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

Having, however, acquired notice by these productions, he had the courage to become a candidate for the academic prizes; and few writers have been more successful. Among the “Eloges” which he wrote, that on Henry IV. was most admired, and scarcely less those on Fenelon, Racine, and Catinat, which excelled in an exact estimate of character and in elegance of style. His poetical pieces, however, even those which obtained the prizes, are more distinguished by purity of style, and elegance and facility of versification, than for genuine poetical spirit. In the mean time his enthusiasm for the stage produced in 1766 “Gustavus Vasa,” in 1776 “MenzikofT,” and in 1778 “The Barmicides,” and afterwards various other dramas, none of which proved rivals to his “Warwick” in the public estimation, except his “Philoctete,” a translation from Sophocles, represented for the first time in 1781, in which he is thought by his countrymen to have preserved all the beauties of the original.

The reputation he had gained by his various prize essays and poems, and by his “Warwick,” at length opened the doors of the French academy, into which he was admitted in 1776. In 1779 he wrote his “Muses Rivales” in compliment to Voltaire, and the year following an eloge on that celebrated writer, with whom he had been acquainted since 1765. He was not less a favourite, or less connected with the encyclopedists, and was at this time accounted an adept in that audacious philosophy which infected France, and finally dissolved her morals.

About 1779 he undertook an abridgment of the abbe“Prevost’s Histoire des Voyages,” an employment so much beneath his talents, that it was generally considered rather as a bookseller’s job than an effort of literary ambition. In the same year he printed his “Tangu et Felime,” in four cantos, which was reckoned one of the best productions of the voluptuous kind. But that on which his fame is more honourably and solidly established, was his “Cour de Litterature, ancienne et moderne,” which justly entitles him to the appellation of the French Quintilian. Being appointed a professor of literature in the Lyceum, the lectures he had delivered in it during many years were collected and properly arranged by him, and soon after published under the title of “Lyceum; or, Course of Literature,” in 12 vols. 8vo. M. Petitot says of this work, that “he not only labours to give to persons of no great knowledge competent information on the topics of his work, but arrests the attention of the most learned. In his plans, the outline of which alone announces an immense stock of science and learning, he embraces all ages in which literature has flourished. Every celebrated work is analyzed and discussed. The beauties of the several writers are happily displayed, and their faults pointed out with all the ability of the most lively and sound criticism. That which distinguishes La Harpe from other moderns who have treated of literature is, that he always assumes the tone of the work he criticises, a merit which we find in none of the ancients except Cicero, Quintilian, and Longinus. If he speaks of the Iliad, we behold him borrow all the rich colours of the father of poetry to decorate his discourse. If he treats of Demosthenes and Cicero, all the great interests of Athens and Rome are re-produced under his pen. If Tacitus is his theme, we are instantly transported to the age of the emperors; we enter into all the mystery of the dark policy of Tiberius, and tremble at the sight of Nero.” The only regret on this subject is that the author did not live to finish his course of instruction; only some fragments have been left of what he purposed as a continuation.

Notwithstanding the multiplicity of his labours, La Harpe was much in company, and his visits were eagerly courted. Doubtless he owed the favour in which he was with polite circles to his early and brilliant success in letters, which at once balanced the prejudices created by the resentment often excited by the severity of his criticisms. From the first essay of his talents he was patronized by Voltaire and D'Alembert, who were at the head of literature and sciences; and it is well known what influence those two celebrated men possessed over the public opinion. VoUaire accorded him the title of his favourite pupil. Married while yet very young, to a woman of wit and beauty, madame de la Harpe and he mutually shone with unusual brilliancy in the most fashionable assemblies. They had been formed in the art of speaking and declamation under the eyes of Voltaire during a long stay they made at Ferney, where they were accustomed to perform the principal parts in the tragedies of that great poet, got up by his direction at his own theatre. This practice was also of great importance to M. de la Harpe in the art of reading, which he possessed in a very superior manner. The mode was still at the height of attending in crowds at the readings given by authors of their works previous to publication; and M. de Ja Harpe, whose various productions succeeded each other so rapidly, was invited to make his readings in so many circles, that he was soon compelled to be select in his choice of the circles he honoured with this gratification.

At the beginning of the revolution he professed himself an advocate for the new order of things; and most likely he continued in the same principles till the downfall of royalty, and till he himself fell a prey to the terrorism of Robespierre. It appears from the report of Gregoire to the national convention, that he was imprisoned from November 1793 to August 1794; and this confinement was the cause of M. La Harpe’s conversion, brought about by the advice of the bishop of St. Brieux, who happened to be his fellow-prisoner La Harpe soon after proved one of the greatest champions of the attempted counter-revolution; and from the latter part of 1794, he devoted almost his whole time to royalist publications, among which were his dissertation on the war declared by the republican tyranny against good sense and morals, his Fanaticism of the Revolutionary Language, his Confutation of Helvetius, and his journal Le Memorial, which he edited conjointly with his friend Fontanes. This Memorial, however, involved La Harpe in the directorial proscription of the 14th September 1797, and he narrowly escaped being transported to Cayenne; it was a twelvemonth before he was restored to his station in Paris. But confinement had injured his health, and he died in Feb. 1803, in the sixty-fifth year of his age. On the evening preceding his death, M. Fontanes called to see him; he was listening to the Prayers for the Sick; and as soon as they were concluded, he stretched his hand to M. Fontanes, and said, “I am grateful to divine mercy for having left me sufficient recollection to feel how consoling these prayers are to the dying.” His funeral was attended by his friends, and most of the distinguished literary characters in France. A deputation from the institute

ned the procession; and M. Fontanes, one of the deputation, pronounced a funeral oration over the crave, Of La Harpe’s other works not noticed already, are, I. “Melanges Litteraires,” 1765, 12mo. 2. Tianslation of Suetonius into French, with notes, 1770, 2 vots. 8vo. 3. Translation of the Lnsiad of Camoens, with notes and a life of the author, 1776, 2 vols, 8vo. 4. “Correspondence Litteraire addressee a Paul I.” emperor of Russia, 1801, 4 vols. 8vo. 5. “Commentaire de tragedies de Racine,” Paris, 7 vols. 8vo, printed since his death. 6. “Refutation de L'Esprit de Helvetius.” He left many manuscripts both in prose and verse.

, an ancient rhetorician of Alexandria, who flourished about the year 360, has left us an excellent “Lexicon upon the ten Orators of Greece,” for that is the title usually given to it, though Meursius will have it, that the author inscribed it only λεξεις; and he is followed in this opinion by James Gronovius. Harpocration speaks in this work, with much seeming exactness, of magistrates, pleadings at the bar, places in Attica, names of men who had the chief management of affairs in the republic, and of every thing, in short, which has been said to the glory of this people by their orators. Aldus first published this Lexicon in Greek at Venice, 1603, in folio, and many other learned men, as Meursius, Maussac, Valesius, have laboured upon it; James Gronovius published an edition of it at Leyden, 1696, in 4to.

, dean of Norwich, and one of the bitterest persecutors under the reign of queen Mary, was born in the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, Old Fishstreet, London, and educated at Winchester school, whence he was sent to New college, Oxford, of which he was admitted fellow in 1534. Having completed his degrees in arts, and taken orders, he became chaplain to bishop Bonner, whose whole spirit he imbibed. In 1554 he was collated to the church of St. Martin Ludgate, which he resigned on being presented to the living of Layndon in Essex in May 1558. He had other preferments, and was created doctor of divinity. A few months before the death of queen Mary, he was preferred to the deanery of Norwich; but was deprived of it in 1560, and committed to the Fleet prison He remained here about a year, and was then set at liberty on giving security for his peaceable behaviour. He died in London in 1578. Among his preferments was that of archdeacon of London, given to him because he would act with more cruelty to the martyrs than his predecessor. He appears, indeed, in every respect, a suitable assistant to Bonner. In learning, however, he does not appear to have been inferior to any of his contemporaries. His published works are, 1. “Concio ad clerum,” Lond. 1553, 8vo. 2. “Homilies,” 1554, 1555, ibid. Among Bonner’s Homilies, nine were written by Harpsfeld. 3. “Disputations and Epistles,” in Fox’s Acts and Monuments. 4. “Supputatio temporum a diluvio ad A.D. 1559,” Lond. 1560.

, brother to the preceding, was born in London, and educated at Winchester school, after which he studied civil law at New college, Oxford, of which he was admitted a fellow in 1536. In 1543 he took the degree of bachelor of laws, and the year following was chosen principal of White-hall, which stood on the site of Jesus college. In 1546 he was appointed regius professor of Greek. He was the first who read this lecture before it was fully established by Henry VIII. and Leland characterizes him as “Atticae linguae interpres facilis, disertus, aptus.” He appears to have resigned this office in 1548. In 1550, Pits says, he went abroad for conscience sake; but in 1553 we find him resigning his fellowship, taking the degree of LL. D. and on Jan. 15, 1554, admitted a civilian in London. In the same year he was made archdeacon of Canterbury, prebendary of St. Paul’s, and also admitted to the living of Layndon, which in 1558 heresigned to his brother. In 1558 he acted as prolocutor for the province of Canterbury in convocation, and after queen Elizabeth came to the throne, was, as well as his brother, one of the seven popish disputants; but his zeal for popery deprived him of all his preferments. He appears to have been afterwards imprisoned, some say for twenty-three years. But it is proved that he was for some years at least under the mild custody of archbishop Parker, who afforded

him every help in compiling his ecclesiastical history. He died in 1583. He wrote, 1. Dialogi sex contra summi pontificatus, monastics vitae, sanctorum sacrorum imaginum, oppugnatores et pseudo-martyres,“Antwerp, 1566, 1573, 4to This was published under the name of Alan Cope, Harpsfeld being then in prison. The initials at the end, A. H. L. N. H. E. V. E. A. C. Pits interprets thus,” Auctor hujus libri Nicolaus Harpsfeldus; edidit vero eum Alanus Copus.“2.” Historia Anglicana ecclesiastica,“Doway, 1622. The original ms. is in the Cotton library, but differs in some passages from the printed book. It is a learned and laborious performance, according to Wood, but much impartiality cannot be expected. 3.” Historia haeresis Wickleffianæ,“published with the former. 4.” Chronicon a diluvio Noe ad annum 1559,“ms. in verse, and 5.” A Treatise concerning Marriage," occasioned by king Henry VIII. 's divorce, a ms. in the library of New college. Other manuscripts are mentioned in our authorities.

, an eminent political writer, was born in January 1611, being the eldest son of sir Sapcote Harrington, and Jane the daughter of sir William Samuel of Upton, in Northamptonshire, the place of his nativity. When he had made a progress in classical learning, he was admitted in 1629 a gentleman-commoner of Trinity college, in Oxford, and placed under Mr. Chillingworth, who had lately been elected fellow of that college; from whom he might possibly acquire some portion of that spirit of reasoning and thinking for himself, which afterwards shone forth so conspicuously in his writings. About three years after, his father died; upon which he left the university, and commenced travelling, having previously furnished himself with the knowledge of several foreign languages. His first step was into Holland, then the principal school of martial discipline; and, what may be supposed to have affected him more sensibly, a country wonderfully flourishing, under the auspices of liberty, commerce, strength, and grandeur. Here it is probable that he began to make government the subject of his meditations; for, he was often heard to say, that, “before he left England, he knew no more of anarchy, monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, oligarchy, or the like, than as hard words, whose signification he found in his dictionary.” On coming into the Netherlands, he entered a volunteer, and remained in that capacity some months, in lord Craven’s regiment; during which time, being much at the Hague, he had the farther opportunity of accomplishing himself in two courts, those of the prince of Orange, and of the queen of Bohemia, daughter of our James I. who was then a fugitive in Holland. He was taken into great favour by this princess, and also by the prince elector, whom he attended to Copenhagen, when his highness paid a visit to the king of Denmark; and, after his return from travelling, was entrusted by him with the affairs of the Palatinate, so far as they were transacted at the British court.

He stayed, however, but a short time in Holland; no temptations or offers could divert or restrain him from the resolution he had formed to pursue his travels, and therefore, taking Flanders in his way, he set out on a tour through part of Germany, France, and Italy. While he was at Rome, the pope performed the ceremony of consecrating wax-lights on Candlemas-day. When his holiness had sanctified these torches, they were distributed among the people, who fought for them very eagerly. Harrington was desirous to have one of them; but, perceiving that it was not to be obtained without kissing the pope’s toe, he declined to accept it on such a condition. His companions were not so scrupulous, and when they came home spoke of his squeamishness to the king. The king told him, “he might have done it only as a piece of respect to a temporal prince;” but Harrington replied, that “since he had the honour to kiss his majesty’s hand, he thought it beneath him to kiss any other prince’s foot.” He is said to have preferred Venice to all other places in Italy, as he did its government to that of the whole world; it being, in his opinion, immutable by any external or internal causes, and to finish only with mankind. Here he cultivated an acquaintance with all the men of letters, and furnished himself with the most valuable books in the Italian tongue, such especially as were written upon politics and government.

After having thus seen Italy, France, the Low Countries, Denmark, and some parts of Germany, he returned home to England, and in the beginning of the civil war, 1642, he took a decided part with the parliament, and endeavoured to get a seat in the house, but could not. His in, clmation to letters kept him from seeking public employments, so that we hear no more of him till 1646; when attending out of curiosity the commissioners appointed by parliament to Charles I. from Newcastle nearer to London, he was by some of them named to wait on his majesty, as a person known to him before, and engaged to no party or faction. The king approved the proposal, and Harrington, entered on the station of a domestic; but would never presume to come into his presence, except in public, till he was particularly commanded by the king, and made one of the grooms of the bed-chamber in May 1647. He had the good fortune to please the king much: “His majesty loved his company,” says Wood, “and, finding him to be an ingenious man, chose rather to converse with him than, with others of his chamber. They had often;” says he, “discourses concerning government; but, when they happened to talk of a commonwealth, the king seemed not to endure it.” Harrington conceived a high notion of the king, finding him to be a different person from what he had been represented, as to parts, morals, religion, &c. and therefore, after the king was removed out of the Isle of Wight to Hurst-castle, in Hampshire, was forcibly turned out of his service, because he vindicated some of his majesty’s arguments against the parliament commissioners at Newport, and thought his concessions more satisfactory than they did. There is no ground to imagine that he saw the king any more till the day he was brought to the scaffold; whither Harrington found means to accompany him, and where, or a little before, he received a token of hifcmajesty’s affection. The king’s execution affected him extremely. He often said, ft nothing ever went nearer him; and that his grief on that account was so great as to bring a disorder upon him."

After the king’s death, he was observed to keep much in his library, and more retired than usual, which his friends attributed to discontent and melancholy. But, to convince them that this was not the cause of his retirement, he produced a copy of his “Oceana;” which “he had been writing,” he said, “not only because it was agreeable to the studies which he pursued, but because, if ever it should be the fate of England to be, like Italy of old, overrun by a barbarous people, or to have its government and records destroyed by some merciless conqueror, they might not be then left to their own invention in, framing a new government.” This “Oceana” is a kind of political romance, in imitation of Plato’s “Atlantic Story,” where, by Oceana, Harrington means England; exhibiting a plan of republican government, which he would have had erected here, in case these kingdoms had formed themselves into a genuine commonwealth. This work, however, pleased no party, and as it reflected severely upon Oliver’s usurpation, met with many difficulties in the publishing; for, it being known to some of the courtiers that it was printing, they hunted it from one press to another, till at last they found it, and carried it to Whitehall. Ah the solicitations he could make were not able to retrieve his papers, till he bethought himself of applying to lady Claypole, who was a good-natured woman, and Oliver’s favourite daughter; and who, upon his declaring that they contained nothing prejudicial to her father’s government, got them restored to him. He printed it in 1656, and dedicated it, as he promised lady Claypole, to her father; who, it is said, perused it, but declared, agreeable to his principles of policy, that “the gentleman must not think to cheat him of his power and authority; for that what he had won by the sword, he would not suffer himself to be scribbled out of.”

This work was no sooner published, than many undertook a refutation of it. This occasioned him to reply, and to explain his scheme, in several successive pieces, which may be easily seen in the collection of his works. In the mean time, he not only endeavoured to propagate his republican' notions by writing, but, for the more effectually advancing a cause, of which he was enthusiastically enamoured, he formed a society of gentlemen, agreeing with him in principles, who met nightly at Miles’s coffee-house, in New Palace-yard, Westminster, and were called the Rota. Wood has given a very particular account of this association, or gang, as he calls them. “Their discourses about government,” says he, “and of ordering a commonwealth, were the most ingenious and smart that ever were heard; for the arguments in the parliament-house were but flat to those. This gang had a balloting-box, and balloted how things should be carried by way of essay, which not being used, or known in England before on this account, the room was every evening very full. The doctrine there inculcated was very taking; and the more, because as to human foresight there was no possibility of the king’s return. The greatest part of the parliament-men hated this rotation and balloting, as being against their power: eight or ten were for it, who proposed it to the house, and made it out to the members, that, except they embraced that sort of government, they must be ruined. The model of it was, that the third part of the senate or house should rote out by ballot every year, not capable of being elected again for three years to come; so that every ninth year the senate would be wholly altered. No magistrate was to continue above three years, and all to be chosen by the ballot, than which nothing could be invented more fair and impartial, as it was then thought, though opposed by many for several reasons. This club of commonwealthsmen, which began about Michaelmas 1659, lasted till about Feb. 21 following; at which time, the secluded members being restored by general Monk, all their models vanished.”

After the restoration, he lived more privately than he had done before, but still was looked upon as a dangerous person, who maintained and propagated principles which could never be reconciled to monarchical government. He employed himself now in reducing his politics into short and easy aphorisms methodically digested, and freely communicated his papers to all who visited him. While he was putting the last hand to his system, he was, by an order from the king, seized December 28, 1661, and committed to the Tower of London for treasonable designs and practices. He was charged by lord chancellor Hyde, at a conference of the lords and commons, with being concerned in a plot, of which twenty-one persons were the chief managers “that they all met in Bow-street, Coventgarden, and in other places that they were of seven different parties or interests, as three for the commonwealth, three for the long-parliament, three for the city, three for the purchasers, three for the disbanded army, three for the independents, and three for the fifth-monarchy men; that their first consideration was how to agree on the choice of parliament-men against the ensuing session; and that a special care ought to be had about the members for the city of London, as a precedent for the rest of the kingdom to follow; whereupon they nominated the four members after chosen, and then sitting in parliament. Their next care was to frame a petition to the parliament for a preaching ministry; and liberty of conscience; then they were to divide and subdivide themselves into several councils and committees, for the better carrying on their business by themselves or their agents and accomplices all over the kingdom. In these meetings Harrington was said to be often in the chair;. that they had taken an oath of secrecy, and concerted measures for levying men and money.” The chancellor added, that though he had certain information of the times and places of their meetings, and particularly those of Harrington and Wildman, they were nevertheless so fixed in their nefarious design, that none of those they had taken would confess any thing, not so much as that they had seen and spoken to one another at those times or places.

But, notwithstanding these declarations of the chancellor, it is certain, that this plot was never proved, and was probahly imaginary. It is at least easy to account upon political principles, for Harrington’s confinement, and the severe usage he met with, when we consider not only his notions of government, which he every where enforced with the greatest zeal; but also how obnoxious he made himself to the powers then in being, by his treatment of the Stuart family. Nothing can be viler than the picture he has drawn of Mary queen of Scotland; he has also painted her son James I. in the most odious colours, suggesting at the same time, that he was not born of the queen, but was a supposititious impostor, and of course had no right to the crown he inherited. His portrait of Charles I. is an abominable figure t “never was man,” says he, “so resolute and obstinate in tyranny. He was one of the most consummate in the arts of tyranny that ever was; and it could be no other than God’s hand, that arrested him in the height of his designs and greatness, and cut off him and his family.” Such a character very ill accorded with what he had himself observed of that unhappy monarch, and with the grief he felt at his death; but Harrington seems in the latter end of his life to have grown fanatic in politics, and his keeping within no bounds might make it the more expedient to put him under confinement. From the Tower he was conveyed very privately to St. Nicholas’s island opposite to Plymouth; and thence, upon petition, to Plymouth, some relations-obliging themselves in a bond of 5000l. for his safe imprisonment. At this place he became acquainted with one Dr. Dunstan, who advised him to take a preparation of guiacum in coffee, as a certain cure for the scurvy, with whi<& he was then troubled. He drank of this liquor in great quantities, which had probably a very pernicious effect, for he soon grew delirious; upon which a rumour prevailed at Plymouth, that he had taken some drink which would make any man mad in a month; and other circumstances made his relations suspect, that he had foul play shewn him, lest he should write any more “Oceanas.” It was near a month before he was able to bear the journey to London, whither, as nothing appeared against him, he had leave from the king to go. Here he was put under the care of physicians, who could afford little help to the weakness of his body, and none at all to the disorders of his mind. He would discourse of other things rationally enough; but, when his own distemper was touched upon, he would fancy and utter strange things about the operation of his animal spirits, which transpired from him, he said, in the shape of birds, flies, bees, or the like. He talked so much of good and evil spirits, that he even terrified those about him; and to those who objected to him that these chimeras were the fruits of a disordered imagination, he would reply, that 11 he was like Democritus, who, for his admirable discoveries in anatomy, was reckoned distracted by his fellowcitizens." In this crazy condition he married the daughter of sir Marmaduke Dprrel, in Buckinghamshire, a lady to whom he was formerly suitor, and with whom he spent the remainder of his life. Towards his latter end, he was subject to the gout, and enjoyed little ease; but, after drooping and languishing for some time, he was at last seized with a palsy, and died at Westminster, September 11, 1677, and lies buried there in St. Margaret’s church, on the south side of the altar, next the grave of sir Walter Raleigh.

His writings were first collected, methodized, reviewed, and published, by Toland, 1700, in one volume, folio; but there was another edition, by Dr. Birch, published in 1737, which Contains several articles omitted in Toland’s, and there was a third edition in 1747. He made some attempts in the poetical way, and in 1658 published an English translation of two eclogues of Virgil, and two books of the “Æneis,” under the title of “An Essay upon two of Virgil’s Eclogues, and two of his Æneids, towards the translation of the whole;” and, in 1659, was printed his translation of the four following books “of the Æneid” but his poetry gained him no reputation.

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

, an ingenious English poet, was the son of John Harrington, esq. who was imprisoned in the Tower, under queen Mary, for holding a correspondence with the lady Elizabeth, with whom he continued in great favour to the time of his death. He also was somewhat of a poet and a translator. Sir John was born at Kelston, near Bath, in Somersetshire, in 1561, and had queen Elizabeth for his godmother. He was instructed in classical learning at Eton-school, and from thence removed to Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. In his thirtieth year, 159J, he published a translation of Ariosto’s “Orlando Furioso,” by which he gained a considerable reputation, and for which he is now principally known. Warton says, that although executed without spirit or accuracy, unanimated and incorrect, it enriched our poetryby a communication of new stores of fiction and imagination, both of the romantic and comic species, of gothic machinery and familiar manners. Mr. Harrington was knighted in the field by the earl of Essex, which gave much offence to the queen, who was sparing of such honours, and chose to confer them herself. In the reign of James, he was created knight of the Bath; and, being a courtier, presented a ms. to prince Henry, levelled chiefly against the married bishops, which was intended only for the private use of his royal highness; but, being published afterwards, created great clamour, and made several of the clergy say, that his conduct was of a piece with his doctrines; since he, together with Robert earl of Leicester, supported sir Walter Raleigh in his suit to queen Elizabeth for the manor of Banwell, belonging to the bishopric of Bath and Wells; on a presumption that the right rev. incumbent bad incurred a pr&munire, by marrying a second wife. Wood’s account of it is this "That sir John Harrington, being minded to obtain the favour of prince Henry, wrote a discourse for his private use, entitled * A brief View of the State of the Church of England, as it stood in queen Elizabeth’s and king James’s reign, to the year 1608.' This book is no more than a character and history of the bishops of those times, and was written to the said prince Henry, as an additional supply to the catalogue of bishops of Dr. Francis Godwin, upon occasion of that proverb,

Henry the eighth pulled down monks and their cells,

Henry the ninth shall pull down bishops and their bells.

“In the said book the author Harrington doth, by imitating his godmother, queen Elizabeth, shew himself a great enemy to married bishops, especially to such as had been married twice; and many things therein are said of them, that were by no means fit to be published, being written only for private use. But so it was, that the book coming into the hands of one John Chetwind, grandson by a daughter to the author, a person deeply principled in presbyterian tenets, did, when the press was open, print it at London in 1653; and no sooner was it published, and came into the hands of many, but it was exceeding clamoured at by the loyal and orthodox clergy, condemning him that published it.”

Sir John died in 1612. His lady, Mary, daughter of sir George Rogers, survived him till 1634. In his epigrams are several to his mother-in-law lady Rogers. These Epigrams“were the most popular of his works, although they cannot now be allowed much poetical merit. They were first published in 1618, and afterwards in 1625, under the title of” The most elegant and witty epigrams of sir John Harrington, knt. digested into four bookes,“8vo. The” NugEe Antique," a miscellaneous collection of his works, and antiquary collections and letters in prose and verse, was published some years ago, by the rev. IJertry Harrington of Bath, in whose family the papers were; of these a’second edition was published in 1792, 3 vols. 12mo, and a third with most valuable additions and improvements, in 1804, 2 vols. 8vo, by Thomas Park, F. S. A. with illustrative notes and memoirs of the author.

