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

was born in the north of England, in the beginning of the sixth century, and educated under the Scottish monks in the famous abbey of rcolmhill, celebrated for having been the seat of learning for British and Irish monks in that age. The Scottish and Irish monks were then stimulated by the fervency of pious zeal to convert the pagan Saxons to the Christian religion, and for that purpose Cuthbert with some others settled in the island of Liridisferne, about four miles from Berwick. Egfred, king of Northumberland, invited Cuthbert to his court, where he converted and baptized many of his nobles, and acquired such reputation, that he received episcopal ordination at York, as bishop of the Northumbrian Saxons. But his love of solitude induced him to return to Lindisferne, since called Holy-island, where he founded a monastery, the remains of which are yet to be seen. There he lived to a great age, and died in the year 686, leaving behind him a great number of disciples. Whatever may be said of those zealous monkish saints who lived from the fifth to the eighth century, it is certain they were better men than their successors have represented them. They never pretended to work miracles, but the latter monks have made them perform many, even after their deaths. There can remain little doubt but Cuthbert was interred in Holy-island, where he resigned his breath; but the monks, ever fertile at invention, have told us many ridiculous stories concerning him. They say that he was first buried at Norham, in Northumberland; but, not relishing the damp situation, he appeared in person to his monks, and desired them to carry his bones to Melrose, about twenty miles farther up the Tweed. His request was complied with; but Melrose not being agreeable to him, he again appeared to his monks, and desired them to put him into a stone boat, and sail with him down the Tweed to Tilmonth, where he rested some years. The stone boat was left with a farmer, who made it a tub for pickling beef in, which enraged St. Cuthbert so much, that he came in the night-time and broke it in pieces. The monks, although almost tired with carrying the saint so often, were obliged to travel with him once more, and rested at Chester; but that place not being agreeable, they carried him to Durham, where his bones rested in peace till the time of the reformation, when the wife of Dr. Whittingham, then dean of that church, and one of the translators of the psalms ascribed to Sternhold and Hopkins, ordered them to be taken up and thrown upon a dunghill.

He was colonel of the Coldstream, or second regiment of guards, in 1701; when Steele, who was indebted to his interest for a captain’s commission in the lord Lucas’s regiment of fusileers, inscribed to him his first work, “The Christian Hero.” On the accession of queen Anne, he was made a lieutenant-general of the forces in Holland. February 13, 1702-3, he was appointed commander in chief of the English forces on the continent, during the absence of the duke of Marlborough; commander in chief of the forces in Ireland, under the duke of Ormond, March 23, 1704-5; and afterwards one of the lords justices of that kingdom, to keep him out of the way of action, a circumstance which broke his heart. He died at Dublin, Jan. 26, 1706-7, and was buried there on the 29th, in the cathedral of Christ-church. He was a person of eminent natural parts, well cultivated by study and conversation; of a free, unreserved temper; and of undaunted bravery and resolution. As he was a servant to queen Mary when princess of Orange, and learned the trade of war under her consort, he was early devoted to them both, and a warm supporter of the revolution. He was an absolute stranger to fear; and on all occasions gave distinguishing proofs of his intrepidity, particularly at the siege of Limerick in 1691, at the memorable attack of the castle of Namur in 1695, and at the siege of Venlo in 1702. Macky says of him, in 1703: “He hath abundance of wit, but too much seized with vanity and self-conceit; he is affable, familiar, and very brave. Few considerable actions happened in this as well as the last war, in which he was not, and hath been wounded in all the actions where he served; is esteemed to be a mighty vigilant officer, and for putting the military orders in execution; he is pretty tall, lusty, wellshaped, and an agreeable companion; hath great revenues, yet so very expensive, as always to be in debt; towards fifty years old.” Swift, in a ms note on the above passage, with his usual laconic cruelty, calls lord Cutts, “The vainest old fool alive.” He wrote a poem on the death of queen Mary; and published in 1687, “Poetical Exercises, written upon several occasions, and dedicated to her Royal Highness Mary Princess of Orange; licensed March 23, 1686-7, Roger L'Estrange.” It contains, besides the dedication signed “J. Cutts,” verses to that princess; a poem on Wisdom; another to Mr. Waller on his commending it; seven more copies of verses (one of them called “La Muse Cavalier,” which had been ascribed to lord Peterborough, and as such mentioned by Mr. Walpole in the list of that nobleman’s writings), and eleven songs; the whole composing a very thin volume, which is by no means so scarce as Mr. Walpole supposes it to be. The author speaks of having more pieces by him.

As soon as Cyprian had withdrawn himself, he was proscribed by name, and his goods confiscated. He lay concealed, but not inactive; for he continued to write from time to time to the clergy and to the laity such letters as their unhappy situation and occasions required. He exhorted the clergy to take care of the discipline of the church, of the poor, and especially of those who suffered for the gospel; and he gave them particular directions upon each of these heads. He exhorted the people to be of good courage, to stand fast in the faith, and to persevere against all the terrors of persecution even unto death; assuring them, in the words of the apostle, that the present “afflictions, which were but for a moment, would work for them a far more exceeding and eternal weight of glory.” When the persecution ceased, either in 251 or 252, Cyprian returned to Carthage, and appeared again at the head of his clergy. He had now much business upon his hands, which was occasioned in his absence, partly by the persecution, and the disorders attending it, and partly by divisions which had arisen among the Christians. The first thing that presented itself was the case of the lapsed, or those unhappy members of the church who had not been able to stand the fiery trial of persecution, but had been drawn by the terrors of it to renounce Christ, and sacrifice to idols; and for the settling of this, he immediately called a council at Carthage. The year after, he called another council, to sit upon the baptism of infants; and, in 255, a third, to debate concerning baptism received from heretics, which was there determined to be void and of no effect. All these points had produced great disputes and disturbances; and as to the last, namely, heretical baptism, it was so far from being fixed at Carthage to the satisfaction of the church, that Stephen, the bishop of Rome, and a great part of the Christian world, afterwards opposed it with the utmost violence.

But what affords the most memorable instance of Cyril’s fiery zeal, is his quarrel with Nestorius, bishop of Constantinople. Nestorius had urged in some of his homilies, that the virgin Mary ought not to be called the mother of God; and these homilies coming to Egypt, raised no small disturbances among the monks there. Cyril wrote a pastoral letter to the monks, in which he maintained, that she was indeed the mother of God, and therefore ought to be called so. As soon as Nestorius heard of this letter, he openly declared Cyril his enemy, and refused to have any iurther commerce with him. Cyril upon this, wrote Nestorius a very civil letter, without approving his doctrine; which Nestorius answered as civilly, without retracting it. The affair was laid at length before pope Celestine; after which Cyril, supported by the pontiff’s authority, began, to issue forth anathemas against Nestorius and his doctrine, and the quarrel rose to such a pitch, that it was necessary to convene a general council at Ephesus, in order to put an end to it: where some bishops of the East, who were assembled on the part of Nestorius, gave Cyril so warm an opposition, that they got him deprived of his bishopric, and thrown into prison. But he was soon set at liberty and restored, and gained a complete victory over Nestorius, who was deposed from his see of Constantinople in the year 431 Cyril returned to Alexandria, where he died in the year 444. His works are voluminous, and have been often printed. They consist of the commentaries upon the Pentateuch, called “Glaphyra, &c.” Isaiah, the 12 lesser prophets, and St. John’s gospel; 17 books on the adoration and worship of God in spirit and truth, composed in form of a dialogue; dialogues on the holy and consubstantial trinity, and on the incarnation; a discourse of the orthodox faith; homilies, letters, and apologies. John Aubert, canon of Laon, published the best edition in Greek and Latin, 1638, 6 vols. fol. which are bound in seven, because vol. 5th consists of two parts. St. Cyril’s style is diffuse and singular; his writings contain much subtilty, metaphysical reasoning, and all the niceties of logic. St. Isidore, of Pelusium, accuses him of acting with too much zeal and heat during the disputes in which he was engaged; but the catholic writers think that he atoned for that fault by his piety and innocent life.

Sir James Dalrymple died in 1750; and the hon. general St. Clair having married sir James’s sister, a very sensible and accomplished woman (the relict of sir John Baird, bart.), in 1752, from his intimacy with alderman Baker, then chairman of the East India company, general St. Clair got Mr. Baker’s promise to appoint his nephew, Mr. Dalrymple, a writer in the company’s service; the young man having conceived a strong desire of going to the East Indies, by reading Nieuhoff’s Voyages, and a novel of that time, called Joe Thomson. He accordingly left Scotland in the spring of 1752, with his brother sir David, who affectionately accompanied him to London. He was put to Mr. Kinross’s academy, at Forty-hill, near Enfield, for some months antecedent to his appointment in the company’s service. He tells us he was obliged to Mr. Kinross for his great kindness and attention to him, and received much good instruction for his conduct through life; by which he greatly profited: but was too short a time at that academy to learn much of what was the object of sending him there, viz. writing and merchants’ accounts; which are, at least were at that time, the only qualifications the East India company thought requisite in their servants: and the absurdity of supposing a boy of sixteen from an academy competent to keep a set of merchants’ books not being considered, some demur was made to Mr. Kinross’s certificate of this part of Mr. Dalrymple’s education not being expressed in terms sufficiently direct; however, this was not insisted on.

