest of any one; nor would he accept favours, that might be presumed to lay him under peculiar obligations. He was not less singular in his conduct to his relations, to whom he had heretofore expressed himself with the utmost tenderness; but now he behaved very differently, “knowing that disinterestedness in that point was one of the keys to the papacy. So that when his brother Antony came to see him at Rome, he lodged him in an inn, and sent him back again the next day with only a present of sixty crowns; strictly charging him to return immediately to his family, and tell them, ‘That his spiritual cares increased upon’him, and he was now dead to his relations and the world; but as he found old age and infirmities begin to approach, he might, perhaps, in a while, send for one of his nephews to wait on him',” Upon the death of Pius V. which happened in 1572, Montalto entered the conclave with the rest of the cardinals; but, appearing to give himself no trouble about the election, kept altogether in his apartment, without ever stirring from it, except to his devotions. He affected a total ignorance of the intrigues of the several factions; and, if he was asked to engage in any party, would reply, with seeming indifference, “that for his part he was of no manner of consequence; that, as he had never been in the conclave before, he was afraid of making some false step, and should leave the affair to be conducted wholly by people of greater knowledge and experience.” The election being determined in favour of cardinal Buon Compagnon, who assumed the name of Gregory XIII. Montalto did not neglect to assure him, “that he had never wished for any thing so much in his life, and that be should always remember his goodness, and the favours he received from him in Spain.” The new pope, however, not only shewed very little regard to his compliment, but during his pontificate, treated him with the utmost contempt, and deprived him of the pension which had been granted to him by Pins V. Nor was he held in greater esteem by the generality of the cardinals, who considered him as a poor, old, doting fellow, incapable of doing either good or harm; and who, by way of ridicule, they were used frequently to style, “the ass of La Marca.” He seldom interfered in> or was present at any public transactions; the chief part of his time was employed in works of piety and devotion; and his benevolence to the indigent was so remarkable, that, when a terrible famine prevailed at Pome, the poor said openly of him, “that cardinal Montalto, who lived upon charity himself, gave with one hand what he received with the other; while the rest of the cardinals, who wallowed in abundance, contented themselves with shewing them the way to the hospital.

ithstanding this affected indifference to what passed in the world, he was never without able spies, who informed him from time to time of every the most minute particular.

Notwithstanding this affected indifference to what passed in the world, he was never without able spies, who informed him from time to time of every the most minute particular. He had assumed great appearance of imbecility and all the infirmities of old age, for some years before the death of Gregory XIII. in 1585; when it was not without much seeming reluctance, that Montalto accompanied the rest of the cardinals into the conclave, where he maintained the same uniformity of behaviour in which he had so long persisted. “He kept himself close shut up in his chamber, and was no more thought or spoken of, than if he had not been there. He very seldom stirred out, and when he went to mass, or any of the scrutinies, appeared so little concerned, that one would have thought he had no manner of interest in any thing that happened within those walls;” and, without promising any thing, he flattered everybody. This method of proceeding was judiciously calculated to serve his ambition. He was early apprised, that there would be great contests or divisions in the conclave; and he knew it was no uncommon case, that when the chiefs of the respective parties met with opposition to the person they were desirous of electing, they would all willingly concur in the choice of some very old and infirm cardinal, whose life would last only long enough to prepare themselves with more strength against another vacancy. These views directed his conduct, nor was he mistaken in his expectations of success. Three cardinals, who were the heads of potent factions, finding themselves unable to choose the persons they respectively favoured, all concurred to elect Montalto. As it was not yet necessary for him to discover himself, when they came to acquaint him with their intention, “he fell into such a violent fit of coughing, that they thought he would have expired upon the spot.” When he recovered himself, he told them, “that his reign would be but for a few days that, besides the continual difficulty of breathing, he had not strength enough to support such a weight; and that his small experience in affairs made him altogether unfit for a charge of so important a nature.” Nor would he be prevailed on to accept it on any other terms, than that “they should all three promise not to abandon him, but take the greatest part of the weight off his shoulders, as he was neither able, nor could in conscience pretend, to take the whole upon himself.” The cardinals giving a ready assent to his proposal, he added, “If you are resolved to make me pope, it will be only placing yourselves on the throne; we must share the pontificate. For my part, I shall be content with the bare title; let them call me pope, and you are heartily welcome to the power and authority.” This artifice succeeded; and, in confidence of engrossing the administration, they exerted their joint interests so effectually, that Montalto was elected. He now immediately pulled off the mask which be had worn for fourteen years, with an amazing steadiness and uniformity. As soon as ever he found a sufficient number of votes to secure his election, he threw the staff with which he used to support himself into the middle of the chapel; and appeared taller by almost a foot than he had done for several years. Being asked according to custom, “Whether he would please to accept of the papacy,” he replied somewhat sharply, “It is trifling and impertinent to ask whether I will accept what I have already accepted: however, to satisfy any scruple that may arise, I tell you, that I accept it with great pleasure; and would accept another, if I could get it; for I find myself strong enough, by the divine assistance, to manage two papacies.” Nor was the change in his manners less remarkable than in his person: he immediately divested himself of the humility he had so long professed; and, laying aside his accustomed civility and complaisance, treated every body with reserve and haughtiness.

conduct, but also that of other governors and judges for many years past; promising rewards to those who could convict them of corruption, or of having denied justice

In the place of such judges as were inclined to lenity, he substituted others of a more austere disposition, and appointed commissaries to examine not only their conduct, but also that of other governors and judges for many years past; promising rewards to those who could convict them of corruption, or of having denied justice to any one at the instance or request of men in power. All the nobility, and persons of the highest quality, were strictly forbidden, on pain of displeasure, to ask the judges any thing in behalf of their nearest friends or dependants; at the same time the judges were to be fined in case they listened to any solicitation. He further commanded every body, “on pain of death, not to terrify witnesses by threats, or tempt them by hopes or promises. He ordered the syndics and mayors of every town and signiory, as well those that were actually in office, as those who had been for the last ten years, to send him a list of all the vagrants, common debauchees, loose and disorderly people in their districts, threatening them with the strappado and imprisonment, if they omitted or concealed any one.” In consequence of this ordinance, the syndic of Albano, leaving his nephew, who was an incorrigible libertine, out of the list, underwent the strappado in the public market-place, though the Spanish ambassador interceded strongly for him. He par ticularly directed the legates and governors of the ecclesiastical state to be expeditious in carrying on all criminal processes; declaring, “he had rather have the gibbets and gallies full, than the prisons.” He aUo intended to have shortened all other proceedings in law. It had been usual, and was pleasing to the people, as often as his holiness passed by, to cry out, “Long live the pope:” but Sixtus, having a mind to go often unexpectedly to the tribunals of justice, convents, and other public places, forbade this custom in regard to himself; and punished two persons who were ignorant of this edict, with imprisonment, for crying out, “Long live pope Sixtus.” Adultery he punished with death: nor was he less severe to those who voluntarily permitted a prostitution of their wives; a custom at that time very common in Rome. The female sex, especially the younger part, attracted, in a very particular manner, the attention of Sixtus; not only the debauching of any of them, whether by force or artifice, but even the attempting of it, or offering the least offence against modesty, was very severely punished. For the more effectual prevention, as well of private assassinations, as public quarrels, he forbade all persons, on pain of death, to draw a sword, or to carry arms specified in the edict; nor would he be prevailed on to spare any who transgressed this order: even to threaten another with an intended injury was sufficient to entitle the menacer to a whipping and the gallies; especially if the nature of their profession furnished the means of carrying their threats into execution. The banditti, who were numerous when Sixtus was advanced to the papacy, were rendered still more so by the junction of many loose and disorderly people; who, conscious of their demerits, and terrified at the severities they daily saw practised, had fled from justice. Their insolence increased with their numbers; insomuch, that no one could live in the ecclesiastical state with saiety to his person or fortune, nor could strangers travel without imminent danger of being robbed or murdered. The public security more especially required the extirpation of these plunderers, which, by the prudence, vigilance, and resolution of this pope, was effectually performed in less than six months. He obliged the nobility of Rome, and the country round it, to an exact payment of their debts. He abolished all protections and other immunities, in the houses of ambassadors, cardinals, nobles, or prelates. To this purpose, he sent for all the ambassadors, and ordered them to acquaint their respective masters, “that he was determined nobody should reign in Rome but himself; that there should be no privilege or immunity of any kind there, but what belonged to the pope; nor any sanctuary or asylum but the churches, anil that only at such times, and upon such occasions, as he should think proper.

to the Vatican. When Sixtus saw Camilla, he pretended not to know her, and asked two or three times who she was; upon which one of the cardinals, who handed her in,

In respect to his private character, it appears, from several instances, that he was, as well in his habit as diet, generally temperate and frugal; that he remembered, and greatly rewarded, every service that was conferred upon him when he was in an inferior station. Nor did his elevation make him unmindful of his former poverty: his sister once intimating, that it was unbecoming his dignity to wear patched linen, he said to her, “Though we are exalted, through the Divine Providence, to this high station, we ought not to forget, that shreds and patches are the only coat of arms our family has any title to.” The behaviour of Sixtus to his relations, previous to his exaltation, has been already noted: soon after his accession to the pontificate, he sent for his family to Rome, with express orders, that they should appear in a decent and modest manner. Accordingly, his sister Camilla, accompanied by her daughter and two grandsons, and a niece, came thither. The pope’s reception of them was as singular as any other part of his conduct; for some of the cardinals, to ingratiate themselves with his holiness, went out to meet her, dressed them all in a very superb manner, and introduced them with great ceremony to the Vatican. When Sixtus saw Camilla, he pretended not to know her, and asked two or three times who she was; upon which one of the cardinals, who handed her in, said, “It is your sister, holy father.” “My sister!” replied Sixtus, with a frown, “I have but one sister, and she is a poor woman at Le Grotte: if you have introduced her in this disguise, I declare 1 do not know her; and yet I think I should know her again, if I was to see her in such clothes as she used to wear.” Their conductors then thought it expedient to send them to a common inn, where they were disrobed of their finery. When this was done, Sixtus sent two of his ordinary coaches for them; and being introduced a second time, the pope embraced them tenderly, and said to Camilla, “Now we see it is our sister indeed: nobody shall make a princess of you but ourselves.” The terms Sixtus stipulated with his sister, as the conditions of her advancement, were, “not to ask any favour in matters of government, or make the least intercession for criminals, or otherwise interfere in the administration of justice;” assuring her that every suit of that kind would meet with a refusal not less mortifying to her than painful to himself. This being settled, he made, indeed, a princely provision, not only for his sister, who took care punctually to obey his orders, but also for all the family.

swered, “He could get no other, for the pope had made his washer-woman a princess;” meaning Camilla, who had formerly been a laundress. The pope ordered strict search

The pope’s severity could not exempt him from several poignant satires, though we have only one instance wherein he thought them worth his resentment; and that related to his sister. Pasquin was dressed one morning in a very dirty shirt; and being askedby Marforio, why he wore such dirty linen answered, “He could get no other, for the pope had made his washer-woman a princess;” meaning Camilla, who had formerly been a laundress. The pope ordered strict search to be made for the author, and promised to give him a thousand pistoles, and his life, provided he would discover himself; but threatened to hang him, if he was found out by any body else. The author, though he had trusted no person with the secret, was so tempted with the offer, that he was simple enough to make a full confession of it to the pope; demanding the money, and to have his life spared. Sixtus was so astonished at his folly and impudence, that he could not speak for some time; and at last said, “It is true we did make such a promise, and we shall not be worse than our word; we give you your life, and you shall have the money immediately; but we reserved to ourselves the power of cutting off your hands, and boring your tongue through to prevent your being so witty for the future:” which was directly executed, Sixtus declaring, that he did not deserve the punishment so much for the pasquinade, as for being so audacious to avow it.

This extraordinary man, who was an encourager of arts as well as arms, died, not without

This extraordinary man, who was an encourager of arts as well as arms, died, not without a suspicion of being poisoned by the Spaniards, Aug. 27, 1500, having enjoyed the papacy little more than five years.

gion, which above all other faults would naturally tend to bring him into disgrace and danger. Those who felt his satire would be glad to excite a clamour against his

In the page where Skelton mentions his being curate of Trompington, he informs us that he was at the same time (1507) rector of Diss in Norfolk, and probably had held this living long before. Tradition informs us, that his frequent buffooneries in the pulpit excited general censure. Of what nature those buffooneries were, we cannot now determine, but it is certain that at a much later period the pulpit was frequently debased by irreverent allusions and personal scurrilities. There appear to have been three subjects at which Skeltori delighted to aim his satire; these were, the mendicant friars, Lilly the grammarian, and cardinal Wolsey. From what we find in his works, his treatment of these subjects was coarse enough in style, and perhaps illiberal in sentiment; and there is some reason to think that he did not preserve a due reverence for the forms and pomp of the established religion, which above all other faults would naturally tend to bring him into disgrace and danger. Those who felt his satire would be glad to excite a clamour against his impiety; and it must be allowed that the vices of his age are frequently represented in such indelicate language, as to furnish his enemies with the very plausible reproach, that he was not one of those reformers who begin with themselves.

f his poems or ballads might very justly rouse the vigilance of his diocesan, the bishop of Norwich, who, Mr. Warton thinks, suspended him from his functions. Anthony

But although we can now have very little sympathy with the injured feelings of the begging friars, it is not improbable that some of his poems or ballads might very justly rouse the vigilance of his diocesan, the bishop of Norwich, who, Mr. Warton thinks, suspended him from his functions. Anthony Wood asserts, that he was punished by the bishop for “having been guilty of certain crimes, as most poets are.” According to Fuller, the crime of “most poets” in Skelton’s case, was his keeping of a concubine, which yet was at that time a less crime in a clergyman than marriage. Skelton, on his death-bed, declared that he conscientiously considered his concubine as his wife, but was afraid to own her in that light; and from this confession, and the occasional liberties he has taken with his pen, in lashing the vices of the clergy, it is not improbable that he had imbibed some of the principles of the reformation, but had not the courage to avow them, unless under the mask of such satire as might pass without judicial censure.

ssical learning recommended him to the office of tutor to prince Henry, afterwards king Henry VIII., who, at his accession, made him royal orator, an office so called