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Oxford, or, as Anthony Wood expresses it, “turn-; bled out of his mother’s womb in the lap of the Oxonian Muses,” in 1560. Having been instructed in grammarlearning in that city, he became a commoner of St. Maryhall, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1579. He had then so distinguished himself, by his uncommon skill in mathematics, as to be recommended soon after to sir Walter Raleigh as a proper preceptor to him in that science. Accordingly, that noble knight became his first patron, took him into his family, and allowed him a handsome pension. In 1585 he was sent over by sir Walter with his first colony to Virginia; where, being settled, he was employed in discovering and surveying that country, in observing what commodities it produced, together with the manners and customs of its inhabitants. He published an account of it under this title, “A brief and true Report of the Newfoundland of Virginia;” which was reprinted in the third voyage of Hakluyt’s “Voyages.” Upon his return to England, he was introduced by his patron to the acquaintance of Henry earl of Northumberland who, “finding him,” says Wood, “to be a gentleman of an affable and peaceable nature, and well read in the obscure pan of learning,” allowed him a yearly pension of 120l. About the same time, Robert Hues, well known by his ' Treatise upon the Globes,“and Walter Warner, who is said to have communicated to the famous Harvey the first hint concerning the circulation of the blood, being both of them mathematicians, received pensions from him of less value, ^o that in 1606, when the earl was committed to the Tower for life, Harriot, Hues, and Warner, were his constant companions, and were usually called the earl of Northumberland’s Magi. They had a table at the earl’s charge, who did constantly converse with them, to divert the melancholy of his confinement; as did also sir Walter Raleigh, who was then in the Tower. Harriot lived for some time at Sion-college, and died in London, July 2, 1621, of a cancer in his lip. He was universally esteemed on account of his learning. When he was but a young man, he was styled by Mr. Hakluyt” Juvenis in disciplinis mathematicis excellens;“and by Camden,” Mathematicus insignis.“A ms. of his, entitled” Ephemeris Chryrometrica,“is preserved in Sion-college library and his” Artis Analytic* Praxis“was printed after his death, in a thin folio, and dedicated to Henry earl of Northumberland. Des Cartes is said to have been obliged to this book for a great many improvements in algebra, which he published to the world as his own, a fact that has been amply proved, in the astronomical ephemeris for 17vS8, by Dr. Zach, astronomer to the duke of Saxe Gotha, from manuscripts which he found in 1784 at the seat of the earl of Egremont at Petworth, a descendant of the above-mentioned earl of Northumberland. These papers also show that Mr. Harriot was an astronomer as well as an algebraist, As to his religion, Wood says, that,” notwithstanding his great skill in mathematics, he had strange thoughts of the Scripture, always undervalued the old story of the Creation of the World, and could never believe that trite position, * Ex nihilo nihil fit.‘ He made a Philosophical Theology, wherein he cast off the Old Testament, so that consequently the New would have uo foundation. He was a deist; and his doctrine he did impart to the earl, and to sir Walter Raleigh, when he was compiling the ’ History of the World,' and would controvert the matter with eminent divines of those times: who, therefore, having no good opinion of him, did look on the manner of his death, as a judgment upon him for those matters, and for nullify, ing the Scripture.“Wood borrowed all this from Aubrey, without mentioning his authority; and it has been answered, that Harriot assures us himself, that when he was with the first colony settled in Virginia, in every town where he came,” he explained to them the contents of the Bible, &c. And though I told them,“says he,” the book materially and of itself was not of such virtue as I thought they did conceive, but only the doctrine therein contained; yet would many be glad to touch it, to embrace it, to kiss it, to hold it to their breasts and heads, and stroke over all their bodies with it, to shew their hungry desires of that knowledge which was spoken of." To which we may add, that, if Harriot was reputed a deist, it is by no means probable that Dr. Corbet, an orthodox divine* and successively bishop of Oxford and Norwich, sending a poem, dated December 9, 1618, to sir Thomas Aylesbury, when the comet appeared, should speak of

Nor is it likely that his noble executors, sir Thomas Aylesbury and Robert Sidney, viscount Lisle, would have suffered an inscription to be engraved upon his monument in St. Christopher’s church, which might have been contradicted by all the town, if it had been false, and which, upon the supposition of his being an infidel, would have been ridiculous:

, an English civilian, chancellor of the dioceses of Durham, Hereford, and Llandaff, and commissary of Essex, Herts, and Surrey, was the son of Dr. John Harris, bishop of Llandaff, who died in 1738. The time of his son’s birth we have not been able to ascertain. He was, however, a member of Oriel college, Oxford, where he took his degree of bachelor of laws in May 1745, and that of doctor in the same faculty in May 1750, in which last year he was admitted into the college of advocates. Here he proved himself an eminent pleader, although not a masterly orator, and enriched himself by very extensive practice. He died at his house in Doctors’ Commons, April 19, 1796, leaving his very extensive property mostly to charitable uses. Among the very munificent items in his will, were 40,000l. to St. George’s hospital; 20,000l. to Hetherington’s charity for the blind; 15,000l. to the Westminster lying-in hospital, and 5000l. to the Hereford infirmary. He also was in his life-time a benefactor to the funds of the society of advocates. In 1752 he published a pamphlet, entitled “Observations upon the English Language, in a letter to a friend,” 8vo, relating to the common mistakes in spelling, pronunciation, and accent. This was anonymous; but he afterwards published with his name, “D. Justiniani Institutionum, Libri quatuor; and a translation of them into English, with notes,” 1756, 4to, a work which did him great credit, and was thought peculiarly adapted for the improvement of young law students. A second edition appeared in 176 1.

, esq. an English gentleman of very uncommon parts and learning, was the eldest son of James Harris, esq. of the Close of Salisbury, by his second wife the lady Elizabeth Ashley, who was third daughter of Anthony earl of Shaftesbury, and sister to the celebrated author of the Characteristics, as well as to the Hon. Maurice Ashley Cooper, the elegant translator of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia. He was born July 20, 1709. The early part of his education was received at Salisbury, under the rev. Mr. Hele, master of the grammar-school, in the Close, who was long known and respected in the West of England as an instructor of youth. From Mr. Hele’s school, at the age of sixteen, he was removed to Oxford, where he passed the usual number of years as a gentleman commoner of Wadham college. His father, as soon as he had finished his academical studies, entered him at Lincoln’s-Inn, not intending him for the bar, but, as was then a common practice, meaning to make the study of the law a part of his education.

When he had attained his twenty-fourth year, his father died. This event, by rendering him independent in fortune, and freeing him from all controul, enabled him to exchange the study of the law for other pursuits that accorded better with his inclination. The strong and decided bent of his mind had always been towards the Greek and Latin classics. These he preferred to every other sort of reading; and to his favourite authors he now applied himself with avidity, retiring from London to the house in which his family had very long resided in the Clo*e of Salisbury, for the sake of enjoying without interruption his own mode of living.

His application during fourteen or fifteen years to the best writers of antiquity continued to be almost unremitting, and his industry was such as is not often exceeded. He rose always very early, frequently at four or five o'clock in the morning, especially during the winter, and by these means he was enabled to mix occasionally in the society of Salisbury and its neighbourhood, without too great a sacrifice of his main object, the acquisition of ancient literature. But it was not until many years after his retirement from London, that he began to read Aristotle and his commen-? tators, or to inquire, so deeply as he afterwards did, into the Greek philosophy. He had imbibed a prejudice, very common at that time even among scholars, that Aristotle was an obscure and unprofitable author, whose philosophy had been deservedly superseded by that of Mr. Locke, a notion which his own writings have since contributed to correct, with no small evidence and authority. In the midst, however, of his literary labours he was not inattentive to the public good, but acted regularly and assiduously as a magistrate for the county of Wilts; giving, in that capacity, occasional proofs of a manly spirit and firmness, without which the mere formal discharge of magisterial duty is often useless and inefficient.

The first fruit which appeared to the world of so many years spent in the pursuit of knowledge, was a volume published in 1744, containing “Three Treatises. The first concerning Art. The second concerning Music, Painting, and Poetry. The third concerning Happiness.” These treatises, in addition to their merit as original compositions, are illustrated by a variety of learned notes and observations, elucidating many difficult passages of ancient writers, the study and examination of whom it was his earnest wish to promote and to facilitate. Lord Monboddo, speaking >fr the dialogue upon Art, praises it, as containing “the best specimen of the dividing, or diaeretic manner, as the ancients called it, that is to be found in any modern book with which he is acquainted.”

In July 1745 he was married to miss Elizabeth Clarke, daughter and eventually heiress of John Clarke, esq of Sandford, near Bridgewater, in the county of Somerset, Five children were the issue of this marriage, of whom two daughters, and a son, the present lord Malmsbury, sur-> vived their father. This change in his state of life by no means withdrew his attention from those studies in which he had been used to take so great delight, and which he had cultivated with such advantage and reputation; for in 1751 he published another work, entitled “Hermes, or a philosophical inquiry concerning Universal Grammar,” 8vo. Of this work, Dr. Lowth, the late bishop of London, says, “Those who would enter deeply into the subject (of universal grammar) will find it fully and accurately handled, with the greatest acuteness of investigation, perspicuity of explication, and elegance of method, in a treatise entitled Hermes, by James Harris, esq. the most beautiful example of analysis that has been exhibited since the days of Aristotle.” What first led Mr. Harris to a deep and accurate consideration of the principles of universal grammar, was a book which he held in high estimation, and has frequently quoted in his Hermes, the “Minerva” of Sanciius. To that writer he confessed himself indebted for abundance of, valuable information, of which it appears that he knew well how to profit, and to push his researches on the subject of grammar to a much greater length, by the help of his various and extensive erudition. Mr. Harris’s system in this work still maintains its ground in the estimation of most men of taste, notwithstanding the coarse attack made on it by Home Tooke.

From the period of his marriage until 176-1, he continued to live entirely at Salisbury, except in the summer, when he sometimes retired to his house at Darnford, near that city. It was there that he found himself most free from the interruption of business, and of company, and at leisure to compose the chief part of those works which were the result of his study at other seasons. His time was divided between the care of his family, in. which he placed his chief happiness, his literary pursuits, and the society of his friends and neighbours, with whom he kept up a constant and cheerful intercourse. The superior taste and skill which he possessed in music, and his extreme fondness for hearing it, led him to attend to its cultivation in. his native place with uncommon pains and success; inSomuch, that under his auspices, not only the annual musical festival in Salisbury flourished beyond most institutions of the kind, but even the-ordinary subscription-concerts were carried on, by his assistance and directions, with a spirit and effect seldom equalled out of the metropolis. Many of the beautiful selections made from the best Italian and German composers for these festivals and concerts, and adapted by him, sometimes to words selected from Scripture, or from Milton’s “Paradise Lost,” sometimes to compositions of his own, have survived the occasions on which they were first produced, and are still in great estimation. Two volumes of these selections have been lately published by Mr. Corfe, organist of Salisbury cathedral; the rest remain in manuscript in possession of lord Malmsbury.

In 1761, by the interest of his near relation, the late Edward Hooper, esq. of Hum court in Hampshire, he was chosen one of the representatives in parliament for the borough of Christ-church, which seat he retained to the day of his death. The year following he accepted the office of one of the lords of the admiralty, from whence he was promoted in 1763 to be a lord of the treasury. He remained in that situation until the ministry with which he was connected went out of office in 1765 and after that time he did not hold any employment until 1774, when he became secretary and comptroller to the queen. This appointment was always valued by him exceedingly; not only by reason of the handsome and flattering manner in which it was conferred upon him by her majesty, but also on account of the frequent occasions it afforded him of experiencing her majesty’s gracious kindness and condescension, of which he had a very high sense, and which were continued to him, without interruption, to the end of his life; for in her service he died.

Although assiduous in the discharge of his parliamentary duty, and occasionally taking a share in debates, he never contracted any violent spirit of party. He abhorred faction of every kind nor did he ever relinquish, for public business, those still more-interesting pursuits which had made the delight and occupation of his earlier years. If they were somewhat intermitted during the sitting of parliament, he renewed them with increased relish and satisfaction on his return into the country. In 1775 he published his Philosophical Arrangements,“a part only of a larger work that he had meditated, but did not finish, upon the peripatetic logic. So far as relates to the” Arrangement" of ideas it is complete; but it has other objects also in view. It combats with great force and ability, the atheistical doctrines of chance and materialism, doctrines which we have seen revived in France, under the specious garb of modern philosophy, and which issuing thence, overspread a great part of Europe; destroying the happiness of mankind, by subverting, in every part of their progress, the foundations of morality and religion.

The last of Mr. Harris’s productions was printed in 1780, by the name of “Philological Inquiries,” but not published sooner than 1781. It is a more popular work than any of his former ones; and contains rather a summary of the conclusions to which the philosophy of the ancients had conducted them in their critical inquiries, than a regular and perfect system. The principles on which those conclusions depend are therefore omitted, as being of a more abstruse nature than was agreeable to his design, which was to teach by illustration and example, not by strict demonstration. “Indeed this publication,” says his biographer, “is not only a retrospective view of those studies which exercised his mind in the full vigour of his life, but likewise a monument of his affection towards many of his intimate friends. I cannot, therefore, but consider it as a pleasing proof of a mind retaining, at an advanced age, a considerable degree of its former energy and activity, together with what is still more rarely to be found, an undiminished portion of its candour and benevolence.”

Before this last volume was entirely concluded, his health began to be very much impaired. He never enjoyed a robust constitution; but for some time, towards the end of his life, the infirmities under which he laboured had gradually increased. His family at length became apprehensive of a decline, symptoms of which were very apparent, and by none more clearly perceived than by himself. This was evident from a variety of little circumstances, but by no means from any impatience or fretfulness, nor yet from any dejection of spirits, such as are frequently incident to extreme weakness of body, especially when it proves to be the forerunner of approaching dissolution. On the contrary, the same equable and placid temper which had distinguished him throughout his whole life, the same tender and affectionate attention to his surrounding family, which he had unceasingly manifested while in health, continued, without the smallest change or abatement, to the very last; displaying a mind thoroughly at peace with itself, and able without disturbance or dismay to contemplate the awful prospect of futurity. After his strength had been quite exhausted by illness, he expired calmly on the 22d of December, 1780, in the $eventy-second year of his age. His remains were deposited in the north aile of the cathedral church of Salisbury, near those of his ancestors, and a monument wassoon after erected to his memory.

In 1801 his son, lord Malmsbury, published a magnificent edition of the works before mentioned in two volumes quarto, with two fine portraits and other plates. Prefixed is an affectionate biographical sketch, from which the present article has been taken. This is concluded by the noble author with the following general view of Mr. Harris’s character, which, from every information, we have reason to think is just and impartial.

"The distinction by which he was most generally known, and by which he is likely to survive to posterity, is that of a Man of Learning. His profound knowledge of Greek, which he applied more successfully, perhaps, than any modern writer has done, to the study and explanation of ancient philosophy, arose from an early and intimate acquaintance with the excellent poets and historians in that language. They, and the best writers in the Augustan age, were his constant and never-failing recreation. By his familiarity with them, he was enabled to enliven and to illustrate his deeper and more abstruse speculations, as every page almost (of his works) will abundantly testify. But his attainments were not confined to ancient philosophy and classical learning. He possessed likewise a general knowledge of modern history, with a very distinguishing taste in the line arts, in one of which, as before observed, he was an eminent, proficient. His singular industry empowered him to make these various acquisitions, without neglecting any of the duties which he owed to his family, his friends, or his country. I am in possession of such proofs, besides those already given to the public, of my father’s laborious study and reflection, as I apprehend, are very rarely to be met with. Not only was he accustomed, through a long series of years, to make copious excts from the different books which he read, and to write critical remarks and conjectures on many of the passages extracted, but he was also in the habit of regularly cammuting to writing such reBections as arose out of his study, which evince a mind carefully disciplined, and anxiously bent on the attainment of self-knowledge and self-government. And yet, though habituated to deep thinking and laborious reading, he was generally cheerful even to playfulness. There was no pedantry in his manners or conversation, nor was he ever seen either to display his learning with ostentation, or to treat with slight or superciliousness those less informed than himself. He rather sought to make them appear partakers of what he knew, than to mortify tnern by a parade of his own superiority. Nor had he any of that miserable fastidiousness about him which too often disgraces men of learning, and prevents their being amused or interested, at least their choosing to appear so, by common performances and common events.

"It was with him a maxim, that the most difficult, and infinitely the preferable, sort of criticism, both in literature and the arts, was that which consists in finding out beauties rather than defects; and although he certainly wanted not judgment to distinguish and to prefer superior excellence of any kind, he was too reasonable to expect id should very often occur, and too wise to allow himself to be disgusted at common weakness or imperfection. He thought, indeed, that the very attempt to please, however it might fall short of its aim, deserved some return of thanks, some degree of approbation; and that to endeavour at being pleased by such efforts, was due to justice, to good-nature, and to good sense.

"Far at the same time from that presumptuous conceit which is solicitous about mending others, and that moroseiiess which feeds its own pride by dealing in general censure, he cultivated to the utmost that great moral wisdom, by which we are made humane, gentle, and forgiving; thankful for the blessings of life, acquiescent in the afflictions we endure, and submissive to all the dispensations of Providence. He detested the gloom of superstition, and the persecuting spirit by which it is so often accompanied; but he abhorred still more the baneful and destructive system of modern philosophy; and from his early solicitude to inspire me with a hatred of it, it would almost seem that he foresaw its alarming approach and fatal progress.

“My father’s affection to every part of his family was exemplary and uniform. As a husband, a parent, a master, he was ever kind and indulgent; and it deserves to be mentioned to his honour, that he thought it no interruption of his graver occupations, himself to instruct his daughters, by exercising them daily both in reading and composition, and writing essays for their improvement, during many of their younger years. No man was a better judge of what belonged to female education, and the elegant accomplishments of the sex, or more disposed to set a high value upon them. But he had infinitely more at heart, that his children should be early habituated to the practice of religion and morality, and deeply impressed with their true principles. To promote this desirable end, he was assiduous both by instruction and example; being himself a constant attendant upon public worship, and enforcing that great duty upon every part of his family. The deep sense of moral and religious obligation which was habitual to him, and those benevolent feelings which were so great a happiness to his family and friends, had the same powerful influence over his public as his private life. He had an ardent zeal for the prosperity of his country, whose real interests he well understood; and in his parliamentary conduct he proved himself a warm friend to the genuine principles of religious and civil liberty, as well as a firm supporter of every branch of our admirable constitution.”

, the first compiler of a “Dictionary of Arts and Sciences” in this country, was born about 1667, and received his education at St. John’s college, in the university of Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1687, and that of master in 1691. Having taken orders in the church, he obtained considerable preferments. He was first instituted into the rectory of Barming, which he resigned for St. Mildred, Bread-street, London; he had also the perpetual curacy of Stroud, near Rochester, in Kent, and he was prebendary of Rochester cathedral. He was a fellow, secretary, and vice-president to the royal society. In 1698 he preached the course of Boyle’s lectures, which was published (see Collection of Boyle’s Lectures, Feb. 1739, vol. I. p. 356—425); and in the next year he took the degree of D. D. Dr. Harris also published several single sermons, viz. a sermon on the Fast, 1701, with another on the Fast, 1703, 4to; a sermon entitled < The Modest Christian’s Duty as to indifferent things in the worship of. God,“1705, 4to; another on” The lawfulness and use of Public Fasting,“1706, 4to;” The evil and mischief of a Fiery Spirit,“a sermon published in 1710, 4to another on the Rebellion in 1715, 8vo; and a sermon on the Accession, 1715, 4-to. He also published a” Collection of Voyages and Travels, with a number of engravings,“afterwards improved and republished by Dr. Campbell a” Treatise on the Theory of the Earth,“in 1697 a” Treatise on Algebra,“in 1702 a” Translation of Pardie’s Geometry into English,“2d edit. 1702. At this time it appears that Dr. Harris” lived and taught mathematics at his house in Amen-Corner.“He published also,” Astronomical Dialogues,“the third edition of which appeared in 1795; but the work for which he was most eminently distinguished, and which entitles him to honourable notice, was his” Lexicon Technicum,“or” An Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences,“in 2 vols. fol. published in 1708; from which originated all the other dictionaries of science and cyclopaedias that have since appeared. He was followed, at a considerable interval of time, in this department of literature, by Mr. Ephrairn Chambers, whose Cyclopedia, with all the improvements it has received, has long maintained distinguished reputation. We are concerned to be obliged to add, that though Dr. Harris was a man of unquestionable abilities and attainments, and of great literary application, he was chargeable with culpable imprudence in his conduct, and notwithstanding the preferments he enjoyed, he was generally in distress. He died Sept. 7, 1719, leaving unfinished the 66 History of Kent,” which was published in folio soon after his death, and which, though it had engaged his attention, more or less, for eight years, is extremely inaccurate. Mr. Gough says (British Topography, vol. I. p. 445), “Dr t Harris died an absolute pauper at Norton-court, and was buried in Norton church, at the expence of John Godfrey, esq. who had been his very good friend and benefactor.”

, president of Trinity-college, Oxford, was born at Broad Campden, in Gloucestershire, in 1578, and sent for education to the free-school of Chipping-Campden, where owing to irregular conduct of the masters and their frequent changes, he appears to have profited little. From thence he was removed to the city of Worcester, and lastly to Magdalen-hall, Oxford, which was preferred from his relationship to Mr. Robert Lyster, then principal, a man somewhat popishly inclined. Here, however, he had a tutor of a different stamp, a reputed puritan, under whom he studied with great assiduity. Although his parents designed him for the law, as soon as he took his bachelor’s degree, he determined to make trial of his talents for the pulpit, and went to Chipping-Campden, where he preached a sermon which gave satisfaction. He afterwards officiated for a clergyman in Oxfordshire, and in both cases without being ordained. At length he was examined by bishop Barlow, who found him a very accomplished Greek, and Latin scholar, and he had the living of Hanweli given him, near Ban bury, in Oxfordshire. During his residence here he was often invited to London, and preached at St. Paul’s cross, also before the parliament, and on other public occasions. He had also considerable offers of preferment in* London, but preserved his attachment to Hanweli, where he was extremely useful in confirming the people’s minds, then much unsettled, in the reformed religion, as well as in attachment to the church of England, although he afterwards concurred with those who overthrew it so far as to accept preferment under them. On the commencement of the civil war, tjie tranquillity of his part of the country was much disturbed by the march of armies, and himself obliged at last to repair to London, after his premises were destroyed by the soldiery. On his arrival in London, he became a member of the assembly, but appears to have taken no active part in their proceedings.or some time, Hanwell having now been taken from him, he officiated at the parish-church of St. Botolph, Bishopsgate-street, until the rilling powers ordered him to Oxford, as one of the reforming visitors. Here during the visitation of the earl of Pembroke, the chancellor of the university, he was admitted; D. D. and president of Trinity-college in April 1,648, in the room of Dr. Hannibal Potter, who was ejected by the visitors. This situation he retained until his death, Uec. 11, 1658,. in his eightieth year. He was buried in^ Trinity-college chapel, with an inscription from the ele-“gant pen of Dr. Bathurst, one of his successors, and contaming praises of his conduct as a president more than sufficient to answer the charges brought against him by others. The only words Dr. Bathurst is said to have struck out are these in Italics,” per decennium hujus collegii Præses æternum cdebrandus“nor was this alteration made in the epitaph itself, but in Wood’s ms. of the” Hist, et Antiquitates Univ. Oxon.“The only fault of which Dr. Harris can be accused, and which was very common with other heads of houses put in by the parliamentary visitors, was taking exorbitant fines for renewals of college leases, by which they almost sold out the whole interest of >the college in such estates. On the other hand he appears to have made some liberal grants of money to the posterity of the founder, sir Thomas Pope.” One is surprized,“says Warton,” at those donations, under the government of Dr. Robert Harris, Cromwell’s presbytenan president. But Harris was a man of candour, and I believe a majority of the old loyal fellows still remained.“Durham, the author of Harris’s life, gives him the character of” a man of admirable prudence, profound judgment, eminent gifts and graces, and furnished with all qualifications which might render him a complete man, a wise governor, a profitable preacher, and a good Christian." He appears to have very little relished some of the innovations of his time, particularly that easy and indiscriminate admission into the pulpits, which filled them with illiterate enthusiasts of every description. His works, consisting of sermons and pious treatises, were collected in 1 vol. fol. published in 1654.