1. “Account of Discoveries in the South Pacific Ocean before 1764,” 1767, 8vo. 2. † “Memorial to the Proprietors of East India Stock,” 1768, 8vo. 3. † “Account of what has passed between the East India Directors and Alexander Dalrymple,” as first printed, 1768, 8vo. 4. “Account of what has passed Do. Do. as published,” 8vo. 5. “Plan for extending the Commerce of this Kingdom, and of the East India Company, by an Establishment at Balambangan,” 1771. 6. * “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 20th June 1769, 8vo. 7. “Letter concerning the proposed Supervisors,” 30th June 1769, 4to. 8. Second Letter Do. 10th July 1769, 4to. 9. “Vox populi Vox Dei, lord Weymouth’s Appeal to the General Court of India Proprietors, considered, 14th August,” 1769, 4to. 10. “Historical collection of South Sea Voyages,” 1770, 2 vols. 4to; 1771, 4to. 11. † “Proposition of a benevolent Voyage to introduce Corn, &c. into New Zealand,” &c. 1771, 4to. 12. Considerations on a Pamphlet (by governor Johnstone) entitled “Thoughts onour acquisitions in the East Indies, particularly respecting Bengal,” 1772, 8vo. 13. “General View of the East India Company’s Affairs (written in January 1769), to which are added some Observations on the present State of the Company’s Affairs,” 1772, 8vo. 14. † “A paper concerning the General Government for India,” 8vo. 15. † “Rights of the East India Company.” N. B. This was printed at the company’s expence, 1773, 8vo. 16. “Letter to Dr. Hawkesworth,” 1773, 4to. 17. *“Observations on Dr. Hawkesworth’s Preface to 2d edition,” 1773, 4to. An opinion of sir David Dalrymple, that there was too much asperity in this Reply, retarded, and the death of Dr. Hawkesworth prevented, the publication. 18. † “Memorial of Doctor Juan Louis Arias (in Spanish),” 1773, 4to. 19. † “Proposition for printing, by subscription, the ms voyages and travels in the British Museum,” 1773, 4to. 20. “A full and clear proof that the Spaniards have no right to Balambangan,” 1774, 8vo. 21. “An historical relation of the several Expeditions, from Fort Marlbro' to the Islands off the West Coast of Sumatra,” 1775, 4to. 22. “Collection of Voyages, chiefly in the South Atlantic Ocean, from the original Mss. by Dr. H alley, M. Bouvet, &c. with a Preface concerning a Voyage on Discovery, proposed to be undertaken by Alexander Dalrymple at his own expence; Letters to Lord North on the subject, and Plan of a Republican Colony,” 1775, 4to. 23. † “Copies of papers relative to the Restoration of the King of Tanjour, the Imprisonment of Lord Pigot, &c. Printed by the East India Company, for the use of the Proprietors.” 1777, 4to. N. B. In this collection are many Minutes of Council, and some Letters by Alexander Dalrymple. 24. † Several other pieces on the same subject, written by Alexander Dalrymple, were printed by admiral Pigot and Alexander Dalrymple, but not sold; those particularly by Alexander Dalrymple are 4to, 1777. 25. “Notes on Lord Pigot’s Narrative.” 26. “Letter to Proprietors of East India Stock,” 8th May 1777. 27. “Account of the transactions concerning the Revolt at Madras, 30th April 1777. Appendix.” 28. “Letter to the Court of Directors, 19th June 1777. Memorial 19th June 1777.” 29. † “Account of the subversion of the Legal Government of Fort St. George, in answer to Mr. Andrew Stuart’s Letter to the Court of Directors,” 1778, 4to. 30. “Journal of the Grenville,” published in the Philosophical Transactions, 1778, 4to. 31. “Considerations on the present State of Affairs between England and America, 1778,” 8vo. 32. “Considerations on the East India Bill, 1769,” 8vo, 1778. 33. “State of the East India Company, and Sketch of an equitable Agreement,” 1780, 8vo. 34. “Account of the Loss of the Grosvenor,” 1783, 8vo. 35. “Reflections on the present State of the East India Company,” 1783, 8vo. 36. “A short account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel,” 1783, 8vo. 37. “A Retrospective View of the Ancient System of the Blast India Company, with a Plan of Regulation,” 178-4, 8vo. 38. “Postscript to Mr. Dairy mple’s account of the Gentoo Mode of collecting the Revenues on the Coast of Coromandel, being, Observations made on a perusal of it by Moodoo Kistna,” 1785, 8vo. 39. “Extracts from Juvenilia, or Poems by George Wither,” 1785, 24mo. 40. “Eair State of the Case between the East India Company and the Owners of Ships now in their service; to which are added, Considerations on Mr. Brough’s Pamphlet, concerning East India Shipping,” 1786, 8vo. 41. “A serious Admonition to the Public on the intended Thief Colony at Botany Bay.” 42. “Review of the Contest concerning Four New Regiments, graciously offered by his Majesty to be sent to India,” &c. 178S, 8vo. 43. * “Plan for promoting the Fur-trade, and securing it to this Country, by uniting the Operations of the East India and Hudson’s Bay Companies,” 1789, 4to. 44. “Memoir of a Map of the Lands around the North Pole,” 1789, 4to, 45. “An Historical Journal of the Expeditions by Sea and Land, to the North of California in 1768, 1769, and 1770, when Spanish establishments were first made at San Diego and Monterey, translated from the Spanish ms. by William Revely, esq. to which is added, Translation of Cabrera Bueno’s Description of the Coast of California, and an Extract from the ms Journal of M. Sauvague le Muet, 1714,” 1790, 4to. 46. “A Letter to a Friend on the Test Act,” 1790, 8vo. 47. “The Spanish Pretensions fairly discussed,” 1790, 8vo, 48. “The Spanish Memorial of 4th June considered,” 1790, 8vo. 49. † “Plan for the publication of a Repertory of Oriental Information,” 1790, 4to. 50. * “Memorial of Alexander Dalrymple,” 1791, 8vo. 51. “Parliamentary Reform, as it is called, improper, in the present State of this Country,” 1793, 8vo. 52. “Mr. Fox’s Letter to his worthy and independent Electors of Westminster, fully considered,” 1793, 8vo. 53. † “Observations on the Copper-coinage wanted for the Circars. Printed for the use of the East India Company,” 1794, 8vo. 54. “The Poor Man’s Friend,” 1795, 8vo. 55. “A collection of English Songs, with an Appendix of Original Pieces,” 1796, 8vo. 56. * “A Fragment on the India Trade, written in 1791,” 1797, 8vo. 57. “Thoughts of an old Man of independent mind, though dependent fortune,” 1800, 8vo. 58. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. I. 4to. April 1791 to January 1793. 59. “Oriental Repertory,” vol. II. 4to. (not completed).

, an eminent Scotch lawyer and antiquary, and brother to the preceding, was born in Edinburgh on the 28th of October 1726, and was educated at Eton school, where he was distinguished no less for his acquisitions in literature-than for the regularity of his manners. From Eton he was removed, to complete his studies at Utrecht, where he remained till 1746. In 1748 he was called to the Scotch bar, where, notwithstanding the elegant propriety of the cases which he drew, his success did not answer the expectations which had been formed of him. This was not owing either to wajjt of science or to want of industry, but to certain peculiarities, which, if not inherent in his nature, were the result of early and deep-rooted habits. He possessed on all occasions a sovereign contempt, not only for verbal antithesis, but for well-rounded periods, and every thing which had the semblance of declamation; and indeed he was wholly unfitted, by an ill-toned voice, and ungraceful elocution, for shining as an orator. It is not surprizing, therefore, that his pleadings, which were never addressed to the passions, did not rival those of some of his opponents, who, possessed of great rhetorical powers, did not, like him, employ strokes of irony too fine to be perceived by the bulk of any audience, but expressed themselves in full, clear, and harmonious periods. Even his memorials, though classically written, and often replete with valuable matter, did not on every occasion please the court; for they were always brief, and sometimes, it was said, indicated more attention to the minutiye of forms than to the merits of the cause. Yet on points which touched his own feelings, or the interests of truth and virtue, his language was animated, his arguments forcible, and his scrupulous regard to form thrown aside. He was on all occasions incapable of misleading the judge by a false statement of facts, or his clients, by holding out to them fallacious grounds of hope. The character indeed which he had obtained for knowledge and integrity in the Scotch law, soon raised him to an eminence in his profession. Accordingly, in March 1766, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of session with the wannest approbation of his countrymen; and in May 1776 he succeeded to the place of a lord commissioner of the justiciary on the resignation of lord Coalston, his wife’s father. Upon taking his seat on the bench he assumed the title of lord Hailes, in compliance with the usage established in the court of session: this is the name by which he is generally known among the learned of Europe.

, the seventh baron and first viscount Stair, was born in 1609, studied at the college of Glasgow, and passed all the regular degrees of learning in that university. On the commencement of the rebellion in the reign of Charles I. he accepted a captain’s commission from the parliament, in the earl of Glencain.'s regiment, but was soon called off to a more suitable province, that of filling a philosophy chair in the university of Glasgow. Having applied himself particularly to the study of the laws, he entered as an advocate in 1648, and became eminent for his judgment and skill, if not for his integrity. When the estates of the nation sent commissioners to Breda to invite Charles II. to Scotland, he was appointed secretary to the embassy, and acquitted himself entirely to his majesty’s satisfaction. He then resumed his practice at the bar, but could not be prevailed upon to take any oaths to the government during the usurpation. When Charles II. was restored to the throne, he conferred on Mr. Dalryrnple the honour of knighthood, appointed him a senator of the college of justice, and in 1671, lord president of the session, in which office his conduct was very unpopular; and in 1682, being dismissed from all his offices, he retired to Holland, where he became such a favourite with William prince of Orange, that when advanced to the throne of these kingdoms, his majesty restored him to his place of lord president, and raised him to the dignity of viscount Stair, lord Glenluce and Stranrawer. His lordship continued to enjoy his high legal office, and the favour of his prince, till his death, Nov. 25, 1695 4 His character as a politician has not been favourably drawn by some historians, particularly Mr. Laing, in. his lately -published “History of Scotland.” His personal character seems liable to less objection, and of his learning no doubt can be justly entertained. He wrote: 1. “The Institutions of the Law of Scotland,” second edit. fol. 1693. 2. “Decisions of the Court of Session from 1661 to 1681,'” 2 vols. fol. 3. “Philosophia nova experimentalis,” published in Holland during his exile, and much commended by Bayle in his Journal. 4. “A Vindication of the Divine Perfections, &c. by a Person of Honour,” 1695, 8vo. 5. “An Apology for his own Conduct,” 4to, the only copy of which extant is said to be in the advocates’ library at Edinburgh. Had lord Orford read much of his history, he needed not have added that “it is not known on what occasion-he published it.”