J. Sceltonus Vates Pierius hie situs est.” Skelton appears to have been a more considerable personage, at one time at least, than his contemporaries would have us to believe. It is certain that he was esteemed a scholar, and that his classical learning recommended him to the office of tutor to prince Henry, afterwards king Henry VIII., who, at his accession, made him royal orator, an office so called by himself, the nature of which is doubtful, unless it was blended with that of laureat. As to his general reputation, Erasmus, in a letter to Henry VIII. styles him “Britannicarum literarum decus et lumen,” a character which must have either been inferred from common opinion, or derived from personal knowledge. Whatever provocation he gave to the clergy, he was not without patrons who overlooked his errors and extravagancies for the sake of his genius, and during the reign of Henry VII. he had the enviable distinction of being almost the only professed poet of the age. Henry Algernon Percy, fifth earl of Northumberland, one of the very few patrons of learned men and artists at that time, appears to have entertained a high regard for our author. In a collection of poems magnificently engrossed on vellum for the use of this nobleman, is an elegy on the death of the earl’s father, written by Skelton. This volume is now in the Bullish Museum, but the elegy may be seen in Skelton’s works, and in Dr. Percy’s Relics.

o the manners of their age. The manners of no age can apologize for the licentiousness of the writer who descends to copy them. There are always enough in an age that

When a favourite author betrays grossnessand indecency, it is usual to inquire how much of this is his own, and how much may be referred 19 the licentiousness of his age? Warton observes, that it is in vain to apologize for the coarseness, obscenity, and scurrility of Skelton, by saying-, that his poetry is tinctured with the manners of his age, and adds, that Skelton would have been a writer without decorum at any period. This decision, however, is not more justly passed on Skelton than it ought to be on others, whom it has been the fashion to vindicate by an appeal to the manners of their age. The manners of no age can apologize for the licentiousness of the writer who descends to copy them. There are always enough in an age that has a court, a clergy, and a people, to support the dignity of virtue, and to assert the respect due to public decency. If we knew more minutely of the manners of our country in these remote periods, it would probably be found that licentiousness has, upon the whole, been more discouraged than patronized by the public voice.

of them is a matter of less trouble and less injury to an edition of his works than his biographers, who have copied one another, would insinuate. As to his poetry,

Although it is impossible to lessen the censure which Skelton incurred among his contemporaries, and immediate successors, it is but fair to say that his indelicacies are of no very seductive kind, that they are obscured by cant words and phrases no longer intelligible, or intelligible but to few, and that the removal of them is a matter of less trouble and less injury to an edition of his works than his biographers, who have copied one another, would insinuate. As to his poetry, Mr. Warton’s character may in general be followed with safety, and ought to be preserved with the respect due to so excellent a critic.

r which frequently involved him in quarrels. On one occasion he had a quarrel with a fellow-student, who happened to be connected with Dr. Baldwin, the provost, and

Here he soon obtained the reputation of a scholar, and also distinguished himself by his skill in fencing, cudgelling, and other manly feats, as well as in some college frolics from which he did not always escape uncensured. His temper was warm, and he entertained that irritable sense of honour which frequently involved him in quarrels. On one occasion he had a quarrel with a fellow-student, who happened to be connected with Dr. Baldwin, the provost, and who insinuated that Skelton was a Jacobite, an accusation which he repelled by the most solemn declaration of his adherence to the Hanover family. Baldwin, however, was prejudiced against him, and endeavoured to keep him out of a scholarship, but, mistaking him for another of the same name, his malice was disappointed, and Skelton received this reward of merit in 1726. Baldwin, however, on other occasions did every thing in his power to make a college life uneasy to him; and Skelton, finding it impossible to gain his favour without disgraceful compliances, resolved to take his degree at the statutable period, and quit the college. This, however, his enemy still endeavoured to prevent, and, on some idle pretence, stopped his degree.

e could give was insufficient for the relief of the poor, he solicited the aid of people of fortune, who usually contributed according to his desire, and could not indeed

On leaving Dr. Madden, he repaired to his brother’s, in Dundalk, until, in 1732, he was nominated to the curacy of Monaghan, in the diocese of Cloghet, by the hon. and rev. Francis Hamilton, the rector. This situation was for some years permanent, and afforded him leisure to pursue his favourite study of diunity, and to execute the duties of a parish priest. “His inclinations,” says his biographer, “were all spiritual, and he only desired an opportunity of being more extensively useful for long before, he had fixed his thoughts on the rewards of a better world than the present.” His life was accordingly most exemplary, and his preaching efficacious. It was said that the very children of Monaghan, whom he carefully instructed, knew more of religion at that time, than the grown people of any of the neighbouring parishes, and the manners of his flock were soon greatly improved, and vice and ignorance retreated before so powerful an opponent. His charities were extraordinary, for all he derived from his curacy was 40l. of which he gave 10l. a year to his mother, and for some years a like sum to his tutor, Dr. Delany, to pay some debts he had contracted at college. The rest were for his maintenance and his charities, and when the pittance he could give was insufficient for the relief of the poor, he solicited the aid of people of fortune, who usually contributed according to his desire, and could not indeed refuse a man who first gave his own before he would ask any of theirs. His visits to the jails were also attended with the happiest effects. On one remarkable occasion, when a convict at Monaghan, of whose innocence he was well assured, was condemned to be hanged within five days, he set off for Dublin, and on his arrival was admitted to the privy council, which then was sitting. Here he pleaded lor the poor man with such eloquence, as to obtain his pardon, and returned with it to Monaghan in time to save his life. In order to be of the more use to his poor parishioners, he studied physic, and was very successful in his gratuitous practice, as well as by his spiritual advice, and was the means of removing many prejudices and superstitions which he found very deeply rooted in their minds.

Christianity,” another piece of irony against the enemies of the church, which was imputed to Swift, who, as usual, neither affirmed nor denied; but only observed, that

He published the same year, “Some proposals for the revival of Christianity,” another piece of irony against the enemies of the church, which was imputed to Swift, who, as usual, neither affirmed nor denied; but only observed, that the author “had not continued the irony to the end.” In 1737, he published a “Dissertation on the constitution and effects of a Petty Jury.” In this, among other things, ^eems to object to locking up a jury without food, until they agree upon their opinion. The attorney general called at his bookseller’s, who refused to give up the name of the author. “Well,” said the attorney general, “give my compliments to the author, and inform him from me, that I do not think there is virtue enough in the people of this country ever to put his scheme into practice.

op,” ten guineas, which Mr. Skelton frequently presented to a Mr. Arbuthnot, a poor cast-off curate, who was unable to serve through age and infirmity. At length Dr.

His fame, however, both as a preacher and writer, his extraordinary care as an instructor of a parish, and his wonderful acts of charity and goodness, began, about 1737, to be the subject of conversation, not only in the diocese of Clogher, and other parts of the North, but also in the metropolis; but still no notice was taken of him in the way of preferment. Dr. Sterne, the bishop of Clogher, usually sent for him, after he had bestowed a good preferment upon another, and gave him, “by way of a sop,” ten guineas, which Mr. Skelton frequently presented to a Mr. Arbuthnot, a poor cast-off curate, who was unable to serve through age and infirmity. At length Dr. Delany, who had been his tutor at college, perceiving him thus neglected, procured for him an appointment to the curacy of St. Werburgh’s in Dublin. This would have been highly acceptable to Mr. Skelton, and Dr. Delany would have been much gratified to place such a man in a situation where his merits were likely to be duly appreciated: it is painful to relate in what manner both were disappointed. When he was on the point of leaving the diocese of Clogher, bishop Sterne perceiving that it would be to his discredit if a person of such abilities should leave his diocese for want of due encouragement, sent a clergyman to inform him, “that if he staid in his diocese he would give him the first living that should fall.” Relying on this, he wrote to Dr. Delany, and the curacy of St. Werburgh’s was otherwise disposed of. The first living that fell vacant was Monaghan, where he had so long officiated, which the bishop immediately gave to his nephew Mr. Hawkshaw, a young gentleman that had lately entered into orders! It would even appear that he had made his promise with a determination to break it, for when he bestowed the preferment on his nephew, he is reported to have said, “I give you now a living worth 300l. a year, and have kept the best curate in the diocese for you, who was going to leave it: be sure take his advice, and follow his directions, for he is a man of worth and sense.” But Skelton, with all his “worth and sense,” was not superior to the infirmities of his nature. He felt this treacherous indignity very acutely, and never attended a visitation during the remainder of the bishop’s life, which continued for a series of years; nor did the bishop ever ask for him, or express any surprize at his absence. Under Mr. Hawkshaw, however, he Jived not unhappily. Mr. Hawkshaw submitted to his instructions, and followed his example, and there was often an amicable contest in the performance of their acts of duty and charity.

is terraqueous majesty, the WorUl.” The objects of his ridicule in this are Hill, the mathematician, who proposed making verses by an arithmetical table, lord Shaftesbury,

After he returned to his curacy, he was offered a school xvorth 500l. a year, arising from the benefit of the scholars, but refused it as interfering with the plan of literary improvement and labour which he had marked out for himself; and when told that he might employ ushers, he said he could not in conscience take the money, without giving up his whole time and attention to his scholars. In 1744, he published “The Candid Reader, addressed to his terraqueous majesty, the WorUl.” The objects of his ridicule in this are Hill, the mathematician, who proposed making verses by an arithmetical table, lord Shaftesbury, and Johnson, the author of a play called “Hurlothrumbo,” with a parallel between Hurlothrumbo and the rhapsody of Shaftesbury. In the same year he also published “A Letter to the authors of Divine Analogy and the Minute Philosopher, from an old officer,” a plain, sensible letter, advising the two polemics to turn their arms from one another against the common enemies of the Christian faith. During the rebellion in 1745, he published a very seasonable and shrewd pamphlet, entitled the “Chevalier’s hopes.” On the death of Dr. Sterne, the see of Clogher was filled by Dr. Clayton, author of the “Essay on Spirit,” a decided Arian; and between him and Skelton there could consequently be no coincidence of opinion, or mutuality of respect. In 1748, Mr. Skelton having prepared for the press his valuable work entitled “Deism revealed,” he conceived it too important to be published in Ireland, and therefore determined to go to London, and dispose of it there. On his arrival, he submitted his manuscript to Andrew Millar, the bookseller, to know if he would purchase it, and have it printed at his own expence. The bookseller desired him, as is usual, to leave it with him for a day or two, until he could get a certain gentleman of great abilities to examine it. Hume is said to have come in accidentally into the shop, and Millar shewed him the ms. Hume took it into a room adjoining the shop, examined it here and there for about an hour, and then said to Andrew, print. By this work Skelton made about 200l. The bookseller allowed him for the manuscript a great many copies, which he disposed of among the citizens of London, with whom, on account of his preaching, he was a great favourite. He always spake with high approbation of the kindness with which he was received by many eminent merchants. When in London he spent a great part of his time in going through the city, purchasing books at a cheap rate, with the greater part of the money he got by his “Deism revealed,” and formed a good library. This work was published in 1749, in two volumes, large octavo, and a second edition was called for in 1751, which waacomprized in two volumes 12mo. It has ever been considered as a masterly answer to the cavils of deists; but the style in this, as in some other of his works, is not uniform, and his attempts at wit are rather too frequent, and certainly not very successful. A few months after its publication the bishop of Clogher, Dr. Clayton, was asked by Sherlock, bishop of London, if he knew the author. “O yes, he has been a curate in my diocese near these twenty years.” “More shame for your lordship,” answered Sherlock, “to let a man of his merit continue so long a curate in your diocese.

eary solitude, and relieve his indigent parishioners with the money. Watson, a bookseller in Dublin, who had advertised then: for sale without success, at last bought

In 1757 a remarkable dearth prevailed in Ireland, and no where more than in Mr. Skelton’s parish. The scenes of distress which he witnessed would now appear scarcely credible. He immediately set himself to alleviate the wants of his flock, by purchases of meal, &c. at other markets, until he had exhausted all his money, and then he had recourse to a sacrifice which every man of learning will duly appreciate. He resolved to sell his books, almost the only comfort he had in this dreary solitude, and relieve his indigent parishioners with the money. Watson, a bookseller in Dublin, who had advertised then: for sale without success, at last bought them himself for 80l. and immediately paid the money. Soon after they were advertised, two ladies, lady Barrymore and a Miss Leslie, who guessed at Skelton’s reason for selling his hooks, sent him So/, requesting him to keep his books, and relieve his poor with the money; but Skelton, with many expressions of gratitude, told them he had dedicated his books to God, and he must sell them; and accordingly both sums were applied to the relief of his parishioners. Every heart warms at the recital of such an act of benevolence, and all reflections on it would lessen the impression. One other circumstance may be added. The bookseller sold only a part of the books in the course of trade, and those that remained, Mr. Skelton, when he could allord it, took from him at the price he sold them for, but insisted on paying interest for the sum they amounted to, for the time Mr. Watson had them in his possession.

y the superstitious. In 1758, Dr. Clayton, bishop of Clogher, died, and was succeeded by Dr. Garnet, who treated Mr. Skelton with the respect he deserved, and in 1759

About 1758, a pamphlet appeared in Dublin, entitled “An Appeal to the common sense of all Christian people,” an artful defence of Arianism, an answer to which was written by Mr. Skelton, in the opinion of his biographer, in a masterly manner and style, exceeding any of hi* former compositions. But as the “Appeal” sunk into obscurity, the answer was not inserted in the edition of his works published in 1770. Here, however, maybe found a description of Longh-Derg, which he wrote about this time, a place much visited by the superstitious. In 1758, Dr. Clayton, bishop of Clogher, died, and was succeeded by Dr. Garnet, who treated Mr. Skelton with the respect he deserved, and in 1759 gave him the living of Devenish, in the county of Fermanagh, near Enniskillen, worth about 300l. a year, and thus he was brought once more into civilized society. When leaving Pettigo, he said to the poor, “Give me your blessing now before I go, and God’s blessing be with you. When you are in great distress, come to me, and I '11 strive to relieve you.” In this new charge, he exerted the same zeal to instruct his flock both in public and private, and the same benevolence toward the poor which had made him so great a benefit to his former people. W r e must refer to his biographer for numerous proofs, for which his memory continues still to be held in high veneration. In 17oG, the bishop of Clogher removed him from Devenish to the living of Fintona, in the county of Tyrone, worth at least 100l. more than the other. He was now in the fifty-ninth year of his age. “God Almighty,” he used to say, “was very kind to me: when I began to advance in years and stood in need of a horse and servant, he gave me a living. Then he gave me two livings, one after another, each of which was worth a hundred a year more than the preceding. I have therefore been rewarded by him, even in this world, far above my deserts.