, a learned English physician, the son of a tradesman at Gloucester, was born there about 1647, and educated at Winchester school. In 1666 he was admitted perpetual fellow of New-college; Oxford, without passing through the year’s probation, in consequence of his being of the founder’s kin. Having, however, embraced the Roman catholic religion, he resigned his fellowship in 1673, and went to France, where, either at Doway or Paris, he took his doctor’s degree. In 1676 he returned to London, and began practice chiefly among the Roman catholics; but when in consequence of Oates’s plot, in 1678, all o.f that persuasion were ordered to leave the metropolis, he renounced the errors of popery, and wrote in 1679 a pamphlet entitled. “A Farewell to Popery,” Lond. 4to, On the revolution, he was appointed physician to king William III. at the recommendation of the celebrated Tillotson. Of his attendance on the king, he himself informs us of this circumstance, that being in his majesty’s chamber, he took the liberty, in the presence of the lords in waiting, to find fault with the custom of binding every morning the king’s feet, which were very much swelled. He said that by this means the humours falling into the feet would be driven back into the viscera. Another anecdote he gives of himself, which perhaps would have come with a better grace from any one else, is, that Dr. Goodall, president of the college of physicians, told him one day that he envied him (Dr. Harris) more than he envied any body else, because he was always easy in his mind, and free from anxious cares. He appears to have had very considerable practice, and was a fellow of the college, and censor in 1689. The time of his death we have not been able to discover, but he was alive in 1725, when he published his “Dissertationes Medicæ et Chirurgicæ, habitæ in amphitheatre collegii regalis,” in the title-­page to which he styles himself “Præses natus, et professor Chirurgiæ.” His other publications were, 1. “Pharmacologia anti-empirica,” Lond. 1683, 8vo. 2. “De morbis acutis infantum,” 1689, 8vo, often reprinted, and translated into English by Cockburn, in 1693, and by IMartyn in 1742, and into French by Devaux. In his “Dissertationes medicæ” are some valuable papers on various medical topics, and he is a strong advocate for inoculation for the small-pox.

, a biographical compiler, was the son of a tradesman at Salisbury, who probably was a dissenter. He was born in that city in 1720, and received his education at an academy kept at Taunton by messrs. Grove and Amory, men of learning and note, as dissenting teachers. An early love of books, and a thirst for knowledge, rendered application easy and profitable; and he was thought qualified to preach before he was nineteen years of age. He first officiated to a congregation at St. Loo, in Cornwall, and was afterwards invited to another in the city of Wells, where he was ordained in 1741. Within a few years, his marriage to a Miss Bovet of Honiton, occasioned his removal to that town; and his ministerial labours for the rest of his life, were confined to a very small congregation at Luppit, in the neighbourhood. To what denomination of dissenters he belonged we are not told. The strain of his discourses is said to have been plain and practical, but none of them have been published, and he appears to have soon courted fame in a different pursuit.

His political, if not his religious creed, led him to study the history of the seventeenth century, which in his time had received few of the lights that have since been thrown upon it; and what he read, he read with the eager eye of a nonconformist, desirous to rescue his brethren from obloquy, and afford them a larger share in the merit of perpetuating the liberties of this kingdom. With this view, he resolved to become the biographer of the English branch of the Stuart family, and of Cromwell, and to assign to each their agency in the production of those great events in the seventeenth century, the rebellion, the restoration, and the revolution.

His preliminary attempt was on a singular subject, the “Life of Hugh Peters,” which, as he published it without his name, has escaped the notice of the collectors of his works, but is prefixed to the late edition of his “Lives” as the first in the order of time, and essentially connected with one of the subjects of his future inquiries. In this life he professed to follow “the manner of Bayle,” and it might have been thought that its aukward appearance in print would have shown Dr. Harris that his choice was injudicious; but, for whatever reason, he followed the same in his subsequent works. The Life of Peters was published in 1751, and in 1753 appeared his Life of James I.; in 1753, that of Charles I.; in 1761, that of Cromwell and in 1765, that of Charles II. this last in 2 vols. 8vo. It was his design to have completed this series with a Life of James II., but he was interrupted by an illness which terminated fatally in February 1770, in the fiftieth year of his age. His degree of D. D. was procured for him from the university or Glasgow, in 1765, by his friend Mr. Thomas Holiis, who had assisted him in his various undertakings, by many curious and interesting communications, and the use of scarce books and pamphlets. Dr. Birch and other gentlemen in London seem also to have contributed liberally to his stock of historical materials. It is indeed as a collection of such, that these Lives have been principally valued, for Dr. Harris cannot be ranked among elegant writers, nor can it be gravely asserted that he is always impartial. His reasonings are strongly tinged with his early prejudices, but his facts are in general narrated with fidelity, and the evidence on both sides is given' without mutilation.

, a most accurate mechanic, the celebrated inventor of the famous time-keeper for ascertaining the longitude at sea, and also of the compound or gridiron-pendulum; was born at Foulby, near Pontefract in Yorkshire, in 1693. His father was a carpenter, in which profession the son assisted; occasionally also, according to the miscellaneous practice of country artists, surveying land, and repairing clocks and watches; and young Harrison always was, from his early childhood, greatly attached to any machinery moving by wheels. In 1700 he removed with his father to Barrow, in Lincolnshire; where, though his opportunities of acquiring knowledge were very few, he eagerly improved every incident from which he might collect information frequently employing all or great part of his nights in writing or drawing and he always acknowledged his obligations to a clergyman who came every Sunday to officiate in the neighbourhood, who lent him a ms copy of professor Sanderson’s lectures; which he carefully and neatly transcribed, with all the diagrams. His native genius exerted itself superior to these solitary disadvantages; for, in 1726, he had constructed two clocks, mostly of wood, in which he applied the escapement and compound pendulum of his own invention: these surpassed every thing then made, scarcely erring a second in a month. In 1728 he came up to London with the drawings of a machine for determining the longitude at sea, in expectation of being enabled to execute one by the board of longitude. Upon application to Dr. Halley, the astronomer royal, he referred him to Mr. George Graham, who advised him to make his machine before applying to that board. He accordingly returned home to perform his task; and in 1735 came to London, again with his first machine, with which he was sent to Lisbon the next year to make trial of it. In this short voyage he corrected the dead reckoning about a degree and a half; a success which procured him both public and private encouragement. About 17 '69 he completed his second machine, of a construction much more simple than the former, and which answered much better: this, though not sent to sea, recommended Mr. Harrison yet stronger to the patronage of his friends and the public. His third machine, which he produced in 1749, was still less complicated than the second, and more accurate, as erring only 3 or 4 seconds in a week. This he conceived to be the ne plus ultra of his attempts; but, by endeavouring to improve pocket-watches, he found the principles he applied to surpass his expectations so much, as to encourage him to make his fourth time-keeper, which is in the form of a pocket-watch, about six inches diameter. With this time-keeper his son made two voyages, the one to Jamaica, and the other to Barbadoes in which experiments it corrected the longitude within the nearest limits required by the act of the 12th of queen Anne; and the inventor had, therefore, at different times, more than the proposed reward, receiving from the board of longitude at different times almost 24,000l. besides a few hundreds from the East India company, &c. These four machines were given up to the board of longitude. The three former were not of any use, as all the advantages gained by making them, were comprehended in the last: being worthy however of preservation, as mechanical curiosities, they are deposited in the royal observatory at Greenwich. The fourth machine, emphatically distinguished by the name of The Time-keeper, was copied by the ingenious Mr. Kendal; and that duplicate, during a three years circumnavigation of the globe in the southern hemisphere by captain Cook, answered as well as the original.

The latter part of Mr. Harrison’s life was employed in making a fifth improved time-keeper, o-n the same principles with the preceding one; which, after a ten weeks trial, in 1772, at the king’s private observatory at Richmond, erred only 4| seconds. Within a few years of his death, his constitution visibly declined; and he had frequent fits of the gout, a disorder that never attacked him before his 77th year. His constitution at last yielding to the infirmities of old age, he died at his house in Red Lion square, March 24, 1776, at eighty-three years of age.

Like many other mere mechanics, Mr. Harrison found a difficulty in delivering his sentiments in writing (at least in the latter periods of his life, when his faculties were much impaired) in which he adhered to a peculiar and uncouth phraseology. This was but too evident in his “Description concerning such mechanism as will afford a nice or true Mensuration of Time,” &c. 1775, 8vo. This small work includes also an account of his new musical scale; being a mechanical division of the octave, according to the proportion which the radius and diameter of the circle have respectively to the circumference. He had in his youth been the leader of a band of church-singers had a very delicate ear for music and his experiments on sound, with a curious monochord of his own improvement, it has been said, were not less accurate than those he was engaged in for the mensuration of time.

, an English historian, was a native of London, and educated at Westminster school, under the celebrated Alexander Nowell. He afterwards studied at both universities, but in what colleges seems doubtful. Wood suspects Christ Church for Oxford, and Baker mentions one of this name a bachelor of arts of St. John’s, Cambridge; but the date, 1571, is obviously too late for our Harrison. He says himself that both universities “are so clear to him that he cannot readily tell to which of them he owes most good will.” After leaving Cambridge he became domestic chaplain to sir William Brooke, knt. lord-warden of the Cinque Ports, and baron of Cobham in Kent, who is supposed to have given him the living of Radwinter, in Essex, in Feb. 1558, which he held until his death in the end of 1592 or beginning of 1593. He wrote a “Historical Description of the Island of Britain,” published in Holiingshed’s Chronicles; and “A Chronology” mentioned by Hollingshed. He translated also “The Description of Scotland,” from Hector Boethius,^ which is prefixed to Hollingshed’s “Hist, of Scotland.” Wood says he obtained a canonry of Windsor, and was buried there, leaving several children by his wife Manan, daughter of Will. Isebrand, ofAnderne, in Picardy. His turn appears to have been more for compiling ancient history than topography; for in his dedication to lord Cobham he says, “Indeed I must needs confess, that un1 now of late, except it were from the parish where I dwell unto your honour in Kent, or out of London, where I was born, unto Oxford and Cambridge, where I have been brought up, I have never travelled forty miles forth right and at one journey in all my life.”

, a young gentleman high in esteem, and (as Swift expresses it) “a little pretty fellow, With a great deal of wit, good sense, and good nature,” was educated at Winchester, and was afterwards of New college, Oxford, of which he became a fellow. He appears to have been employed in private tuition, which was not a very profitable employment. He had no other income than 40l. a year as tutor to one of the duke of Queensbury’s sons. In this employment he fortunately attracted the favour of Dr. Swift, whose generous solicitations with Mr. St. John obtained for him the reputable employment of secretary to lord Raby, ambassador at the Hague, and afterwards earl of Stafford. A letter of his, whilst at Utrecht, dated December 16, 1712, printed inthedean’s works, informs us that his office was attended with much vexation and little advantage. Even in Jan. 13, 1713, when he brought over the barrier treaty, and, as Swift says, was the queen’s minister, entrusted in affairs of the greatest importance, he had not a shilling in his pocket to pay his hackney coach. He died soon after this, Feb. 14,1712-13. See the “Journal to Stella” of that and the following day, where Dr. Swift laments his loss with the most unaffected sincerity. Mr. Tickell has mentioned him with respect, in his “Prospect of Peace;” and Dr. Young, in the beautiful close of an “Epistle to lord Lansdown,” most pathetically bewails his loss. Dr. Birch, who has given a curious note on Mr. Harrison’s “Letter to Swift,” has confounded him with Thomas Harrison, M. A. of Queen’s college. In the “Select Collection,” by Nichols, are some pleasing specimens of his poetry; which, with “Woodstock-Park” in Dodsley’s “Collection,” and an “Ode to the duke of Marlborough, 1707,” in Duncombe’s “Horace,” are all the poetical writings that are known of this excellent young man, who figured both as an humourist and a politician in the fifth volume of the “Tatler,” of which (under the patronage of Bolingbroke, Henley, and Swift) he was professedly the editor. There was another William Harrison, author of “The Pilgrim, or the happy Convert, a pastoral tragedy,” 1709.

, a learned English prelate, successively bishop of Chichester and Norwich, and archbishop of York, the son of William Harsnet, a baker at Colchester, was born in that town, and baptised June 20, 1561. He was probably sent to the free-school of Colchester, but was admitted Sept. 8, 1576, of King’s college, Cambridge, whence he removed to Pembroke-hall, of which he became a scholar, and was elected fellow Nov. 27, 1583. He took his degree of B.A. in 1580, and that of M. A. in 15'84. Three years after, in March 1586-7, he was elected master of the free-school in Colchester, but, preferring the prosecution of his studies at Cambridge, he resigned this office in November 1588, and returned to Pembrdke-hall, where he studied divinity, in which indeed he had made great progress before, and had been admitted into holy orders, as appears by a sermon preached by him at St. Paul’s cross, Oct. 27, 1584, on the subject of predestination. In 1592 he served the office of proctor, and five years after became chaplain to Dr. Bancroft, bishop of London, by whose favour he obtained the rectory of St. Margaret Fish-street, London, which he resigned in 1604; and the vicarage of Chigwell in Essex, which he resigned in 1605, but continued to reside at Chigwell, where he had purchased a house and estate, now the property and residence of his descendant Mrs. Fisher. In 1598 he was collated to the prebend of Mapesbury in St. Paul’s, and Jan. 1602 to the archdeaconry of Essex, all in bishop Bancroft’s disposal. In April 1604, sir Thomas Lucas of Colchester presented him to the rectory of Shenfield in that county. The year following, upon the resignation of bishop Andrews, he was chosen master of Pembroke-hall, which he held until 1616, when he resigned in consequence of the society having exhibited to the king an accusation branching into fifty-seven articles. Many of these, Le Neve says, were scandalous, and the proof evident; but, as Le Neve was iiot able to procure a sight of tHem, we are not enabled to judge. They do not, however, appear to have injured his interest at court. He had been consecrated bishop of Chichester in 1609, and was now, in 1619, three years after he quitted Pembroke-hall, translated to Norwich, on the death of Dr. Overall. In 1624 we find him again accused in the house of commons of “putting down preaching setting up images praying to the east;” and other articles which appear to have involved him with the puritans of his diocese, but which he answered to the satisfaction of the parliament as well as of the court. On the death of Dr. Montague, he was translated to the archbishopric of York in 1628, and in Nov. 1629, was sworn of the privy council. These dignities, however, he did not enjoy long, dying atMorton-on-the-marsh, Gloucestershire, while on a journey, May 25, 1631. He was buried at Chigwell church, agreeably to his own desire, where his effigies is still to be seen fixed on the north side of the chancel, against the wall. He left several charitable legacies and a year or two before his death founded and endowed a free school at Chigwell, and some alms-houses the history of his school may be seen in Lysons’s “Environs.” He bequeathed his library to the corporation of Colchester for the use of the clergy. Besides the sermon above noticed, the only other occasion on which Dr. Harsnet appeared as a writer, was in writing some pamphlets to expose the impostures of one John Darrell, who pretended to have the power of casting out devils. Bishop Harsnet’s character, from what we have related, appears to be equivocal it is said he was equally an enemy to puritanism and to popery and, according to Fuller, was the first who used the expression conformable puritans, i. e. those who conformed out of policy, and yet dissented in their judgments.

, an English poet and divine, was the son of a father of both his names, who was fellow of Pembroke college, Oxford, prebendary of Wales, canon, of Bristol, and vicar of St. Mary Magdalen, Taunton, Somersetshire. Refusing to take the oaths after that revolution which placed a new family on the throne, he relinquished *all his preferments, in 1691, and retired to Kentbury in Buckinghamshire, where he died Feb. 10, 1736, aged eighty-five. His son informs us, that when judge Jeffries came to Taunton -assizes in 1685, to execute his commission upon the unfortunate persons concerned in Monmouth’s rebellion, Mr. Harte, then minister of St. Mary Magdalen’s, waited on him in private, and remonstrated much against iiis severities. The judge listened to him calmly, and with some attention, and though he had never seen him before, advanced him in a few months to a prebendal stall in the cathedral church of Bristol. Old Mr. Harte was so much respected for his piety and learning, that the prelates Kidder, Hooper, and Wynne, who successively filled the see of Bath and Wells, contrived that he should receive the profits of his prebend of Wells as long as he lived; and Mr. Simon Harcourt, afterwards lord chancellor, offered him a bishopric in queen Anne’s time, which he declined with grateful acknowledgments. According to his son’s account, he was a most laborious student, employing ten or twelve hours a day, without any interruption, but that of casual sickness, for fifty years successively. His principal business was in referring every difficult part of Scripture to those particular passages in the fathers and eminent modern divines who had explained them expressly or occasionally.

The time of our poet’s birth has not been settled. A writer in the Gentleman’s Magazine fixes it about 1707, but an earlier date will correspond better with circumstances. If he was born in 1707, his lines to lady Hertford must have been written at eleven, which is highly improbable, yet there is some difficulty in adjusting the date of this poem. In Lintot’s edition, it is subscribed Sept. 30, 1725; but Francis, the late marquis of Hertford, was born in 1719, a year after his father’s marriage, and when Mr. Harte, according to the above account, could have been only eleven years of age. We have his own authority that all the poems published in this volume were written when he was under nineteen, consequently the date of 1725 must be an error, especially if Collins’s account of the Hertford family be correct But here, too, there is something that requires explanation, as the title of Beauchamp was not conferred on the family for many years after the publication of these poems.

He received his education at Marlborough school, under the rev. Mr. Hildrop, to whom he dedicates the few divine poems in the volume published in 1727. At what time he went to Oxford does not appear, but he took his master’s degree June 30, 1720, according to the last edition of the graduates of that university, a clear proof that he must have been born long before 1707. With Pope he acquired an early intimacy, and shared rather more of his friendship than that poet was wont to bestow on his brethren. Pope encouraged his poetical enthusiasm, and inserted many lines in his poems; and Harte repaid the instructions of so distinguished a preceptor, by compliments introduced, not without elegance and propriety, in his Essays on Painting and on Satire, and elsewhere.

In 1727, he published the volume of poems, already mentioned, dedicated to the gallant and eccentric earl of Peterborough, who was, as the, author acknowledges, the first “who took notice of him.” This volume was ushered in by a very numerous list of subscribers, among whom is the name of Alexander Pope, for four copies. An edition of these poems may be sometimes picked up, dated 1739, and printed for John Cecil, instead of Bernard Lintot, the original publisher. As the same list of subscribers is repeated, it is probable that these were the remaining copies bought at Lintot’s sale (who died in 1737), and published with a new title-page.

In 1730 he published his “Essay on Satire,” 8vo, and in 1735 the “Essay on Reason,” folio, to which Pope contributed very considerably, although no part of his share can be exactly ascertained, except the first two lines. He afterwards published two sermons, the one entitled “The Union and Harmony of Reason, Morality, and Revealed Religion,” preached at St. Mary’s, Oxford, February 27, 1736-7, which excited so much admiration, or curiosity, as to pass through five editions. The other was a “Fastsermon,” preached at the same place, Jan. 9, 1739-40. He was afterwards vice-principal of St. Mary-hall, and in so much reputation as a tutor, that lord Lyttelton, who was one of his earliest friends, recommended him to the earl of Chesterfield, as a private and travelling preceptor to his natural son. With this young man, to whom his lordship addressed those letters which have so much injured his reputation, Mr. Harte travelled from 1746 to 1750. Lord Chesterfield is said to have procured for him a canonry of Windsor, in 1751, “with much difficulty,” arising from his college connections, St. Mary-hall, of which Dr. King was principal, being at that time noted for jacobitism.

In 1759, he published his “History of Gustavus Adolphus,” 2 vols. 4to, a work on which he had bestowed much labour, and in which he has accumulated very valuable materials. An edition was soon published in German by George Henry Martini, with a preface, notes, and corrections from the pen of the translator John Gottlieb Bohme, Saxon historiographer, and professor of history in the university of Leipsic. Its success, however, at home was far inferior to his hopes, although sufficient to encourage him to publish an 8vo edition in 1763, corrected and improved. At this time he resided at Bath, dejected and dispirited between real and imaginary distempers. In November 1766, a paralytic stroke deprived him of the use of his right leg, affected his speech, and in some degree his bead. He employed, however, his intervals of health, in preparing “The Amaranth” for the press, which was published in 1767. In the following year, he had entirely lost the use of his left side, and languished in this melancholy condition till March 1774, when he breathed his last, having just outlived the publication of the celebrated letters addressed to his pupil, Mr. Stanhope, but which, it is hoped, he did not see. At the time of his death he was vicar of St. Austel and St. Blazy in Cornwall.

Dr. Maty expresses his wonder, that lord Chesterfield should not have chosen a tutor who understood a little better the external decorations which his lordship prized so highly. “Harte,” says this biographer, “had none of the amiable connecting qualifications, which the earl wished in his son.” “It was impossible he should succeed in finishing the polish of his education in the manner lord Chesterfield wished; and it is a matter of astonishment that the earl should not have perceived how much the tutor’s example must have defeated his precepts. The three principal articles he recommended to his son, were his appearance, his elocution, and his style. Mr. Harte, long accustomed to a college life, was too aukward both in his person and address to be able to familiarize the graces with his young pupil. An unhappy impediment in his speech, joined to his total want of ear, rendered him equally unfit to perceive as to correct any defects of pronunciation, a careful attention to which was so strongly recommended in all lord Chesterfield’s letters, as absolutely necessary for an orator.”

All this, however, lord Chesterfield knew, and yet appointed Mr. Harte, appears to have been perfectly satis-, fied with his conduct, and treated him with great kindness and condescending familiarity as long as he lived. Dr. Maty seems to have forgot that Harte left his pupil before his lordship had-fully developed that abominable plan of hypocrisy and profligacy, which, notwithstanding his biographer’s softenings, has irrecoverably disgraced his memory; and as it is acknowledged that Mr. Stanhope did not practise the system which his father so elegantly and artfully recommended, let us hope that he was preserved by the better foundation Mr. Harte had laid.

His “Life of Gustavus Adolphus,” it must be allowed, was a very unfortunate publication. He had learning, industry, and the spirit of research; and he had acquired a considerable degree of political and military knowledge. He had, besides, access to the most valuable materials, and his work may be considered as in many respects original. But either through affectation, or by means of oaie desultory course of reading in every language but his own, he was led to adopt a style peculiarly harsh and pedantic, and often unintelligible, by the irregular construction of his sentences, by new words of his own coinage, or by old words used in a new sense. The wonder is, that in all this he fancied himself “writing in a style less laboured and ornamental than is usually exhibited by the fluent writers of the present age.” George Hawkins, his bookseller, we are told, sometimes objected to his uncouth words or phrases, while the work was in the press, but Harte refused to change them, and used to add with a complacent sneer, “George, that’s what we call writing” It is such writing, however, as we do not find in liis Sermons printed in 1737 and 1740, far less in his “Essays on Husbandry,” which ought to have been mentioned as printed in 1764, and which, with very few exceptions, are distinguished for perspicuity of style, and far more elegance than that subject is generally supposed to admit.

The “Life of Gustavus” probably employed many of his years, at least the subject must have occupied his mind for a very considerable time before he began to collect his materials. The undertaking was suggested to him by lord Peterborow, with whom he could have had no communication except previously to the year 1734, when his lordship’s growing infirmities deprived him of the pleasures of society, and in the following year, of life, When travelling with Mr. Stanhope, our author procured access to various sources of information, and dwelt so long on his subject with a fond regard, that when he found how coolly his work was received by the world, and how harshly by the critics, he became uneasy, fretful, and, according to lord Chesterfield, seriously ill with disappointment. Dr. Johnson was of opinion, that the defects of his history proceeded not from imbecility, but from foppery; and it is certain that the critics* while they pointed out the defects in his style, paid due encomiums on the merit of the history in other respects.

According to Boswell, Dr. Johnson said “he was excessively vain. He put copies of his book in manuscript into the hands of lord Chesterfield and lord Granville, that they might revise it. Now how absurd was it to suppose that two such noblemen would revise so big a manuscript. Poor man! he left London the day of the publication of his book, that he might be out of the way of the great praise he was to receive; and he was ashamed to return, when he, found how ill his book had succeeded. Itwas unlucky in coming out the same day with Robertson’s History of Scotland.” Not the same day, for Robertson’s history was published a month sooner, but Hume’s “House of Tudor” came out the same week; and after perusing these, poor Harte’s style could not certainly be endured. It was not, however, so very absurd to submit his manuscript to lord Chesterfield or lord Granville, if they permitted him; and the former certainly did peruse it, although he might think it too generally contaminated for a few friendly hints or corrections.

With Pope, Harte appears to have been on very intimate terms, and we find his encomiastic lines among the testimonies of authors prefixed to the “Dunciad.” He had even attained so much character both as a poet and a philosopher, that the “Essay on Man” was at first attributed to him. It may not be impertinent to introduce here an anecdote, related by Dr. Warton, who was very intimate with Harte. " Pope told Mr. Harte, that in order to disguise his being the author of the second epistle of the Essay on Man, he made, in the first edition, the following bad rhyme:

And Harte remembered to have often heard it urged, in inquiries about the author, whilst he was unknown, that it was impossible it could be Pope’s, on account of this very passage." Warton, it may be added, always spoke with respect of Harte’s abilities.