, brother to the preceding, keeper of the pictures, medals, &c. and antiquary to his majesty, was originally apprenticed to a coach-painter in Clerkenwell, and after quitting his master, went to Rome to pursue the study of painting, where, about the year 1749, an invitation was given him by Roger Kynaston, esq. of Shrewsbury, in company with Mr. (afterwards sir John) Frederick, to accompany them to Naples. From that city they proceeded in a felucca, along the coast of Calabria, crossed over to Messina, and thence to Catania, where they met with lord Charlemont, Mr. Burton, afterwards lord Cunningham, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Murphy. They then sailed together in a ship, hired by lord Charlemont and his party, from Leghorn, with the intention of making that voyage; the felucca followed first to Syracuse, then to the isle of Malta, and afterwards separated; but Mr. Dalton, accompanying the party in the ship, made the voyage to Constantinople, several parts of Greece, and Egypt. This voyage led to his publication, which appeared in 1781, called, “Explanation of the set of prints relative to the manners, customs, &c. of the present inhabitants of Egypt, from discoveries made on the spot, 1749, etched and engraved by Richard Daiton, esq.” On his return to England, he was, by the interest of his noble patron lord Charlemont, introduced to the notice of his present majesty, then prince of Wales, who, after his accession to the throne, appointed him his librarian, an office for which it would appear he was but indifferently qualified, if Dr. Morell’s report be true. Soon after, it being determined to form a noble collection of drawings, medals, &c. Mr. Daltou was sent to Italy in 1763, to collect the various articles suited to the intention. The accomplishment of that object, however, was unfortunately attended with circumstances which gave rise to sir Robert Strange’s memorable letter of complaint to the earl of Bute, in which he says, indignantly, although not altogether unjustly, that “persecution haunted him, even beyond the Alps, in the form of Mr. Dalton.” On this subject it may here be necessary only to refer to sir Robert’s letter, and to the authorities in the note.

, an English lawyer, was born somewhere in the county of Cambridge, in 1554, and bred to his profession in Lincoln’s-inn, or Gray’s-inn, and was formerly as well known for his book on the office of justice of the peace, as Burn is at present: his “Duty of Sheriffs” was also a book in good esteem. In Neal’s “History of the Puritans,” mention is made of Mr. Dalton the queen’s counsel, who, in 1590, pleaded against Mr. Udal, who was condemned for writing a libel called “A demonstration of Discipline:” this was probably our Dalton, who also in 1592 supported the episcopal power in parliament, of which he was a member, when attacked by the puritan party. There is a ms. of his in the British Museum, entitled “A Breviary or Chronology of the state of the lioinan or Western church or Empire; the decay of true religion, and the rising of papacy, from the time of our Saviour till Martin Luther.” In this he is styled Michael Dalton of Gray’s-inn, esq. It is supposed that he died before the commencement of the civil war.

, so in Moreri, but in other French biographical works placed under Arnaud, one of the troubadours of the twelfth century, was born of noble parents, in the castle of Ribeyrac, in Perigord. If we may judge of his merit by his works which have descended to us, it would be difficult to give him the preference to his brethren in that century, yet the old Italian critics assign him the first place. Dante in particular speaks of him as the best writer of tender verses in the Provencal language, and seems equally partial to the prose part of his romances; Petrarch also, who places him at the head of the Provencal poets, calls him the great master of love, and has honoured him so far as to conclude one of his own stanzas with a verse from Arnaud. It has, however, been doubted whether this verse be the production of Arnaud, and Crescinjbeni has employed a long digression in discussing the question. The best, however, of Arnaud’s productions must have been lost, for what remain by no means support the character which Dante and Petrarch have given of him. He has the credit of inventing that species of composition called the sestine, and attached great importance to rhyme. Besides his poetical talents, he had musical skill, and composed some of his own songs. Milloi speaks of having seen seventeen pieces by Arnaud, and there are eight in the imperial library at Paris, with a life of him. One of his works is entitled “Fantaumasias del Paganisme.” He is supposed to have died about 1180.

, an English poet and historian, the son of a music-master, was born near Taunton, in Somersetshire, in 1562. In 1579 he was admitted a commoner of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where he continued about three years, and by the help of an excellent tutor, made considerable improvement in academical studies. He left the university, however, without taking a degree, and pursued the study of history and poetry under the patronage of the earl of Pembroke’s family. This he thankfully acknowledges in his “Defence of Rhime,” which is printed in the late edition of his works, as a necessary document to illustrate the ideas of poetry entertained in his time. To the same family he was probably indebted for an university education, as no notice occurs of his father, who, if a music-master, could not well have escaped the researches of Dr. Burney. The first of his product ions, at the age of twenty-three, was a translation of Paulns Jovius’s ' Discourse of Rare Inventions, both military and amorous, called Imprese,“London, 1585, 8vo, to which he prefixed an ingenious preface. He afterwards became tutor to the lady Anne Clifford, sole daughter and heiress to George, earl of Cumberland, a lady of very high accomplishments, spirit, and intrepidity. To her, when at the age of thirteen, he addressed a delicate admonitory epistle. She was married, first to Richard, earl of Dorset, and afterwards to the earl of Pembroke,” that memorable simpleton,“says lord Orford,” with whom Butler has so much diverted himself." The pillar which she erected in the county of Westmoreland, on the road-side between Penrith and Appleby, the spot where she took her last leave of her mother,

, an illustrious Italian poet, descended from one of the first families of Florence, of the name of Caccia Guida. Alighieri was the surname of the maternal line, natives of Ferrara, so called from a golden wing which the family bore on their arms. He was born in 1265, a little after the return of the Guelfs or pope’s faction, who had been exiled from their native country in consequence of the defeat at Monte Aperte. The superiority of his genius appeared early, and if we may credit his biographer Boccaccio, his amorous disposition appeared almost as soon. His passion for the lady whom he has celebrated in his poem by the name of Beatrice, is said to have commenced at nine years of age. She was the daughter of Eoleo Portinari, a noble citizen of Florence. His passion seems to have been of the platonic kind, according to the account he gives of it in his “Vita Nuova,” one of his earliest productions. The lady died at the age of twenty-six and Dante, affected by the afflicting event, fell into a profound melancholy, to cure which his friends recommended matrimony. Dante took their advice, but was unfortunate in choosing a lady of a termagant temper, from whom he found it necessary to separate, but not until they had lived miserably for a considerable time, during which she bore him several children. Either at this period, or after the death of his first mistress, he seems by his own account to have fallen into a profligate course of life, from which he was rescued by the prayers of his mistress, now a saint, who prevailed on the spirit of Virgil to attend him through the infernal regions. It is not easy to reduce this account to matter of fact, nor is it very clear indeed whether his reigning vice was profligacy, or ambition of worldly honours. It is certain, however, that he possessed this ambition, and had reason to repent of it.

He had already conceived notions of military glory, and had distinguished himself by his bravery in an action where the Florentines obtained a signal victory at Arezzo. This, joined with his acknowledged learning, prepared the way for his advancement to the first honours of the state. Italy, at that time, was distracted between the factions of the Guelfs, or partizans of the pope, and the Ghibellines, who adhered to the emperor. After many revolutions, the Gnelfs had got the superiority in Florence; and in 130O Dante, with several colleagues, was elected prior, the first executive office in the republic of Florence, and from this he is said to have dated all his misfortunes. Although the faction of the Ghibellines seemed totally extinct, an uninterrupted flow of ten years prosperity was attended with consequences more fatal to the Guelfs than all their past misfortunes. The two noble families of the Cherchi and Donati had been engaged in a quarrel of old standing, and now had recourse to arms, in consequence of a dispute between two branches of the family of Cancelieri, of Pistoia. The rival factions had distinguished themselves by the names of the blacks and the whites, i. e. the Neri and the Bianchi. Donati, from an old attachment to the part of the Cancelieri, called the blacks, joined their faction, which immediately determined the Cherchi to join the whites; and in order to put an end to the quarrel, Dante and his colleagues, ordered the heads of the opposite factions t remove from Pistoia to Florence, the consequence of which was, that all the noble families of Florence ranged themselves with the one or the other, and even the lower order of the citizens became partizans. At last, at a secret meeting of the blacks, Carso Donati proposed to apply to pope Boniface VIII. to terminate these intestine broils, by sending Charles of Valois of the blood royal of France. The whites, having learned this, assembled in arms, and clamoured loudly against the project, and Dante was so dissatisfied with it, that from that moment it is probable he took a decided part against the black faction.

His fame rests on his “Divina Commedia,” unquestionably a great and singular, but very unequal work. At what time, or in what place, he wrote it, his numerous commentators seem unable to determine. The life of Dante, in which we have principally followed Mr. Boyd, in the preliminary matter to his excellent translation, is after all not the life of a poet, nqr does it furnish the information we naturally look for in order to enable us to trace the progress of genius. Boccaccio asserts, that he began the “Commedia” in his thirty-eighth year, and had finished seven cantos of his “Inferno” before his exile, and that in the plunder of his house, on that event, the beginning of his poem was fortunately preserved, but remained for some time neglected, till, its merit being accidentally discovered by an intelligent poet, Dino, it was sent to the marquis Marcello Marespina, an Italian nobleman, by whom Dante was then protected. The marquis restored these lost papers to the poet, and intreated him to proceed in the work, which opened in so promising a manner. To this accident we are probably indebted for the poem of Dante, which he must have continued under all the disadvantages of an unfortunate and agitated life. It does not appear at what time he completed it: perhaps before he quitted Verona, as he dedicated the “Paradeso” to his Veronese patron. The critics are not agreed why he called this poem “Commedia.”