of his practices to distribute money, even in times of moderate plenty, among indigent housekeepers, who were struggling to preserve a decent appearance. He was also

In his latter days, when the air of Fintona became too keen for him, he passed some of his winters in Dublin, and there was highly valued for his preaching, which, in the case of charities, was remarkably successful. During a dearth, owing to the decline of the yarn manufactory at Fintona, he again exhausted his whole property in relieving the poor, and again sold his books for 100l. He said he was now too old to use them; but the real cause was, that he wanted the money to give to the poor, and the year after he bestowed on them 60l. It was one of his practices to distribute money, even in times of moderate plenty, among indigent housekeepers, who were struggling to preserve a decent appearance. He was also the kind and liberal patron of such of their children as had abilities, and could, by his urgent application and interest, be advanced in the world.

hich he had left unfinished, came into the hands of Thomas Henshaw, esq. of Kensington, near London, who corrected, digested, and added to them, his additions being

He wrote “Prolegomena Etymologica;” “Etymologicon linguae Anglicanae;” “Etymologicon Botanicum;” “Etymologica Expositio vocum forensium;” “Etymoiogicon vocum omnium Anglicarum;” “Etymologicon Onomasticon.” After his death these works, which he had left unfinished, came into the hands of Thomas Henshaw, esq. of Kensington, near London, who corrected, digested, and added to them, his additions being marked with the letter H: and after this, prefixing an epistle to the reader, published them with this title, “Etymologicon Linguae Anglicanse,” &,c. 1671, folio.

n of king James,” Lond. 1621, fol. in Latin and English verse, with historical notes, which Granger, who calls this Slater’s “capital work,” thinks the most valuable

, a learned divine and poet, was born in Somersetshire in 1587, and was admitted a member of St. Mary hall, Oxford, in 1600, whence he removed to Brasenose college in 1607. In the following year he took his degree of B. A. and was chosen to a fellowship. He took his master’s degree in 1611, entered into holy orders, and was beneficed. In 1623 he took his degrees in divinity, and bad by this time acquired very considerable reputation for his poetical talent, and his knowledge in English history. He died at Otterden in Kent, where he was beneficed, in Oct. or Nov. 1647. His works are, 1. “Threnodia, sive Pandioniuni,” &c. being elegies and epitaphs on the queen Anne of Denmark, to whom he had been chaplain. It is a quarto of four sheets, printed in 1619. The elegies and epitaphs are in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English verses, and some of them in the fantastical shape of pillars, circles, &c. 2. “PaltcAlbion, or the History of Great Britain from the first peopling of this island to the reign of king James,” Lond. 1621, fol. in Latin and English verse, with historical notes, which Granger, who calls this Slater’s “capital work,” thinks the most valuable part. 3. “Genethliacon, sive stemma regis Jacobi,” Lond. 1630, a thin folio in Lat. and English, with a foolish genealogy of king James from Adam. He published also “The Psalms of David, in fowre languages, Hebrew, Greeke, Latin, and English, and in 4 parts, set to the tunes of our church, with corrections,1652, 16mo. There appears to have been an edition before this, which was posthumous, but the date is not known. Dr, Burney says this is the most curious and beautiful production of the kind, during the seventeenth century, that has come to his knowledge. Both words and music are very neatly engraved on near sixty copper- plates. The English version is that of Sternhold, retouched, not always for the better, and the music is selected from Ravenscroft.

rder. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed,

, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines of the duchy of Juliers, whence he derived his name. His origin, according to Varillas, was so obscure, that not knowing the name of his father, he adopted that of his birth-place; but this is the report of an enemy, as his father’s name was Philip, and his family not of the lower order. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed, first to Paris, and then to Orleans, where he studied the law for three years. He took the degree of licentiate in this faculty, but, having always an aversion to the bar, he continued his pursuits chiefly in polite literature. Uporf his return to Paris, he was recommended by his friend Sturmius, in 1535, to John Du Bellay, archbishop and cardinal; who conceived such an affection for him, that he settled on him a pension, and communicated to him affairs of the greatest importance; for Sleidan had a turn for business, as well as letters. He accompanied the ambassador of France to the diet of Haguenan, but returned to Paris, and remained there till it was not safe for him to stay any longer, as he was inclined to the sentiments of the reformers. In 1542 he retired to Strasburg, where he acquired the esteem and friendship of the most considerable persons, and especially of James Sturmius; by whose counsel he undertook, and by whose assistance he was enabled, to write the history of his own time. He was employed in some uegociations both to France and England; and, in one of these journeys, he met with a lady whom he married in 1546. About the same time the princes of the league of Smalcald honoured him with the title of their historiographer, and granted him a pension, and when he lost this by the dissolution of the league in 1547, the republic of Strasburgh gave him another. In 1551, he went, on the part of the republic, to the council of Trent; but, the troops of Maurice, elector of Saxony, obliging that council to break up, he returned to Strasburgh without having transacted any business. He was employed in other affairs of state, when the death of his wife, in 1555, plunged him into a deep melancholy, with such a total loss of memory, as that he did not know his own children. Some imputed this to poison; and others to natural causes. It ended, however, in his death, at Strasburg, Oct. 31, 1556, in the fiftieth year of his age.

ry branches of physic in London, particularly chemistry, under Mr. Strafforth, an excellent chemist, who had been pupil to the celebrated Stahl. He also studied his

The younger years of sir Hans Sloane were marked by a strong attachment to the works of nature, in the contemplation of which he passed his leisure hours, until his studies of every kind were, in his sixteenth year, interrupted by a spitting of blood, which confined him to his room for three years. When, by strict regimen and abstinence, he had recovered, he studied the preliminary branches of physic in London, particularly chemistry, under Mr. Strafforth, an excellent chemist, who had been pupil to the celebrated Stahl. He also studied his favourite science of botany at Chelsea garden, which was then but just established, and, young as he was, contracted during that time an acquaintance with Boyie and Ray.

Plantartim,” with proper acknowledgments. At London Dr. Sloane became the favourite of Dr. Sydenham, who took him into his house, and zealously promoted his interest

After four years thus employed, he visited France for improvement, in company with Mr. (afterwards sir) Tancred llobinson, M. D. (see his life, vol. XXVI.) and another student. At Paris he attended the lectures of Tournefort and Du Verney; and is supposed to have taken his degrees in medicine at Montpellierj some say at Orange. At Montpellier he was recommended by Tournefort to M. Chirac, then chancellor and professor of that university, and by his means to other learned men, particularly Magnol, whom he always accompanied in his botanical excursions, and derived much benefit from his instructions. He returned to London at the latter end of 1684, and immediately went to visit his illustrious friends Boyle and Ray. The latter was now retired and settled at Black Notley in Essex. Dr. Sloane sent him a great variety of plants and seeds, which Ray has described in his “Historia Plantartim,” with proper acknowledgments. At London Dr. Sloane became the favourite of Dr. Sydenham, who took him into his house, and zealously promoted his interest in the way of practice. On Jan. 21, 1685, he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and in April 1687, entered into the college of physicians. Such early advancements in his profession are the strongest presumptions in favour of his superior knowledge, and promising abilities. Yet these flattering prospects he relinquished, to gratify his ardour for natural knowledge.

s to his successor, he constantly applied the money to the relief of those belonging to the hospital who most wanted it. In the preceding year, 1693, he had been elected

Dr. Sloane returned from his voyage, May 29, 1689, and fixing in London, soon became eminent. In 169-1 he was chosen physician to Christ’s hospital, which station he filled until age and infirmities obliged him to resign in 1730, and although he punctually received every year the emolument of his office, because he would not set a precedent that might be disadvantageous to his successor, he constantly applied the money to the relief of those belonging to the hospital who most wanted it. In the preceding year, 1693, he had been elected secretary to the Royal Society, and had revived the publication of the “Philosophical Transactions,” which had been interrupted from the year 1687. This office he held till 1712, when he was succeeded by Dr. Halley. About the same time, he became an active member of the college of physicians, in promoting the plan of a dispensary for the poor, which was at length carried into execution. The feuds excited on this occasion, by the apothecaries, gave rise to the once celebrated satire by Dr. Garth.

he queen’s consent was necessary to the acceptance of it. He was frequently consulted by queen Anne, who, in ber last illness, was blooded by him. On the accession of

In 1708, he was elected a foreign member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris, a distinction of the highest estimation in science, and the greater at that time, as the French nation was at war with England, and the queen’s consent was necessary to the acceptance of it. He was frequently consulted by queen Anne, who, in ber last illness, was blooded by him. On the accession of George I. he was created a baronet, being the first English physician on whom an hereditary title of honour had been conferred. He was appointed physician general to the army, which office he enjoyed till 1727, when he was made physician to George II. He also gained the confidence of queen Caroline, and prescribed for the royal family until his death.

ceived, as in London, the visits of persons of rank, of all learned foreigners, of the royal family, who sometimes did him. that honour; and never refused admittance

Having thus resigned all his public employments, he left London in May 1741, and retired to his house at Chelsea, the manor of which he had purchased in 1712, and to which he removed his museum. Here he received, as in London, the visits of persons of rank, of all learned foreigners, of the royal family, who sometimes did him. that honour; and never refused admittance or advice to any, whether rich or poor, who came to consult him concerning their health. Hitherto his great temperance had preserved him from experiencing the infirmities of old age, but in his ninetieth year, he complained of frequent "pains, and was sensible of an universal decay, the progress of which he bore with complacency, and after an illness of only three days, expired Jan. 11, 1752. He was interred on the 18th at Chelsea, in the same vault with his lady, who died in 1724. She was the daughter of alderman Langley of London, and married to Dr. Sloane in 1695. Of this marriage two daughters only survived him, the eldest of whom was married to George Stanley, esq. of Hampshire, and the younger to lord Cadogan.

s frequently solicited by distressed persons of all classes, and, as is usual in such cases, by many who abused his bounty. To foreigners he was extremely courteous,

Sir Hans Sloane was tall and well made in his person; easy, polite, and engaging in his manners; sprightly in his conversation, and obliging to all. It appears by his correspondence in the British Museum that he was a man. of great benevolence, and from that character, was frequently solicited by distressed persons of all classes, and, as is usual in such cases, by many who abused his bounty. To foreigners he was extremely courteous, and ready to shew and explain his curiosities to all who gave him timely notice' of their visit. He kept an open table once a week for his learned friends, particularly those of the Royal Society. In the aggregation of his vast collection of books, he is said to have sent his duplicates, either to the royal college of physicians, or to the Bodleian library.

is life-time, he left a more considerable legacy at his death. He was ever a benefactor to the poor, who felt the consequences of his death severely. He was zealous

He was governor of almost every hospital in London; and to each, after having given 100l. in his life-time, he left a more considerable legacy at his death. He was ever a benefactor to the poor, who felt the consequences of his death severely. He was zealous in promoting the establishment of the colony of Georgia in 1732; and formed himself the plan for bringing up the children in the Foundling hospital in 1739. In 1721 he gave the freehold of the ground at Chelsea, near four acres, on which the botanical garden stood, to the company of apothecaries, on condition chat the demonstrator should, in the name of the company, deliver annually to the Royal Society, fifty new plants, till the number should amount to 2000, all specifically different from each other; the list of which was published yearly in the Philosophical Transactions. The first wa printed in 1722, and the catalogues were continued until 1773, at which time the number 2550 was completed. These specimens are duly preserved in the archives of the society, for the inspection of the curious.

n. For this our author was indebted to the celebrated antiquary Ashmole, also a native of Lichfield, who, discerning his capacity, sent him to Westminster-school in

, a learned prelate, was born in 1663,at Lichfield in Staffordshire, where his father followed the business of a dyer, but appears not to have been in opulent circumstances, as he was unable to give his son a liberal education. For this our author was indebted to the celebrated antiquary Ashmole, also a native of Lichfield, who, discerning his capacity, sent him to Westminster-school in 1G78. Here he was soon distinguished as a young man of parts and application, and acquired particular notice by the classical turn of his exercises. Two years after, he wrote two elegies, one in Latin and the other in English, on the death of Lilly, the astrologer, out of gratitude, we are told, to his patron Ashmole, a great admirer of Lilly. Whatever the poetical merit of these elegies, we may say, in reference to the subject, that they would now be thought ironical.

Dr. Smalridge, who had long been admired as a preacher, was chosen lecturer of

Dr. Smalridge, who had long been admired as a preacher, was chosen lecturer of St. Dunstan’s in the West, London, in Jan. 1708, and for some time quitted the university. His early acquaintance with Atterbury had now been improved into a great degree of intimacy and friendship, arising no doubt, from a similarity of sentiments and studies; and in 1710 Dr. Smalridge had an opportunity of giving a public testimony of his regard for Atterbury, by promoting his advancement to the prolocutor’s chair in the lower house of convocation, and presenting him to the upper house, in an elegant speech, which was much admired, and afterwards printed. In this speech he even touches on Atterbury’s warmth in controversy, with considerable delicacy indeed, but in a manner that became one who would not deceive the learned body he was addressing. Smalridge himself was not much of a party man, and studiously avoided an intemperate interference in disputed points respecting either church or state, unless where his principles might be called in question, or his silence misunderstood.

ury; but he soon regained his favour with the princess of Wales at least, afterwards queen Caroline, who was his steady patron till his death.