From every evidence, he appears to have been a man of extensive learning, and acquainted not only with the best authors of his time, but with the classics, the fathers of the church, and other eminent writers of antiquity, which Dr. Maty, rather inconsiderately, calls “Gothic erudition.” It is true that he often discovers that kind of reading which is seldom read, but the illustrations he has appended to the poems in “The Amaranth,” from the fathers, &c. are generally apt and judicious. Towards the close of life, he cheered his painful and solitary hours by devotional reading, He died unmarried, and at one time seems to have considered the married state as unfavourable to the exertions of genius. In his “Essay on Painting,” he very ungallantly recommends that the artist should be

Notwithstanding the unfortunate reception of his history, he projected another undertaking of the same kind. This we learn from the concluding passage of his Gustavus, in which he says his intention was to carry the history of Germany down to the peace of Munster, but that he was deterred by the magnitude of the undertaking. He adds, however, in a note, that he had completed the history of the thirty years’ war, from the breaking out of the troubles in Bohemia in 1618, to the death of Gustavus in 1632. These papers, with whatever else he left, are supposed to have fallen into the hands of his servant Edward Dore, who afterwards kept an inn at Bath. Dore and his family are no more, and the manuscripts are probably irrecoverably lost. We have his own authority also, that he intended to have written a criticism on the poetry of Dryden, which he seems to have appreciated with just taste. The advertisement to “Religious Melancholy,” from which this information is taken, is inserted almost entire, by Dr. Warton in his edition of Pope, as the result of a conference between Pope and Harte.

Harte’s poems, in general are entitled to considerable praise, although it may probably be thought that he was a better critic than a poet, and exhibited more taste than genius. His attachment to Pope led him to an imitation of that writer’s manner, particularly in the “Essay on Rear son,” and that on “Satire.” His “Essay on Reason” has been somewhere called a fine philosophical poem. It might with more propriety be called a fine Christian poem, as it has more of religion than philosophy, and might be aptly entitled An Essay on Revelation. The “Essay on Satire” has some elegant passages, but is desultory, and appears to have been written as a compliment to the “Dunciad” of Pope, whose opinions he followed as far as they respected the merits of the dunces whom Pope libelled.

For his “Essay on Painting,” he pleads that it was written at intervals, upon such remarks as casually occurred itv his reading, and is therefore deficient in connection. He adds that he had finished the whole before he saw Du Fresnoy, which may readily be believed. He discovers, however, a very correct notion of an art which was not at that time much studied in this country, and has laid down many precepts which, if insufficient to form a good painter, will at least prevent the student from falling into gross improprieties. So much knowledge of the art, and acquaintance with the works of the most eminent painters, argues a, taste surprizing at his early age. He had some turn for drawing, and made several sketches when abroad, which were afterwards engraved as head pieces for the poems in the “Amaranth.” In this essay, he delights in images which, although in general pleasing and just, are perhaps too frequently, and as it were periodically, introduced. With all his admiration of Pope, he was not less attached to Dryden as a model; and if he has less harmony than Pope, has at the same time less monotony.

The “Amaranth” was written, as he informs us, te for his private consolation under a lingering and dangerous state of health.' 1 There is something so amiable, and we may add, so heroic in this, that it is impossible not to make every allowance for defects; but this collection of poems does not upon the whole stand so much in need of indulgence as may be expected. Some of them were sketched when he was abroad, and now were revised and prepared, and others may perhaps be the effusions of a man in sickness and pain. Yet there are more animated passages of genuine poetry scattered over this volume, than we find in his former works. The whole of the “Amaranth” is of the serious cast, such as became the situation of the author. We have, indeed, heard of authors who have sported with unusual glee in their moments of debility and decay, and seemed resolved to meet death with an air of good humour and levity. Such a state of mind, where it does really occur, and is not affectation, is rather to be wondered at than envied. It is not the feeling of a rational and an immortal creature.

, an ingenious physician and phU losopher, the son of a clergyman at Armley, in Yorkshire, was born Aug. 30, 1705. After being for some time at a private school, he was admitted of Jesus-college Cambridge, in 1720, and was afterwards elected a fellow of that society. He took his degree of A. B. in 1725, and that of A. M. in 1729. He was originally intended for the church, but having some scruples as to subscription to the thirty-nine articles, gave up that design, although throughout the whole of his life he femained in communion with the church -of England. He now directed his studies to the medical profession, in which he became eminent for skill, integrity, and charitable compassion. His mind was formed to benevolence and universal philanthropy; and he exercised the healing art with anxious and equal fidelity to the poor and to the rich. He commenced practice at Newark, in Nottinghamshire, whence he removed to Bury St. Edmund’s, in Suffolk; and after this he settled for some time in London. His last residence was at Bath.

Dr. Hartley was industrious and indefatigable in the pursuit of all collateral branches of knowledge^ and lived in personal intimacy with the learned men of his age. The bishops Law, Butler, and Warburton, and Dr. Jortin, were his intimate friends, and he was much attached to bishop Hoadiy. Among his other friends or correspondents may be mentioned Dr. Hales, Mr. Hawkins Browne, Dr. Young, Dr. Byrom, and Mr. Hooke the Roman historian. Pope was also admired by him, not only as a man of genius, but as a moral poet; yet he soon saw the hand of Bolingbroke in the “Essay on Man.” Dr. Hartley’s genius was penetrating and active his industry indefatigable his philosophical observations and attentions unremitting. From his earliest youth he was devoted to the sciences, particularly to logic and mathematics. He studied mathematics, together with natural and experimental philosophy, under the celebrated professor Saunderson. He was an enthusiastic admirer and disciple of sir Isaac Newton in every branch of literature and philosophy, natural and experimental, mathematical, historical, and religious. His first principles of logic and metaphysics he derived from Locke. He took the first rudiments of his own work, the “Observations on Man,' 7 from Newton and Locke; the doctrine of vibrations, as instrumental to sensation and motion, from the former, and the principle of association originally from the latter, further explained in a dissertation by the rev. Mr. Gay. He began this work when about twenty-five years of age, and published it in 1749, when about forty-three years of age, under the title of” Observations on Man, his frame, his duty, and his expectations,“2 vols. 8vo. His biographer informs us that” he did not expect that it would meet with any general or immediate reception in the philosophical world, or even that it would be much read or understood; neither did it happen otherwise than as he had expected. But at the same time he did entertain an expectation that at some distant period it would become the adopted system of future philosophers.“In this, however, he appears to have been mistaken. We know of no” future“philosophers of any name, who have adopted his system. Dr. Priestley, indeed, published in 1775” Hartley’s Theory, &c. with Essays on the subject of it," but all he has done in this is to convince us of his own belief in materialism, and his earnest desire to prove Hartley a materialist, who dreaded nothing so much, although it must be confessed that hie doctrines have an apparent tendency to that conclusion. Since that time, Hartley’s work was nearly forgotten, until 1791, when an edition was published by his Son, in a handsome 4to volume, with notes and additions, from the German of the rev. Herman Andrew Pistorius, rector of Poseritz, in the island of Rugen; and a sketch of the life and character of Dr. Hartley. The doctrine of vibrations, upon which he attempts to explain the origin and propagation of sensation, although supported by much ingenious reasoning, isnot only built upon a gratuitous assumption, but as Haller has shewn, it attributes properties to the medullary substance of the brain and nerves, which are totally incompatible with their nature.

Dr. Hartley was the author of some medical tracts relative to the operation of Mrs. Stephens’ s medicine for the stone, a disease with which he was himself afflicted; he was, indeed, principally instrumental in procuring for Mrs. Stephens the five thousand pounds granted by parliament for discovering the composition of her medicine, which was published in the Gazette in June, 1739. In 1738 he published “Observations made on ten persons who have taken the Medicament of Mrs. Stephens;” and in 1739 his “View of the present Evidence for and against Mrs. Stephens’s Medicine as a Solvent for the Stone, containing 155 Cases, with some Experiments and Observations,” and a “Supplement to the View of the present Evidence,” &c. His own case is the 123d in the above-mentioned “View;” but, notwithstanding any temporary relief which he might receive from the medicine, he is said to have died of the stone, after having taken above two hundred pounds weight of soap, which is the principal ingredient in its composition. In the Gentleman’s Magazine for February, 1746, Dr. Hartley published with his name, “Directions for preparing and administering Mrs. Stephens’s Medicine in a solid Form.” He is also said to have written in defence of inoculation for the small-pox, against the objections of Dr. Warren, of Bury St. Edmund’s; and some papers of his are to be met with in the Philosophical Transactions. He died at Bath, August 28, 1757, aged fifty-two. He was twice married, and left issue by both marriages.

The philosophical character of Dr. Hartley, says his Son, is delineated in his works. The features of his private and personal character were of the same complexion. It may with peculiar propriety be said of him, that the mind was the man. His thoughts were not immersed in worldly pursuits or contentions, and therefore his life was not eventful or turbulent, but placid, and undisturbed by passion or violent ambition. From his earliest youth his mental ambition was pre-occupied by pursuits of science. His hours of amusement were likewise bestowed upon objects of taste and sentiment. Music, poetry, and history, were his favourite recreations. His imagination was fertile and correct, his language and expression fluent and forcible. His natu/al temper was gay, cheerful, and sociable. He was addicted to no vice in any part of his life, neither to pride, nor to sensuality, nor intemperance, nor ostentation, nor envy, nor to any sordid self-interest; but his heart was replete with every contrary virtue. The virtuous principles which are instilled in his works, were the invariable and decided principles of his life and doctrine. His person was of the middle size, and well proportioned. His complexion fair, his features regular and handsome. His countenance open, ingenuous, and animated. He was peculiarly neat in his person and attire. He was an early riser, and punctual in the employments of the day methodical in the order and disposition gf his library, papers. and writings, as the companions of his thoughts, but without any pedantry, either in these habits, or in any other part of his character. His behaviour was polite, easy, and graceful; but that which made his address peculiarly engaging, was the benevolence of heart from which that politeness flowed. He never conversed with a fellow-creature without feeling a wish to do him good. He considered the moral end of our creation to consist in the performance of the duties of life attached to each particular station, to which all other considerations ought to be inferior and subordinate; and consequently that the rule of life consists in training and adapting our faculties, through the means of moral habits and associations, to that end. In this he was the faithful disciple of his own theory; and by the observance of it he avoided the tumult of worldly vanities and their disquietudes, and preserved his mind in sincerity and vigour, to perform the duties of life with fidelity, and without distraction. His whole character was eminently and uniformly marked by sincerity of heart, simplicity of manners, and manly innocence of mind.

, an ingenious writer on agriculture in the seventeenth century, was the son of a Polish merchant, who, when the Jesuits prevailed in that country, was obliged to remove himself into Prussia, where he settled and built the first house of credit at Elbing, and his grandfather, the deputy of the English company at Dantzick, brought the English company to Elbing; whence that town came by trade to the splendour and result which it afterwards attained. His family, indeed, was of a very ancient extraction in the German empire, there having been ten brothers of the name cf Hartlib. Some of them were privy-counsellors to the emperor, some to other inferior princes; some syndics of Ausperg and Norimberg.

He was the issue of a third wife, his father having married two Polonian ladies of noble extraction. This third wife seems to have been an English woman, for she had two sisters very honourably married here; one, first to Mr. Clark, son of a lord mayor, and afterwards to a “veryrich knight, sir Richard Smith, one of the king’s privycouncil, she bringing him a portion of 10,000l.; after his death, she married a third time sir Edward Savage, and was made one of the ladies of honour to the king’s mother. Her daughter married sir Anthony Irby, at Boston,” a knight of 4 or 5000l. sterling a year.“The other sister married Mr. Peak, a younger brother. Warton says, Hartlib came over into England about 1640. In 1641 he published” A relation of that which hath been lately attempted, to procure ecclesiastical peace among Protestants," Lond. 1641.

In 1645 he published “The Discourse of Flanders Husbandry,” 4to, about 24 pages; not then knowing who was the author; the “Legacy” to his sons, which relates also to the cultivation of their estates, consists of three 4to pages, and was written on the author’s death -bed, 1645. The author was sir Richard Weston, whom Harte apprehends to be the sir Richard Weston “who was ambassador from England to Frederick V. elector Palatine, and king of Bohemia, in 1619, and present at the famous battle of Prague, concerning which a curious relation of his, by way of letter, is still preserved in ms.” It is remarked in the Philosophical Transactions, that England has profited in agriculture to the amount of many millions, by following the directions laid down in this little treatise, which has always been looked upon as a capital performance in husbandry.

About 1750, a piece was ignorantly published under sir R. Weston’s name, entitled “A treatise concerning the Husbandry and Natural History of England,” 8vo, which is a poor jejune abridgment of “Hartlib’s Legacy.” It seems that Hartlib afterwards, in order to enlarge and better explain this famous discourse, published another edition, and annexed Dr. Beati’s annotations to it.

In 1652 Hartlib published “His Legacy, or an enlargement of the discourse of Husbandry used in Brabant and Flanders,” Lond. 4to. This work was only drawn up at Hartlib’s request; and passing through his correction and revision, was published by him. It consists of one general answer to the following query, namely, “what are the actual defects and omissions, as also the possible improvements, in English husbandry” The real author was Robert Child. To it are annexed various correspondences from persons eminent for skill in agriculture at this time; as C. D. B. W. R. H. T. Underbill, Henry Cruttenden, W. Potter, &c. as also the “Mercurius Laetificans” and twenty large experiments by Gabriel Plattes together with annotations on the legacy by Dr. Arnold Beati, and replies to the animadversions by the author of the Legacy. In the preface Hartlib laments greatly that no public director of husbandry was established in England by authority; and that we had not adopted the Flemish custom of letting farms upon improvement. Cromwell, as Harte says, in consequence of this admirable performance, allowed Hartlib a pension of IQOl. a year; and it was the better to fulfil the intentions of his benefactor, that he procured Dr. Beati’s excellent annotations before-mentioned, with the other valuable pieces from his numerous correspondents.

Hartlib says himself, “As long as I have lived in England, by wonderful providences, I have spent yearly out of my own betwixt 3 and 409l. a year sterling; and when I was brought to public allowances, I have had from the parliaments and councils of state a pension of 300l. sterling a year, which as freely I have spent for their service, and the good of many.” He says he “erected a little academy for the education of the gentry of this nation, to advance piety, learning, morality, and other exercises of industry, not usual then in common schools.” This probably occasioned Milton’s “Tractate on Education,” about 1646, addressed to him; and “Two letters to him on the same subject, by sir William Petty,” Lond. 1647, 1648, 4to. Walter Blythe, the author of “The Improver Improved,” 1653, 4to, says that Hartlib lodged and maintained Speed in his house, whilst he composed his book of improvements in husbandry.

“About the time,” observes Harte, “when Hartlib flourished, seems to be an rera when English husbandry rose to high perfection; for the preceding wars had made the country gentry poor, and in consequence thereof industrious; though sometimes the reverse of this happens in many kingdoms. But these wise men found the cultivation of their own lands to be the very best posts they could be fixed in. Yet, in a few years, when the restoration took place, all this industry and knowledge were turned into dissipation and heedlessness; and then husbandry passed almost entirely into the hands of farmers.” Hartlib wrote a little treatise “on Setting Land,” which is much esteemed; and some attribute to him “Adam’s Art Revived,” though that work seems to belong more properly to Sir H. Platt. He also wrote “A true and ready way to learn the Latin Tongue,” 1654, 4to. “A Vindication of Mr. John Durie,” 1650, 4to, three sheets; and published “Twisse’s doubting Conscience resolved,” 1652, 8vo. He was also author of “The reformed Common-wealth of Bees, with the reformed Virginian Silkworm,” Lond. 1655, 4to; and of " Considerations concerning England’s Reformation in Church and State, 14 1647, 4to.

He was consulted in a book called “Chemical, Medicinal, and Chirurgical Addresses to Samuel Hartlib.” Lond. 1655, 8vo, and again in a pamphlet “On Motion by Engines,” 1651. There were also “Letters to Hartlib from Flanders,” 1650, 4to. Dury, Hartlib’s friend, whom Whitlock calls a “German by birth, a good scholar, and a great traveller,” was appointed in 1649 deputylibrarian, under Whitlock, of what had been the royal library. Dury was Milton’s friend and correspondent. On the restoration, all Hartlib’s public services were forgotten. In Dec. 1662, his pension was 700l. in arrears; and in a letter to lord Herbert, he complains “he had nothing to keep him alive, with two relations more, a daughter and a nephew, who were attending his sickly condition.” About the same time he presented a petition to the house of commons, by the name of Samuel Hartlib, sen. setting forth his services, and praying relief; in which, among other things, he says, that for thirty years and upwards he had exerted himself in procuring “rare collections of Mss. in all the parts of learning, which he had freely imported, transcribed, and printed, and sent to such as were most capable of making use of them; also the best experiments in husbandry and manufactures, which by printing he hath published for the benefit of this age and posterity.” The event of these applications, and the time of the death of this ingenious man, is unknown. Sprat, in his history of the royal society, says nothing of Hartlib, who seems to have been an active promoter of that institution. Nor is it less remarkable, that he never mentions Milton’s “Tractate of Education,” although he discusses the plan of Cowley’s philosophical college. Harte intended to republish Hartlib’s tracts, and those with which he was concerned; and Warton had seen his collection.

, a learned divine, was born in 1680, at Minister, of catholic parents. After having been several years a Je.uit, he turned protestant at Cassel in 1715, was soon after made professor of philosophy and poetry, and, in 1722, appointed professor of history nnd rhetoric at Marpurg, where he died in 1744. His most esteemed works are, “Hist. Hassiaca,” 3 vols. “Vita? Pontificum Romanorum Victoris III. Urbani II. Pascalis II. Gelasii II. Callisti II. Honorii II.;” “State of the Sciences in Hesse,” in German; “Praecepta eloquentiae rationalis,” &c. He has also left above eighty “Academical Discourses.” He must be distinguished from George Hartman, a German mathematician, who, in 1540, invented the bombarding-staff, “Baculus Bombardicus,” and was author of a treatise on perspective, reprinted at Paris, 1556, 4to and from Wolfgang Hartman, who published the Annals of Augsburg, in folio, 1596.

, an eminent mathematician, was born at Goud?, in Holland, March 26, 1656. His father intended him for the ministry, but the young man had an early disposition for contemplating the heavenly bodies, which engrossed his whole attention, and finding, at the age of thirteen or fourteen, that without some knowledge of the mathematics he could make no satisfactory progress in this study, he saved his boyish allowance and presents in money, and applied to a teacher of the mathematics, who promised to be very expeditious, and kept his word. Under him he first learned to grind optic glasses, and at length, partly by accident, was enabled to improve single microscopes by using small globules of glass, melted in the flame of a candle. By these he discovered the animalculse in semine humano, which laid the foundation of a new system of generation.

In the mean time, in obedience to his father’s request, be spent some years at Leyden and Amsterdam in the study of the belies lettres, Greek, philosophy, and anatomy, until 1672, when he resumed his microscopical observations at Amsterdam, and communicated his clisco^ veries respecting the animalcules to Huygens, who published them in the “Journal des Savans” without mentioning Hartsoeker. Hartsoeker, indignant at being thus deprived of the honours of invention, determined to avow himself the inventor of the new microscope, and the first observer of the animalcules; and sent a letter to that purpose to the same literary journal. The editor, however, had the precaution to send it privately to Huygens, who, after reprimanding Hartsoeker for his rashness in being prejudiced against him by envious and interested persons, drew up a memoir for the journal, in which he did his young friend all the justice he could desire.

Hartsoeker being now at Paris, and observing that the telescopical glasses of the observatory there were not large enough, made some attempts to improve them, which, although not successful at first, procured him the good opinion and encouragement of Cassini; flattered by whom he soon made good glasses of all sizes, and at length one of six hundred feet focus, which, on account of its rarity, he never would part with. As to these glasses of so long a focus, he one day told Varignon and the abbe St. Pierre, that he thought it impossible to form them in a bason, but that by trying pieces of glass intended to be quite flat, one might happen to meet with some that were segments of a sphere of a very long radius, and that he had in this manner met with one of twelve hundred feet focus; that this sphericity depended upon some insensible unevennesses in the tables of polished iron upon which the melted glass is stretched out, or on the manner of loading the gFasses to polish them one against another; and that these trials were more tedious than difficult; which was all he chose at this time to communicate.

In 1694 he published at Paris, his first work, under the title of “Essai de Dioptrique,” in which he demonstrated with great perspicuity the whole theory of that science, as far as regards spherical glasses, for he rejects all other figures as useless. He then adds the methods, many of them peculiar to himself, of grinding and polishing glasses, and the names and quantities of the ingredients to be made use of for forming them; and a general system of refraction, along with his experiments, leading him to the different refrangibiiity of the rays of light, he pretends to have been the first to assign their different velocities as the cause of it. Thus his essay on dioptrics is likewise an essay on the first principles of natural philosophy. He reckons but two elements, one a substance, infinite, perfectly fluid, always in motion, and no part of which is ever perfectly separated from the rest the other a collection of little bodies different insize and figure, perfectly hard and unalterable, confusedly swimming in the fluid element, where they meet, unite, and become the different sensible bodies. With these two elements he forms every thing, and accounts for the weight and hardness of bodies, as he does elsewhere, from the same system, for their elasticity. There are other opinions advanced by him, which the more advanced state of the science has proved erroneous; but this work at that time procured him the esteem of many men of learning, particularly father Malebranche and the marquis de L'Hopital, who, finding him well versed in the old geometry, would fain have gained him over to the new geometry of infinites, to which they were partial; but he considered it of little service in natural philosophy, and had not a better opinion of any of the more abstruse parts of algebra. Encouraged, however, by the success of his Dioptrics, he two years alter published, at Paris, his “Principes cle Physique,” in which he explains at large the system he had already given in miniature, adding to it his own sentiments and those of many others on some subjects which he had not before handled, the whole forming a course of natural philosophy, which, by avoiding too great minuteness, he has rendered sufficiently perspicuous.

On the revival of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, in 1699, he was named a foreign associate, and was soon after chosen member of the royal society of Berlin, but he never used either of these titles, or any other, in any of the works he afterwards published. It is probable, however, that they were of some service to his reputation at least, especially on the following occasion. Peter the Great, on his arrival at Amsterdam, having applied to the magistrates of that city for a person capable of instructing him in those branches of learning he was desirous of acquiring, they named Hartsoeker for that purpose; and he became so agreeable to the czar, that that monarch would have prevailed upon him to follow him to Moscovy. But the length of the journey for a numerous family, and the difference between the Russian manners and those of the people among whom he had hitherto lived, hindered him from accepting the proposal. The magistrates of Amsterdam, to acknowledge the honour he had done to their choice of him upon this occasion, erected a small observatory for him on one of their bastions, which was a handsome compliment to him, although at little expence.

In 1704, after very pressing solicitations, he went to the court of the elector Palatine, who appointed him his first ma&ematiciau, and honorary professor of philosophy in the university of Heidelberg. Here he published, in 1707 and 1708, his lectures, under the title of “Conjeetures Physiques,” and then took his leave for a time of the electorate, in order to visit other parts of Germany, or study natural history, and mines in particular. At Cassel he repeated the experiments made by Mr. Hamberg with the landgrave’s burning glass constructed by Mr. Tschirnhaus, but without being able to vitrify even lead, insomuch that he absolutely denied the fact, affirming that what Hamberg took for vitrified gold was a substance issuing from the charcoal tbat supported it, mixed perhaps with some of the heterogeneous parts of the metal itself.

From Hesse Cassel Hartsoeker repaired to Hanover, where Leibnitz, the professed friend of all men of learning, presented him to the elector, afterwards George I. and the electoral princess, the late queen Caroline, who gave him a very gracious reception. About this time, the elector palatine hearing speak of the burning-glass of M. Tschirnhaus, asked Mr. Hartsoeker if he could make him such a one. Upon this he caused three to be cast, and having soon finished them, the elector presented him with the largest, which was three feet and five inches Rhinland measure jn diameter, nine feet focus, and this focus perfectly circular, of the size of a louis d'or, and so ponderous, that two men could with difficulty move it.

In 1710 he published a volume entitled “Eclaircissements sur les conjectures physiques,” being answers to objections, most of which he attributes to Leibnitz; and two years after he published another volume by way of sequel to it, and in 1722 a collection of several separate pieces on the same subject. ^In these three works he attacked, very freely, several celebrated names in the republic of letters, protesting all the while, that if he did not esteem them, he would have given himself no trouble about them, and that they were very welcome to criticize upon him in their turn. But, in spite of this apology, he could not conceal an irritable temper, and considerable virulence in his manner of treating them. Neither Newton, Leibnitz, Huygens, or the other members of the royal academy of sciences at Paris, escaped him on this occasion. The academy, however, notwithstanding such behaviour, tolerated him as one of her members, and considered him as subject to fits of ill humour, while the several members, instead of answering him, pursued their researches. In the second work he takes up and extends his favourite system of plastic souls. In man, according to him, the rational soul issues its orders, and a vegetative soul, which is the plastic, not only intelligent, but more intelligent than even the rational, immediately executes these orders, besides superintending or carrying on the whole animal oeconomy of the circulation of liquids, nutrition and accretion; operations, in his opinion, above the reach of mere mechanics. But it was immediately objected that rational soul, that vegetative soul, is ourselves, and how can we do all these things without knowing it This difficulty he solves by a comparison, which is at least ingenious. Suppose, says he, a dumb man alone in a room, and servants placed in the adjacent rooms to wait upon him. He is made to understand that when he has a mind to eat, he has only to strike the floor with his stick. Accordingly he strikes, and immediately sees his table covered with dishes. Now how can he conceive that this noise, which he has not heard, and of which he has not even any idea, should have brought the servants to him Hartsoeker, not content with attributing these intelligent plastic souls to men and animals, gives them to plants, and even to the celestial bodies.