, of the same family, probably, with the preceding, and native also of Perugia, was an excellent mathematician, and is memorable for having fitted a pair of wings so exactly to his body, as to be able to fly with them. He made the experiment several times over the lake Trasimenus; and succeeded so well, that he had the courage to perform before the whole city of Perugia, during the solemnity of the marriage of Bartholomew d'Alviano with the sister of John Paul Baglioni. He shot himself from the highest part of the city, and directed his flight over the square, to the admiration of the spectators: but unfortunately the iron, with which he managed one of his wings, failed; and then, not being able to balance the weight of his body, he fell on a church, and broke his thigh. Bayle fancies, that the history of this Daedalus, for so he was called, will not generally be credited; yet he observes, that it is said to have been practised at other places, for which he refers us to the “Journal des Sgavans” of 1678. Dante was afterwards invited to be professor of the mathematics at Venice. He flourished towards the end of the fifteenth century, and died before he was forty years old.

, a native of Perugia, of the family of Rainaldi, imitated so well the verses of the poet Dante, that he was generally called by his name. He was not less distinguished by the delicacy of his poetry, than by his skill in the mathematics and in architecture. He died in 1512, in an advanced age, after having invented several machines, and composed a commentary on the sphere of Sacrobosco. His grandson Vincent Dante, an able mathematician, like him, was at the same time painter and sculptor. His statue of Julius III. has been generally looked upon as a master-piece of the art. Philip II. king of Spain, offered him a large salary to induce him to come and finish the paintings of the Escurial; but the delicacy of Dante’s constitution would not permit him to quit his natal air. He died at Perugia in 1576, at the age of forty-six. There is extant by him, “The lives of those who have excelled in drawings for statues.”

, bishop of Salisbury in the seventeenth century, was born in Watling-street, London, where his father was an eminent merchant, but originally descended from the ancient family of the Davenants of Sible-Heningham, in Essex. What school he was educated in, we cannot find. But, on the 4th of July, 1587, he was admitted pensioner of Queen’s college, in Cambridge. He regularly took his degrees in arts; that of master in 1594. A fellowship was offered him about the same time; but his father would not permit him to accept of it, on account of his plentiful fortune: however, after his father’s decease he accepted of one, into which he was admitted September 2, 1597. Being thus settled in the college, he distinguished himself, as before, by his learning and other excellent qualifications. Tn 1601-he took his degree of B. D. and that of D. D. in 1609. This same year last-mentioned he was elected lady Margaret’s professor, which place he enjoyed till 1621. He was also one of her preachers in 1609 and 1612. On the 20th of October 1614, he was admitted master of his college, and continued in that station till April 20, 1622. And so considerable did he become, that he was one of those eminent English divines sent by king James I. to the synod of Dovt, in 1618. He returned to England in May 1619, after having visited the principal cities in the Low Countries. Upon the death of his brother-in-law, Dr. Robert Townson, he was nominated bishop of Salisbury; and was elected June 11, 1621, confirmed November 17 following, and consecrated the 18th of the same month. He continued in favour during the remainder of king James the First’s reign; but in Lent 1630-1, he incurred the displeasure of the court Cor meddling (in a sermon preached before the king at Whitehall) with the predestinarian controversy “all curious search” into which his majesty had strictly enjoined “to be laid aside.” In a letter to Dr. Ward, bishop Davenant gives the following account of this unpleasant affair. As soon as his sermon was ended, it was signified to him that his majesty was much displeased that he had stirred this question, which his majesty had forbidden to be meddled withal, one way or other: the bishop’s answer was, that he had delivered nothing but the received doctrine of our church, established in the 17th article, and that he was ready to justify the truth of what he had then taught. He was told, the doctrine was not gainsaid, but his majesty had given command these questions should not be debated, and therefore he took it more offensively that any should be so bold as in his own hearing to break his royal commands. To this he replied, that he never understood his majesty had forbidden the handling of any doctrine comprised in the articles of our church, but only raising of new questions, or adding of new sense thereunto, which he had not done, nor ever should do. Two days after, when he appeared before the privy-council, Dr. Sam. Harsnet, archbishop of York, made a speech nearly half an hour long, aggravating the boldness of bishop Davenant’s offence, and shewing many inconveniencies that it was likely to draw after it. When the archbishop had finished his speech, the bishop desired, that since he was called thither as an offender, he might not be put to answer a long speech upon the sudden; but that his grace would be pleased to charge him point by point, and so to receive his answer; for he did not yet understand wherein he had broken any commandment of his majesty’s, which was taken for granted. After some pause, the archbishop told him he knew well enough the point which was urged against him, namely, the breach of the king’s declaration. Then he stood upon this defence, that the doctrine of predestination, which he taught, was not forbidden by the declaration; 1st, Because in the declaration all the articles are established, amongst which, the article of predestination is one. 2. Because all ministers are urged to subscribe unto the truth of the article, and all subjects to continue in the profession of that as well as of the rest. Upon these and such like grounds, he gathered that it could not be esteemed amongst forbidden, curious, or needless doctrines; and here he desired that out of any clause in the declaration it might be shewed him, that keeping himself within the bounds of the article, he had transgressed his majesty’s command; but the declaration was not produced, nor any particular words in it; only this was urged, that the king’s will was, that for the peace of the church these high questions should be forborne. He added, that he was sorry he understood not his majesty’s intention; which if he had done before, he should have made choice of some other matter to treat of, which might have given no offence; and that for the time to come, he should conform himself as readily as any other to his majesty’s command; whereupon he was dismissed. At his departure he entreated the lords of the council to let his majesty understand that he had not boldly, or wilfully and wittingly, against his declaration, meddled with the fore-named point; and that now, understanding fully his majesty’s mind and intention, he should humbly yield obedience thereunto. But although he was dismissed without farther censure, and was even admitted to kiss the king’s hand, yet he was never afterwards in favour at court. He died of a consumption April 20, 1641, to which a sense of the melancholy event approaching did not a little contribute. Among other benefactions, he gave to Queen’scollege, in Cambridge, the perpetual advowsons of the rectories of Cheverel Magna, and Newton Tony, in Wiltshire, and a rent-charge of 3 1l. 10s. per annum, for the founding of two Bible-clerks, and buying books for the library in the same college. His character was that of a man humble and hospitable; painful in preaching and writing; and behaving in every station with exemplary gravity and moderation. He was a man of great learning, and an eminent divine; but strictly attached to Calvinism in the article of unconditionate predestination, &c. Whilst he was at the synod of Dort, he inclined to the doctrine of universal redemption; and was for a middle way between the two extremes, maintaining the certainty of the salvation of a certain number of the elect; and that offers of pardon were sent not only to all that should believe and repent, but to all that heard the Gospel; that grace sufficient to convince and persuade the impenitent (so as to lay the blame of their condemnation upon themselves) went along with these offers; that the redemption of Christ and his merits were applicable to these; and consequently there was a possibility of their salvation. He was buried in Salisbury cathedral.

By degrees he obtained complete enlargement, and had nothing to regret but the wreck of his fortune. In this dilemma, he adopted a measure which, like a great part of his conduct throughout life, shews him to have been a man of an undaunted and unaccommodating spirit, fertile in expedients, and possessed of no common resources of mind. Indeed, of all schemes, this seemed the most unlikely to succeed, and even the most dangerous to propose. Yet, in the very teeth of national prejudices or principles, and at a time when all dramatic entertainments were suspended, discouraged by the protectoral court, and anathematized by the people, he conceived, that if he could contrive to open a theatre of some kind, it would be sure to be well filled. Viewing his difficulties with great precaution, he proceeded by slow steps, and an apparent reluctance to revive what was so generally obnoxious. Having, however, obtained the countenance of lord Whitlocke, sir John Maynard, and other persons of rank, he opened a theatre in Rutland-house, Charterhouse-yard, on the 21st of May, 1656, and performed a kind of non-descript entertainments, as they were called, which were dramatic in every thing but the names and form, and some of them were called operas. When he found these relished and tolerated, he proceeded to more regular pieces, and with such advantages in style and manner, as, in the judgment of the historians of the stage, entitle him to the honour of being not only the reviver, but the improver of the legitimate drama. These pieces he afterwards revised, and published in a more perfect state, and they now form the principal part of his printed works, although modern taste has long excluded them from the stage.