In the following year, 1711, he resigned the lectureship of St. Dunstan’s, having been made one of the canons of Christ-church, on the same day that Atterbury was made dean; and the latter having resigned the deanery of Carlisle, Dr. Smalridge succeeded him in that preferment, as he did likewise in the deanery of Christ-church, in 17 Is, when Atterbury was made bishop of Rochester. In 1714 Dr. Smalridge was consecrated bishop of Bristol, and the queen soon after appointed him her lord almoner, in which capacity he for some time served her successor George I.; but refusing to sign the declaration which the archbishop of Canterbury and the bishops in and about London had drawn up against the rebellion in 1715, he was removed from that place. In this measure he probably was influenced by Atterbury; but he soon regained his favour with the princess of Wales at least, afterwards queen Caroline, who was his steady patron till his death.

s of Wales procured a pension of 300l. a-year for the widow, and a prebend of Worcester for the son, who afterwards received the living of C bristleton near Chester,

Newton says the Biographia Britannica is wrong about his family, and “that he left a widow and three children, a son named Philip and two daughters, both sensible clever women. Caroline princess of Wales procured a pension of 300l. a-year for the widow, and a prebend of Worcester for the son, who afterwards received the living of C bristleton near Chester, from sir Roger Mostyn, and had the chancellorship of Worcester conferred upon him by bishop Hough, out of regard to his father’s memory. A subscription too was opened, and nobly promoted for the publication of sixty of the Bishop’s Sermons; some of which, it must be confessed, are unequal to the rest, but it is some excuse that they were never designed for the press.

have nowhere else met with. “In this state of exigence those ladies were visited by Mr. Wairtwrigbt, who had been some years register to that diocese, and had, by the

Bishop Newton adds that he had Bristol, the poorest bishopric, and Christ-church the most expensive deanery in the kingdom. This seems to confirm in some degree what Mr. Skelton says in his “Hylema.” “The bishopric of Bristol is one of the lowest in point of income among the English sees. Hence it was that Dr. Smalridge, at his decease, was not able to leave even a tolerable subsistence to his widow and two daughters.” Mr. Skelton adds a noble instance of liberality, which we have nowhere else met with. “In this state of exigence those ladies were visited by Mr. Wairtwrigbt, who had been some years register to that diocese, and had, by the profits of his place, and other practice of the law, acquired 3000l. This sum, his all, he with difficulty prevailed on the widow and her daughters to accept.” Mr. Skelton informs us that when queen Caroline heard of this liberal act from Mrs. Smalridge, she was so pleased with Mr. Wain Wright’s conduct, as to send him to Ireland, as a baron of the Exchequer.

and what in her circumstances became desirable, the notice and protection of his father’s relations. Who they were we are not told, but young Smart was very cordially

Smart was born earlier than the usual period of gestation, and to this circumstance his biographer ascribes that delicacy of constitution which rendered him unequal to the indulgences of men of vigour and gaiety. His taste for poetry is said to have appeared when he was only four years old, in an extempore effusion, which has not been preserved, but which is said to have indicated a relish for verse, and an ear for numbers. He was educated at Maidstone until he was eleven years old, at which time his father died, and his mother was induced to send him to Durham, where he might enjoy the advantages of a good school, change of air, and what in her circumstances became desirable, the notice and protection of his father’s relations. Who they were we are not told, but young Smart was very cordially received at Raby Castle, by lord Barnard, and in this family obtained the friendship of the hon. Mrs. Hope, and the more substantial patronage of the late duchess of Cleveland, who allowed him forty pounds a year until her death, in 1742. His gratitude to these noble personages is amply testified by his “Ode to lord Barnard,” whom he particularly acknowledges as one who encouraged his youthful studies. It was probably owing to the liberality of the same family that, after he had acquired very considerable reputation at Durham school, he was sent to Cambridge, in his seventeenth year, and admitted of Pembroke Hall, Oct. 30, 1739.

Smart, as a young man, aiming at poetical honours, was gratified with the letters of Pope; and Pope, who was ever alive to extent of fame, was not sorry to find his

During the early part of his residence at Cambridge he wrote the Tripos poems, among his works, a species of composition of which it is not often that much notice is taken, but the merit of Smart’s verses was immediately and generally acknowledged. When afterwards, by the advice of his friends, he offered himself as a candidate for an university scholarship, he is said to have translated Pope’s Ode on St. Cecilia’s day into Latin. But this is doubted by his biographer, on account of the length and labour of the composition. He must, however, have executed that translation about this time, as the applause it received induced him to turn his mind to other translations from the same author, and to write to him for his advice or approbation, which produced a correspondence very flattering on both sides. Smart, as a young man, aiming at poetical honours, was gratified with the letters of Pope; and Pope, who was ever alive to extent of fame, was not sorry to find his works introduced on the continent in a classical form. Smart proceeded, accordingly, to translate the “Essay on Criticism,” of all Pope’s writings, perhaps the most unfit for the purpose; but it brought him into some reputation with scholars.

s riding out, by jumping from his horse and plunging into the flood to rescue the distressed damsel, who was near perishing in the stream, into which she had fallen

In 1743, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and July 3, 1745, was elected a fellow of Pembroke hall. About this time, he wrote a comedy, of which a fevr songs only remain; and a ludicrous soliloquy of the Princess Periwinkle, preserved in the Old Woman’s Magazine. The play was called “A Trip to Cambridge, or the Grateful Fair.” The business of the drama, says his biographer, “was laid in bringing up an old country baronet to admit his nephew a fellow commoner at one of the colleges in, which expedition a daughter or niece attended. In their approach to the seat of the Muses, the waters from a heavy rain happened to be out at Fenstauton, which gave a youug student of Emmanuel an opportunity of shewing his gallantry as he was riding out, by jumping from his horse and plunging into the flood to rescue the distressed damsel, who was near perishing in the stream, into which she had fallen from her poney, as the party travelled on horseback. The swain being lucky enough to effect his purpose, of course gained an interest in the lady’s heart, and an acquaintance with the rest of the family, which he did not fail to cultivate on their arrival at Cambridge, with success as far as the fair one was concerned. To bring about the consent of the father (or guardian, fur my memory is not accurate), it was contrived to have a play acted, of which entertainment he was highly fond; and the Norwich company luckily came to Cambridge just at that time; only one of the actors had been detained on the road; and they could not perform the plav that night, unless the baronet would consent to take apart; which, rather than be disappointed of his favourite amusement, he was prevailed upon to do, especially as he was assured that it would amount to nothing more than sitting at a great table, and signing an instrument, as a justice of peace might sign a warrant: and having been some years of the quorum, he felt himself quite equal to the undertaking. The tinder-play to he acted by the Norwich company on this occasion, was the ‘ Bloody War of the King of Diamonds with the King of Spades;’ and the actors in it came on with their respective emblems on their shoulders, taken from the suits of the cards they represented. The baronet was the king of one of the parties, and in signing a declaration of war, signed his consent to the marriage of his niece or daughter, and a surrender of all her fortune.” This farce vvas acted at Pembroke-college-hall, the parlour of which made the green-room.

introduced to this gentleman’s family by Dr. Burney, the celebrated author of the History of Music, who composed several of Smart’s songs, and enriched the coilection

In 1747, Smart took the degree of master of arts, and became a candidate for the Seatonian prize, which was adjudged to himfor five years, four of them in succession. The Mibjects of his poems were, “The Eternity,” March 5, 1750. “The Immensity,” April 20, 1751. “The Omniscience,” Nov. 1, 1752. “The Power,” Dec. 5, 1753. and “The Goodness of the Supreme Being,” Oct. 28, 1755. It is probable he might have succeeded in the year 1754, but his thoughts were for some time diverted by an important change in his situation. In 1753 he quitted college. on his marriage with Miss Ann-Maria Carnan, the daughter by a former husband of Mary wife of the hue worthy Mr. John Newbery. He had been introduced to this gentleman’s family by Dr. Burney, the celebrated author of the History of Music, who composed several of Smart’s songs, and enriched the coilection of his works published in 1791 with some original compositions not generally known tobelong to our poet. Before this time, Smart had occasionally visited London, and had relinquished the prospects of any regular profession. In 1751 he published his Seatonian poem on the “Immensity of the Supreme Being:” and about the same time appears to have been engaged with Newbery in a general scheme of authorship. He had a ready turn for original composition, both in prose and verse, and as Newbery projected many works in the form of periodical miscellanies, must have been an useful coadjutor. During the years 1750 and 1751 he was a frequent contributor to the “Student, or Oxford and Cambridge Miscellany,” and carried on at the same time “The Midwife, or the Old Woman’s Magazine,” a small periodical pamphlet, which was published in three-penny numbers, and was afterwards collected into three volumes, 12mo. Smart and Newbery were almost the sole writers in this last work, which consists of short pieces in prose and verse, mostly of the humorous kind, and generally in a style of humour which in our more polished days would be reckoned somewhat coarse.

ir being entered in the hallbook of the stationers’ company, and threatened to prosecute all persons who should pirate them, or any part of them. As he affected to conceal

During the publication of the “Midwife,” he wrote the prologue and epilogue to Othello, when acted at Drurylane theatre by the Delaval family and their friends. Of the importance of this prologue and epilogue he had so high an opinion, that when he published them, in March 1751, he added a solemn notice of their being entered in the hallbook of the stationers’ company, and threatened to prosecute all persons who should pirate them, or any part of them. As he affected to conceal his share in the “Midwife,” he permits that old lady to copy these articles “because a work of merit printed in that Magazine is as a brilliant set in gold, and increased, not diminished, in its lustre.” He was now acquiring the various arts of puffing, and he ever preserved a much higher opinion of his works than even his best friends could allow to be just. Among other schemes, to which it is to be regretted a man of talents should descend, we find him about the beginning of 1752, endeavouring to amuse the town with a kind of farcical performance, called the “Old Woman’s Oratory,” intended partly to ridicule orator Henley’s buffooneries, and partly to promote the sale of the Old Woman’s Magazine. In neither of these was he very successful; the magazine was soon discontinued for want of encouragement, and Henley was a man whose absurdities could be heightened only by himself.

uld afford a very unfavourable opinion of our author’s character, had it not been an attack on a man who had rendered himself ridiculous and contemptible by practising

The Hilliad,” which is perhaps one of the most bitter satires ever published, would afford a very unfavourable opinion of our author’s character, had it not been an attack on a man who had rendered himself ridiculous and contemptible by practising with unblushing effrontery every species of literary and medical quackery. According to Smart, Hill gave the first public provocation, in one of his “Inspectors,” where he accuses Smart of ingratitude. Hill alledged that he had been the cause of Smart’s being brought up to town; that he had been at all times his friend, and had supported his character; and, long before he appeared as “Inspector,” he spoke well of those pieces, on the merit of which Smart’s fortune at that time depended; he hints also among other favours, that he had been the means of introducing him to Newbery; and for all this, the only return Smart made was by an abusive poem, “a long elaborate work, which he has read at alehouses and cyder cellars, and if any bookseller will run the risk, will publish.” To this heavy accusation, Smart pleaded not guilty in totOy solemnly declaring in an advertisement in the Daily Gazetteer, that he never received the least favour from Hill, directly or indirectly, unless an invitation to dinner, which he never accepted, might be reckoned such. He denied at the same time having ever been in his company but twice, the first time at Mr. Newbery’s, the second at Vauxhall gardens; and asserts that Hill had been his enemy as much as it was in his power, particularly in the “Impertinent,” another of his papers, in which he abuses not only Smart, but Fielding, who was his particular friend. This declaration was corroborated by an advertisement from honest Newbery, who adds that he introduced Smart to Hill, six months after the former had engaged with himself (Newbery) in business, when they met as perfect strangers. With respect to Hill’s assertion that he had been the means of introducing Smart to Mr. Newbery, the latter declares it to be an absolute falsehood.

. Smart’s acquaintance were likewise forward in their services; and particularly Dr. Samuel Johnson, who, on the first approaches of Mr Smart’s malady, wrote several

In 1754, Smart published the Seatonian prize poem ou the “Power,” and in 1756, that on the “Goodness of the Supreme Being; and in the same year, his” Hymn to the Supreme Being,“on recovery from, a dangerous, fit of illness, which illness seems to have filled up the space between the years 1754 and part of 1756.” Though the fortune,“says his hiographer,” as well as the constitution of Mr. Smart, required the utmost care, he was equally negligent in the management of both, and his various and repeated embarrassments acting upon an imagination uncommonly fervid, produced temporary alienations of mind; which at last were attended with paroxysms so violent and continued as to render confinement necessary. In this melancholy state, his family, for he had now two children, must have been much embarrassed in their circumstances, but for the kind friendship and assistance of Mr. Newbery. Many other of Mr. Smart’s acquaintance were likewise forward in their services; and particularly Dr. Samuel Johnson, who, on the first approaches of Mr Smart’s malady, wrote several papers for a periodical publication in which that gentleman was concerned, to secure his claim to a share in the profits of it."

esses, indeed, that he had been encouraged to think that such a translation would be useful to those who are desirous of acquiring or recovering a competent knowledge

Smart’s madness, according to Dr. Johnson’s account, discovered itself chiefly in unnecessary deviations from the usual modes of the world, in things ibat are not improper in themselves. He would fall upon his knees and say his prayers in the street, or in any unusual place, and insisted on people praying with him. His habits were also remark, ably slovenly, but he had not often symptoms of dangerous lunacy, and the principal reason of his confinement was to give his constitution a chance of recovering from the eifr cts of intemperance. After his release, when his mind appeared to be in some measure restored, he took a pleasant lodging in the neighbourhood of St. James’s park, and conducted his affairs for some time with prudence. He was maintained partly by his literary occupations, and partly by the generosity of his friends, receiving-, among other benefactions, fifty pounds a year from the treasury, but by whose interest his biographer has not been able to discover. In 1757 he published a prose translation of the works of “Horace.” From this performance he could derive little fame. He professes, indeed, that he had been encouraged to think that such a translation would be useful to those who are desirous of acquiring or recovering a competent knowledge of the Latin tongue, but the injury done to learners by literal translations was at this time too generally acknowledged to allow him the full force of this apology.

ed after a short illness occasioned by a disorder in his liver, May 18, 1770, leaving two daughters, who, with his widow, were long settled at Reading, and by their

His last publication, in 1768, exhibited a more striking proof of want of judgment than any of his late performances. It was entitled “The Parables of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Done into familiar verse, with occasional applications for the use of younger minds,” This was dedicated to Master Bonnel George Thornton, a child of three years old, and is written in that species of verse which would be tolerated only in the nursery. In what manner he lived during his latter years, his biographer has not informed us; but at length he was confined for debt in the King’s-bench prison, the rules of which were obtaiued for him by his brother-in-law, Mr. Thomas Carnan. Here he died after a short illness occasioned by a disorder in his liver, May 18, 1770, leaving two daughters, who, with his widow, were long settled at Reading, and by their prudent management of the.bookselling trade, transferred to them by the late Mr. John Newbery, were enabled to maintain a very respectable rank in life.