The elector Palatine dying in 1716, Hartsoeker quitted the palatine court the year following, when the dowager clectress, a princess of the house of Medicis, in whom a taste for learning was hereditary, returned to Italy, her native country. As soon as the landgrave of Hesse saw him disengaged, he did him the honour to solicit him a second time to come and reside with him. But Hartsoeker thought his days too few to spend in a court, and therefore, removed to Utrecht, where he undertook a course of natural philosophy, and made an extract of all the curious and useful observations buried here and there among a heap of useless matter in Lewenhoeck’s letters. And having received some reproaches from Paris on account of the freedoms which he had taken with the royal academy of sciences, he began to draw up an apology, but did not live to finish it. He died Dec. 10, 1725. Fontenelle says he was brisk, facetious, obliging, but of an easy temper, which his artful friends often abused, and which betrayed him into those critical asperities which are too frequent in his works.

, a celebrated Jesuit, was born at Cologne in 1694, of a patrician family, and taught the belles lettres there until he went to Milan, on being appointed professor of Greek and Hebrew. On his return to his own country, he acquired much celebrity as a preacher and as a professor of philosophy and divinity. He died in 1763; his principal works were, l.“Summa historic omnis ab exordio rerum ad annum a Christo nato 1718,” Luxembourg, 1718, ISmo. 2. “De initio metropoleos ecclesiasticae Coloniae, &c. disquisitio,” Cologne, 1731, 4to. 3. “Bibliotheca scriptorum Coloniensium,” ibid. 1747, folio. 4. “Dissertationes decem historico-criticx in sacram scripturam,” fol. 5. “Inscriptionis Herseliensis Ubio-Romanse explanatio,” Cologne, 1745, 8vo. He was also employed for many years of his life in the publication of a collection of the “Councils of the church of Germany,” which had been projected by Schannat, a learned ecclesiastic, who had collected materials for the purpose. These, on his death, were put into the hands of Hartzheim, who after augmenting and reducing them to order, published the first four volumes. The work was afterwards continued by Scholl and Neissen.

, a caustic wit of the Elizabethan period, and the butt of the wits of his time, was born about 1545. His father, although a rope-maker by trade, was of a good family, and nearly related to sir Thomas Smith, the celebrated statesman. He was educated at Christ’s college, Cambridge, and for some time at Pembroke hall, and took both his degrees in arts. He afterwards obtained a fellowship in Trinity-hall, and served the office of proctor in the university. Having studied civil law, he obtained his grace for a degree in that faculty, and in 1585 was admitted doctor of laws at Oxford, which he completed in the following year, and practised as an advocate in the prerogative court of Canterbury at London. As a poet and a scholar, he had great merit. His beautiful poem, signed Hobbinol, prefixed to the “Faerie Queene,” bespeaks an elegant and well-turned mind; and among his works are several productions of great ingenuity and profound research. But he had too much propensity to vulgar abuse; and having once involved himself with his envious and railing contemporaries Nash and Greene, came their equal in this species of literary warfare. He afforded the ai, howe?er, sufficient advantage, by having turned almanack-maker and a prophetic dealer in earthqu ikes and prodigies, things which must not be altogether reierred to the credulity of the times, since they were as aptly ridiculed then by his opponents, as they would be now, did any man of real knowledge and abilities become so absurd as to propagate the belief in them. His highest honour was in having Spenser for his intimate friend; nor was he less esteemed by sir Philip Sidney, as appears by the interesting account Mr. Todd has given of Harvey’s correspondence in his excellent Life of Spenser. For an equally curious account of Harvey’s literary quarrels with Nash, &c. the reader may be referred with confidence to one of the most entertaining chapters in Mr. DTsraeli’s “Calamities of Authors.” He is supposed to have died in 1630, aged about eighty-five. Among his works which provoked, or were written in answer to, the attacks of his contemporaries, we may enumerate, 1. “Three proper and wittie letters touching the Earthquake, and our English reformed versifying,” Lond. 1.080, 4to. 2. “Two other very commendable Letters touching artificial versifying,” ibid. 15SO, 4to. Harvey boasted his being the inventor of English hexameters, which very jnstly exposed him to ridicule. 3. “Foure Letters, and certain Sonnets, touching Robert Greene and others,” ibid. 1592. His uniiKinlv treatment of Greene has been noticed with proper indignation by sir E. Brydges in his reprint of Greene’s *' Groatsworth of Wit,“and by Mr. Haselwood in his life of that poet in the” Censura Literaria.“5.” Pierce’s Supererogation, or a new prayse of the old Asse, with an advertisement for Pap. Hatchet and Martin Marprelate,“ibid. 1593, &c. This war ol scurrility was at length terminated by an order of the archbishop of Canterbury,” that all Nashe’s books and Dr. Harvey’s bookes be taken wheresoever they be found, and that none of the said bookes be ever printed hereafter.“Among his more creditable performances, Tanner has enumerated, 1.” Rhetor, sive dtiorutn dterum oratio de natura, arte et exercitatione rbetorica,“Lond. 1577, 4to. 2.” Ciceronianus, vel oratio post reditum habita Cantabrigise ad suos auditores,“ibid. 1577, <Ko. 3.” Gratulatio Vatdenensium, lib. IV. ad Elizabetham reginam,“ibid. 1578. 4.” Smithus, vel musarum lachrymze pro obitu honoratiss. viri Thorn se Smith," ibid. 1578, 4to.

, an English physician, was born in Surrey, acquired the Greek and Latin tongues in the Low Countries, and was admitted of Exeter-college, Oxford, in Ib55. Afterwards he went to Leyden, and studied under Vanderlinden, Vanhorn, and Vorstius, all of them professors of physic, and men of eminence. He was taugbt chemistry there by a German, and, at the same place, learned the practical part of chirurgery, and the trade of an apothecary. After this he went to France, and thence returned to Holland, where he was admitted fellow of the college of physicians at the Hague; being-, at that time, physician in ordinary to Charles II. in his exile. He afterwards returned to London, whence he was sent, in 1659, with a commission to Flanders, to be physician to the English army there; where staying till he was tired of that employment, he passed through Germany into Italy, spent some time at Padua, Bologna, and Rome, and then returned through Switzerland and Holland to England. Here he became physician in ordinary to his majesty; and, after king William came over, was made physician of the Tower. At this time there was a great debate who should succeed to this office, and the contending parties were so equally matched in their interests and pretensions, that it was extremely difficult to determine which should have the preference. The matter was at length brought to-a compromise; and Dr. Harvey was promoted, because he was in appearance sickly and infirm, and his death was expected in a few months. He survived, however, not only his rivals, but all his contemporary physicians, and died after he had enjoyed his office above fifty-years. He wrote several medical treatises, which never have been in any esteem. Unlike his predecessor of the same name, whose modesty equalled his knowledge, and who never proceeded a step without fact and experiment, Gideon Harvey was a vain and hypothetical prater throughout. Under pretence of reforming the art of medicine, he attacked the characters of the most eminent physicians of the time, combining: the most insulting sarcasms with many glaring falsehoods and absurdities; and although, in the general war which, he waged, he justly attacked many abuses which then prevailed in the profession, yet he often committed great errors of judgment. His principal work, part of which was published in 1683, and part in 1686, was entitled “The Conclave of Physicians, detecting their intrigues, frauds, and plots against the patients,” &c.

, an eminent English physician, who first discovered the circulation of the blood, was born of a. good family at Folkstone, in Kent, April 2, 156^. At ten years of age he was sent to the grammar-school at Canterbury, and at fourteen removed thence to Caius college, in Cambridge, where he spent about six years in the study of logic and natural philosophy, as preparatory to the study of physic. He then travelled through France and Germany, to Padua in Italy; where, having studied physic under Minadous, Fabricius ab Aquapendente, and Casserius, he was created doctor of physic and surgery in that university, 1602. He had a particular regard for Fabricius, often quotes him in terms of the highest respect; and declares, that he was the more willing to publish his book, “De Motu Cordis,” because Fabricius, who had learnedly and accurately delineated in a particular treatise almost all the parts of animals, had left the heart alone untouched. Soon after, returning to England, he was incorporated M. D. at Cambridge, and went to London to practise, and married. In 1604, he was admitted candidate of the college of physicians in London; and three years after fellow, and physician to St. Bartholomew’s hospital. In 1615, he was appointed lecturer of anatomy and surgery in that college; and the year after read a course of lectures there, the original ms. of which is extant in the British Museum, and is entitled, “Prcelectiones anatom. universal, per me Gulielmum Harvaeiunu medicum Londinensem, anat. & chirurg. professorem.” This appointment of lecturer was probably the more immediate cause of the publication of his grand discovery of the circulation of the I id. The date of this promulgation is not absolutely a -tained: it is commonly said that he first disclosed is opinion on the subject in 1619; but the index of his ms, containing the propositions on which the doctrine is founded, refers them to April 1616. Yet with a patience and caution, peculiarly characteristic of the sound philosopher, he withheld his opinions from the world, until reiterated experiment had amply confirmed his doctrine, and had enabled him to demonstrate it in detail, and to advance every proof of its truth of which the subject is capable.

In 1628 he published at Francfort his “Exercitatio anatomicade motu cordis & sang inis;” dedicated to Charles I. There follows also another dedication to the college of physicians, in which he observes, thiit he had frequently before, in his “Anatomical Lectures,” declared his new opinion concerning the motion and use of the heart, and the circulation of the blood; and for above nine years had confirmed and illustrated it before the college, by reasons and arguments grounded upon ocular d moustration, and defended it from the objections of the most skilful anatomists. This discovery was of such vast importance to the whole art of physic, that as soon as men were satisfied, which they were in a tew years, that it could not be contested, several put in for the prize themselves, and a great many affirmed the disc very to be due to others. Some asserted, that father Paul was the first discoverer of the circulation, but being too much suspected for heterodoxies already, durst not make it public, for fear of the inquisition. Honoratus Faber professed himself to be the author of that opinion; and Vander Linden, who published an edition of Hippocrates, about the middle of the seventeenth century, took a great deal of pains to prove, that this father of physic knew the circulation of the blood, and that Harvey only revived it. But the honour of the discovery has been sufficiently asserted and confirmed to Harvey; and, says Freind, “as it was entirely owing to him, so he has explained it with all the clearness imaginable: and, though much has been written upon tuat subject since, I may venture to say, his own book is the shortest, the plainest, and the most convincing, of any, as we may be satisfied, it' we look into the many apologies written in defence of the circulation.”

In 1632 he was made physician to Charles I. as he had been before to king James; and, adhering to the royal cause upon the breaking out of the civil wars, attended his majesty at the battle of Edge-hill, and thence to Oxford where, in 1642, he was incorporated M. D. In 1645 the king procured him to be elected warden of Merton-college in that university but, upon the surrendering of Oxford the year after to the parliament, he left that office, and retired to London. In 1651 he published his book, entitled “Exercitationes de Generatione animalimn.” This is a curious work, and had certainly been more so, but for some misfortune, by which his papers perished, during the time of the civil wars. For although he had both leave and an express order from the parliament to attend his majesty upon his leaving Whitehall, yet his house, in London, was in his absence plundered of all the furniture; and his “Adversaria,” with a great number of anatomical observations, relating especially to the generation of insects, were taken away. This loss he lamented several years after in terms which show how he felt it.

In the following year, 1652, Harvey had the satisfaction of seeing his merits acknowledged by his brethren in an unusual and most honourable manner: by a vote of the college his bust in marble was placed in their hall, with a suitable inscription recording his discoveries. He returned this compliment, by presenting to the college, at a splendid entertainment to which he invited the members, an elegantly furnished convocation-room, and a museum filled with choice books and chirurgical instruments, which he had built, at his own expence, in their garden. On the resignation of Dr Prujeau, in 1654, Harvey was unanimously nominated to the presidency, but he declined the offer on account of his age and infirmities. He still, however, frequented the meetings of the college; and his attachment to that body was shewn more conspicuously in 1656, when, at the first anniversary feast instituted by himself, he gave up his paternal estate of fifty-six pounds per annum in perpetuity, for their use. The particular purposes of this donation were, the institution of an annual feast, at which a Latin oration should be spoken in commemoration of the benefactors of the college, a gratuity for the orator, and a provision for the keeper of his library and museum. His old age was afflicted with infirmities, especially with most excruciating attacks of the gout; but he lived to complete his eighty-eighth year, acCOrding to his epitaph, and expired on the 3d of June 1658, in great tranquillity and self-possession. He was buried in the chapel of Hampstead, belonging to the church of Great Samfurd in Essex, where there is a monument erected over his grave with a Latin inscription.

The private character of this great man appears to have been in every respect worthy of his public reputation. Cheerful, candid, and upright, he lived on terms of great harmony with his friends and brethren, and exhibited no spirit of rivalry or hostility in his career. He spoke modestly of his own merits, and generally treated his controversial antagonists with temperate and civil language, often very different from their own. He wrote in a remarkably perspicuous Latin style, which is flowing and even eloquent where the subject allows of ornament. The college of physicians very properly honoured his memory by a splendid edition of all his works in quarto, 1766, to which a Latin life of the author was prefixed, elegantly written by Dr. Laurence.

, a dissenting clergyman, was born in 1729, and having passed with reputation through his grammatical learning, he was entered as student for the profession of a dissenting minister, in the academy supported by Mr. Coward’s funds. Upon quitting this place, he engaged as an assistant to a boarding-school at Peck ham, and preached occasionally for some neighbouring ministers in and out of London. During this period of his life he studied very diligently the Greek and Roman classics, to which he was devoted through life. In 1754 he undertook the care of a grammar-school at Congleton, in Cheshire, and preached for some years on alternate Sundays, to two small societies in the vicinity of that town. In 1765 he removed to Bristol, and in about five years he was obliged, as he pretended, to quit his situation on account of his principles as an Arian and Arminian, being for some time scarcely able to walk along the streets of Bristol without insult; but the truth was, that a charge of immorality was brought against him, which he never satisfactorily answered, and which sufficiently accounted for his unpopularity. He had previously to this, in 1768, obtained the degree of D. D. from the university of Edinburgh, and with this he came to London, and obtained employment as a literary character, and also as an instructor in the Greek and Latin classics. He died miserably poor, in 1794, after having been confined many years in consequence of a paralytic attack. He was author of many works, the most important of which is “A View of the various Editions of the Greek and Roman Classics,” which has been several times reprinted, and has, as well as his “Introduction to the New Testament,” been translated into several foreign languages. His other works were pamphlets on the Arian and Socinian controversy, if we except an edition of the Greek Testament, 2 vols. 8vo, and a “Translation of the New Testament,” into modern English, which exhibits an extraordinary proof of want of taste and judgment.

, an eminent doctor and minister of Bremen, son of Cornelius de Hase, minister and professor of divinity at Bremen, and Sarah Wolter, a lady distinguished by her learning, and her knowledge of Hebrew, was born November 30, 1682, and was appointed professor of belles-lettres at Hanau, but recalled to Bremen the following year, to be minister and professor of Hebrew, and admitted D. D. at Francfort upon Oder in 1712, though absent; and member of the royal society at Berlin in 1718. In 1723 he was made professor of divinity at, Bremen, and died there April 25, 1731. He left a volume of “Dissertations,” which are much esteemed; and assisted M. Lampe in a journal begun under the title of “Bibliotheca Historico-Philologico-Theoiogica,” and continued under that of “Musieum Historico-PhilologicoTheologicum.” His brother James was also a man of considerable erudition. He published many classical tracts, which were well received by the learned. He died in 1723.

, a native of Holstein, was born July 3, 1651, and educated partly at home and partly at Lubeck. He made such progress in the Greek and oriental languages, that he was in 1683 appointed to the professorship of the Greek language at the university of Kiel, to which was added that of the Hebrew and oriental languages; but he died before he had completed his fortieth year, May 29, 1691. His principal works are, 1. “Dissertatio de Linguis Orientalibus,” Leipsic, 1677, 8vo. 2. “Henrici Opitii synasmus restitutus,” ibid. 1678, and 1691, 4to. 3. “Biblia parva Gneca, in quibus dicta insigniora omnia ex Versione Septuagintavirali secundum ordmem librorum biblicorum observatum in biblis parvis Opitianis, cum cura exhibentur,” Kilon, 1686, 12mo. 4. An edition with notes of “Mich. Pselli de operatione Dsemonum.” 5. “Janua Hebraismi aperta,” Kilon, 169 1.

, one of the favourite pupils of Linnæus, and eminently distinguished by hisillus“trations of the natural history and medicine of the Levant, was born at Toernvalla, in East Gothland, Jan. 3d, 1722. He was the son of a poor curate, who died at an early age, and whose widow, on account of mental and corporeal infirmities, was obliged to be placed in the hospital at Vadstena. Her brother, a worthy clergyman of the name of Pontin, educated young Hasselquist with his own children, at the school of Linkoeping; but he was soon deprived of this benefactor, and was obliged to become the tutor of young children till he was old enough to go to the university; and by a similar plan he was enabled to support himself after he entered at Upsal, in 1741. Here he soon took a decided turn for physic and natural history, and had some talents for poetry; and such was his diligence, that his superiors procured him, in 1746, a royal stipend or scholarship. In June 1747, he published his thesis, entitled” Vires Plantarum," setting forth the erroneous and often foolish principles on which plants had formerly been employed in medicine, and suggesting a truly philosophical one iii their natural botanical affinities.

In one of his botanical lectures in 1747, Linnæus happening to speak of Palestine, one of the most important and interesting countries to the philosopher as well as the divine, but of whose productions we had less knowledge than of those of India, the zeal of young Hasselquist became instantly excited. In vain did his preceptor, secretly delighted with his enthusiasm, represent to him the difficulties of the undertaking, the distance, the dangers, the expence, and above all the weak state of his own health, particularly of his lungs. Hasselquist’s first step was to solicit assistance to defray the expences of his journey, but the whole he obtained is represented as far inadequate to his undertaking. He began, however, to learn the oriental tongues, at the same time that he was completing his academical studies, reading lectures, and obtaining the degree of licentiate in physic. The faculty, considering his merit and circumstances, Would not aliow him to he at any expence on this occasion, any more than for his attendance on the lectures of the professors. The degree of doctor of physic was afterwards conferred on him during his absence at Cairo, March 8th, 75!, with the same honourable and delicate attention to his peculiar situation. In the spring of 1749 he went to Stockholm, read lectures on botany there during the summer, and so far recommended himself to public notice, that the company of merchants trailing to the Levant, offered him a free passage to Smyrna in one of their ships, in which he set sail August 7th, arriving at Smyrna on the 27th of November, 1749. He kept a regular journal f his voyage. Touching at Gottenburgh, he there met Toreen, just returned from China with abundance of treasures for his master Linnæus, in whose works they have at various times been communicated to the public.

At Smyrna Hasselquist nret with the kindest reception from his relation, Mr. Rydelius, the Swedish consul, as well as from the French consul, M. Peysonel, one of the first who suspected the animal nature of corals. He spent the winter in noticing every thing he could meet with respecting the main objects of his pursuit, in this place and its neighbourhood, as well as the religious ceremonies and manners of the people. He visited the house and garden, once occupied by the famous Sherard, at Sedekio, near Smyrna, but found no traces of any great care having been taken to adorn the garden, or to store it with exotic plants. He made an excursion to Magnesia, his quality of physician causing him to be received every where with respect. As the spring advanced he became desirous of extending his inquiries and early in May set sail for Alexandria, where he arrived on the 13th. Here the palm-trees, which now first presented themselves to his notice, excited him to inquire into and to verify the celebrated history of their artificial impregnation, of whicii he wrote a full account to Linnæus. Having spent two months in seeing all he could at Alexandria, Rosetta, and Cairo, he visited the Egyptian pyramids in July, brought from thence Chondrilla juncea, the only plant he could find, which is. now in the herbarium of his preceptor, was hospitably entertained by the Arabs, and returned safe to Cairo, where he had afterwards an opportunity of seeing the caravan depart for Mecca, of which he has given an ample and interesting description, as well as of many other festivals and exhibitions. He visited the catacombs, and examined many mummies of the ancient Ibis, by the size of which he was induced to take this famous bird to be a species of Ardea, common and almost peculiar to Egypt, different from the Tantalus Ibis of Linnæus. The learned Cuvier, however, has recently shewn that naturalists have been widely mistaken on this subject, and Bruce alone has indicated the real Ibis.

Hasselqnist proceeded, in March 1751, to 'Damiata, whence he sailed for Jaffa, or Joppa, and arrived there after a voyage of four days. He had now reached the great theatre of his inquiries, the Holy Land; and he entered upon the examination of its productions, and their sacred as well as medical history, with all the zeal which had at first prompted him to the journey, and which was crowned with eminent success. Having spent near two months in this celebrated country, he sailed from Seide the 23d of May, for Cyprus, from whence he proceeded to Rhodes, and to Stanchio, the ancient Cos, finally returning to Smyrna in the end of July.

From time to time, in the course of his travels, he had written to LinnaBtis, and had sent home various natural curiosities, as well as several dissertations, which were printed in the Transactions of the Upsal and Stockholm academies. His letters to various friends were occasionally printed, in a periodical publication called Literary News, at Stockholm; and in return for the entertainment and information he gave his countrymen, they contributed some necessary supplies towards his expensive undertakings. Unfortunately he had, in the meanwhile, sacrificed, instead of restoring his health. He flattered himself, as all in his condition do, and thought that a winter’s repose at Smyrna might restore him. He tried the country air and a milk diet, but he wasted away daily, like a lamp whose oil is spent, and departed this life, Feb. 9, 1752, at six in the evening, to the inexpressible grief o f all who knew him, in the 31st year of his age.

In the course of his expensive journeys and his illness, this unfortunate young man had unavoidably incurred debts beyond what his casual supplies from home could liquidate; and the collections and manuscript notes, which still remained at Smyrna, were seized by his creditors, for a sum amounting to 14,000 dollars of copper-money, or about 350l. sterling. This circumstance was no sooner made known, through Linnæus and his friend Bteck, to the accomplished queen of Sweden, Louisa Ulrica, the worthy sister of the great Frederick of Prussia, than she immediately redeemed these treasures out of her own purse, gave Linnæus all the duplicates, and commissioned him to arrange and publish the manuscript journal and remarks of his deceased pupil; a task which he undertook with alacrity, and executed with care and judgment. These papers were given to the public in 1757, in Swedish, except several Latin descriptions, under the title of “Iter Palaestinum,” or a Journey to the Holy Land, in one volume, 8vo, with a biographical preface by Linnseus, who subjoined to the work the very interesting letters of Hasselquist to himself. This book has been translated into several languages, and appeared in English, at London, in 1766; but this translation is in many parts defective, especially with regard to the natural history and the scientific names. In 1758 the above-mentioned Dr. Baeck, physician to the queen, published, at Stockholm, an oration in praise of Hasselquist, in 8vo.

Hasselquist must ever rank high as an original and faithful observer, not only in his own immediate line of study, out in whatever came before him. His illustrations of the natural history of Scripture are above all things valuable and correct. Far less prone to go learnedly and ingeniously astray than his distinguished countryman Olaus Celsius, in the “Hierobotanicon,” he has, by accurate observation and plain sense, cleared up many difficulties, which commentators, without the former, and disdaining the latter, have often embroiled.

, the historian of Kent, was the only son of Edward Hasted of Hawley, in Kent, esq. barrister at law, descended paternally from the noble family of Clifford, and maternally from the ancient and knightly family of the Dingleys of Woolverton in the Isle of Wight. He was born in 1732, and probably received a liberal education; but we have no account of his early life. At one time he possessed a competent landed property in the county of Kent, and sat in the chair for a little while at the quarter sessions at Canterbury. His laborious “History of Kent” employed his time and attention for upwards of forty years; and such was his ardour in endeavouring to trace the descent of Kentish property, that he had abstracted with his own hand, in two folio volumes, all the wills in the prerogative office at Canterbury. His materials, in other respects, appear to have been ample. He had access to all the public offices and repositories of records in London; to the libraries and archives of the archbishop at Lambeth, the dean and chapter of Canterbury, and that at Surrenden in Kent. He had also the ms collections of Thorpe, Le Neve, Warburton, Edmondson, Lewis, Twisden, and many others, with much valuable correspondence with the gentlemen of the county. This work was completed in four folio volumes, 1778 1799. The whole exhibits more research than taste, either in arranging the information, or in style; and it is very defective in notices of manners, arts, or biographical and literary history. Its highest praise is that of a faithful record of the property of the country, and of its genealogical history. During the latter part of his labours, he fell into pecuniary difficulties, which are thought to have prevented his making a proper use of his materials, and obliged him to quit his residence in Kent. After this he lived in obscure retirement, and for some time in the environs of London. A few years before his death, the earl of Radnor presented him to the mastership of the hospital at Corsham in Wiltshire, to which he then removed; and some time after by a decree in the court of chancery, recovered his estates in Kent. He died at the master’s lodge at Corsham, Jan. 14, 1812. By Anne his wife, who died in 1803, Mr. Hasted left four sons and two daughters, of whom the eldest son is vicar of Hollingborne, near Maidstone in Kent, and in the commission of the peace for that county.