, a learned Englishman, was born at Coventry, in Warwickshire, about 1598, and educated in grammar-learning at a school in that city. He was sent to Merton-college in Oxford at fifteen years of age; where, spending two years, he, upon an invitation from some Romish priest, afterwards went to Doway. He remained there for some time; and then going to Ypres, he entered into the order of Franciscans among the Dutch there, in 1617. After several removals from place to place, he became a missionary into England, where he went by the name of Franciscus a Sancta Clara; and at length was made one of the chaplains to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I. Here he exerted himself to promote the cause of popery, by gaining disciples, raising money among the English catholics to carry on public matters abroad, and by writing books for the advancement of his religion and order. He was very eminent for his uncommon learning, being excellently versed in school-divinity, in fathers and councils, in philosophers, and in ecclesiastical and profane histories. He was, Wood tells us, a person of very free discourse, while his fellowlabourer in the same vineyard, Hugh Cressey, was reserved; of a lively and quick aspect, while Cressey was clouded and melancholy: all which accomplishments made him agreeable to protestants as well as papists. Archbishop Laud, it seems, had some knowledge of this person; for, in the seventh article of his impeachment, it is said, that “the said archbishop, for the advancement of popery and superstition within this realm, hath wittingly and willingly received, harboured, and relieved divers popish priests and Jesuits, namely, one called Sancta Clara, alias Davenport, a dangerous person and Franciscan friar, who hath written a popish and seditious book, entitled, ‘ Dens, Natura, Gratia,’ &c. wherein the thirtynine articles of the church of England, established by act of parliament, are much traduced and scandalized: that the said archbishop had divers conferences with him, while he was writing the said book,” &c. To which article, the archbishop made this answer: “I never saw that Franciscan friar, Sancta Clara, in my life, to the utmost of my memory, above four times or five at most. He was first brought to me by Dr. Lindsell: but 1 did fear, that he would never expound the articles so, that the church of England might have cause to thank him for it. He never came to me after, till he was almost ready to print another book, to prove that episcopacy was authorised in the church by divine right; and this was after these unhappy stirs began. His desire was, to have this book printed here; but at his several addresses to me for this, I still gave him this answer: That I did not like the way which the church of Rome went concerning episcopacy; that I would never consent, that any such book from the pen of a Romanist should be printed here; that the bishops of England are very well able to defend their own cause and calling, without any help from Rome, and would do so when they saw cause: and this is all the conference I ever had with him.” Davenport at this time absconded, and spent most of those years of trouble in obscurity, sometimes beyond the seas, sometimes at London, sometimes in the country, and sometimes at Oxford. After the restoration of Charles II. when the marriage was celebrated between him and Catherine of Portugal, Sancta Clara became one of her chaplains; and was for the third time chosen provincial of his order for England, where he died May 31, 1680, and was buried in the church-yard belonging to the Savoy. It was his desire, many years before his death, to retire to Oxford to die, purposely that his bones might be laid in St. Ebb’s churcb, to which the mansion of the Franciscans or grey-friars sometime joined, and in which several of the brethren were anciently interred, particularly those of his old friend John Day, a learned friar of his order, who was there buried in 165;s. He was the author of several works: 1. “Paraphrastiea expositio articulorum confessionis Anglicae:” this book was, w r e know not why, much censured by the Jesuits, who would fain have had it burnt; but beino-soon after licensed at Rome, all farther rumour about it stopped. 2. “Deus, Natura, Gratia sive, tractatus de praedestinatione, de mentis,” &c. this book was dedicated to Charles I. and Prynne contends, that the whole scope of it, as well as the paraphrastical exposition of the articles, reprinted at the end of it in 1635, was to reconcile the king, the church, and the articles of our religion, to the church of Rome. He published also a great number of other works, which are not now of consequence enough to be mentioned.

, the patron of Wales, was the son of Xantus or Santus, prince of Ceretica, now Cardiganshire, and born about the close of the fifth century. Being brought up to the church, he was ordained priest; he then retired to the Isle of Wight, and for some time lived in the accustomed solitude of those times. From this he at length emerged, and went into Wales, where he preached to the Britons. He built a chapel at Glastonbury, and founded twelve monasteries, the principal of which was in the vale of Ross, near Menevia. Of this monastery frequent mention is made in the acts of the Irish saints. The rules he established for his monasteries were, as usual; rigid, but not so injudicious or absurd as some of the early monastic statutes. One of his penances was manual labour in agriculture, and, for some time at least, there was no accumulation of worldly goods, for whoever was admitted as a member, was enjoined to leave every thing of that kind behind him. When the synod of Brevy in Cardiganshire was held in the year 519, St. David was invited to it, and was one of its chief champions against Pelagianism. At the close of this synod, St. Dubricius, archbishop of Caerleon upon Usk, resigned his see to St. David, who translated it to Menevia, now called St. David’s. Here he died about the year 544 in a very advanced age. He is praised by his biographers for his eloquence and powers in conversion, and has, according to them, been in all succeeding ages the glory of the British church. He wrote the “Decrees of the Synod of Victoria,” which he called soon after he became bishop; the “Rules of his Monasteries;” some “Homilies,” and “Letters to king Arthur,” all of which have perished.

, a poet and statesman, was the third son of John Davies, of Tisbury, in Wiltshire, not a tanner, as Anthony Wood asserts, but a gentleman, formerly of New Inn, and afterwards a practitioner of law in his native place. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Mr. Bennett, of Pitt-house in the same county. When not fifteen years of age he was sent to Oxford, in Michaelmas term 1585, where he was admitted a commoner of Queen’s college, and prosecuted his studies with perseverance and success. About the beginning of 1588 he removed to the Middle Temple, but returned to Oxford in 1590, and took the degree of B. A. At the Temple, while he did not neglect the study of the law, he rendered himself obnoxious to the discipline of the place by various youthful irregularities, and after being fined, was at last removed from commons. Notwithstanding this, he was called to the bar in 1595, but was again so indiscreet as to forfeit his privileges by a quarrel with Mr. Richard Martin, whom he beat in the Temple hall. For this offence he was in Feb. 1597-8 expelled by the unanimous sentence of the society. Martin was, like himself, a wit and a poet, and had once been expelled for improper behaviour. Both, however, outlived their follies, and rose to considerable eminence in their profession. Martin became reader of the society, recorder of London, and member of parliament, and enjoyed the esteem of Selden, Ben Jonson, and other men of learning and genius, who lamented his premature death in 1618.

In 1603 he was sent as solicitor-general to Ireland, and immediately rose to be attorney-general. Being afterwards appointed one of the judges of assize, he conducted himself with so much prudence and humanity on the circuits as greatly to contribute to allay the ferments which existed in that country, and received the praises of his superiors, “as a painful and well-deserving servant of his majesty.” In Trinity term 1606 he was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law, and received the honour of knighthood on the llth of February 1607. His biographer attributes these promotions to the patronage of lord Ellesmere and the earl of Salisbury, with whom he corresponded, and to whom he sent a very interesting account of a circuit he performed with the lord-deputy in July 1607. Such was Ireland then, that a guard of “six or seven score foot and fifty or three score horse” was thought a necessary protection against a peasantry recovering from their wildness.

In 1608 he was sent to England with the chief justice in order to represent to king James the effects which the establishment of public peace, and these progresses of the law, had produced since the commencement of his majesty’s reign. His reception on such an occasion could not but be favourable. As his residence in Ireland afforded him many opportunities to study the history and genius of that people, he published the result of his inquiries in 1612 under the title of “A Discovery of the true causes why Ireland was never entirely subdued till the beginning of his majesty’s reign.” This has been reprinted four times, and has always been considered as a most valuable document for political inquirers. Soon after the publication of it he was appointed the king’s serjeant, and a parliament having been called in Ireland in the same year, he was elected representative for the county of Fermanagh, the first that county had ever chosen; and after a violent struggle between the Roman catholic and protestant members, he was chosen speaker of the house of commons. In 1614 he interested himself in the restoration of the society of antiquaries, which had been institued in 1590, but afterwards discontinued, and was now again attempted to be revived by sir James Ley; at this period it could enumerate among its members the names of Cotton, Hackwell, Camden, Stow, Spelman, and Whitlock. In 1715 he published “Reports of Cases adjudged in the king’s courts in Ireland.” These, says his biographer, were the first reports of Irish judgments which had ever been made public during the four hundred years that the laws of England had existed in that kingdom. To the Reports is annexed a preface, addressed to lord chancellor Ellesmere, “which vies with Coke in solidity and learning, and equals Blackstone in classical illustration and elegant language.”

, a man of considerable talents, and who prided himself on being through life “a companion of his superiors,” was born about 1712. In 1728 and 1729 he was at the university of Edinburgh, completing his education, and became, as Dr. Johnson used to say of him, “learned enough for a clergyman.” That, however, was not his destination, for in 1736 we find him among the dramatis personae of Lillo’s celebrated tragedy of “Fatal Curiosity,” at the theatre in the Hay market, where he was the original representative of young Wilmot, under the management of Henry Fielding. He afterwards commenced bookseller in Duke’s court, opposite the church of St. Martin-in-the-fields, and afterwards in Round court in the Strand, but met with misfortunes which induced him to return to the theatre. For several years he belonged to various companies at York, Dublin, and other places, particularly at Edinburgh, where he appears to have been at one time the manager of the theatre. At York he married miss Yarrow, daughter of a performer there, whose beauty was not more remarkable than the blamelessness of her conduct and the amiableness of her manners. In 1753 he returned to London, and with Mrs. Davies was engaged at Drury-lane, where they remained for several years in good estimation with the town, and played many characters, if not with great excellence, at least with propriety and decency. Churchill, in his indiscriminate satire, has attempted to fix some degree of ridicule on Mr. Davies’s performance, which, just or not, had the effect of driving him from the stage, which about 1762 he exchanged for a shop in Russel-street, Covent Garden; but his efforts in trade were not crowned with the success which his abilities in his profession merited. In 1778 he became a bankrupt; when, such was the regard enterr tained for him by his friends, that they readily consented to his re-establishment; and none of them, as he says himself, were more active to serve him than those who had suffered most by his misfortunes. Yet, all their efforts might possibly have been fruitless if his powerful and firm friend Dr. Johnson had not exerted himself to the utmost in his behalf. He called upon all over whom he had any influence to assist Tom Davies; and prevailed on. Mr. Sheridan, patentee of Drury-lane theatre, to give him a benefit, which he granted on the most liberal terms. In. 1780, by a well-timed publication, the “Life of David Garrick,” which has passed through several editions, Mr. Davies acquired much fame, and some money. He afterwards published “Dramatic Miscellanies,” if) 3 yols. of which a second edition appeared a few days only before the author’s death. His other works are, 1. “Some Memoirs of Mr. Henderson.” 2. “A Review of lord Chesterfield’s Characters.” 3. A “Life of Massinger.” 4. Lives of Dr. John Eacharo, sir John Davies, and Mr. Lillo, prefixed to editions of their works, published by Mr. Davies; and fugitive pieces without number in prose and verse in the St. James’s Chronicle, and almost all the public newspapers. The compiler of this article in the last edition of this Dictionary, informs us that he “knew him well, and has passed many convivial hours in his company at a social meeting, where his lively sallies of pleasantry used to set the table in a roar of harmless merriment. The last time he visited them he wore the appearance of a spectre; and, sensible of his approaching end, took a solemn valediction of all the company.” Mr. Davies died the 5th of May, 1785, and was buried, by his own desire, in the vault of St. Paul, Covent Garden, close by the side of his next door neighbour, the late Mr. Grignion, watchmaker. Mrs. Davies died Feb. 9, 1801. Tom Davies, as he was familiarly called, was a good-natured and conscientious man in business as in private life, but his theatrical bias created a levity not consistent with prudence. Had he been rich, he would have been liberal: Dr. Campbell used to say he was not a bookseller, but a gentleman who dealt in books"