ng the want of proper dates, and other circumstances illustrative of the literary character of a man who, with all his failings, had many amiable qualities. Of his personal

In 1791, a collection of his poetical pieces was formed, to which were prefixed some memoirs of his life collected from his relations. Of these much use has been nade in the present sketch, but it has been found necessary to employ considerable research in supplying the want of proper dates, and other circumstances illustrative of the literary character of a man who, with all his failings, had many amiable qualities. Of his personal character, the following particulars yet remain to he added from the Memoirs.

conversation, the following extemporary spondaic, descriptive of the three Bedels of the university, who were at that time all very fat men, is still remembered by his

"His piety was exemplary and fervent; it may not be uninteresting to the reader to be told, that Mr. Smart, in composing the religious poems, was frequently so impressed with the sentiment of devotion, as to write particular passages on his knees. He was friendly, affectionate, and liberal to excess; so as often to give that to others, of which he was in the utmost want himself; he was also particularly engaging in conversation, when his first shyness was worn away; which he had in common with literary men, but in a very remarkable degree. Having undertaken to introduce his wife to my lord Darlington, with whom he was well acquainted; he had no sooner mentioned her name to his lordship, than he retreated suddenly, as if stricken with a panic, from the room, and from the house, leaving her to follow overwhelmed with confusion. As an instance of the wit of his conversation, the following extemporary spondaic, descriptive of the three Bedels of the university, who were at that time all very fat men, is still remembered by his academical acquaintance.

he law did not suit the bent of his genius, he wrote a strong memorial on the subject to his father, who had the good sense to allow him from that time to pursue the

The father of Mr. Stneaton was an attorney, and wished to bring him up to the same profession. Mr. Smeaton therefore, came up to London in 1742, and attended the courts in Westminster-hull; but, finding that the law did not suit the bent of his genius, he wrote a strong memorial on the subject to his father, who had the good sense to allow him from that time to pursue the path which nature pointed for him. Early in 1750 he had lodgings in Turnstile, Holborn, and was commencing the business of a mathematical-instrument-maker. In 1751 be invented a machine to measure a ship’s way at sea, and a compass of peculiar construction, touched by Dr. Knight’s artificial magnets: and made two voyages with Dr. Knight, to ascertain the merit of his contrivances. In 1753 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and the number of his papers inserted in the Transactions of that body sufficiently evinces how highly he deserved that distinction. In 1759 he received, by an unanimous vote, their gold medal, for his pape/ entitled “An Experimental Enquiry concerning the natural Powers of Wind and Water to turn Mills, and other MacJiines depending on a circular Motion.” This paper, he says, was the result of experiments made on working models, in 1752 and 1753, but not communicated to the society till 1759; before which time he had not an opportunity of putting the effect of these experiments into real practice, in a variety of cases, and for various purposes, so as to assure the society that he had found them to answer. These experiments discovered that wind and water could be made to do one-third more than was before known, and they were made, we may observe, in his 27th anil 28th years.

e found hardy enough to undertake it. Such a man was first found in the person of Mr. H. Winstanley, who, in 3696, was furnished by the Trinity-house with the necessary

Indeed his building the Eddystone lighthouse, were there no other monument of his fame, would establish his character. The Eddystone rocks have obtained their name from the great variety of contrary sets of the tide or current in their vicinity. They are situated nearly S. S. W. from the middle of Plymouth Sound. Their distance from the port of Plymouth is about 14 miles. They are almost in the line which joins the Start and the Lizard points; and as they lie nearly in the direction of vessels coasting up and down the channel, they were unavoidably, before the establishment of a lighthouse there, very dangerous, and often fatal to ships. Their situation with regard to the Bay of Biscay and the Atlantic is such, that they lie open to the swells of the bay and ocean, from all the southwestern points of the compass; so that all the heavy seas from the south-west quarter come uncontrolled upon the Eddystone rocks, and break upon them with the utmost fury. Sometimes, xvhen the sea is to all appearance smooth and even, and its surface unruffled by the slightest breeze, the ground swell meeting the slope of the rocks, the sea beats upon them in a frightful manner, so as not only to obstruct any work being done on the rock, or even landing upon it, when, figuratively speaking, you might go to sea in a walnut-shell. That circumstances fraught with danger surrounding it should lead mariners to wish for a lighthouse, is not wonderful; but the danger attending the erection leads us to wonder that any one could be found hardy enough to undertake it. Such a man was first found in the person of Mr. H. Winstanley, who, in 3696, was furnished by the Trinity-house with the necessary powers. In 1700 it was finished; but in the great storm of November 1703, it was destroyed, and the projector perished in the ruins. In 1709 another, upon a different construction, was erected by a Mr. lludyerd, which, in 1755, was unfortunately consumed by fire. The next building was under the direction of Mr. Smeaton, who, having considered the errors of the former constructions, has judiciously guarded against them, and erected a building, the demolition of which seems little to be dreaded, unless the rock on which it is erected should perish with it. But although Mr. Saieaton completed the building of the Eddystone lighthouse in a manner that did him so much credit, it does not appear that he soon got into full business as a civil engineer; for in 17G4, while he was in Yorkshire, he offered himself a candidate for the place of one of the receivers of the Derwentvvater Restate. This place was conferred upon him at a full board in Greenwich hospital, the last day of the same year, notwithstanding a powerful opposition. He was very serviceable in it, by improving the mills, and the estates belonging to the hospital; but in 1775 his private business was so much increased that he wished to resign, though he was prevailed upon to hold it two years longer. He was now concerned in many important public works. He made the river Calcler navigable; a work that required great skill and judgment, on account of the very impetuous floods to which that river is liable. He planned and superintended the execution of the great canal in Scotland, which joins the two seas; and was supposed to prevent the falling of Londonbridge, when that event was apprehended, on the opening of the great arch. In 1771 he became joint proprietor, with his friend Mr. Holmes, of the works for supplying Greenwich and Deptford with water, an undertaking which they succeeded in making useful to the public and beneficial to the proprietors, which it had never been before. Mr. Smeaton, in the course of his employments, constructed a vast variety of mills, to the entire satisfaction and great advantage of the owners; and he improved whatever he took under his consideration, of the mechanical or philosophical kind. Among many instances of this, we may mention his improvements in the air-pump, the pyrometer, the hygrometer, and the steam engine. He was constantly consulted in parliament, and frequently in the courts of law on difficult questions of science; and his strength of judgment, perspicuity of expression, and strict integrity, always appeared on those occasions to the highest advantage. About 1785, finding his health begin to deciinej Mr. Smeaton wished as much as possible to withdraw himself from business, and to employ his leisure in drawing up and publishing an account of his principal inventions and works. His narrative of the Eddystone lighthouse, already mentioned, was a part of this design, and the only part which he was able to complete. Notwithstanding his wish to retire from business, he could not resist the solicitation of his frit'nd Mr. Aubert, then chairman of the trustees for Ram&gate harbour, to accept the place of engineer to that harbour; and the improvements actually made, as well as his report published by the trustees in 179l, evince the attention which he paid to that important business.

words of his friend Mr. Holmes. “Mr. Smeaton had a warmth of expression, that might appear to those who did not know him to border on harshness, but those more intimately

On the 16th of September 1792, Mr. Smeaton was suddenly struck with paralysis, as he was walking in his garden at Austhorpe, and remaining in a very infirm state, though in full possession of his faculties, died on the 28th of the ensuing month. The character of this celebrated engineer may properly be given in the words of his friend Mr. Holmes. “Mr. Smeaton had a warmth of expression, that might appear to those who did not know him to border on harshness, but those more intimately acquainted with him, knew it arose from the intense application of his mind, which was always in the pursuit of truth, or engaged in investigating difficult subjects. He would sometimes break out hastily, when any thing was said that did not tally with his ideas; and he would not give up any tiling he argued for, till his mind was convinced by sound reasoning. In all the social duties of life, he was exemplary; he was a most affectionate husband, a good father, a warm, zealous, and sincere friend, always ready to assist those he respected, and often before it was pointed out to him in what way he could serve them. He was a lover and encourager of merit, wherever he found it; and many men are in a great measure indebted for their present situation to his assistance and advice. As a companion he was always entertaining and instructive; and none could spend their time in his company without improvement.” As a man,“adds Mr. H.” I always admired and respected him, and his memory will ever be most dear to me." A second edition of his narrative of the Eddystone, was published in 1793, under the revisal of his friend Mr. Aubert: but without any addition. The papers of Mr. Smeaton were purchased of his executors by sir Joseph Banks, under the voluntary promise of accounting to them, for the profits of whatever should be published. Accordingly under the inspection of a society of civil engineers, founded originally by Mr. Smeaton, three 4to volumes of his reports have been published 1797, &c. with a life prefixed. During many years of his life, Mr. Smeaton was a constant attendant on parliament, his opinion being continually called for. And here his natural strength of judgment and perspicuity of expression had their full display. It was his constant practice, when applied to, to plan or support any measure, to make himself fully acquainted with it, and be convinced of its merits, before he would be concerned in it. By this caution, joined to the clearness of his description, and the integrity of his heart, he seldom failed having the bill he supported carried into an ad of parliameut. No person was heard with more attention, nor had any one ever more confidence placed in his testimony. In the courts of law he had several compliments paid to him from the bench, by the late lord Mansfield and others, on account of the new light he threw upon difficult subjects.

ebrated as a teacher, having instructed, as he informs us in his practice, nearly a thousand pupils, who assisted, whilst attending his lectures, eleven hundred and

, M. D. an eminent accoucheur, was a native of Scotland, and after some practice in his country, settled in the early part of the last century in London. He was principally celebrated as a teacher, having instructed, as he informs us in his practice, nearly a thousand pupils, who assisted, whilst attending his lectures, eleven hundred and fifty poor women. The women were supported, by a subscription among the pupils, during their lying-in. Dr. Smellie was the first writer who considered the shape and size of the female pelvis, as adapted to the head of the foetus, and who ascertained the position of the latter during the period of gestation; and his opinion has been confirmed by later writers, particularly by Dr. Hunter, who had several opportunities of dissecting women who died undelivered, at different periods of their pregnancy. He also introduced many improvements in delivery and in the use of instruments, and abolished many superstitious notions, and erroneous customs, that prevailed in the management of women in labour, and of the children; and he had the satisfaction to see the greater part of his maxims adopted, not only in this island, but by the most respectable practitioners in the greater part of Europe.

practice recommended in the treatise. These were very soon translated into French by Mons. Preville, who assigns as a motive for the undertaking, the high character

In 1752 he published his lectures; having spent, as he says, six years in digesting and improving them, under the title of a “Treatise of Midwifery,” in one volume, 8vo. This was followed in 1754, by a volume of cases, intended to illustrate the method of practice recommended in the treatise. These were very soon translated into French by Mons. Preville, who assigns as a motive for the undertaking, the high character the author enjoyed on the continent. Smellie mentions, in the preface to his volume of cases, his intention of publishing a second volume, to contain a collection of cases in preternatural Jabours, which would complete his plan. This volume did not appear until about five years after his death, namely, in 17G8. “Some years ago,” the editor says, “the author retired from business in London, to his native country, where he employed his leisure hours in methodizing and revising his papers, and in finishing his collection of cases for this publication. The manuscript was transmitted to the person who prepared the two former volumes for the press, and even delivered to the printer, when the doctor died advanced in years, in 1763, at his own house near Lanerk in North Britain. This, with the two former volumes,” the editor continues to say, “we may venture to call a complete system of midwifery. It is the fruit of forty years experience, enriched with an incredible variety of practice, and contains directions and rules of conduct to be observed in every case that can possibly occur in the exercise of the obstetric art; rules that have not been deduced from the theory of a heated imagination, but founded on solid observation, confirmed by mature reflection, and reiterated experience.” This opinion of the merit of the author, and his work, has been confirmed by the general suffrage of the public.

ntemporaries. The most formidable of these wasDr. William Burton, practitioner of midwifery at York, who- attacked him with great acrimony; and Dr. William Douglas,

This author had the fate of almost all ingenious men, to excite the indignation of some of his contemporaries. The most formidable of these wasDr. William Burton, practitioner of midwifery at York, who- attacked him with great acrimony; and Dr. William Douglas, who styles himself physician extraordinary to the prince of Wales, and manmidwife, addressed two letters to Dr. Smellie, in 1748, accusing him of degrading the profession, by teaching midwifery at a very low price, and giving certificates to pupils who had only attended him a few weeks, by which means the number of practitioners was enormously multiplied, and many improper persons admitted. Apothecaries, he says, resorted to the doctor, from various parts of the country, and at the end of two or three weeks, returned to their shops, armed with diplomas signed by the professor, attesting their proficiency in the art. These were framed and hung up in the most conspicuous parts of their houses, and were, without doubt, surveyed with veneration by their patients. “In your bills,” he says, “you set forth that you give a universal lecture in midwifery for half a guinea, or four lectures for a guinea.” In these universal lectures, the whole mystery of the art was to be unfolded. He charges him also with hanging out a paper lanthorn, with the words “Midwifery taught here for five shillings,” each lecture, we presume. This was certainly an humiliating situation for a man of so much real merit. Dr. Douglas relates these cases, in which he contends that Smellie had acted unscientifically; and particularly says, that he suffered one of the women to die by not giving timely assistance. To the charges of mal-practice, Dr. Smellie answered, by giving a full recital of the cases, and referred to Dr. Sands, and other practitioners, who attended with him. His answer was so satisfactory, that Dr. Douglas retracted his charges in his second letter. On the other points, Smellie was silent. It is probable, that, having practised the first nineteen years at a small town in Scotland, where medical fees may be supposed to be low, he might not think the price he demanded for his instructions so insignificant and inadequate as it really was. Smellie is said to have been coarse in his penron, and aukward and unpleasing in his manners, so that he never rose into any great estimation among persons of rank. On the other hand, he appears to have had an active and ingenious mind, with a solid understanding and judgment. He had a peculiar turn to mechanics, which was evinced by the alterations he made in the forceps, crotchets, and scissors, which all received considerable improvements under his hands; but this was more particularly shewn by the elegant construction of his phantoms, or machines, on which he demonstrated the various positions of the foetus in utero, and the different species of labour. That he was candid and modest appears through every page of his works; ready on all occasions to acknowledge the merit of others, and when correcting their errors assuming no superiority over them. We will conclude this account with the words of one of his pupils, who appears to have been well acquainted with his disposition and manners. “No man was more ready than Dr. Smellie to crave advice and assistance when danger or difficulty occurred, and no man was more communicative, without the least self-sufficiency or ostentation. He never officiously intermeddled in the concerns of others, or strove to insinuate himself into practice by depreciating the character of his neighbour; but made his way into business by the dint of merit alone, and maintained his reputation by the most benelicent and disinterested behaviour.