, a lady of high rank and higher virtues, the daughter of Theophilus earl of Huntingdon, was born April 19, 1682. Her mother was the daughter of sir John Lewis, of Ledstone, in the county of York. The accession of a large fortune, after the death wf her brother George earl of Huntingdon, enabled her to afford an illustrious example of active goodness and benevolence. She fixed her principal residence at Ledstonehouse, where she became the patroness of merit, the benefactress of the indigent, and the intelligent friend and counsellor of the surrounding neighbourhood. Temperate, chaste, and simple, in her habits, she devoted her time, her fortune, and the powers of her understanding, which was of a high order, to the benefit and happiness of all around her. “Her cares,” says her biographer, “extended even to the animal creation; while over her domestics she presided with the dispositions of apparent, providing for the improvement of their minds, the decency of their behaviour, and the propriety of their manners. She would have the skill and contrivance of every artificer used in her house, employed for the ease of her servants, and that they might suffer no inconvenience or hardship. Besides providing for the order, harmony, and peace of her family, she kept great elegance in and about her house, that her poor neighbours might not fall into idleness and poverty for want of employment; and while she thus tenderly regarded the poor, she would visit those in the higher ranks, lest they should accuse her of pride or superciliousness.” Her system of benevolence was at once judicious and extensive. Her benefactions were not confined to the neighbourhood in which she lived; to many families, in various parts of the kingdom, she gave large annual allowances. To this may be added her munificence to her relations and friends, her remission of sums due to her in cases of distress or straitened circumstances, and the noble hospitality of her establishment. To one relation she allowed five hundred pounds annually, to another she presented a gift of three thousand pounds, and to a third three hundred guineas. She acted also with great liberality towards a young lady whose fortune had been injured in the Southsea scheme: yet the whole of her estates fell short of three thousand pounds a-year. In the manors of Ledstone, Ledsham, Thorpe-arche, and Colhngham, she erected charity-schools; and, for the support of them and other charities she gave, in her life-time. Collingham, Shadwell, and her estate at Burton Salmon. Sht also gave Wool for building a new church at Leeds; but, that this donation might not hurt the mother church there, she afterwards offered a farm near Leeds, of 23l. per annum, and capable of improvement, to be settled on the vicar and his successors, provided the town would do the like; which the corporation readily agreed to, and to her ladyship’s benefaction added lands of the yearly value of 24l. for the application of which they were to be entirely answerable to her kindred This excellent lady also bequeathed at her death considerable sums for charitable and public uses; amongst which were five scholarships in Queen’s college, Oxford, for students in divinity, of 28l. a year each, to be enjoyed for five years, and, as the rents should rise, some of her scholars to be capable, in time, of having 60l. per annum, for one or two years after the first term. She died Dec. 22, 1739. She was fond of her pen, and frequently employed herself in writing; but, previous to her death, destroyed the greater part of her papers. Her fortune, beauty, and amiable qualities, procured her many solicitations to change her state; but she preferred, in a single and independent life, to be mistress 01 her actions, and the disposition of her income.

, the son of Dr. Hatcher, regius professor of physic in Cambridge, and physician to queen Mary, flourished in the sixteenth century, but of his birth, or death we have no dates. He became a fellow of Eton college in 1555. He is said to have left that fur Gray’s inn, and to have afterwards studied physic. He compiled some memoirs of the eminent persons educated in Eton college, in two books, in a catalogue of all the provosts, fellows, and scholars, to the year 1572. Mr. Harwood acknowledges his obligations to this work, but leaves us at a loss to understand its being compiled “after the manner of Bayle.” Hatcher, however, he informs us, was a very able antiquary, and a learned and pious man. He published the epistles and orations of his fellow-collegian, Walter Haddon, in a book entitled “Lucubrationes.” He died in Lincolnshire.

, bishop of Durham. Of this great prelate we meet with few accounts previous to his promotion to the see of Durham, except his being a prebendary of Lincoln and York, and secretary to Edward III. by whom he appears to have been much esteemed. Before this time the popes had for many years taken upon them the authority of bestowing all the bishoprics in England, without even consulting the king: this greatly offended the nobility and parliament, who enacted several statutes against it, and restored to the churches and convents their ancient privilege of election. Richard de Bury, bishop of Durham, dying April 24, 1345, king Edward was very desirous of obtaining this see for his secretary Hatfield; but, fearing the convent should not elect, and the pope disapprove him, he applied to his holiness to bestow the bishopric upon him, and thereby gave him an opportunity of resuming his former usurpations. Glad of this, and of obliging the king, and showing his power at the same time, the pope immediately accepted him; objections, however, were made against him by some of the cardinals, as a man of light behaviour, and no way fit for the place; to this the pope answered, that if the king of England had requested him for an ass, he would not at that time have denied him: he was therefore elected the 8th of May, and consecrated bishop of Durham, 10th of July, 1345.

What his former behaviour, on which the cardinals grounded their objections, may have been, is uncertain; but it is scarce to be imagined, that a king of Edward’s judgment and constant inclination to promote merit, would have raised him to such a dignity had he been so undeserving; nor would he have employed him in so many affairs of consequence as he appears to have done had he not been capable of executing them. In 1346, David king of Scotland, at the head of 50,000 men, invaded England, and after plundering and destroying the country wherever he came, encamped his army in Bear-park, near Stanhope, 141 the county of Durham, from which he detached parties to ravage the neighbouring country; to repel these invaders, a great number of the northern noblemen armed all their vassals, and came to join the king, who was then at Durham; from thence they marched against the Scots in four separate bodies, the first of which was commanded by lord Percy and bishop Hatfield, who on this occasion assumed the warrior, as well as several other prelates. The Scots were defeated, and their king taken prisoner. In 13 54 the bishop of Durham and lords Percy and Ralph Nevill were appointed commissioners to treat with the Scots for the ransom of their captive monarch. In 1355, when king Edward went into France at the head of a large army, he was attended by our prelate; to whom, however, It is more important to mention, that Trinity college, in Oxford, owed its foundation; it was at first called Durham college, and was originally intended for such monks of Durham as should chuse to study there, more particulars of which may be seen in Warton’s Anglia Sacra. Wood, in his Annals, relates the matter somewhat differently. At the dissolution it was granted, in 1552, to Dr. Owen, who sold it to sir Thomas Pope, by whom it was refounded^ endowed, and called Trinity college. Before Hatfield’s time, the bishops of Durham had no house in London to repair to when summoned to parliament; to remedy this, this munificent prelate built a most elegant palace in the Strand, and called it Durham-house (lately Durham-yard), and by his will bequeathed it for ever to his successors in the bishopric. This palace continued in possession of the bishops till the reformation, when it was, in the fifth of Edward VI. demised to the princess Elizabeth. In the fourth of Mary it was again granted to bishop Tunstall and his successors, and afterwards let out on a building lease, with the reservation of 200l. a year out-rent, which the bishop now receives. On this pfat of ground the Adelphi buildings are erected.

Bishop Hatfield was the principal benefactor, if not the founder, of the Friary at Northallerton, in Yorkshire, for Carmelites or white friars. The records of his time give large accounts of his charities to the poor, his great hospitality and good housekeeping^ and of the sums he expended in buildings and repairs during the time he held the bishopric. After a life spent in an uniform practice of munificence and charity, he died at his manor of Alfond, or Alford, near London, May 7, 1381, and by his will directed his body to be buried in his own cathedral. ' It is there entombed in the south aile under a monument of alabaster, prepared by himself in his life-time, which is now remaining very perfect, though without any inscription.

, or Atto Vercellensis, bishop of Vercelli, in Italy, of a noble family, was born in Piedmont iri the beginning of the tenth century, and was esteemed a learned divine and canonist. He was promoted to the bishopric of Vercelli in the year 945, and by knowledge and amiable manners proved himself worthy of this rank, It is not mentioned when he died. His works are, I. “Libeilus de pressuris Ecclesiasticis,” in three parts, inserted in D'Achery’s “Spicilegium.” This treatise on the sufferings and grievances of the church, Mosheim says, shews in their true colours the spirit and complexion of the times. 2. “Epistolae.” 3. “Canones statutaque Vercellensis Ecclesiae,” both in the same collection. In the Vatican, and among the archives of Vercelli, are many other productions of this author, all of which were collected by Baronzio, and published as the “Complete works of Hatto,” in. 1768, 2 vols. fol.

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

Sir Christopher did not enjoy his high office above four years, and died unmarried, Sept. 20, 1591, of a broken heart, as usually reported, owing to the stern perseverance with which Elizabeth had demanded an old debt which he was unable to pay. Camden enumerates him among the liberal patrons of learning, and as eminent for his piety towards God, his fidelity to his country, his untainted integrity, and unparalleled charity. In his opinions respecting matters of religion, he appears to have been averse to persecution, which brought upon him the reproach of being secretly affected to popery, but of this we have no proof. As chancellor of Oxford, which office he held from 1588 to his death, he did much to reform the education and discipline of that university. He was buried under a stately monument in the choir of St. Paul’s. Wood says he wrote several things pertaining to the law, none of which are extant 2 but the following has been attributed to him, “A Treatise concerning Statutes or Acts of Parliament, and the exposition thereof,” Lond. 1677, 8vo. Warton thinks he was the undoubted writer of “the fourth act in the tragedy of Tancred and Gismund,” which bears at the end composuit Ch. Hat. This play was the joint production of five students of the Inner Temple, and was acted at that society before the queen in 1568, but not printed till 1592. It is reprinted in the second edition of Dodsley’s collection.

, an ingenious mechanic, born at Orleans, March 20, 1647, made a great progress in mechanics in general, but had a particular taste for clockwork, and made several discoveries in it that were of singular use. He found out the secret of moderating the vibration of the balance by means of a small steelspring, which has since been made use of. This discovery he laid before the members of the academy of sciences in 1694 and these watches are, by way of eminence, called pendulum-watches not that they have real pendulums, but because they nearly approach to the justness of pendulums. M. Huygens perfected this happy invention; but having declared himself the inventor, and obtained a patent for making watches with spiral springs, the abbe* Feuille opposed the registering of it, and published a piece on the subject against Huygens. He died in 1724. Besides the above, he wrote a great many other pieces, most of which are small pamphlets, but very curious; as, 1. His “Perpetual Pendulum.” 2. “New Inventions.” 3. “The Art of Breathing under Water, and the means of preserving a Flame shut up in a small place.” 4. “Reflections on Machines for raising water.” 5. His opinion on the different sentiments of Mallebranche and Regis, relating to the appearance of the Moon when seen in the horizon. 6. “The Magnetic Balance.” 7. “A Placet to the king on the Longitude.” 8. “Letter on the secret of the Longitude.” 9. “A New System on the Flux and Reflux of the Sea.” 10. “The means of making sensible experiments that prove the Motion of the Earth;” and many other pieces.

, a classical editor of considerable fame, was born in 1684, but where, or where educated, none of our authorities mention. In 1718 we find him a preacher at the village of Stad aan't Haringvliet,. in the island of Overflacke, between Holland and Zealand, in which year he published “Tertulliani Apologeticus,” Leyden, 8vo, with a commentary. In 1721 he was appointed professor of Greek in the university of Leyden, and afterwards filled the chair of history and rhetoric. He died in that city, April 25, 1742. He translated many of the writings of the Italian antiquaries into Latin for Vander Aa’s “Thesaurus Italiae,” and for Polenus’s “Supplementa nova utriusque Thesauri Romanarum Grsecarumque Autiquitatum.” His principal separate publicationsare, 1. “Dissert, de Alexandri magni numismate,” Leyden, 1722, 4to. 2. “Oratio cle actione oratoris, sive corporis eloquentia,” ibid. 1724, 4to. 3. “Series numismatum antiquorum Henr. Adriani a Mark,” 1727, 8vo. 4. “Museum Hilenbroekianum,” without date or place. 5. “Thesaurus Morellian us: familiarum Romanarum numismata,” with a commentary, Amst. fol. 1734. 6. “A History of Asia, Africa, and Europe, from the end of the fabulous ages,” in Dutch, three parts, 1736 39, fol. with plates of coins. 7. “Sylloge scriptorum de pronunciations Grascae Linguae,” Leid. 1736 and 1740. 8. “Reguin et imperatorum Romanorum numismata, ducis Croyiaci, et Arschotani, &c.” Amst. 1738, 4to, &c. The classics he edited were, 1. “Lucretius,” Leyden, 1725, 2 vols. 4to, a very splendid, learned, and critical edition some have given it the preference to all former editions, and it appears as yet doubtful whether it be excelled by that of the late Mr. Gilbert Wakefield. 2. “Josephus,” fol. Amst. 1726. By this he seems to have lost almost as much reputation as he gained by his Lucretius, it being shamefully incorrect.

4. “Dionysius Periegetes,” Gr. Lat. ibid. 1738. 5. “Sallust.” Amst. 1742, 2 vols. 4to, on the basis of Wasse and Gruter, but with very little from Havercamp, except the notes on the “Fragmenta Sallustiana,” and good indexes.

, an English poet who flourished about the end of the fifteenth century, was a native of Suffolk, and educated at Oxford. He travelled afterwards in England, Scotland, France, and Italy, and became a complete master of French and Italian poetry. On his return, his acquired politeness and knowledge procured him an establishment in the household of Henry VII. who was struck with the liveliness of his conversation, and admired the readiness with which he could repeat most of the old English poets, especially Lydgate: his knowledge also of the French tongue might be a recommendation to that monarch, who was fond of studying the best French books then in vogue.

Hawes’s principal work is his “Pastime of Pleasure,” first printed by Wynkyn de Worde in 1517, with wooden cuts. This, Mr. Warton says, contains no common touches of romantic and allegoric fiction. The personifications are often happily sustained, and indicate the writer’s familiarity with the Provincial school: he also says that “Hawes has added new graces to Lvdgate’s manner.” Mr. Ellis, however, seems to be of a different opinion, and thinks that he has copied Lydgate’s worst manner; and that he is diffuse, fond of expletives and epithets which add nothing to the sense. Hawes’s other works are, “The Temple of Glass,” in imitation of Chaucer’s “Temple of Fame;” “The Conversyon of Swerers,” and one or two other rarities, described in our authorities.

, an English physician, and founder of the Humane Society, was born at Islington, Nov. 28,1736; and received the early part of his education in his native village, and completed it in St. Paul’s school. He was afterwards placed with Mr. Carsan, an ingenious medical practitioner near Vauxhall; and, on the expiration of his apprenticeship, was for a short time an assistant to Mr. Dicks, in the Strand, whom he succeeded in business; and, by his application, and unwearied attention to his patients, acquired a considerable degree of reputation and affectionate esteem. In May 1759, he married an amiable woman, by whom he had a numerous family, and who survives to lament his loss.

In 1773 he became deservedly popular, from his incessant zeal in calling the attention of the public to the resuscitation of persons apparently dead, principally by drowning. In this laudable attempt he encountered much opposition, and some ridicule. The practicability of resuscitation was denied. He ascertained its practicability by advertising rewards to persons, who, between Westminster and London bridges, should, within a certain time after the accident, rescue drowned persons from the water, and bring them ashore to places appointed for their reception, where means might be used for their recovery, and give immediate notice to him. The public mind being thus awakened to the subject, greater exertions were made by individuals than had ever before been known; and many lives were saved by himself and other medical men, which would otherwise have certainly been lost; and Mr. Hawes, at his own expence, paid the rewards in these cases for twelve months, which amounted to a considerable sum. His excellent friend, Dr. Cogan (then somewhat known to the public, and since much better known, by several valuable publications), who had long turned his thoughts to this subject, remonstrated with him on the injury which his private fortune would sustain from a perseverancein these expences and he at last consented to share them with the public. Dr. Coganancl he agreed to join their strength; and each of them bringing forward fifteen friends to a meeting at the Chapter coftee-house in 1774, the Humane Society was instantly formed. From this period the weight and organization of the infant institution devolved in great measure on Mr. Hawes, whose undeviating labours have, it is hoped, established it for ever; and without which, there would very probably not have been at this time a similar establishment in Europe, America, or India; where Humane societies have now multiplied with every great stream that fructifies the soil of those different regions.

In 1774, he published “An Account of Dr. Goldsmith’s last Illness,” whose death he ascribed to the improper administration of a popular medicine; and from this unfortunate event he deduced many useful cautions respecting the exhibition of powerful medicines.

In 1777, appeared his “Address on Premature Death and Premature Interment;” which he liberally distributed, in order to awaken attention in the public mind, against the too early interment of persons supposed to be dead, before it was clearly ascertained that life was totally extinct. This performance had been suggested to his mind, even prior to the establishment of the great object of resuscitation, which he afterwards so successfully pursued.

In 1780 was published, his third edition of an “Examination of the Reverend John Wesley’s Primitive Physick;” in which the absurdities and dangerous remedies recommended by that venerable and (on many other accounts) respectable writer were acutely exposed by a combination of irony and serious argument. In 1780, or 1731, he removed to Palsgrave-place, and commenced practice as a physician; the degree of doctor of medicine having been conferred upon him some time before.

In 1781, Dr. Hawes published “An Address to the Legislature, on the Importance of the Humane Society;” and, by his steady perseverance, and personal endeavours, he lived to see most of his objects realized, as conducive to the restoration of suspended animation. About the same period, appeared his “Address to the King and Parliament of Great Britain; with Observations on the General Bills of Mortality.” These useful and interesting publications gradually raised the reputation of the author to the notice of many learned, as well as benevolent, characters. In the same year, he was elected physician to the Surrey Dispensary and about the same time, commenced his medical lectures on suspended animation and was the first, and perhaps the only, person that ever introduced the subject as a part of medical education. These lectures were closed by a proposal of bestowing prize-medals, suggested by the ardour of his mind, and founded by his munificence; and in October 1782, the gold medal was awarded, by four respectable physicians, to Dr. Richard Pearson, of Birmingham, and the silver medal to a writer whose paper wat signed Humanitas. Since that period similar prize-medals, bestowed by the Medical Society, have given rise to the invaluable works of Pearson, Goodwin, Coleman, Kite, and Fothergill.

In 1782, Dr. Hawes removed to East-cheap; and (having been elected physician to the London Dispensary in 1785) to Bury-street, in 1786; and to Spital-square in 1791. In 1793, when the manufactories of cottons had so far superseded those of silks as to occasion temporary want, and even beggary, among the artisans in Spitalfields, Dr. Hawes singly stood forward; and, principally by his activity, 1200 families were snatched from ruin. On this emergency he published a short address, which does great credit to his humanity and good sense.

This worthy man died Dec. 5, 1808, and was interred in the new burying-ground at Islington.

Dr. Hawes was a man totally without guile; and self never entered into his contemplation. There was a simplicity in his manners, the result of an innocent and unsuspecting heart. Without possessing, or affecting to possess, any very superior literary talents, he contrived to furnish to the public an acceptable work in his “Annual Reports.” His practice had been considerable; and his medical knowledge was respectable. In the resuscitative part he was eminently skilled. He was an honorary member of the Massachusetts Humane Society; and of many others, at Edinburgh, Manchester, Bath, &c. &c. and a vice-president of the London Electrical Dispensary.

The Royal Humane Society is a shining and an eminent proof of his philanthropy; an institution which has been found highly useful, and to establish which he employed many years of his life. The moment in which one of the regular anniversaries of the society were at an end, he began to meditate plans for the success of the ensuing year. The nomination of succeeding stewards, the augmentation of the list of regular subscribers, and the obtaining of churches and preachers for the benefit of his favourite institution, were never out of his sight; and so much indeed did the Humane Society engross his attention, that his own immediate interests appeared to him to be subordinate considerations. He was always ready to afford both his pecuniary and his professional assistance to distress; and his name ought to be recorded among those who add to the character of the nation, by the establishment of institutions founded on benevolent principles.

, an eminent naval officer, was the son of Edward Hawke, esq. barrister at law, by Elizabeth, daughter of Nathaniel Bladen, esq. He was from his youth brought up to the sea, and passed through the inferior stations till, in 1713—4, he was appointed captain of the Wolf. His intrepidity and conduct were first of all distinguished in the memorable engagement with the combined fleets of France and Spain on Toulon, in 1744, when the English fleet was commanded by the admirals Matthews, Lestock, and Rowley. If all the English ships had done their duty on that day as well as the Berwick, which captain Hawke commanded, the honour and discipline of the navy would not have been so tarnished. He compelled the Pader, a Spanish vessel of 60 guns, to strike; and, to succour the Princessa and Somerset, broke the line without orders, for which act of bravery he lost his commission, but was honourably restored to his rank by the king. In 1747 he was appointed rear-admiral of the 'white; and on the 14th of October, in the same year, fell in with a large French fleet, bound to the West Indies, convoyed by nine men of war, of which he captured seven. This was a glorious day for England, and the event taught British commanders to despise the old prejudice of staying for a line of battle. “Perceiving,” says the gallant admiral in his letters to the Admiralty, “that we lost time in forming our line, I made the signal for the whole squadron to chase, and when within a proper distance to engage.” On October the 31st, admiral Hawke arrived at Portsmouth with his prizes, and as a reward of his bravery, he was soon afterwards made knight of the bath. In 1748 he was made vice-admiral of the blue, and elected an elder brother of the Trinity-house; in 1755 he was appointed viceadmiral of the white, and in 1757 commanded the squadron which was sent to co-operate with sir John Mordaunt in the expedition against Rochfort. In 1759, sir Edward commanded the grand fleet opposed to that of the French equipped at Brest, and intended to invade these kingdoms. He accordingly sailed from Portsmouth, and, arriving off Brest, so stationed his ships that the French fleet did not dare to come out, and had the mortification of beholding their coast insulted, and their merchantmen taken. The admiral, however, being by a strong westerly wind blown from his station, the French seized this opportunity, and steered for Quiberon-bay, where a small English squadron lay under the command of commodore Duff. Sir Edward Hawke immediately went in pursuit of them, and on the 20th of November came up with them off Belleisle. The wind blew exceedingly hard at the time, nevertheless the French were engaged, and totally defeated, nor was the navy of France able to undertake any thing of consequence during the remainder of the war. This service, owing to the nature of the coast, was peculiarly hazardous; but when the pilot represented the danger, our gallant admiral only replied, “You have done your duty in pointing out the difficulties; you are now to comply with my order, and lay me along the Soleil Royal.” For these and similar services, the king settled a pension of 2000l. per annum on sif Edward and his two sons, or the survivor of them; he also received the thanks of the house of commons, and the freedom of the city of Cork in a gold box. In 1765 he was appointed vice-admiral of Great Britain, and first lord of the admiralty; and, in 1776, he was made a peer of England, under the title of Baron Hawke, of Towton, in the county of York. His lordship married Catharine the daughter of Walter Brooke, of Burton-hall, in Yorkshire, esq. by whom he had four children. He was one of the greatest characters that ever adorned the British navy; but most of all remarkable for the daring courage which induced him on many occasions to disregard those forms of conducting or sustaining an attack, which the rules and ceremonies of service had before considered as indispensable. He died at his seat at Shepperton in Middlesex, October 14, 1781.

, an elegant and ingenious English writer, was born either in 1715, or 1719, in London, and was, as some report, brought up to the trade of a watchmaker. Sir John Hawkins, however, informs us that he was, when very young, a hired clerk to one Harwood, an attorney in Grocers’-alley in the Poultry. His parents were probably dissenters, as he was a member of the celebrated Mr. Bradbury’s meeting, from which, it is said, he was expelled for some irregularities. It does not appear that he followed any profession, but devoted himself to study and literary employment. So early as 1744 he succeeded Dr. Johnson in compiling the parliamentary debates for the Gentleman’s Magazine, to which he afterwards contributed many of his earlier productions in verse. In 1746, he wrote in that publication, under the' name of Greville, the “Devil Painter, a tale;” the “Chaise Percee,” from the French; “Epistle to the King of Prussia;” “Lines to the Rev. Mr. Layng” (who was at this time a writer in the Magazine), and to the celebrated Warburton “On a series of theological inquiries” “A Thought from Marcus Antoninus” “The Smart.” In- 1747 he contributed “The Accident” “Ants’ Philosophy” “Death of Arachne;” “Chamontand Honorius” “Origin of Doubt;” “Life,” an ode “Lines to Hope” “Winter,” an ode“”The Experiment,“a tale. In 1748,” The Midsummer Wish“” Solitude“” The two Doves,“a fable” Autumn“in 1749,” Poverty insulted“”Region allotted to Old Maids;“” The Nymph at her Toilet;“” God is Love;“” Cloe’s Soliloquy." Some of these are signed H. Greville. Whether he wrote any prose compositions is doubtful. Mr. Duncombe, on whose authority the above list is given, says nothing of prose.