, an eminent navigator, of the sixteenth century, was born at Sandridge, in the parish of StokeGabriel, near Dartmouth in Devonshire. His birth near that eminent sea-port, having given him a fair opportunity, to which probably was added a strong natural disposition, he put himself early to sea; where, by the help of a good master, and his subsequent industry, knowledge, and experience, he became the most expert pilot, and one of the ablest navigators of his time. The first public employment he had was in 1585, when he undertook to discover a new passage, by the north-west parts of America, to the East-Indies. For that purpose, he sailed from Dartmouth, on the seventh of June, with two barks, one of fifty and the other of thirty-five tons, which were fitted out at the charge of some noblemen and gentlemen; and met, July 19, many islands of ice floating, in 60 degrees northern latitude. They were soon encompassed with them; and going upon some, perceived, that the roaring noise they heard, at which they were greatly astonished, was caused only by the rolling of the ice together. The next day, they discovered the southern coast of Greenland, five hundred leagues distant from the Durseys, or Missenhead, in Ireland; and observed it to be extremely rocky and mountainous, and covered with snow, without any signs of wood, grass, or earth to be seen. The shore, likewise, was so full of ice, that no ship could come near it by two leagues: and so shocking was the appearance of it, and the cracking of the ice so hideous, that they imagined it to be a quite desolate country, without a living creature, or even any vegetable substance; for which reason captain Davis named it, “The Land of Desolation.” Perceiving that they were run into a very deep bay, wherein they were almost surrounded with ice, they kept coasting along the edge of it, south-south-west, till the 25th of July; when, after having gone fifty or sixty leagues, they found that the shore lay directly north. This made them alter their course to the north-west, in hopes of finding their desired passage: but on the 29th they discovered land to the north-east, in 64 degr. 15 min. latitude. Making towards it, they perceived that they were passed the ice, and were among many green, temperate, and pleasant islands, bordering upon the shore; though the hills of the continent were still covered with great quantities of snow. Among these islands were many fine bays, and good roads for shipping: they landed in some, and the people of the country came down and conversed with them by signs, making Mr. Davis understand, that there was a great sea towards the north west. He staid in this place till the first of August, and then proceeded in his discovery. The sixth of that month, they found land in 66 degr. 40 min. latitude, quite free from ice; and anchored in a safe road, under a great mountain, the cliffs whereof glistered like gold. This mountain he named, Mount Raleigh: the road where their ships lay at anchor, Totness Road: the bay which encompassed the mountain, Exeter Sound: the foreland towards the north, Dier’s Cape: and the foreland towards the south, Cape Walsingham. He departed from hence the eighth of August, coasting along the shore, which lay south-south-west, and east-north-east; and on the eleventh came to the most southerly cape of that land, which he named, “The Cape of God’s Mercy,” as being the place of their first entrance for the discovery. Going forward, they came into a very fine straight, or passage, in some places twenty leagues broad, in others thirty, quite free from ice, the weather in it very tolerable, and the water of the same colour and nature as the main ocean. This passage still retains the name of its first discoverer, being called to this day Fretum Davis, or Davis’s Straights. Having sailed, north-west, sixty leagues in this passage, they discovered several islands in the midst of it; on some of which they landed. The coast was very barren, without wood or grass; and the rocks were like fine marble, full of veins of divers colours. Some days after they continued searching for the north-west passage, but found only a great number of islands. And, on the 2oth, the wind coming contrary, they altered their course and design, and returning for England, arrived at Dartmouth the 29th of September. The next year Mr. Davis undertook a second voyage, for the farther discovery of the north-west passage, being supported and encouraged again by secretary Walsingham, and other adventurers. With' a view therefore of searching the bottom of the Straights he had been in the year before, he sailed from Dartmouth, May the 7th, 1586, with four ships, and the 15th of June discovered land in 60 degrees latitude, and 47 degrees longitude west from London. The ice along the coast reached in some places ten, in some twenty, and in others fifty leagues into the sea; so that, to avoid it, they were forced to bear into 57 degrees latitude. After many tempestuous storms, they made the land again, June the 29th, in 64 degrees of latitude, and 58 of longitude; and ran among the temperate islands they had been at the year before. But the water was so deep, they could not easily come to an anchor; yet they found means to go ashore, on some of the islands, where they were much caressed and welcomed by the natives, who knew them again. Having finished a pinnace, which was to serve them for a front in their discoveries, they landed, not only in that, but also in their boats, in several places: and, upon the strictest search, found the land not to be a continent, as they imagined, but a collection of huge, waste, and desert isles, with great sounds and inlets passing between sea and sea. They pursued their voyage the 11th of July, and on the 17th, in 63 degrees 8 minutes latitude, met with a prodigious mass of ice, which they coasted till the 30th. This was a great obstacle and discouragement to them, not having the like there the year before; and, besides, the men beginning to grow sickly, the crew of one of the ships, on which he chiefly depended, forsook him, and resolved to proceed no farther. However, not to disappoint Mr. W. Sanderson, who was the chief adventurer in this voyage, and for fear of losing the favour of secretary Walsingham, who had this discovery much at heart, Mr. Davis undertook to proceed alone in his small bark of thirty tons. Having therefore fitted, and well-victualled it, in a harbour lying in 66 degrees 33 minutes latitude, and 70 degrees longitude, which he found to be a very hot place, and full of muscatoes, he set sail the 12th of August, and coming into a straight followed the course of it for eighty leagues, till he came among many islands, where the water ebbed and flowed six fathom deep. He had hopes of finding a passage there, but upon searching farther in his boat, he perceived there was none. He then returned again into the open sea, and kept coasting southward as far as 54 degrees and a half of latitude: in which time he found another great inlet near forty leagues broad, between two lands, west, where the water ran in with great violence. This, he imagined, was the passage so long sought for; but the wind being then contrary, and two furious storms happening soon after, he neither thought it safe nor wise to proceed farther, especially in one small bark, and when the season was so far advanced. He, therefore, sailed for England the 11th of September; and arrived there in the beginning of October. By the observations which he made, he concluded, that the north parts of America are all islands. He made a third voyage to these parts again the year following, 1587. All the western merchants, and most of those of London, refused to be engaged farther in the undertaking; but it was encouraged by the lord treasurer Burleigh and secretary Walsinghain. Mr. Davis having, in his last voyage, discovered prodigious quantities of excellent cud-tish, in 56 degrees of latitude, two ships were sent along with him for fishing, and one only for the discovery of the North west passage. They sailed from Dartmouth the 19tii of May, and discovered land the 14th of June, at sixteen leagues distance, but very mountainous, and covered with snow. On the 21st of June the two barks left him, and went upon the fishing, after having promised him, not to depart till his return to them about the end of August, yet having finished their voyage in about sixteen days after, they set sail for England without any regard to their promise. Captain Davis, in the mean time, pursued his intended discovery, in the sea between America and Greenland, from 64 to 73 degrees of latitude. Having entered the Straights which bear his name, he went on northward, from the 21st to the 30th of June; naming one part Merchants Coast; another, the London Coast; another, Hope Sanderson in 73 degrees latitude, being the farthest he went that day. The wind coming northerly, he altered his course, and ran forty leagues west, without seeing any laud. On the 2d of July, he fell in with a great bank of ice, which he coasted southward till the 1 9th of July, when he came within sight of Mount Raleigh on the American coast, in about 67 degrees of latitude. Having sailed sixty leagues north-west into the gulf that lies beyond it, he anchored, July 23, at the bottom of that gulf, among many islands, which he named “The Earl of Cumberland’s Isles” He quitted that place again the same day, and sailed back south-east, in order to recover the sea; which he did the 29th in 62 degrees of latitude. The 30th he passed by a great bank, or inlet, to which he gave the name of Lumley’s Inlet; and the next day by a head land, which he called “The Earl of Warwick’s Foreland.” On the first of August he fell in with the southermost cape, named by him Chudley’s Cape: and, the 12th, passed by an island which he named Darcy’s Island. When he came in 52 degrees of latitude, not finding the two ships that had promised to stay for him, he was in great distress, having but little wood, and only half a hogshead of water left; yet, taking courage, he made the best of his way home, and arrived at Dartmouth September the 15th, very sanguine, that the north-west passage was most probable, and the execution easy; but secretary Walsinghaw dying not long after, all farther search was laid aside. Mr. Davis, notwithstanding, did not remain idle. For, August 26, 1591, he was captain of the Desire, rear admiral to Mr. Thomas Cavendish, in his second unfortunate expedition to the South -Sea; and is highly blamed by Mr. Cavendish, for having deserted him, and thereby being the cause of his overthrow. After many disasters, Mr. Davis arrived again at Bear-haven in Ireland, June 11, 1593. He performed afterwards no less than five voyages to the East-Indies, in the station of a pilot. One was in a Dutch ship, in which he set out, March 15, 1597-8, from Flushing, and returned to Middleburgh, July 23, 1600. Of the rest we have no account, except of that which he performed with sir Edward Michelbourne, in which were spent nineteen months, from December 5, 1604, to July 9, 1606. During this voyage Mr. Davis was killed, on the 27th of December, 1605, in a desperate fight with some Japonese near the coast of Malacca. He married Faith, daughter of sir John Fulford, of Fulford in Devonshire, knight, by Dorothy his wife, daughter of John lord Bouchier, earl of Bath, by whom probably he had issue: for some of his posterity are said to have been living about the middle of the last century, at or near Deptford.