friendship from the year 1752, they were introduced to the society of the first wits in France, but who were also unhappily the most notorious deists. The biographer

After the publication of this work, Dr. Smith remained four years at Glasgow, discharging his official duties with increasing reputation. Towards the end of 1763 he received an invitation from Mr. Charles Townsend to accompany the duke of Buccieugh on his travels; and the liberal terms of the proposal, added to a strong desire of visiting the continent of Europe, induced him to resign his professorship at Glasgow. Early in the year 1764 he joined the duke of Buccieugh in London, and in March set out with him for the continent. Sir James Macdonald, afterwards so justly lamented by Dr. Smith and many other distinguished persons, as a young man of the highest accomplishments and virtues, met them at Dover. After a fevr days passed at Paris, they settled for eighteen months at Thou louse, and then took a tour through the south of France to Geneva, where they passed two months. About Christmas 1765 they returned to Paris, and there remained till the October following. By the recommendations of David Hume, with whom Dr. Smith had been united in. strict friendship from the year 1752, they were introduced to the society of the first wits in France, but who were also unhappily the most notorious deists. The biographer of Dr. A. Smith has told us, in the words of the duke of Buccleugh himself, that he and his noble pupil lived together in the most uninterrupted harmony during the thres years of their travels; and that their friendship continued to the end of Dr. Smith’s life, whose loss was then sincerely regretted by the survivor. The next ten years of Dr. A. Smith’s life were passed in a retirement which formed a striking contrast to his late migrations. With the exception of a few visits to Edinburgh and London, he passed the whole of this period with his mother at Kirkaldy, occupied habitually in intense study. His friend Hume, who considered a town as the true scene for a man of letters, in vain attempted to seduce him from his retirement; till at length, in the beginning of 1776, he accounted for his long retreat by the publication of his “Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,” 2 vols. 4to. This book is well known as the most profound and perspicuous dissertation of its kind that the world has ever seen. About two years after the publication of this work the author was appointed one of the commissioners of the customs in Scotland. The greater part of these two years he passed in London, in a society too extensive and varied to allow him much time for study. In consequence of his new appointment, he returned in 1778 to Edinburgh, where he enjoyed the last twelve years of his life in affluence, and among the companions of his youth. “During the first years of his residence in Edinburgh,” says his biographer, “his studies seemed to be entirely suspended; and his passion for letters served only to amuse his leisure and to animate his conversation. The infirmities of age, of which he very early began to feel the approaches, reminded him at last, when it was too late, of what he yet owed to the public and to his own fame. The principal materials of the works which he had announced had long ago been collected, and little probably was wanting, but a few years of health and retirement, to bestow on them that systematical arrangement in which he delighted; and the ornaments of that flowing, and apparently artless style, which he had studiously cultivated, but which, after all his experience and composition, he adjusted with extreme difficulty to his own taste.” The death of his mother in 1784, who, to an extreme old age, had possessed her faculties unimpaired, with a considerable degree of health, and that of a cousin, who had assisted in superintending his household, in 1788, contributed to frustrate his projects. Though he bore his losses with firmness, his health and spirits gradually declined, and, in July 1790, he died of a chronic obstruction in his bowels, which had been lingering and painful. A few days before his death he gave orders to destroy all his manuscripts, with the exception of some detached essays, which he left to the care of his executors, and which have since been published in one volume 4to, in 1795.

writer on the subject of the corn-trade, was horn at Stepney, in 1713. His father was Charles Smith, who occupied several mills by descent, and erected those great

, an able writer on the subject of the corn-trade, was horn at Stepney, in 1713. His father was Charles Smith, who occupied several mills by descent, and erected those great establishments of the kind at Barking in Essex, from which he retired to Croydon, where he died in 1761. Our author succeeded, on his father’s retirement, to the occupation of his predecessors: but, having a competent fortune, left the active management to his partner and relation, while he found leisure to pursue his inquiries at Barking, and discharge the duties of a country magistrate. In 1748, he married Judith, daughter of Isaac Lefevre, brother to Peter Lefevre, who had established the largest malt-distillery in England; and from henceforth he resided among his wife’s relations at Stratford in Essex. Here, inquisitive and industrious, he turned his attention to the operations of the corn-trade, and policy of the corn-laws, and was induced by the scarcity of 1757, to lay the result of his labours on this subject before the public, in three valuable tracts published in 1758 and 1759. These were well received, and the author lived to see an edition of them published by the city of London; to hear his work quoted with approbation by Dr. Adam Smith, in his “Wealth of Nations;” and to observe his recommendations adopted by parliament. But in the midst of these enjoyments he died by a fall from his horse, Feb. 8, 1777, aged sixtythree. His only son, Charles Smith, esq. was lately member of parliament for Westbury in Wiltshire. Mr. Smith’s tracts on corn had become very scarce, when in 1804 they were re-published by George Chalmers, esq. with a memoir of the author.

She discovered from a very early age an insatiable thirst for reading, which was checked by an aunt, who had the care of her education; for she had lost her mother almost

, an elegant poetess, was born in 1749. She was the daughter of Nicholas Turner, esq. a gentleman of Sussex, whose seat was at Stoke, near GuiU ibrd; but he had another house at Bignor Park, on the banks of the Aru.n, where she passed many of her earliest years, amidst scenery which had nursed the fancies of Otway and Collins, and where every charm of nature seems to have left the most lively and distinct impression on her mind. She discovered from a very early age an insatiable thirst for reading, which was checked by an aunt, who had the care of her education; for she had lost her mother almost in her infancy. From her twelfth to her fifteenth year, her father resided occasionally in London, and she was introduced into various society. It is said that before she was sixteen, bhe married Mr. Smith, a partner in his father’s house, who was a West India merchant, and also an East India director; an ill-assorted match, and the prime source of all her future misfortunes. After she had resided some time in London, and partly in the vicinity, Mr. Smith’s father, who could never persuade his son to give his time or care sufficiently to the business in which he was engaged, allowed him to retire into the country, and purchased for him Lyss farm in Hampshire.

In this situation, Mrs. Smith, who had now eight children, passed several anxious and important

In this situation, Mrs. Smith, who had now eight children, passed several anxious and important years. Her husband was imprudent, kept a larger establishment than suited his fortune, and engaged in injudicious and wild speculations in agriculture. She foresaw the storm that was gathering over her; but she had no power to prevent it; and she endeavoured to console her uneasiness by recurring to the muse, whose first visitings had added force to the pleasures of her childhood. “When in the beech woods of Hampshire,” she says, “I first struck the chords of the melancholy lyre: its notes were never intended for the public ear: it was unaffected sorrow drew them forth I wrote mournfully, because I was unhappy.

ore her death which promised success, but it does not appear that these were completed. Her husband, who seems never to have conquered his habits of imprudence, died,

During this long period of constant literary exertion, which alone seemed sufficient to have occupied all her time, Mrs. Smith had both family griefs and family business of the most perplexing and overwhelming nature to contend with. Her eldest son had been many years absent as a writer in Bengal; her second surviving son died of a rapid and violent fever; her third son lost his leg at Dunkirk, as an ensign in the 24th regiment, and her eldest daughter expired within two years after her marriage. The grandfather of her children had left his property, which lay in the West Indies, in the hands of trustees and agents, and it was long unproductive to her family. Some arrangements are said to have been attempted before her death which promised success, but it does not appear that these were completed. Her husband, who seems never to have conquered his habits of imprudence, died, it is said, in legal confinement, in March 1806; and on Oct. 28 following, Mrs. Smith died at Telford, nearFarnham, in Surrey, after a lingering and painful illness, which she bore with the utmost patience.

, one of those writers who, without much labour have attained high reputation, and who

, one of those writers who, without much labour have attained high reputation, and who are mentioned with reverence rather for the possession than the exertion of uncommon abilities, was the only son of Mr. Neale, an eminent merchant, by a daughter of the famous baron Lechmere; and born in 1668. Some misfortunes of his father, which were soon after followed by his death, occasioned the son to be left very young in the hands of Mr. S nith, who had married his father’s sister. This gentleman treated him with as much tenderness as if he had been his own cnild; and placed him at Westminster-school under the care of Dr. Busby. After the death of his generous guardian, young Neale, in gratitude, thought proper to assume the name of Smith. He was elected from Westminster to Cambridge, but, being offered a studentship, voluntarily removed to Christ-church in Oxford; and was there by his aunt handsomely maintained as long as she lived; alter which, he continued a member of that society till within five years of his own death. Some time before he left Christ church, he was sent for by his mother to Worcester, and acknowledged by her as a legitimate son; which his friend Oldisworth mentions, he says, to wipe off the aspersions that some had ignorantly cast on his birth. He passed through the exercises of the college and university with unusual applause; and acquired a great reputation in the schools both for his knowledge and skill in disputation. He had a long and perfect intimacy with all the Greek and Latin classics; with whom he had carefully compared whatever was worth perusing in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages, and in all the celebrated writers of his own country. He considered the ancients and moderns, not as parties or rivals for fame, but as architects upon one and the same plan, the art of poetry.

sed the polite world, that sense was thought to be sacrificed to sound: and this occasioned Addison, who wrote the prologue, to satirize the vitiated taste of the public.

His works are not many, and those scattered up and down in miscellaneous collections. His celebrated tragedy, called “Phaedra and Hippolitus,” was acted at the theatre royal in 1707. This play was introduced upon the stage at a time when the Italian opera so much engrossed the polite world, that sense was thought to be sacrificed to sound: and this occasioned Addison, who wrote the prologue, to satirize the vitiated taste of the public. The chief excellence of this play, which has been praised far beyond its merits, is the versification. It is not destitute of the pathetic; but is so wonderfully inferior, not only to the Hippolytus of Euripides, but even to the Phédre of Racine, and is so full of glaring faults, that it is astonishing how Addison could tolerate it, or how it could be made even a temporary fashion to admire it. It is now as little thought of as it deserves. This tragedy, with “A Poem to the Memory of Mr. John Phillips,” his most intimate friend, three or four odes, and a Latin oration spoken publicly at Oxford, “in laudem Thomas Bodleii,” were publhhed in 1719, under the name of his Works, by his friend Oldisworth, who prefixed a character of Smith.

of part of Demosthenes; it not being thought proper to trust the superintendance of others to a man who took so little care of himself. From this time Smith employed