In 1752-3-4, he was concerned with Drs. Johnson, Bathurst, and Warton, in the Adventurer, and from the merit of his papers acquired much reputation and many friends. At this time, his wife kept a school for the education of young ladies, at Bromley in Kent; and his ambition was to demonstrate by his writings how well qualified he was to superintend a seminary of that kind. But an incident happened after the publication of the Adventurer which gave a new turn to his ambition. Arohbishop Herring, who had read his essays with much delight, and had satisfied himself that the character of the author would fully justify the honour intended, conferred on him the degree of doctor of civil law, with which he was so elated, as to imagine that it opened a way for the profession of a civilian, and, having prepared himself by study, made an effort to be admitted a pleader in the ecclesiastical courts, but met with such opposition as obliged him to desist. After this disappointment, he devoted his attention again to the concerns of his school, which was much encouraged, and became a source of considerable emolument. This degree, however, and the consequence he began to acquire in the world, alienated him from son*e of the most valuable of his early friends. Although he had until this time, lived in habits of intimacy with Dr. Johnson, he appears to have withdrawn from him; and it is singular, that in all Mr. Boswell’s narrative of that eminent man’s life, there is not one instance of a meeting between Johnson and Hawkesworth. This seems in some degree to confirm sir John Hawkins’s account, which states that “his success wrought no good effects upon his mind and conduct:” Dr. Johnson made the same remark, and with a keen resentment of his behaviour; and sir John thinks “he might use the same language to Hawkesworth himself, and also reproach him with the acceptance of an academical honour to which he could have no pretensions, and which Johnson, conceiving to be irregular, as many do, held in great contempt;” thus much is certain, that soon after the attainment of it the intimacy between them ceased.

In 1756, at Garrick’s desire, Dr. Hawkesworth altered the comedy of “Amphytrion, or the two Sosias,” from Dryden, and in 1760 wrote “Zimri,” an oratorio, set to music by Stanley, which appears to have been approved by the public. About the same time he altered for Drurylane theatre, Southern’s tragedy of“Oroonoko,” by some omissions and some additions, but the latter, in the opinion of the critics, not enough to supply the place of the former. In 1761 he appeared to more advantage as the author of a dramatic fairy tale, “Edgar and Emtneline;' acted at Drury-lane theatre with great success. Dr. Hawkes worth, having gained much popularity from the eastern stories introduced in the Adventurer, this year gave to the public, in two volumes, his line tale of” Almoran and Hainet," which, notwithstanding some inconsistencies and improbabilities of fable, is entitled to very high praise for its moral tendency, and was long a favourite with the public.

In 1765 he published dean Swift’s works, with explanatory notes, and a life written upon a plan long before laid down by Dr. Johnson; and here it is worthy of remark, that whatever coolness may at one time have subsisted between them, all traces of animosity had been effaced from the mind of Dr. Johnson, when he characterized Hawkesworth as a man “capable of dignifying his narration with so much elegance of language and force of sentiment.” To this edition, the critics of the day discovered many objections, which have, however, been since removed by more accurate information respecting Swift, and by the indefatigable researches of his more recent editor, Mr. Nichols, a man who cannot be praised too highly for having enlarged the resources of literary history.

In 1766, Dr. Hawkesworth was the editor of three additional volumes of Swift’s Letters, with notes and illustrations. In this publication he discovers an uncommon warmth against infidel publications, and speaks of Bolingbroke and his editor Mallet with the utmost detestation: that 4 in this he was sincere, will appear from the following proof. We have already mentioned, that in 1744 he succeeded Dr. Johnson as the writer or compiler of the parliamentary debates in the Gentleman’s Magazine; in this office, if it maybe so termed, he continued until 1760, when the plan of the Magazine was improved by a Review of New Publications. Mr. Owen Ruffhead was the first who filled this department, and continued to do so about two years, according to sir John Hawkins, when he was succeeded by Dr. Hawkesworth; but there must have been an intermediate reviewer, if sir John be correct in the time when Mr. Ruffhead ceased to write, as Dr. Hawkesworth’s first appearance as a critic 'is ascertained, upon undoubted authority, to have been April 1765. In the month of October of that year, there appeared in the Magazine an abstract of Voltaire’s “Philosophical Dictionary,” by a correspondent. Dr. Hawkesworth’s friends, to vyhom it appears his connection with the Magazine was no secret, were alarmed to see an elaborate account of so impious a work; and one of them wrote to him on the subject. An extract from his answer, now before us, and dated Nov. 8, 176:5, will perhaps fill up a chasm in his personal as well as literary history.

“I am always sorry when I hear anonymous performance, not expressly owned, imputed to particular persons, that which a man never owned either privately or in public, I think he should not be accountable for. J speak feelingly on this subject, for though Mr. Duncombe assured you that the Magazine was solely under my direction, I must beg leave to assure you that it is not, nor ever was, there being in almost every number somethings that I never see, and some things that I do not approve. There is in the last number an account of Voltaire’s ‘ Philosophical Dictionary,’ a work of which I never would give any account, because I would not draw the attention of the public to it. It is true that the extracts exhibited in this article do not contain any thing contrary to religion or good morals; but it is certain that these extracts will carry the book into many hands that otherwise it would never have reached; and the book abounds with principles which a man ought to be hanged for publishing, though he believed them to be true, upon the same principle that all states hang rebels and traitors, though the offenders think rebellion and treason their duty to God. I beg, Sir, that you would do me the justice to say this whenever opportunity offers, especially with respect to the political part of the Magazine, for I never wrote a political pamphlet or paper, or ever directly or indirectly assisted in the writing of either in my life.”

In 1768 he published an excellent translation of “Telemachus,” in 4to. He continued to review new books in the magazine, but without offering any publications from his own pen that can now be traced, until 1772, when he was invited to write an account of the late voyages to the South Seas, a fatal undertaking, and which in its consequences deprived him of peace of mind and life itself. When these navigators returned home, the desire of the public to be acquainted with the new scenes and new objects which were now brought to light, was ardently excited, and different attempts were made to satisfy the general curiosity. There soon appeared a publication entitled “A Journal of a Voyage round the World.” This was the production of some person who had been upon the expedition; and, although the account was dry and imperfect, it served in a certain degree to relieve the public eagerness. The journal of Sydney Parkinson, draughtsman to sir Joseph Banks, to whom it belonged by ample purchase, was likewise printed, from a copy surreptitiously obtained; but an injunction from the court of chancery for some time prevented its appearance. This work, though dishonestly given to the world, was recommended by its plates. But it was Dr. Hawkesworth’s account of Lieutenant Cook’s voyage which completely gratified the public curiosity, as it was written by authority, was drawn up from the journal of the lieutenant, and the papers of sir. Joseph Banks; and besides the merit of the composition, derived an extraordinary advantage from the number and excellence of its charts and engravings, which were furnished at the expence of government. The large price given by the bookseller for this work, and the avidity with which it was read, displayed in the strongest light the anxiety of the nation to be fully informed in every thing that belonged to the late navigation and discoveries.

This account, chiefly from the pen of Dr. Kippis, captain Cook’s biographer, in the Biographia Britannica, is too favourable: the public was not satisfied with this work. The literary journals, indeed, examined it with candour, and rather with favour; but men of science were disappointed, and the friends of religion and morals were shocked/ No infidel could have obtruded opinions more adverse to the religious creed of the hation, than what Dr. Hawkesworth advanced in his preface. He denied a special providence; he supposed that providence might act in some general way in producing events, but contended that one event ought not to be distinguished, or accounted an extraordinary interposition more than another. He asks, “If the deliverance of the Endeavour was an extraordinary interposition, why did not Providence interpose to prevent the ship from striking at all, rather than to prevent her from being beaten to pieces after she had struck?” a question which was considered as much fitter for the mouth of a professed scoffer than that of a man whose regard for revealed religion approached, in the opinion of some, to intemperate zeal. In his “Almoran and Hamet,” his notions of providence are confused and perplexed; but in this he has attacked revealed religion, by striking off one of its principal duties, and one of its most consoling hopes, the duty and efficacy of prayer, of which he was not, however, insensible when he wrote No. 28 of the Adventurer.

An innumerable host of enemies now appeared in the newspapers and magazines; some pointed out blunders in matters of science, and some exercised their wit in poetical translations and epigrams these might hurt his feelings as an author but the greater part, who arraigned his impious sentiments and indecent narratives, probably rendered his sufferings as a man more acute. Against their charges he stood defenceless; and no defence indeed could be attempted with a reasonable expectation of success. But what, we are told, completed his chagrin, was the notice frequently given in an infamous magazine published at that time, that “All the amorous passages and descriptions in Dr. Hawkesworth’s Collection of Voyages (should be) selected and illustrated with a suitable plate” And this, in defiance of public decency, was actually done, and he whose fame had been raised on his labours in the cause of piety and morals, was thus dragged into a partnership in the most detestable depravity that the human mind can invent.

That such a reception given to a work of which he thought he might be proud, and from which he drew so great an emolument, should have irritated his mind, can excite little surprize. No respect for the services he had rendered to religion or virtue could obliterate the memory of his declension; and it certainly aggravated the pain his friends felt, when they considered that whatever was objectionable in this work, had come from his pen without provocation and without necessity, either from the nature of the undertaking, or the expectation of the public. He was, indeed, so sensible that his opinions would shock the feelings of his readers, that he thought it necessary to apologize for them in a very respectful, although unsatisfactory manner.

Soon after the publication of this ill-fated book, he became known to a lady who had great property and interest in the East India company; and through her means was chosen a director of that body, at the general election, in April 1773. The affairs of the company were at this time in a confused state, and the public mind greatly agitated by the frequent debates both in parliament and at the Indiahouse. Dr. Hawkesworth (who in the list is styled John Hawkesworth, esq.) probably attended the meetings, but took no active share: his health was indeed now declining and he expired at the house of his friend Dr. Grant, of Lime-street, Nov. 17, 1773. He was interred at Bromley, in Kent, where a monument was erected to his memory.

Of his personal character the following friendly sketch appeared in the Annual Register for 1773, and was no doubt intended to counteract some disadvantageous reports respecting his principles, which were circulated about the time of his death. “Nature had endowed him with an uncommonly fine understanding, which had been improved not only by long study, but by converse with mankind. His fertile mind teemed with ideas> which he delivered in so clear, and yet concise a manner, that no one could be at a loss perfectly to comprehend his meaning, or ever tired by hearing him speak; especially as his diction was so unaffectedly pure, and his language so simply elegant, that the learned and unlearned attended with equal pleasure to that unstudied flow of eloquence, which, without seeming to look for them, always adopted those words which were most suitable to the subject, as well as most pleasing to his hearers. It has been objected to him, that he suffered his passions to hold too strong a dominion over him; and it must be confessed a too keen sensibility seemed to him, as indeed it ever is to all who possess it, a pleasing but unfortunate gift. Alive to every tender sentiment of friendship, his heart dilated with joy whenever heaven put it in his power to be beneficial to those he loved; but this feeling disposition was the means of leading him into such frequent, though transient gusts of passion, as were too much for his delicate constitution to bear, without feeling the effects of them. Yet with all these quick sensations, he was incapable of lasting resentment or revenge; and had he never found an enemy till he had done an injury, he would, we may venture to pronounce, have left the world without having known one.”

, an able naval commander, was born at Plymouth about 1520. Being the son of a seaman, captain William Hawkins, he imbibed a love for the profession, and when a youth made several voyages to Spain, Portugal, and the Canaries. In the spring of 1562 he formed the design of his first famous voyage, the consequence of which was very important to his country, as he then began that traffic in slaves, which after two centuries and a half we have seen abolished. At that time, however, this trade was accounted honourable and useful, and sir John bore the badge of his exploits in a crest of arms granted him by patent, consisting of a “demi-moor in his proper colour, bound with a cord,” not unlike a device which we have seen employed to excite an abhorrence of the slave-trade when its abolition was first agitated. In returning from a third expedition of this kind he was attacked and defeated by a Spanish fleet. After undergoing many hardships, he reached home in Jair. 1568; and it is said that his ill-success in this instance damped his ardour for maritime enterprise. In 1573 he was appointed treasurer of the navy, and in a few months he had nearly lost his life by a wound from an enthusiastic assassin, who mistook him for another person. He was now consulted on every important occasion, and in 1588; was appointed rear-admiral on-board the Victory, to confront the famous armada. His conduct on this occasion obtained for him the high commendations of his illustrious queen, the honour of knighthood, and other important commands in the navy. He died in 1595, it is said of vexation, on account of an unsuccessful attempt on the enemies possessions in the West Indies, and in the Canaries. He was a good mathematician, and understood every thing that related to his profession as a seaman. He possessed much personal courage, and had a presence of mind that set him above fear, and which enabled him frequently to deliver himself and others out of the reach of the most imminent dangers; he had great sagacity, and formed his plans so judiciously, and executed the orders committed to him with so much punctuality and accuracy, that he ever obtained the applause of his superiors. He was submissive to those above him, and courteous to his inferiors, extremely affable to his seamen, and much beloved by them. He sat twice in parliament as burgess for Plymouth, and once for some other borough. He erected an hospital at Chatham for the relief of disabled and diseased seamen, and is highly applauded by his contemporaries and by historians, who lived after him. His son, sir Richard Hawkins, was brought up to a maritime life, and in 1582, when very young, he had the command of a vessel in an expedition under his uncle to the West Indies; he also commanded a ship in the action against the Spanish armada, in which he was greatly distinguished. About 1593, he sailed with three ships, his own property, to the coast of Brazil, at the commencement of a much longer voyage; but he was obliged to burn one of his little squadron, another deserted their commander, so that he was under the necessity of sailing alone through the straits of Magellan. To satisfy the desires of his men, he made prizes of some vessels, which drew upon him the whole force of a Spanish squadron, to which he was compelled to yield. After a confinement of two years in Peru and the adjacent provinces, he was sent back to Europe. He died in 1622, as he was attending, on business, the privycouncil. He left behind him a work of considerable value, which was printed and ready for publication it is entitled “The Observations of sir Richard Hawkins, knight, into the South-sea, A.D. 1593.” From this piece, which the author dedicated to prince Charles, afterwards king Charles I., it appears that the issue of his voyage to the South-seas, his long confinement, and the disasters which naturally attended it, brought him into great distress. His nautical observations, his description of the passage through the straits of Magellan, and his remarks on the sea-scurvy, and on the best methods of preserving his men in health, were considered at that period of very great importance. He intended to have published a second part of his observations, in which he meant to have given an account of what happened to him and his companions during their stay in Peru, and in Terra Firma, but which death prevented him from accomplishing.

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

Without friends or family connections, or at least without such as could advance him in the profession to which he had betaken himself, he was now (his clerkship being expired, and he himself admitted an attorney and solicitor) to seek for the means of procuring business by making for himself reputable and proper connections.

About 1741, a club having been instituted by Mr. Immyns, an attorney, a musical man, (but better known as the amanuensis of Dr. Pepusch), and some other musical persons, under the name of “The Madrigal Society,” to meet every Wednesday evening, he became a member of it, and continued so many years. Pursuing his inclination for music still farther, he became also a member of “The Academy of Ancient Music,” which used to meet every Thursday evening at the Crown and Anchor in the Strand, but afterwards removed to Freemasons’ -hall; and of this he continued a member till a few years before its removal.

Impelled by his own taste for poetry, and excited to it by his friend Foster Webb’s example, who had contributed to “The Gentleman’s Magazine” many very elegant poetical compositions, he had, before this time, himself become an occasional contributor in the same kind, as well to that as to some other publications. The earliest of hi? productions of this species, now known, is supposed to be a copy of verses “To Mr. John Stanley, occasioned by looking over some compositions of his, lately published,” which bears date 19th February, 1740, and was inserted in “The Daily Advertiser” for February 21, 1741; but, about 1742, he proposed to Mr. Stanley the project of publishing, in conjunction with him, six cantatas for a Voice and instruments, the words to be furnished by himself, and the iriusic by Mr. Stanley. The proposal was accepted, the publication was to be at their joint expence, and for their mutual benefit; and accordingly, in 1742, six cantatas were thus published, the five first written by Mr. Hawkins, the sixth and last by Foster Webb; and, these having succeeded beyond the most sanguine expectations, a second set of six more, written wholly by himself, were in like manner published a few months after, and succeeded equally well.

As these compositions, by being frequently performed at Vauxhall, Ranelagh, and other public places, and at many private concerts, had become favourite entertainments, and established the author’s reputation as a poet, many persons, finding him also a modest well-informed young man of unexceptionable morals, were become desirous of his acquaintance. Among these was Mr. Hare of Lhnehouse, a brewer, who being himself a musical man, and having met him at Mr. Stanley’s at musical parties, gave him an invitation to his house; and, to forward him in his profession, introduced him to a friend of his, Peter Storer of Highgate, esq. This introduction became, from his own good conduct, the means of making Mr. Hawkins’s fortune, though in a way which neither he nor Mr. Hare at that time could foresee, and different from that in which it was first intended.

In the winter of this year 1749, Dr. (then Mr.) Johnson was induced to institute a club to meet every Tuesday evening at the King’s Head, in Ivy-lane, near St. Paul’s. It consisted only of nine persons, and Mr. Hawkins was invited to become one of the first members; and about this time, as it is supposed, finding his father’s house, where he had hitherto resided, too small for the dispatch of his business, now very much increasing, he, in conjunction with Dr. Munckley, a physician, with whom he had contracted ah intimacy, took a house in ClementVlane, Lombard-street. The ground-floor was occupied by him as an office, and the first floor by the doctor as his apartment. Here he continued till the beginning of 1753, when, on occasion of his marriage with Sidney, the youngest of Mr. Storer’s daughters, who brought him a considerable fortune, which was afterwards greatly increased, he took a house in Austin Friars, near Broadstreet, still continuing to follow his profession of an attorney. Having received, on the death of Peter Storer, esq. his wife’s brother, in 1759; a very large addition to her fortune, he quitted business to the present Mr. chamberlain Clark, who had a short time before completed his clerkship under him, disposed of his house in Austin Friars, and purchasing a house at Twickenham for a country, he soon afterwards bought the lease of one in Hatton-street, London, for a town-residence.

From a very early period of his life he had entertained a strong love for the amusement of angling; and being long acquainted with Walton’s. “Complete Angler,” had, by observation and experience, himself become a very able proficient in the art. Hearing, about this time, that Mr. Moses Browne proposed to publish a new edition of that work, and being himself in possession of some material particulars respecting Walton, he, by letter, made Mr. Browne an offer of writing, for his intended edition,-Walton’s Life. To this proposal no answer was returned, at least for some time, from which circumstance Mr. Hawkins concluded, as any one reasonably would, that his offer was not accepted; and, therefore, having also learnt in the mean time that Mr. B. meant not to publish the text as the author left it, but to modernize it in order to file off die rust, as he called it, wrote again to tell Mr. Browne that he so understood it; and that, as Mr. B.'s intention was to sophisticate the text in the manner above mentioned, he, Mr. Hawkins, would himself publish a correct edition. Such an edition, in 1760, he accordingly published in octavo with notes, adding to it a “Life of Walton” by himself, a “Life of Cotton,” the author of the second part, by the well-known Mr. Oldys; and ‘a set’ of cuts designed by Wale, and engraved by Ryland.

His propensity to music, manifested by his becoming a member and frequenter of the several musical societies before mentioned, and also by a regular concert at his house in Austin Friars, had led him, at the same time that he was endeavouring to get together a good library of books, to be also solicitous foY collecting the works of some of the best musical composers; and, among other acquisitions, it was his singular good fortune to become possessed by purchase of several of the most scarce and valuable theoretical treatises on the science itself any where extant, which had formerly been collected by Dr. Pepusch*. With this stock of erudition, therefore, he about this time, at the instance of some very good judges, his friends, set about procuring materials for a work then very much wanted, a “History of the Science and Practice of Music,” which he afterwards published.

At the recommendation of the well-known Paul Whitehead, esq his neighbour in the country, who, conceiving him a fit person for a magistrate, had mentioned him as such to the duke of Newcastle, then lord lieutenant for. Middlesex, his name was, in 1761, inserted in the commission of the peace for that county; and having, besides a due attention to the great work in which he was engaged, by the proper studies, and a sedulous attendance at the sessions, qualified himself for the office, he became an active and useful magistrate in the countyt. Observing, as he had frequent occasion to do in the course of his duty, the bad state of highways, and the great defect in the laws for amending and keeping them in repair, he set himself to revise the former statutes, and drew an act of parliament consolidating ajl the former ones, and adding such other regulations as were necessary. His sentiments on this subject he published in octavo, in 1763, under the title of “Observations on the State of Highways, and on, the Laws for amending and keeping them in Repair,” subjoining to them the draught of the act before mentioned, which bill, being afterwards introduced into parliament, passed into a law, and is that under which all the highways in the kingdom are at this time kept repaired. Of this

* This collection of treatises, he, af-house quarrel produced an application ter tlio completion of his work, gave, fora warrant. To check this, therein 1778, to the British Museum, where fore, he altered his mode, and received, it still continues. his due fees, but kept them separately

f When he first began to act, he in a purse; and at the end of every

not even the legal and authorized on, the winter, delivered the whole amount

and pursued this method for some time, to the clergyman of the parish, to be

litigation, and that every trilling ale-poor as he judged fit. bill it is but justice to add, that, in the experience of more than thirty years, it has never required a single amendment.

Johnson, and sir Joshua (then Mr.) Reynolds, had, in, the winter of this year 1763, projected the establishment of a club to meet every Monday evening at the Turk’s Head in Gerrard street, and, at Johnson’s solicitation, he, Mr. H. became one of the first members. This club, since known by the appellation of “The Literary Club,” was at first intended, like the former in Ivy-lane, to have consisted of no more than nine persons, and that was the number of the first members; but the rule was broken through to admit one who had been a member of that in Ivy-lane, Till this admission, Johnson and Mr. Hawkins were the only persons that had been members of both.

An event of considerable importance and magnitude, in 1764, engaged him to stand forth as the champion of the county of Middlesex, against a claim, then for the first time set up, and so enormous in its amount as justly to excite resistance. The city of London finding it necessary to re-build the gaol of Newgate, the expence of which, according to their own estimates, would amount to 40,Oooj. had this year applied to parliament, by a bill brought into the House of commons by their own members, in which, on a suggestion that the county prisoners, removed to Newgate for a few days previous to their trials at the Old Bailey, were as two to one to the London prisoners constantly confined there, they endeavoured to throw the burthen of two-thirds of the expence on the county, while they themselves proposed to contribute one third only. This attempt the magistrates for Middlesex thought it their duty to oppose; and accordingly a vigorous opposition to it was commenced and supported under the conduct of Mr. Hawkins, who drew a petition against the bill, and a case of the county, which was printed and distributed amongst the members of both houses of parliament. It was the subject of a day’s conversation in the House of lords; and produced such an effect in the House of commons, that the city, by their own members, moved for leave to withdraw the bill. The success of this opposition, and the abilities and spirit with which it was conducted, naturally attracted towards him the attention of his fellow-magistrates; and, a vacancy not long after happening in the office of chairman of the quarter sessions, Mr. Hawkins was, on the 19th day 4>f September, 1765, elected the successor. In the year 1771 he quitted Twickenham, and, in the summer of the next year, he, for the purpose of obtaining, by searches in the Bodleian and other libraries there, farther materials for iiis History of Music, made a journey to Oxford, carrying with him an engraver from London, to make drawings from the portraits in the music-school.

On occasion of actual tumults or expected disturbances, he had more than once been called into service of great personal danger. When the riots at Brentford had arisen, during the time of the Middlesex election in 1768, he and some of his brethren attended to suppress them; and, in consequence of an expected riotous assembly of the journeymen Spitalfields weavers in Moorfields, in 1769, -the magistrates of Middlesex and he at their head, with a party of guards, attended to oppose them, but the mob, on seeing them prepared, thought it prudent to disperse. In these and other instances, and particularly in his conduct as chairman, having given sufficient proof of his activity, resolution, abilities, integrity, and loyalty, he, on the 23d of October, 1772, received from his present majesty the honour of knighthood.

Mr. Gostling of Canterbury, with whom, though they had never seen each other, he had for some years corresponded by letter, having invited him, he, in this year, paid him a visit at Canterbury, and procured from him a great deal of very curious musical intelligence, which none but Mr. Gostling could have furnished; and in the month of June in the next year, 1773, he repeated his visit. In this latter year, 1773, Dr. Johnson and Mr. Steevens published, in ten volumes octavo, their first joint edition of Shakspeare, to which sir J. H. contributed such notes as are distinguished by his name, as he afterwards did a few inbre on the republication of it in 1778. An address to the king from the county of Middlesex, on occasion of the American war, having, in 1774, been judged expedient, end at his instance voted, he drew up such an address, and together with two of his brethren had, in the month of October in that year, the honour of presenting it.

After sixteen years’ labour, he, in 1776, published, in five volumes, quarto, his “General History of the Science and Practice of Music,” which, in consequence of permission obtained in 1773 for that purpose, he dedicated to the king, and presented it to him at Buckingham-house on the Mth of November 1776, when he was honoured with an audience of considerable length both from the king and queen. Few works have been attacked with more acrimony and virulence than this. Its merit, however, as containing a great deal of original and curious information, which, but for its author, would have perished, has been amply attested by the approbation of some of the very best judges of the science and of literary composition; and by thai of the university of Oxford, who, in consequence of its publication, made him soon after, a voluntary offer of the degree of doctor of laws, which he had reasons for declining, and afterwards paid him the compliment of requesting his picture.