“The account of his second voyage for the Discovery of the North-west Passage, in 1586,” seems to be of his composition; for he speaks always in the first person. There are likewise in print two letter.-? of his to Mr. Sanderson, one dated from Exeter, October 14, 1586; and the other from Sandridge, September 16, 1587. Hakluyt has also preserved “A Traverse Booke made by M. John Davis, in his third voyage for the discoverie of the Northwest Passage, anno 1587,” and it appears that he composed a treatise entitled “The World’s Hydrographicall Description,” for Hakluyt has extracted from it, and published, “A report of Master John Davis, of his three voyages made for the Discovery of the North-west Passage.” His voyage to the East Indies in a Dutch ship, in 1598, was written also by himself. It is said that “There is a flutter, [Routier] or Brief Directions for sailing into the East Indies, digested into a plain method by this same person, John Davis, of Limehouse, (as he is there called) written upon experiment of his five voyages thither, and home again.” But either it was not written by the same John Davis, who is the subject of this article, or else our John Davis was not killed in the East Indies, as we have said above upon the authority of Purchas, and of those that have copied from him.

Davison came not suddenly or surprisingly into his high office, but easily, naturally, and gradually, in the very same way that his predecessors, Cecil, Smith, and Walsingham had done, and with the general approbation of all the council; and, as he was no mean or obscure person when called to that high employment, so he was not given to subserviency, at the peril of his life and reputation; and notwithstanding the star chamber sentence, he very well knew how to make his innocence plain, both to that age and to posterity.

One of these is the cabinet of natural history in the botanical garden. That before his time served merely as a repository for the products of the different pharmaceutical operations, performed during the public lectures on chemistry, in order that they might be distributed to the poor while suffering under disease. It contained nothing appertaining to natural history, strictly so called, except a collection of shells made by Tournefort, which had afterwards been employed to amuse Lewis XV. during his infancy; but such was the industry of Daubenton, that, within a few years, he collected specimens of minerals, fruits, woods, shells, from every quarter, and methodically arranged them. By applying himself to ascertain, or to improve the operations necessary to preserve the different parts of organized bodies, he succeeded in giving to the inanimate forms of quadrupeds and birds the appearance of real life; and presented to the naturalist the most minute circumstances of. their characters, while at the same time he no less gratified the virtuosi by exhibiting them in their natural forms and colours.

Besides his publications, Danhenton was of great service to science as a lecturer. From 1775 he gave lectures on natural history in the college of medicine. In 1783 he lectured on rural ceconomy. He was appointed professor of mineralogy hy the Convention at the garden of plants, and he gave lectures during the short existence of what' was called the Normal school. He was likewise one of the editors of the “Journal des Savans,” and contributed to both the Encyclopaedias. As a lecturer he was extremely popular, and retained his popularity to the last.

, another son of the celebrated printer, and himself a printer, was educated at Eton school, and in 1571 elected thence to King’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of M. A. and became fellow, and being ordained, supplied the place of minister at Ryegate in Surrey, in the room of the martyrologist, Fox. He afterwards appears to have turned his thoughts to his father’s trade, as he was called on the livery of the stationers’ company in 1578. He carried on business in his father’s house in Aldersgate-street, and had an exclusive privilege jointly with him during their lives, and that of the longest liver, to print the Psalms of David in metre. The books he printed himself are dated from 1578 to 1581, after which his copies were printed by his assigns as far as 1597. When he died is not known. He wrote some verses, “Contra papistos incendiaries,” in Fox’s Martyrology, 1576, which Herbert informs us are omitted in the subsequent editions. He translated Fox’s “De Christo triumphante comoedia,” to which he wrote a preface, and two dedications; one in the edition of 1579, to Mr. William Kyllegrewe; the other in the edition of 1607, to William lord Howard, of Effingham. He wrote also a preface and conclusion to the “Testaments of the Twelve Patriarchs,” and a short Latin preface to P. Baro’s treatises “De fide, &c.” It was in this work that he first introduced a typographical reform in the distinct use of the letters j and i, v and u, which, however, did not generally take place until the following century.

From a comparison of dates it appears to have been in 1769, when he came of age, that he formed this curious project. Accompanied by a Mr. Bicknell, a barrister, rather older than himself, he went to Shrewsbury to explore the Foundling hospital, and from these children, Mr. Day, in the presence of Mr. Bicknell, selected two girls of twelve years each; both beautiful: one fair, with flaxen locks and light eyes, whom he called Lucretia; the other, a clear auburn brunette, with darker eyes, more glowing bloom, and chesnut tresses, he called Sabrina. These girls were obtained on written conditions, for the performance of which Mr. Bicknell was guarantee. They were to this effect: that Mr. Day should, within the twelvemonth after taking them, resign one into the protection of some respectable tradeswoman, giving one hundred pounds to bind her apprentice; maintaining her, if she behaved well, till she married, or began business for herself. Upon either of these events he promised to advance four hundred pounds more. He avowed his intention of educating the girl he should retain, with a view to make her his future wife: solemnly engaged never to violate her innocence; and if he should renounce his plan, to maintain her decently in some creditable family till she married, when he promised five hundred pounds as her wedding portion. It would, probably, be quite unnecessary to make any appeal to the feelings of parents, or to offer any remarks on the conduct of the governors of this hospital respecting this strange bargain, for the particulars of which we are indebted to Miss Seward. The narrative goes on to inform us, that Mr. Day went instantly into France with these girls, not taking an English servant, that they might receive no ideas, except those which himself might chuse to impart, and which he soon found were not very acceptable. His pupils teazed and perplexed him; they quarrelled; they sickened of the small pox; they chained him to their bed-side, by crying if they were ever left alone with any person who could not speak English. Hence he was obliged to sit up with them many nights, and to perform for them the lowest offices of assistance. They lost no beauty, however, by their disease, and came back with Mr. Day in eight months, when Sabrina was become the favourite. He placed Lucretia with a chamber milliner, and she afterwards became the wife of a linendraper in London. With Sabrina he actually proceeded during some years, in the execution of his favourite project; but none of his experiments had the success he wished. Her spirit could not be armed against the dread of pain and the appearance of danger, a species of courage which, with him, was a sine qua non in the character of a wife. When he dropped melted sealing-wax upon her arms, she did not endure it heroically; nor when he fired pistols at her petticoats, which she believed to be charged with balls, could she help starting aside, or suppress her screams. When he tried her fidelity in secret-keeping, by telling her of well-invented dangers to himself, in which greater danger would result from its being discovered that he was aware of them, he once or twice detected her having imparted them to the servants, and to her play-fellows. He persisted, however, in these foolish experiments, and sustained their continual disappointment during a whole year’s residence in the vicinity of Lichfield. The difficulty seemed to be in giving her motive to self-exertion, self-denial, and heroism. It was against his plan to draw it from the usual sources, pecuniary reward, luxury, ambition, or vanity. His watchful cares had precluded all knowledge of the value of money, the reputation of beauty, and its concomitant desire of ornamented dress. The only inducement, therefore, which this girl could have to combat and subdue the natural preference in youth of ease to pain, and of vacant sport to the labour of thinking, was the desire of pleasing her protector, though she knew not how, or why he became such; and in that desire fear had greatly the ascendant of affection. At length, however, he renounced all hopes of moulding Sabrina into the being which his disordered imagination had formed; and, ceasing now to behold her as a wife, placed her at a boardingschool at Sutton Coldfield, Warwickshire, where, durin^ three years, she gained the esteem of her instructress, grew feminine, elegant, and amiable. She is still living, an ornament to the situation in which she is placed.

On this high character, after the facts we have exhibited, it will not be necessary to offer any remarks. As the epithet “constitutional lawyer” is here employed, it remains to be mentioned, that he was admitted of the Middle Temple in 1765, and called to the bar in 1779. Much of this time, we have seen, elapsed in his travels, and pursuits of another kind; nor, although his name remained on the books of the society, did he ever enter seriously into the business of the profession. In politics he attached himself to no party, properly so called; he was neither whig nor tory; but joined many of the popular associations about the close of the American war, to which he was a decided opponent, and wrote some political pamphlets on peace, reform of parliament, and other topics which agitated the nation at that period.