He died in 1710, in his forty-second year, at the seat of George Ducket, esq. called Hartham, in Wiltshire; and was buried in the parish church there. Some time before his death, he engaged in considerable undertakings; and raised expectations in the world, which he did not live to gratify. Oldisworth observes, that he had seen of his about ten sheets of Pindar, translated into English; which, he says, exceeded any thing in that kind he could ever hope for in our language. He had drawn out a plan for a tragedy of Lady Jane Grey, and had written several scenes of it; a subject afterwards nobly executed by Mr. Rowe. But his greatest undertaking was a translation of Longinus, to which he proposed a large addition of notes and observations of his own, with an entire system of the art of poetry in three books, under the titles of “thoughts, diction, and figure.” He intended also to make remarks upon all the ancients and moderns, the Greek, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and English poets; and to animadvert upon their several beauties and defects. Oldisworth has represented Smith as a man abounding with qualities both good and great; and that may perhaps be true, in some degree, though amplified by the partiality of friendship. He had, nevertheless, some defects in his conduct one was an extreme carelessness in the particular of dress which singularity procured him the name of “Captain Rag.” The ladies, it is said, at once commended and reproved him, by the name of the “handsome sloven.” It is acknowledged also, that he was much inclined to intemperance which was caused perhaps by disappointments, but led to that indolence and loss of character, which has been frequently destructive to genius, even of a higher order than he appears to have possessed. Dr. Johnson thus draws up his character: “As his years advanced, he advanced in reputation; for he continued to cultivate his mind; but he did not amend his irregularities, by which, he gave so much offence, that, April 24, 1700, the dean and chapter declared ' the place of Mr. Smith void, he having been convicted of riotous misbehaviour in the house of Mr. Cole, an apothecary; but it was referred to the dean when and upon what occasion the sentence should be put in execution. Thus tenderly was he treated; the governors of his college could hardly keep him, and yet wished that he would not force them to drive him away. Some time afterwards he assumed an appearance of decency; in his own phrase, he whitened himself, having a desire to obtain the censorship, an office of honour and some profit in the college; but when the election came, the preference was given to Mr. Foulkes, his junior; the same, I suppose, that joined with Freind in an edition of part of Demosthenes; it not being thought proper to trust the superintendance of others to a man who took so little care of himself. From this time Smith employed his malice and his wit against the dean, Dr. Aldrich, whom he considered as the opponent of his claim. Of his lampoon upon him, I once heard a single line too gross to be repeated. But he was still a genius and a scholar, and OxtV-rd was unwilling to lose him: he was endured, with all his pranks and his vices, two years longer; but on December 20, 1705, at the instance of all the canons, the sentence declared five years before was put in execution. The execution was, I believe, silent and tender; for one of his friends, from whom I learned much of his life, appeared not to know it. He was now driven to London, where he associated himself with the whigs, whether because they were in power, or because the tories had expelled him, or because he was a whig by principle, may perhaps be doubted. He was, however, caressed by tnen of great abilities, whatever were their party, and was supported by the liberality of those who delighted in his conversation. There was once a design, hinted at by Oldisvvorih, to have made him useful. One evening, as he was sitting with a friend at a tavern, he was called down by the waiter, and, having stayed some time below, came up thoughtful. After a pause, said he to his friend, ‘ He that wanted me below was Addison, whose business was to tell me that a history of the revolution was intended, and to propose that I should undertake it. I said, ’ What shall I do with the character of lord Sunderland?‘ And Addison immediately returned, ’ When, Rag, were you drunk last?' and went away. Captain Rag was a name that he got at Oxford by his negligence of dress. This story I heard from the late Mr. Clark, of Lincoln’s Inn, to whom it was told by the friend of Smith. Such scruples might debar him from some profitable employments; but as they could not deprive him of any real esteem, they left him many friends; and no man was ever better introduced to the theatre than he, who, in that violent conflict of parties, had a prologue and epilogue from the first wits on either side. But learning and nature will now-and-then take different courses. His play pleased the critics, and the critics only. It was, as Addison has recorded, hardly heard the third night. Smith had, indeed, trusted entirely to his merit; had insured no band of applauders, nor used any artifice to force success, and found that naked excellence was not sufficient for its own support. The play, however, was bought by Lintot, who advanced the price from fifty guineas, the current rate, to sixty; and Halifax, the general patron, accepted the dedication. Smith’s indolence kept him from writing the dedication, till Lintot, after fruitless importunity, gave notice that he would publish the play without it. Now, therefore, it was written; and Halifax expected the author with his book, and had prepared to reward him with a place of three hundred pounds a year. Smith, by pride, or caprice, or indolence, or bashful ness, neglected to attend him, though doubtless warned and pressed by his friends, and at last missed his reward by not going to solicit it. In 1709, a year after the exhibition of Phaedra, died John Philips, the friend and fellow-collegian of Smith, who, on that occasion, wrote a poem, which justice must place among the best elegies which our language can shew, an elegant mixture of fondness and admiration, of dignity and softness. There are some passages too ludicrous; but every human performance has its faults. This elegy it was the mode among his friends to purchase fora guinea-, and, as his acquaintance was numerous, it was a very profitable poem. Of his ‘ Pindar,’ mentioned by Oldisworth, I have never otherwise heard. His ‘ Longinus’ he intended to accompany with some illustrations, and had selected his instances of * the false Sublime,’ from the works of Blackmore. He resolved to try again the fortune of the stage, with the story of * Lady Jane Grey.' It is not unlikely that his experience of the inefficacy and incredibility of a mythological tale might determine him to choose an action from English history, at no great distance from our own times, which was to end in a real event, produced by the operation of known characters. Having formed his plan, and collected materials, he declared that a few months would complete his design; and, that he might pursue his work with fewer avocations, he was, in June, 1710, invited by Mr. George Ducket, to his house at Hartham in Wiltshire. Here he found such opportunities of indulgence as did not much forward his studies, and particularly some strong ale, too delicious to be resisted. He ate and drank till he found himself plethoric: and then, resolving to ease himself by evacuation, he wrote to an apothecary in the neighbourhood a prescription of a purge so forcible, that the apothecary thought it his duty to delay it till he had given notice of its danger. Smith, not pleased with the contradiction of a shopman, and boastful of his own knowledge, treated the notice with rude contempt, and swallowed his own medicine, which, in July 1710, brought him to the grave. He was buried at Hartham. Many years afterwards, Ducket communicated to Oldmixon, the historian, an account, pretended to have been received from Smith, that Clarendon’s History was, in its publication, corrupted by Aldrich, Smalridge, and Atterbury; and that Smith was employed to forge and insert the alterations. This story was published triumphantly by Oldmixon, and may be supposed to have been eagerly received: but its progress was soon checked for, finding its way into the journal of Trevoux, it fell under the eye of Atterbury, then an exile in France, who immediately denied the charge, with this remarkable particular, that he never in his whole life had once spoken to Smith; hrs company being, as must be inferred, not accepted by those who attended to their characters. The charge was afterwards very diligently refuted by Dr< Burton of Eton a man eminent for literature, and, though not of the same party with Aldrich and Atterbury, too studious of truth to leave them burthened with a false charge. The testimonies which he has collected have convinced mankind that either Smith or Ducket were guilty of wilful and malicious falsehood. This controversy brought into view those parts of Smith’s life which with more honour to his name might have been concealed. Of Smith I can yet say a little more. He was a man of such estimation among his companions, that the casual censures or praises which he dropped in conversation were considered, like those of Scaliger, as worthy of preservation. He had great readiness and exactness of criticism, and by a cursory glance over a new composition would exactly tell all its faults and beauties. He was remarkable for the power of reading with great rapidity, and of retaining with great fidelity what he so easily collected. He therefore always knew what the present question required; and, when his friends expressed their wonder at his acquisitions, made in a state of apparent negligence and drunkenness, he never discovered his hours of reading or method of study, but involved himself in affected silence, and fed his own vanity with their admiration and conjectures. One practice he had, which was easily observed: if any thought or image was presented to his mind that he could use or improve, he did not suffer it to be lost; but, amidst the jollity of a tavern, or in the warmth of conversation, very diligently committed to paper. Thus it was that he had gathered two quires of hints for his new tragedy; of which Howe, when they were put into his hands, could make, as he says, very little use, but which the collector considered as a valuable stock of materials. When he came to London, his way of life connected him with the licentious and dissolute; and he affected the airs and gaiety of a man of pleasure; but his dress was always deficient: scholastic cloudiness still hung about him, and his merriment was sure to produce the scorn of his companions. With all his carelessness, and all his vices, he was one of the murmurers at form tie; and wondered why he was suffered to be poor, when Addison was caressed and preferred: nor would a very little have contented him; for he estimated his wants at six hundred pounds a year. In his course of reading it was particular, that he had diligently perused, and accurately remembered, the old romances of knight-errantry. He had a high opinion of his own merit, and something contemptuous in his treatment of those whom he considered as not qualified to oppose or contradict him. He had many frailties; yet it cannot but be supposed that he had great merit, who could obtain to the same play a prologue from Addison, and an epilogue from Prior; and who could have at once the patronage of Halifax, and the praise of Oldisworth.

er, was a painter of portraits, but produced also some good landscapes. He is said, however, by some who remember him, to have been more remarkable for painting fruit

, of Ch'uhester, the second, but most known, of three brothers, all distinguished as painters, was born in 1714. George is celebrated as a painter of landscape, but it was expected by the connoisseurs of the time, that his younger brother John would have surpassed him in that syle of painting. In the contests for prizes, at the society for the encouragement of arts, John’s landscapes were frequently preferred to those of George; but he died at an earlier period, and all memory of his works, as well as of the artist himself, has been nearly obliterated. William, the eldest brother, was a painter of portraits, but produced also some good landscapes. He is said, however, by some who remember him, to have been more remarkable for painting fruit and flowers, than for the other branches of his art. William was deformed, and his countenance was thought by many to resemble that of the celebrated John Locke. John died July 29, 1764, at the age of forty- seven, William on the 27th of the ensuing September, at the age of fifty -seven. George survived till Sept. 7, 1776, when he died, at the age of sixty-two. Their remains are deposited in the church-yard of St. Paneras at Chichester, and distinguished only by a plain stone, containing their names and the profession of each, with the dates above recited. Mr. W. Pether, an ingenious painter and engraver in mezzotinto, who was intimate with these brothers, published several years ago an admirable print, with fine likenesses of the three, represented in a groupe; the eldest is reading a lecture upon landscape to the two younger, who are listening with great attention.

ondon. Here he was patronized by William Cecil, lord Burleigh, to whom he dedicated his sermons, and who prevented the prosecutions to which the other scrupulous puritans

, an English divine of popular fame in the sixteenth century, was born in 1550 of a good family at Withcock in Leicestershire, and after purstuing his studies at Oxford, entered into the church. Wood thinks he took the degree of M. A. as a member of Hart-hall, in 1583; and adds, that “he was then esteemed the miracle and wonder of his age, for his prodigious memory, and for his fluent, eloquent, and practical way of preaching.” His scruples, however, as to subscription and ceremonies were such, that being loth, as his biographer Fuller informs us, “to make a rent either in his own conscience or in the church,” he resolved not to undertake a pastoral charge, but accepted the office of lecturer of the church of St. Clement Danes, London. Here he was patronized by William Cecil, lord Burleigh, to whom he dedicated his sermons, and who prevented the prosecutions to which the other scrupulous puritans were at that time exposed. He appears to have been one of the most popular preachers of his age. Fuller informs us, as an instance, that after his preaching a sermon on Sarah’s nursing of Isaac, in which he maintained the doctrine that it was the duty of all mothers to nurse their own children, “ladies and great gentlewomen presently remanded their children from the vicinage round about London, and endeavoured to discharge the second moietie of a mother, and to nurse them, whom they had brought into the world.” Their compliance with his instructions on this point was the more condescending 1 as Mr. Smith was a bachelor.

Of his death we have no certain account. Fuller, who gives him the highest character, and whose principles would

Of his death we have no certain account. Fuller, who gives him the highest character, and whose principles would not have permitted him to pay this respect to a puritan, unless of very extraordinary worth or talents, after making every inquiry, concludes that he died about 1600. Wood says that he was “in great renown among men in 1593,” in which year he thinks he died.

his mission to his “being a person of a Spanish port and demeanour, and well known to the Spaniards, who held him, as their king did, in high value, and especially for

, a traveller and ambassador, was the son of sir Clement Smith, of Little Baddow in Essex, by a sister of Edward Seymour, duke of Somerset, and consequently sister to Jane Seymour, the third queen of Henry VIII. He was educated at Oxford, but in what college is not known. Wood informs us that he travelled into foreign countries, and became very accomplished both as a soldier and a gentleman. He was in France in the reign of his cousin Edward VI. and from the introduction to his book of “Instructions,” it appears that he had been in the service of several foreign princes. In 1576, when the states of the Netherlands took up arms in defence of their liberty against the encroachments of the Spanish government, they solicited queen Elizabeth for a loan; but, this being inconvenient, she sent Smith to intercede with the Spanish monarch in their behalf. For this purpose she conferred the honour of knighthood upon him. Wood imputes his mission to his “being a person of a Spanish port and demeanour, and well known to the Spaniards, who held him, as their king did, in high value, and especially for this reason that he was first cousin to king Edward VI.” Carnden, in his “History of Elizabeth,” says that he was graciously received by the king of Spain, and that “he retorted with such discretion the disgraceful injuries of Caspar Quiroga, archbishop of Toledo, against the queen, in hatred of her religion, and of the inquisitors of Sevil, who would not allow the attribute of Defender of the Faith in the queen’s title, that the king gave him thanks for it, and was displeased with the archbishop, desiring the ambassador to conceal the matter from the queen, and expressly commanded the said attribute to be allowed her.” We have no further account of his history, except that he was living in 1595, irv great esteem by learned and military men. He wrote, 1. A “Discourse concerning the forms and effects of divers Weapons, and other very important matters military; greatly mistaken by divers men of war in their days, and chiefly of the rnusquet, calyver, and long-bow, &c.” Lond. 1589, reprinted 1590, 4to. 2. “Certain instructions, observations, and orders military, requisite for all chieftains, captains, higher and lower officers,” ibid. 1594, 1595, 4to. To this are added “Instructions for enrolling and mustering.” There are two Mss. relative to his transactions in Spain in the Cotton library, and one in the Lambeth library.

reat Britain, and in reclaiming the inhabitants from barbarism. If the same, which is very probable, who is mentioned in Stow’s “Survey of London,” under the name of

, commonly called Capt. John Smith, or Smyth, was born at Willoughby in the county of Lincoln, but descended from the Smyths of Cuerdley. He ranks with the greatest travellers and adventurers of his age, and was distinguished by his many achievements in the fpur quarters of the globe. In the wars of Hungary about 1602, in three single combats he overcame three Turks, and cut off their heads, for which and other gallant exploits Sigismund, duke of Transylvania, under whom he served, gave him his picture set in gold, with a pension of three hundred ducats: and allowed him to bear three Turks heads proper as his shield of arms. He afterwards went to America, where he was taken prisoner by the Indians, from whom he found means to escape. He often hazarded his life in naval engagements with pirates, Spanish men of war, and in other adventures, and had a considerable hand in reducing New-England to the obedience of Great Britain, and in reclaiming the inhabitants from barbarism. If the same, which is very probable, who is mentioned in Stow’s “Survey of London,” under the name of “Capt. John Smith, some time governor of Virginia and admiral of New-England,” he died June 21, 1631, and was buried at St. Sepulchre’s church, London. There is a ms life of him, by Henry Wharton in the Lambeth library, but his exploits may be seen in his “History of Virginia, NewEngland, and the Summer Isles,” written by himself, and published at London in 1624, fol. Wood also attributes to him, l. “A Map of Virginia, with a description of the country, the commodities, people, government, and religion,” Oxon. 1612, 4to. 2. “New-England’s Tryals, &c.” Lond. 1620, 4to. 3. “Travels in Europe, &c.” ibid. 1630, reprinted in Churchill’s Voyages, vol. II.

hard Stearn or Stern, archbishop of York; and in 1681 was invited to Durham by Dr. Dennis Granville, who had a great regard for his family, and esteemed him highly for

Our author was born at Lowther, Nov. 10, 1659, and was at first educated by his father with a care which his extraordinary capacity amply repaid, for we are told that he learned the Latin grammar in the fifth year of his age, and the Greek grammar in his ninth. After this he was sent to Bradford in Yorkshire, and placed under Mr. Christopher Nesse, a nonconformist (see Nessje) of considerable learning; but here it is said he forgot almost all his grammar rules. He then appears to have been taught by Mr. William Lancaster, afterwards provost of Queen’s college, Oxford, and next by Mr. Thomas Lawson, a quaker schoolmaster, under whom he continued his progress in the learned languages. He was also for some time at the school of Appleby, whence he was sent to Cambridge, and admitted of St. John’s college June 11, 1674, about a year before his father’s death. From his first entrance at college, he was much noticed for his exemplary conduct, afcd close application to study, which enabled him to take his degrees in arts with great reputation; that of A. B. in 1677, and of A. M. in 1681. Being intended for the church, he was ordained both deacon and priest, by Dr. Richard Stearn or Stern, archbishop of York; and in 1681 was invited to Durham by Dr. Dennis Granville, who had a great regard for his family, and esteemed him highly for his attainments. In July 1682 he was admitted a minor canon of Durham, and about the same time he was collated to the curacy of Croxdale, and, in July 1684, to the living of Witton-Gilbert. In 1686 he went to Madrid, as chaplain to lord Lansdowne, the English ambassador, and returned soon after the revolution. In 1694 Crew, bishop of Durham, appointed him his domestic chaplain, and had such an opinion of his judgment, that he generally consulted him in all ecclesiastical matters of importance. His lordship also collated him to the rectory and hospital of Gateshead in June 1695, and to a prebend of Durham in September following. In 1696 he was created D. D. at Cambridge, and was made treasurer of Durham in 1699, to which bishop Crew, in July 1704, added the rectory of Bishop-Wearmouth.

ther’s will, but died before him, a student of the Temple; and Posthumus Smith, an eminent civilian, who died 1725.