Not long after this publication, in November 1777, he was induced, by an attempt to rob his house, which, though unsuccessful, was made three different nights with the interval of one or two only between each attempt, to quit his house in Hatton-street and, after a temporary residence for a short time in St. James’s-place, he took a lease of one, formerly inhabited by the famous admiral Vernon, in the street leading up to Queen-square, Westminster, and removed thither. By this removal, he became a constant attendant on divine worship at the parish church of St. Margaret, Westminster; and having learnt, in December 177S, that the surveyor to the board of ordnance was, in defiance of a proviso in the lease under which they claimed, carrying up a building at the east end of the church, which was likely to obscure the beautiful painted glass window over the altar there, sir J. H. with the concurrence of some of the principal inhabitants, wrote to the surveyor, and compelled him to take down two feet of the wall, which he had already carried up above the sill of the window, and to slope off the roof of his building in such a manner as that it was not only no injury, but, on the contrary, a defence, to the window.

In the month of December, 1783, Dr. Johnson, having discovered in himself symptoms of a dropsy, sent for sir John Hawkins, and telling him the precarious state of his health, declared his desire of making a will, and requested him to be one of his executors. On his accepting the office, he told him his intention of providing for his servant; and, after concerting with him a plan for investing a sum of money for that purpose, he voluntarily opened to him the state of his circumstances, and the amount of what he had to dispose of. Finding the doctor, however, notwithstanding liis repeated solicitations from time to time, extremely averse to carrying this intention into effect by the actual execution of a will, and thinking it might in some measure arise from the want oi legal information as to the necessary form, he, sir J. from the above communications, some time afterwards, drew and sent him a draught of a will, with instructions how to execute it, but leaving in it blanks for the names of his executors, and for that of the residuary legatee, (for though Johnson had given no instructions on this latter head, sir J. H. had apprized him of the absolute necessity of a bequest of the residue, that it might not become, as it would otherwise, by the silent operation of law, the property of his executors). Johnson still procrastinated, but at length executed this draught; so carelessly, however, as to omit firsts filling up the blanks,

When this circumstance became known to sir J. H. he represented this act to him (as it really was) as a mere nullity; and Johnson was prevailed upon, on the 27th of November, 1784, at Mr. Strahan’s, at Islington, to give him the necessary instructions, which he, sir J. on the spot converted into proper legal form, by dictating, conformably to. them, a will to Mr. Hoole, who, with some other friends, had there called in upon Johnson, and which being coinpleted, was executed by Johnson and properly attested. In the codicil, which Johnson afterwards made, sir J. assisted in the same manner, as to legal phraseology, and directing the proper mode of execution and attestation.

From so long an acquaintance with him, and from having been intimately consulted in his affairs, and, as it is strongly believed, in consequence of a conversation that passed between them, sir J. H. was induced, on the event of Johnson’s death, on the 13th day of December, 1784, to undertake to write a life of him, and accordingly he st;t himself to collect material^* for that purpose, and for an. edition of his works, which with his life was afterwards published. But, not three months after the commencement of this undertaking, he met with the severest loss that a literary man can sustain, in the destruction of his library; consisting pf a numerous and well-chosen collection of books, ancient and modern, in many languages, fnd on most subjects, which it had been the business of ^bove thirty years at intervals to get together. This event was the consequence of a fire. Of this loss, great as it was in pecuniary value, and comprising in books, prints, and drawings, many articles that could never be replaced, he was never heard in the smallest degree to complain; but, having found a temporary reception in a large house in Orchard-street, Westminster, he continued there a short time, and then took a house in the Broad Sanctuary, Westminster.

This event, for a short time, put a stop to the progress of his undertaking. As soon, however, as he could sufficiently collect his thoughts, he recommenced his office of biographer of Johnson, and editor of his works; and completed his intention by publishing, in 1787^ the life and works, in eleven volumes, 8vo, which he dedicated to the king. With this production he terminated his literary labours; and, having for many years been more particularly sedulous in his attention to the duties of religion, and accustomed to spend all his leisure from other necessary concerns in theological and devotional studies, he now more closely addicted himself to them, and set himself more especially to prepare for that event which he saw could be at no great distance and, the better to accomplish this end, he, in the month of May 1788, by a will and other proper instruments, made such an arrangement of his affairs as he meant should take place after his decease.

In this manner he spent his time till about the month of May 1789, when, finding his appetite fail him in a greates degree than usual, he had recourse, as he had sometimes had before on the same occasion, to the waters of the Islington Spa. These he drank for a few mornings; but on the 14th of that month, while he was there, he was, it is supposed, seized with a paralytic affection, as on his returning to the carriage which waited for him, his servants perceived a visible alteration in him. On his arrival at home he went to bed, but got up a few hours after, intending to receive an old friend from whom he expected a visit in the evening. At dinner, however, his disorder returning, he was led up to bed, from which he never rose, for, being afterwards accompanied with an apoplexy, it put a period to his Jife, on the 21st of the same month, about two in the morning. He was interred on the 28th in the cloisters of Westminster-abbey, in the north walk near the easternmost door into the church, under a stone, containing, by his express injunctions, no more than the initials of his name, the date of his death and his age; leaving behind biox a high reputation for abilities and integrity, united with the well-earned character of an active and resolute magistrate, an affectionate husband and father, a firm and zealous friend, a loyal subject, and a sincere Christian (as, notwithstanding the calumnies of his enemies, can be abundantly testified by the evidence of many persons nowliving), and rich in the friendship and esteem of very many of the very first characters for rank, worth, and abilities, of the age in which he lived.

, an architect of considerable note, was born in 1666, and at the age of seventeen became the scholar of sir Christopher Wren, but deviated a little from the lessons and practice of his master, at least he did not improve on them, though his knowledge in every science connected with his art, is much commended, and his character remains unblemished. He was deputysurveyor at the building of Chelsea college, clerk of the works at Greenwich, and was continued in the same posts by king William, queen Anne, and George I. at Kensington, Whitehall, and St. James’s; surveyor of all the new churches, and of Westminster-abbey, from the death of sir Christopher, and designed many that were erected in pursuance of the statute of queen Anne for building fifty new churches viz. St. Mary Wool no th, in Lombard-street; Christ church, in Spitaifields St. George, Middlesex St. Anne, Limehouse and St. George, Bloomsbury the steeple of which is a master-stroke of absurdity. It consists of an obelisk topped with the statue of George I. hugged by the royal supporters: a lion, an unicorn, and a king, on such an eminence, as Walpole observes, are very surprizing. He also rebuilt some part of All Souls’ college, Oxford, and gave the plan for a new front to the street, which may be seen in Williams’s “Oxonia,” but has never been executed. At Blenheim and Castle-Howard he was associated with Vanbrugh, and was employed in erecting a magnificent mausoleum there, when he died in March 1736, near seventy years of age. He built several mansions, particularly Easton Neston in Northamptonshire; restored a defect in Beverley minster by a machine that screwed up the fabric with extraordinary art repaired, in a judicious manner, the west end of Westminster-abbey and gave a design for the Radcliffe library at Oxford.

, a brave officer of the four, teenth century, has been slightly noticed by his contemporaries at home, and would not have been brought into a conspicuous point of view but for the engraved portrait of him presented to the society of antiquaries in 1775, by lord Hailes. He is said, by the concurrent testimony of our writers, to have been the son of a tanner of Sible Hedingham, in Essex, where he was born in the reign of Edward II. Mr. Morant says, the manor of Hawk wood in. that parish takes its name from sir John. But it was holden before him by Stephen Hawkwood, probably his father, a circumstance which would lead one to doubt the meanness of his birth as well as his profession. Persons who gave names to manors were generally of more considerable rank: and the manor appears to have been in the family from the time of king John.

Our hero is said to have been put apprentice to a tailor in London: “but soon,” says Fuller, “turned his needle into a sword, and his thimble into a shield,” being prest into the service of Edward III. for his French wars, where he behaved himself so valiantly, that from a common soldier he was promoted to the rank of captain; and for some farther good service had the honour of knighthood conferred on him by that king, though he was accounted the poorest knight in the army. His general, the black prince, highly esteemed him for his valour and conduct, of which he gave extraordinary proofs at the battle of Poictiers.

Upon the conclusion of the peace between the English and French by the treaty of Bretigni 1360, sir John, finding his estate too small to support his title and dignity, associated himself with certain companies called, by Froissart, “Les Tard Venus;” by Walsingham, “Magna Comitiva.” These were formed by persons of various nations, who, having hitherto found employment in the wars between England and France, and having held governments, or built and fortified ho.uses in the latter kingdom which, they were now obliged to give up, found themselves reduced to this desperate method of supporting themselves and their soldiers by marauding and pillaging, or by en-, gaging in the service of less states, which happened to be at war with each other. Villani, indeed, charges Edward III. with secretly authorizing these ravages in France, while outwardly he affected a strict observance of the peace. At this time, in the summer, continues this historian, ah English tailor, named John della Guglea, that is, John of the needle, who had distinguished himself iri the war, began to form a company of marauders, and collected a number of English, who delighted in mischief, and hoped to live by plunder, surprizing and pillaging first one town, and then another. This company increased so much that they became the terror of the whole country. All who had not fortified places to defend them were forced to treat with him, and furnish him with provision and money, for which he promised them his protection. The effect of this was, that in a few months he acquired great wealth. Having also received an accession of followers and power, he roved from one country to another, till at length he came to the Po. There he made all who came in his way prisoners. The clergy he pillaged, but let the laity go without injury. The court of Rome was greatly alarmed at these proceedings, and made preparations to oppose these banditti. Upon the arrival of certain Englishmen on the banks of the Po, Hawkwood resigned his command to them, and professed submission to the king of England, to whose servants he presented a large share of his ill-gotten wealth.

The first appearance of Hawkwood in Italy-was in the 1*isan service in 1364; after which period he was every where considered as a most accomplished soldier, and fought, as different occasions presented themselves, in the service of many of the Italian states. In 1387 we find him engaged in a hazardous service in defence of the state of Florence. The earl of Armagnac, the Florentine general, having been lately defeated by Venni, the governor of the Siannese, the victors marched to surprize Hawkwood, and encamped within a mile and a half of him. But this cautious general retreated into the Cremonese, and when by several skirmishes he had amused the enemy, who kept within a mile of him, and thought to force his camp, he sallied out and repulsed them with loss. This success a little discouraged them. Venni is said to have sent Hawkwood a fox in a cage, alluding to his situation; to which Hawkwood returned for answer, “the fox knew how to find his way out.” This he did by retreating to the river Oglio, placing his best horse in the rear till the enemy had crossed the river, on whose opposite bank he placed 400 English archers on horseback. The rear by their assistance crossed the river and followed the rest, who, after fording the Mincio, encamped within ten miles of the Adige. The greatest danger remained here. The enemy had broken down the banks of the river, and let out its waters, swoln by the melting of the snow and mountains to overflow the plains. Hawkwood’s troops, surprized at midnight by the increasing floods, had no resource but immediately to mount their horses, and, leaving all their baggage behind them, marched in the morning slowly through the water, which came up to their horses bellies. By evening, with great difficulty, they gained Baldo, a town in the Paduan. Some of the weaker horses sunk under the fatigue. Many of the foot perished with cold, and struggling against the water; many supported themselves by laying hold on the tails of the stronger horses. Notwithstanding every precaution, many of the cavalry were lost as well as their horses. The pursuers, seeing the country under water, and concluding the whole army had perished, returned back. The historian observes, that it was universally agreed no other general could have got over so many difficulties and dangers, and led back his small army out of the heart of the enemy’s country, with no other loss than that occasioned by the floods, which no precaution could have prevented. One of the most celebrated actions of Hawkwood’s life, says Muratori, was this treat, performed with so much prudence and art, that ! deserves to be paralleled with the most illustrious Roman generals; having, to the disgrace of an enemy infinitely superior in number, and in spite of all obstructions from the rivers, given them the slip, and brought off his army safe to Castel Baldo, on the borders of the Paduan. Sir John Hawkwood, as soon as he found himself among his allies, employed himself in refreshing his troop and watching the enemy’s motions.

At the end of 1391 the Florentines made peace with Galeazzo and the rest of their enemies, though on disadvantageous terms. To reduce the expences of the state, they discharged their foreign auxiliaries, except Hawkwood, of whose valour and fidelity they had had such repeated proofs, with 1000 men under his command.

Peace being now re-established abroad, the city of Florence was, in 1393, distracted with civil feuds, which were not terminated by the execution and exile of some principal citizens. But at the close of this year they sustained a greater loss in sir John Hawkwood, who died March 6, advanced in years, at his house in the street called PulveYosa, near Florence. His funeral was celebrated with -reat magnificence, and the general lamentation of the whole city. His bier, adorned with gold and jewels, was supported by the first persons of the republic, followed by horses in gilded trappings, banners, and other military ensigns, and the whole body of the citizens. His remains were deposited in the church of St. Repar.ita, where a statue (as Poggio and Rossi call it, though it is well known to be a portrait) of him on horseback was put np by a public decree. If the Florentine historians did not distinguish between a statue and a portrait, no wonder our countryman Stowe talks of an “image as great as a mighty pillar,” erecteci to the memory of sir John Hawkwood at Florence or that Weever, copying him, calls it “a statue.”

In the representation of this hero painted on the dome of the church, he appears mounted on a pacing gelding, whose bridle, with the square ornament embossed on it, is covered with crimson velvet or cloth, and the saddle is red, stuffed or quilted. He is dressed in armour with a surcoat flowing on from his shoulders, but girt about his body; his greaves are covered with silk or cloth, but the kneepieces may be distinguished under them: his shoes, which are probably part of his greaves, are pointed according to the fashion of the times. His hands are bare in his right he holds a yellow baton of office, which rests on his thigh in his left the bridle. His head, which has very short hair, is covered with a cap not unlike our earls’ coronets, with a border of wrought work.

Sir John had a cenotaph in the church of his native town, erected by his executors Robert Rokeden senior and junior, and John Coe. It is described by Weever, as “a tomb arched over, and engraven to the likeness of hawks flying in a wood,” which, Fuller says, was “quite flown away.” It is plain the last of these writers never took any pains to visit or procure true information about this monument, which still remains in good preservation near the upper end of the fourth aile of Sible Hedingham church. The arch of this tomb is of the mixed kind, terminating in a sort of bouquet, on both sides of which, over the arch, are smaller arches of tracery in relief. The arch is adorned with hawks and their bells, and other emblems of hunting, as, a hare, a boar, a boy sounding a conch-shell, &c. The two pillars that support it are charged with a dragon and lion. Under this arch is a low altar-tomb with five shields in quatrefoils, formerly painted. In the south window of the chantry chapel, at the east end of this aile, are painted hawks, hawks bells, and escallops, which last are part of the Hawkwood arms, as the first were probably the crest, as well as a rebus of the name; and we find a hawk volant on sir John’s seal. In the north and west side of the tower are two very neat hawks on perches in relief, in rondeaux hollowed in the wall: that over the west door is extremely well preserved. They probably denote that some of the family built the tower. Mr. Morant imagines some of them rebuilt this church about the reign of Edward III. but none appear to have been in circumstances equal to such munificence before our hero; and perhaps his heirs were the rebuilders.

Contemporary and succeeding writers agree in their praises of this illustrious general. Both friends and enemies considered him as one of the greatest soldiers of his age. Poggio styles him “rei militaris scientia clarus, et bello assuetus,” “dux sagax,” “dux prudens,” “tantus dux,” “rei bellicae peritissimus,” fl ad belli officia prudentissimus,“” expertae virtutis et fidei;“epithets these which might serve instead of a particular character. Muratori calls him,” II prodeet il accortissimo capitano." As he had been formed under the Black Prince, it is not to be wondered that his army became the most exact school of martial discipline, in which were trained many captains, who afterwards rose to great eminence.

The circumstances of the times must make an apology for the frequent changes of his service, which led him to engage as suited his interest. He was a soldier of fortune; and his abilities in the field occasioned him to be couned by different rival states. The Florentines offered the best terms, and to them he ever after adhered with an irreproachable fidelity. His chanty appears in his joining with several persons of quality in this kingdom, in founding the English hospital at Rome for the entertainment of poor travellers.

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

, esq. an agreeable English writer, was born at Glenburne in Sussex, Aug. 21, 1695, and educated partly at Newick, near Lewes, and partly at Lewes. In 1712 he went to Oxford, which he left without a degree, and removed to the Temple. Here he studied the law until a defect in his sight from the small pox obliged him to relinquish it. In 1718 he travelled in England and Scotland, and in 1720 on the continent, where he was a very acute observer and inquirer. After his return he resided for some years at his house in Sussex.

When lord Hardwicke was called up to the house of lords in 1734, he was chosen to succeed him in representing the borough of Seatbrd in the Commons; and he represented this borough for the remainder of his life. He defended the measures of sir Robert Walpole in general, but was far from being subservient or indiscriminate in his approbation of public measures. In 1728 he published his 1 Essay on Civil Government;“in 1730 his poem entitled” Mount Caburn,“dedicated to the duchess of Newcastle, in which he celebrates the beauties of his native country, and the virtues of his friends. In 1735 he published” Remarks on the Laws relative to the Poor, with proposals for their better relief and employment; and at the same time brought in a bill for the purpose. He made another attempt of this kind, but without effect. In May 1738, he was appointed a commissioner of the victualling-office. In 1753 appeared “Religio Philosophi; or, the principles of morality and Christianity, illustrated from a view of che universe, and of man’s situation in it.” This was followed, in 1754, by his “Essay on Deformity;” in which he rallies his own imperfection in this respect with much liveliness and good humour. “Bodily deformity,” says he, “is very rare. Among 558 gentlemen in the House of commons, I am the only one that is so. Thanks to my worthy constituents, who never objected to my person, and I hope never to give them cause to object to my behaviour.” The same year he translated Hawkins Browne “De Immortalitati Animse.” In 1755 he translated and modernized some “Epigrams of Martial;” but survived this publication only a short time, dying June 22, the same year. A little time before, he had been appointed keeper of the records in the Tower; and it is said that his attention and assiduity, during the few months he held that office, were eminently serviceable to his successors.

He left a son, who inherited the imperfect form of his father. This gentleman went into the service of the East India company, where he acquired rank, fortune, and reputation; but, being one of those who opposed Cossim Ally Kawn, and unfortunately falling into his hands, was, with other gentlemen, ordered to be put to death at Patna, October 5, 1762. Mr. Hay’s works were collected by his daughter in two volumes, quarto, 1794, with a biographical sketch, exhibiting his many amiable qualities, and public spirit.

, an eminent musical composer, was born at llhorau, in Lower Austria, in 1733. His father, a wheelwright by trade, played upon the harp without the least knowledge of music, which, however, excited the attention of his son, and first gave birth to his passion for music. In his early childhood he used to sing to his father’s harp the simple tunes which he was able to play, and being sent to a small school in the neighbourhood, he there began to learn music regularly; after which he was placed under Reuter, maestro di capella of the cathedral at Vienna; and having a voice of great compass, was received into the choir, where he was well taught, not only to sing, but to play on the harpsichord and violin. At the age of eighteen, on the breaking of his voice, he was dismissed from the cathedral. After this, he supported himself during eight years as well as he could by his talents; and began to study more seriously than ever. He read the works of Matthcson, lieinichen, and others, on the theory of music; and for the practice, studied with particular attention the pieces of Emanuel Bach, whom he made his model in writing for keyed instruments. At length, he met with Porpora, who was at this time in Vienna; and during five months was so happy as to receive his counsel and instructions in singing and the composition of vocal music.

About this time he resided in the house with Metastasio three years, as music-master to mademoiselle Martinetz, and during this time had the great advantage of hearing the Italian language spoken with purity, and of receiving the imperial laureat’s counsel, as to cloathing the finest lyric compositions with the most appropriate and expressive jnelodies. In 1759 he was received into the service of count Marzin, as director of his music, whence, in 1761, he passed to the palace of prince Esterhazi, to whose service he was afterwards constantly attached. He arrived in England in 1791, and contributed to the advancement of his art, and to his own fame, by his numerous productions in this country; while his natural, unassuming, and pleasing character, exclusive of his productions, endeared him to his acquaintance and to the nation at large. It ought to be recorded, that twelve of his noble and matchless symphonies were composed here expressly for Salomon’s concerts, and that it was from his spirit of enterprize, and enthusiastic admiration of Haydn, and love of his art, that we were indebted for his visit to this country: besides tht>e sublime symphonies, his piano-forte sonatas, his quartets and songs, were sufficient to establish his reputation as a great and original composer, upon a lasting foundation, ii only what he produced during the few years which he remained among us was known. He returned to Germany in 1796.

The first time we meet with his name in the German catalogues of music, is in that of Breitkopf of Leipsic, 1763, to a Divertimento a Cembalo, 3 Concern a Cembalo, 5 Trios, 8 Quadros or quartets, and 6 Symphonies in four and eight parts." The chief of his early music was for the chamber. He is said at Vienna to have composed, before 1782, a hundred and twenty-four pieces for the bariton, a species of viol di gamba, for the use of his prince who was partial to that instrument, and a great performer upon it.

Besides his numerous productions for instruments, he has composed many operas for the Esterhazi theatre, and church music that has established his reputation us a deep contrapuntist. His “Stabat Mater” has been performed and p imed in England, but his oratorio of “II Ritorno di Tobia,” composed in 1775, for the benefit of the widows of musicians, has been annually performed at Vienna ever since, and is as high in favour there as Handel’s “Messiah” in England. His instrumental “Passione,” in sixteen or eighteen parts, was among his later and most exquisite productions previous to his arrival in England. It entirely consists of slow movements, on the subject of the last seven sentences of our Saviour, as recorded in the Evangelists. These strains are so truly impassioned and full of heart-felt grief and dignified sorrow, that though the movements are all slow, the subjects, treatment, and effects, are so new and so different, that a real lover of music will feel no lassitude, or wish for lighter strains to stimulate attention.

His innumerable symphonies, quartets, and other instrumental pieces, which are so original and so difficult, had the advantage of being rehearsed and performed at Esterhazi under his own direction, by a band of his own forming. Ideas so new and so varied were not at first so universally admired in Germany as at present. The critics in the northern parts of the empire were up in arms, but before his decease he was as much respected all over Europe by professors, for his science as invention. And the extent of his tarne may be imagined from his being made the hero of a poem on music, in Spanish, written and published at Madrid, thirty years ago, entitled “La Musica Poema^ par D. Tomas de Yarte.” This sublime work was produced for Cadiz. He lias not long since published it in score with German and Italian words, so that it may be performed as an oratorio.

The la>t of his compositions which were received in England subsequent to the “Creation,” were, two sets of quartets, of which the first violin, calculated to display Salomon’s powers of execution and expression, is very difficult; and his “Seasons.” There is a general cheerfulness and good-humour in Haydn’s allegros, which exhilarate every hearer. But his adagios are often so sublime in ideas and the harmony in which they are clad, that though played by inarticulate instruments, they have a more pathetic effect on our feelings than the finest opera air united with the most exquisite poetry. He has likewise movements and passages that are sportive, playful, and even grotesque, for the sake of variety; but they are often so striking and pleasant, that they have the eifect of bon mots in speaking or writing.

His grand and sublime oratorio of the “Creation,” and his picturesque and descriptive “Seasons,” composed since his departure from England, if music were a language as intelligible and durable as the Greek, would live anct be admired as long as the Iliad and Odyssey of Homer. And we cannot help thinking that future ages will be as curious to know when and where he flourished, as the country and chronology of Orpheus and Amphion.

In 1791, when at Oxford, he was created doctor of music, and some time before his death, was admitted a, member of the French institute. On his return from this country, he took a small house and garden at Gumpendorf, where he lived as a widower until the time of his death, which happened in May 1309.

, a learned Franciscan, preacher in ordinary to queen Anrie of Austria, was born in 1593 at Paris, and died there in 1661. His principal works are, “Biblia Magna,” 1643, 5 vols. fol.; and “Biblia Maxima,” 1660, 19 vols. fol. No part of the last is esteemed but the Prolegomena, and even they are too diffuse but his “Biblia Magna” is reckoned a very good work. He must not be confounded with John de la Haye, a Jesuit, who died 1614, aged seventy-four, leaving an “Evangelical Harmony,” 2 vols. fol. and other works; nor with another John de la Haye, valet de chambre to Margaret of Valois, who published her poems.

, esq. a very singular person, whose great erudition was so concealed by his modesty, that his name is known to very few, though his publications are many. He was born in 1678, and became distinguished in 1704 by a “Treatise of Fluxions,” in folio, which was, we believe, the first treatise on that science ever published in the English language; and the only work to which he ever set his name. In 1710 came out a small 4to pamphlet in 19 pages, entitled “A new and easy Method to find out the Longitude from observing the Altitudes of the Celestial bodies.” Also in 1723, he published “The Moon, a Philosophical Dialogue,” tending to shew that the moon is not an opaque body, but has native light of her own.