Here he not only repaired the chancel in a handsome and substantial manner, but built a very spacious and ele*­gain parsonage-house, entirely at his own expeuce, and laid out considerable sums on his prebendal house, and on other occasions shewed much of a liberal and charitable spirit. But his chief delight was in his studies, to which he applied with an industry which greatly impaired his health, so that he began to decline about two years before his death, which took place July 30, 1715, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. He died at Cambridge, where he had resided for some time in order to complete his edition of the works of the venerable Bede; and was interred in the chapel of St. John’s college, in which a handsome marble monument was erected to him, with a Latin inscription by his learned friend Thomas Baker; the antiquary. His character seems in all respects to have been estimable. He was learned, generous, and strict in the duties of his profession. He was one of ten brothers, five of whom survived him, and whom he remembered in his will. They were all men of note William, a physician, died at Leeds in 1729; Matthew, a Blackwell-hall factor, died at Newcastle in 1721; George, a clergyman and chaplain general to the army, died in 1725; Joseph, provost of Queen’s-college, Oxford, of whom hereafter; Benjamin, remembered also in his brother’s will, but died before him, a student of the Temple; and Posthumus Smith, an eminent civilian, who died 1725.

nder his own eye at the public school at Durham, under Mr. Thomas Battersby, a very diligent master, who qualified him for the university at the age of fifteen. He was

, younger brother of the preceding Dr. John Smith, and the munificent provost of Queen’s college, Oxford, was born at Lowther, Oct. 10, 1670. His father dying when he was five years old, his mother removed with her family to Guisborough in Yorkshire, where he was educated for some time, until his brother placed him under his own eye at the public school at Durham, under Mr. Thomas Battersby, a very diligent master, who qualified him for the university at the age of fifteen. He was not, however, sent thither immediately, but put under the tuition of the rev. Francis Woodman, one of the minor canons of Durham, an excellent classical scholar. The dean also, Dr. Dennis Granville, invited him to his house, and took a lively interest in his education. Here he continued until the revolution, when Dr. Granville, who could not be reconciled to the new government, determined to follow his master, king James, to France, and much solicited young Smith to embark in the same cause, which his party did not think at that time hopeless. But Smith being very eager to commence his university education, and hearing of the arrival of his uncle, Dr. John, from Madrid, preferred going to London to meet and advise with him. This had another happy effect, for he now found a generous patron in his godfather, sir Joseph Williamson, who received him very kindly, and gave him recommendatory letters to Oxford, where he was admitted, May 10, 1689, to a scholarship in Queen’s college. Here he had Mr. William Lancaster for his tutor, and pursued his studies with such zeal and success as to become an honour to the society. Among his contemporaries were, the afterwards well known and highly respected prelates Tanner and Gibson, with both of whom now began an intimacy which subsisted all the-ir lives. In 1693, being chosen a taberder, he took his first degree in arts, and was advancing in his studies, when sir Joseph Williamson removed him from college, by appointing him his deputy keeper of the paper-office at Whitehall; and sir Joseph being soon after one of the plenipotentiaries at Ryswick, took Mr. Smith with him as his secretary.

n of “handsome Smith,” to distinguish him from his fellow- proctor, Mr. Smith of St. John’s college, who had few personal graces. They were equally attentive, however,

On queen Anne’s visiting the university in 1702, Mr. Smith was selected to address her majesty; and in 1704, he served the office of senior proctor with spirit and prudence, and constantly attended the disputations and other exercises in the public schools. At this time it appears he had the appellation of “handsome Smith,” to distinguish him from his fellow- proctor, Mr. Smith of St. John’s college, who had few personal graces. They were equally attentive, however, to their duties, and in their attendance on the public disputations, which made Tickel say on one occasion, “there was warm work at the schools, for that the two Smiths made the sparks fly” In the exercise of this office, Mr. Smith coming to a tavern, where was a party carousing, one of whom happened to be a relation of prince George of Denmark, he admonished them for their irregularity, which they considered as an intrusion, and made use of the French language, which they thought he did not understand, to speak disrespectfully of him. On this, Mr. Smith, in the same language, informed them of the nature and obligations of his office, in a manner so polite, and at the same time so spirited, that they acknowledged their fault, admired his behaviour, and having accepted an invitation to spend the following evening with him in his college, treated him ever after with the greatest respect.

he declined, and employed his interest, which was very great, in behalf of his tutor, Dr. Lancaster, who was accordingly elected, and proved a considerable benefactor

On the death of Dr. Halton in July 1704, Mr. Smith’s friends proposed him as a candidate for the provostship, but this he declined, and employed his interest, which was very great, in behalf of his tutor, Dr. Lancaster, who was accordingly elected, and proved a considerable benefactor to the college. It was he who conducted the erection of the buildings on the south side, from the benefaction of

nother, William Henry Granviile, nephew to dean Granville, and the last earl of Bath of that family, who had a very high esteem for him.

These promotions requiring a residence in London, Mr. Smith was soon after appointed chaplain to Edward Villiers, earl of Jersey, then lord chamberlain, whom he had known at Ryswick, where his lordship was one of the plenipotentiaries. Lord Jersey now introduced him at court, and he preached several times before the' queen, and would have been otherwise promoted by his lordship’s interest had he lived. But he not only lost this patron by death, but another, William Henry Granviile, nephew to dean Granville, and the last earl of Bath of that family, who had a very high esteem for him.

er, niece to the late provost, Dr. Halton, and of the noble family of Lonsdale, a very amiable lady, who had engaged his affections while resident with her uncle at

In the mean time, having accumulated his degrees in divinity, Nov. 2, 1708, he was presented by his college to the rectory of Knights-Emham, and the donative of UptonGrey, both in the county of Southampton. Soon after he married Mis.s Mary Lowther, niece to the late provost, Dr. Halton, and of the noble family of Lonsdale, a very amiable lady, who had engaged his affections while resident with her uncle at Queen’s. In 1716, Dr. Smith exchanged Upton -Grey with Dr. Grandorge, prebendary of Canterbury, for t'ie rectory of St. Dionis Back-church, London, where he performed the duties of a parish priest with the utmost assiduity, and was much admired, and consulted for his advice in matters of conscience, and where he reclaimed several persons, some of distinction, from the errors of popery, and was a great benefactor to the repairs of the church, over which he presided for forty years. He likewise annually bought a great number of religious tracts, which he liberally distributed among his parishioners.

London. Anne became the wife of the rev. William Lamplugh, some time fellow of New college, Oxford, who died in 1737, after which she married major James Hargrave,

Mrs. Smith died April 29, 1745, and was buried at Kidlington, where many of the family He. By her he had three children, Joseph, Anne, and William. The last died young, and was buried in St. Dionis church, London. Anne became the wife of the rev. William Lamplugh, some time fellow of New college, Oxford, who died in 1737, after which she married major James Hargrave, and survived her father, as did her brother, Joseph Smith, esq. LL. D. who inherited the estate at Kidlington.

lord Orford) to be the best mezzotinter that has appeared, was certainly a genius of singular merit, who united softness with strength, and finishing with freedom. He

, pronounced by Mr. Walpole (since lord Orford) to be the best mezzotinter that has appeared, was certainly a genius of singular merit, who united softness with strength, and finishing with freedom. He flourished towards the end of king William’s reign, but of his life lit' tie is known, except that he served his time with one Tillet, a painter, in Moor-fields; and that as soon as he became his own master, he applied to Becket, and learned the secret of mezzotinto. Being further instructed by Vander Vaart, he was taken to work in the house of sir Godfrey Kneller; and, as he was to be the publisher of that master’s works, no doubt he received considerable hints from him, wh,tch he amply repaid. “To posterity, perhaps,” says lord Orford, “his prints will carry an idea of something burlesque; perukes of outrageous length flowing over suits of armour, compose wonderful habits. It is equally strange that fashion could introduce the one, and establish the practice of representing the other, when it was out of fashion. Smith excelled in exhibiting both, as he found them in the portraits of Kneller.” Lord Orford and Mr. Strutt have given a list of his best works, and the latter an instance of avarice not much to his credit.

nslation of the work: for after the task was finished by the whole number appointed to the business, who were somewhat above forty, the version was revised and improved

, bishop of Gloucester, a very learned prelate, was born in the city of Hereford, and became, about the year 1568, a student in Corpus Christi college, Oxford; from which college he transferred himself to Brasen Nose, and took the degrees in arts, as a member of that house. He was afterwards made one of the chaplains, or petty canons of Christ-church, and was admitted to the degree of bachelor in divinity, whilst he belonged to that royal foundation. In process of time he was raised to the dignity of canon residentiary of the cathedral church of Hereford: he was created doctor of divinity in 1594; and, at length, in 1612, advanced to tke see of Gloucester, and consecrated on the 20th of September in that year. His knowledge of the Latin, Greek, and Oriental languages was so extraordinary, that, upon this account, he was described, by a learned bishop of the kingdom, as a, “very walking library.” He used to say of himself, that he was “covetous of nothing but books.” It was particularly for his exact and eminent skill in the Eastern tongues, that he was thought worthy, by king James the First, to be called to that great work, the last transiation by authority of our English Bible. In this undertaking he was esteemed one of the principal persons. He began with the first, and was the last man in the translation of the work: for after the task was finished by the whole number appointed to the business, who were somewhat above forty, the version was revised and improved by twelve selected from them; and, at length, was referred to the final examination of Bilson bishop of Winchester, and our Dr. Smith. When all was ended, he was commanded to write a preface, which being performed by him, it was made public, and is the same that is now extant in our Church Bible. The original is said to be preserved in the Bodleian library. It was for his good services in this translation, that Dr. Smith was appointed bishop of Gloucester, and had leave to hold in commendam with his bishopric his former livings, namely, the prebend of Hinton in the church of Hereford, the rectories of Upton-onSevern, Hartlebury in the diocese of Worcester, and the first portion of Ledbury, called Overhall. According to Willis he died October 20; but W r ood says, in the beginning of November, 1624, and was buried in his own cathedral. He was a strict Calvinist, and of course no friend to the proceedings of Dr. Laud. In 1632, a volume of sermons, transcribed from his original manuscripts, being fifteen in number, was published at London, in folio, and he was the editor of bishop Babington’s works, to which he prefixed a preface, and wrote some verses for his picture. One of bishop Smith’s own sermons was published in octavo, 1602, without his knowledge or consent, by Robert Burhill, under the title of “A learned and godly Sermon, preached at Worcester, at an assize, by the Rev. and learned Miles Smith, doctor of divinitie.

te on the spot, but were not permitted. He was also one of the witnesses against archbishop Cranmer, who had done him many acts of friendship in the preceding reign.

On the accession of queen Mary, he returned to England, was restored to his professorship, made canon of Christ-church, and chaplain to her majesty. One of his principal appearances on record was at Oxford, where, when the bishops Ridley and Latimer were brought to the stake, he preached a sermon on the text, “If I give my body to be burnt, and have not charity, it profiteth me nothing.” This discourse, which lasted only about a quarter of an hour, was replete with invectives against the two martyrs, and gross assertions, which they offered to refute on the spot, but were not permitted. He was also one of the witnesses against archbishop Cranmer, who had done him many acts of friendship in the preceding reign. For this conduct he was deprived of all his preferments when queen Elizabeth came to the throne in 1559, and was committed to the custody of archbishop Parker, by whose persuasion he recanted part of what he had written in defence of the celibacy of the clergy. He then contrived to make his escape, and went to Doway in Flanders, where he obtained the deanery of St. Peter’s church, and a professorship. He died in 1563. He wrote about sixteen tracts in favour of popery, some of which were answered by Peter Martyr. A list of them may be seen in Dodd or Wood. They are partly in Latin and partly in English, the latter printed in London, and the former at Lovaine.

L. D. in 1723, and D. D. in 1739. Very little, we regret to say, is on record, respecting Dr. Smith, who has so well deserved of the learned world. He was mathematical

, the very learned successor of Bentley as master of Trinity college, Cambridge, was born in 1689, and educated at that college, where he took his degrees of A. B. in 1711, A.M. in 1715, L L. D. in 1723, and D. D. in 1739. Very little, we regret to say, is on record, respecting Dr. Smith, who has so well deserved of the learned world. He was mathematical preceptor to William duke of Cumberland, and master of mechanics to his majesty, George II. It appears that he was maternal cousin, of the celebrated Roger Cotes, whom he succeeded in 1716, as Plumian professor at Cambridge, and afterwards succeeded Bentley as master of Trinity. He published some of the works of his cousin Cotes, particularly his “Hydrostatical and Pneumatical Lectures,1737, 8vo also a collection of Cotes’s pieces from the Philosophical Transactions, &c. 1722, 4to. His own works, which sufficiently evince his scientific knowledge, were his “Complete systern of Optics,1728, 2 vols. 4to; and his “Harmonics, or the philosophy of Musical Sounds,1760. He died in 1768, in the seventy-ninth year of his age. The late Mr. Cumberland, who was under him at Trinity college, says. Dr. Smith was a strict examiner into the proficiency of the students, and led himself the life of a student, abstemious and recluse, his family consisting only of an unmarried sister advanced in years, and a niece. He was of a thin habit, the tone of his voice shrill and nasal, and his manner of speaking such as denoted forethought and deliberation.

Previous Page

Next Page