The books which Dee printed and published are, 1. “Propaedumata aphoristica; de prsestantiorib.ua quibustlam naturae virtutibus aphorismi,” Lond. 1558, 12mo. 2. “Monas hieroglyphica ad regem Romanorum Maxirnilianum,” Antwerp, 1564. 3. “Epistola ad eximium ducis Urbini mathematicum, Fredericum Commandinum, praefixa libello Machometi Bagdedini de superficierum divi­^ionibus, edita opera Devi et ejusdem Commandini Urbinatis,” Pisauri,!570. 4. “The British Monarchy, otherwise called the Petty Navy Royal,” 1576, a ms. in the Ashmolean museum. 5. “Preface Mathematical to the English Euclid, published by sir Henry Billingsley, knt.” where he says many more arts are wholly invented by name, definition, property, and use, than either the Grecian or Roman mathematicians have left to our knowledge, 1570. 6. “Divers and many Annotations and Inventions dispersed and added after the tenth book of the English Euclid,” 1570. 7. “Epistola prseiixa ephemeridibus Joannis Feldi a 1557, cui rationem declaraverat ephemericles conscribendi.” 8. “Parallaticee com mentation is praxeosque nucleus quidam,” Lond. 1573. This catalogue of Dee’s printed and published books is to be found in his Compendious Rehearsal, &c. as well as in his letter to archbishop Whitgift. Among them are, l.“The great volume of famous and rich discoveries, wherein also is the history of king Solomon every three years, his Ophirian voyage, the originals of presbyter Joannes, and of the first great charn and his successors for many years following. The description of divers wonderful isles in the northern, Scythian, Tartarian, and the other most northern seas, and near under the north pole, by record written 1200 years since, with divers other rarities,” 1576. 2. “The British complement of the perfect art of Navigation. A great volume. In which are contained our queen Elizabeth her tables gubernautic for navigation by the paradoxal compass, invented by him anno 1.557, and navigation by great circles, and for longitudes and latitudes, and the variation of the compass, finding most easily and speedily, yea, if need be, in one minute of time, and sometimes without sight of sun, moon, or stars, with many other new and needful inventions gubernautic,” 1576. 3. “De modo evangelii Jesu Christ! publicandi, propagandi, stabiliendique, inter infideles atlanticos. Volumen magnum libris distinctum qtiatuor: quorum primus ad serenissimam r.ostram potentissimamque reginam Elizabetham inscribiiur; secundus ad summos privati sutc sacra: majestatis consilii senatores; tertius ad Hispaniarum regem Philippum quartus ad pontificem Romanum,” 1591. 4. “Speculum unitatis, sive, apologia pro fratre llogerio Bacone Anglo; in quo docetur nihil ilium per daemoniorum fecisse auxilia, sed pbilosopbum fuisse maximum naturaliterque, et modis homini Christiano licitis maximas fecisse res, quas indoctum solet vulgus in dtemoniorum referre facinora, ' 1557. 5.” De nubium, soils, lunse, ac reliquorum planetarum, imo, ipsius stelliferi cceli, ab intimo ternc centro distantiis, mutuisque intervallis, et eorundem omnium magnitudine, liber anofeutTixo;, ad Edvardum Sextum, Anglisc regem,“1551. 6.” The philosophical and poetical original occasions of the configurations and names of the heavenly Asterisms written at the request of the honble. lady, lady Jane, duchess of Northumberland,“1553. 7.” De hominis corpore, spiritu, et anima: sive, microcosmicum totius naturalis philosophise compendium.“8.” De unico mago et triplice Herode, eoque antichristiano,“1570. 9.” Reipublicae Britannicoe synopsis,“in English, 1562. 10.” Cabbalæ Hebraicæ compendiosa tabella,“1562. 11.” De itinere subterraneo,“, lib. 2. 1560. 12.” Trochilica inventa," lib. 2. 1553, &c. &c.

“No sooner was the queen dead,” says De Foe, “but the rage of men increased upon me to that degree, that their threats were such as I am unable to express. Though I have written nothing since the queen’s death; yet a great many things are called by my name, and I bear the answei'ers insults. 1 have not seen or spoken with the earl of Oxford, since the king’s landing, but once; yet he bears the reproach of my writing for him, and I the rage of men for doing it.” — De Foe appears, indeed, to have been stunned by factious clamour, and overborne, though not silenced, by unmerited obloquy. He probably lost his original appointment when the earl of Oxford was finally expelled. Instead of meeting with reward for his zealous services in support of the protestant succession, he was, on the accession of George I, discountenanced even by those who had derived a benefit from his active exertions. Thus cruelly circumstanced, he published in 1715, his “Appeal to Honour and Justice, being a true account of his conduct in public affairs.” As a motive for this intrepid measure, he affectingly says, “By the hints of mortality, and the infirmities of a life of sorrow and fatigue, I have reason to think, that I am very near to the great ocean of eternity; and the time may not be long ere I embark on the last voyage: wherefore, I think I should make even accounts with this world before I go, that no slanders may lie against my heirs, to disturb them in the peaceable possession of their father’s inheritance, his character.” Before he could finish his appeal, he was struck with an apoplexy. After languishing more than six weeks, neither able to go on, nor likely to recover, his friends would delay the publication no longer. “It is the opinion of most who know him,” says Baker, the publisher, “that the treatment which he here complains of, and others of which he would have spoken, have been the cause of this disaster.” When the ardent mind of De Foe reflected on what he had done, and what he had suffered, his heart melted in despair, and the year 1715 may be regarded as the period of our author’s political life. The death of Anne, and the accession of George the first, seem to have convinced him of the vanity of party-writing. And from this eventful epoch, he appears to have studied how to meliorate the heart, and how to regulate the practice of life.

, a clergymnn of Ireland, of considerable celebrity in his day, was born in that kingdom about 1686. His fatiior lived as a servant in the family of sir John fennel, an [rish judge, and afterwards rented a small farm, in which situation he is supposed to have continued to his decease; for, when our author came to be in prosperous circumstances, he was advised by Dr. Swift not to take his parents out of the line of life they were fixed in, but to render them comfortable in it. At what place, and under whom, young Delany received his grammatical education, we are not able to ascertain; but at a proper age he became a sizer in Trinity college, Dublin; went through his academical course; took the customary degree*; and was cnosen, first a junior, and afterwards a senior fellow of the college. During this time he formed an intimacy with Dr. Swift; and it appears from several circumstances, that he was one of the dean of St. Patrick’s chief favourites. It is not unreasonable to conjecture, that, besides his considerable merit, it might be some general recommendation to him, that he readily entered into the dean’s playful disposition. He joined with Swift and Dr. Sheridan in writing or answering riddles, and in composing other slight copies of verses, the only design of which was to pass away the hours in a pleasant manner; and several of Mr. Delany’s exertions on these occasions may be seen in Swift’s works. These temporary amusements did not, however, interfere with our author’s more serious concerns. He applied vigorously to his studies, distinguished himself as a popular preacher, and was so celebrated as a tutor, that by the benefit of his pupils, and ijis senior fellowship, with all its perquisites, he received every year between nine hundred and a thousand pounds. In 1724 an affair happened in the college of Dublin, with regard to which Dr. Delany is represented as having been guilty of an improper interference. Two under-graduates having behaved very insolently to the provost, and afterwards refusing to make a submission for their fault, wefe both of them expelled. On this occasion Dr. Delany took the part of the young men, and (as it is said) went so far as to abuse the provost to his face, in a sermon at the college-chapel. Whatever may have been his motives, the result of the matter was, that the doctor was obliged to give satisfaction to the provost, by an acknowledgement of the otfence. Our author’s conduct in this affair, which had been displeasing to the lord primate Boulter, might probably contribute to invigorate the opposition which the archbishop made to him on a particular occasion. In 1725 he was presented by the chapter of Christ-church, to the parish of St. John’s, in the city of Dublin, but without a royal dispensation he could not keep his fellowship with his new living. Archbishop Boulter, therefore, applied to the duke of Newcastle, to prevent the dispensation from being granted. In 1727 Dr. Delany was presented by the university of Dublin to a small northern living, of somewhat better than one hundred pounds a year; and about the same time, lord Carteret promoted him to the chancellorship of Christ-church, which was of equal value. Afterwards, 1730, his excellency gave him a prebend in St. Patrick’s cathedral, the produce of which did not exceed either of the other preferments. In 1729 Dr. Delany began a periodical paper, called “The Tribune,” which was continued through about twenty numbers. Soon after, our author engaged in a more serious and important work, of a theological nature, the intention of publishing which brought him to London in 1731; it had for title, “Revelation examined with candour,” the first volume whereof was published in 1732. This year appears to have been of importance to our author in a domestic as well as in a literary view; for on the 17th of July he married in England, Mrs. Margaret Tenison, a widow lady of Ireland, with a large fortune. On his return to Dublin, he manifested his regard to the university in which he was educated, and of which he had long been a distinguished member, by giving twenty pounds a year to be distributed among the students. In 1734 appeared the second volume of “Revelation examined with candour,” and so favourable a reception did the whole work meet with, that a third edition was called for in 1735. In 1738 Dr. Delany published a 30th of January sermon, which he had preached at Dublin before the lord-lieutenant, William duke of Devonshire. It was afterwards inserted in the doctor’s volume upon social duties. In the same year appeared one of the most curious of Dr. Delany’s productions, which was a pamphlet entitled, “Reflections upon Polygamy, and the encouragement given to that practice in the scriptures of the Old Testament.” This subject, however, has since been more ably handled by the late ingenious Mr. Badcock, in the two fine articles of the Monthly Review relative to Marian’s “Thelyphthora.” Dr. Deiany was led by his subject to consider in a particular manner the case of David; and it is probable, that he was hence induced to engage in examining whatever farther related to that great Jewish monarch. The result of his inquiries he published in “An historical account of the life and rei^n of David king of Israel.” The first volume of this work appeared in 1740, the second in 1712, and the third in the ame year. It would be denying Dr. Delany his just praise, were we not to say, that it is an ingenious and & learned performance. It is written witli spirit; there are some curious and valuable criticisms in it, and many of the remarks in answer to Bayle are well founded; but it has not been thought, on the whole, a very judicious production. It is not necessary to the honour of the sacred writings, or to the cause of revelation, to defend, or to palliate the conduct of David, in whatsoever respects he acted wrong. It is peculiar to the Scriptures, in the biographical parts, to exhibit warnings as well as examples.

Dr. Delany, on the 9tti of June 1743, married a second time. The lady with whom he formed this connexion was Mrs. Pendarves, the relict of Alexander Pen Janes, esq a very ingenious and excellent woman; of whom some account will be given in the next article. The doctor had lost his first wife December 6, 1741. March 13, 1744, our author preached a sermon before the society for promoting protestant working schools in Ireland. In May 1744, he was raised to the highest preferment which he ever attained, the deanry of Down, in the room of Dr. Thomas Fletcher, appointed to be bishop of Dro no re. In the same year, previously to this promotion, our author published a volume of sermons upon social duties, fifteen in number, to which in a second edition, 1747, were added five more, on the opposite vices. This is the most useful of Dr. Delany’s performances; the objects to which rt relates being of very important and general concern. Dr. Delany’s next publication was not till 174-8, and that was only a sixpenny pamphlet. It was entitled “An Essay towards evidencing the divine original of Tythes,” and had at first been drawn up, and probably preached as a sermon. The text, rather a singular one, was the tenth commandment, which forbids us to covet any thing that is our neighbour’s; and it required some ingenuity to deduce the divine original of tithes from that particular prohibition. After an interval of six years, Dr. Delany again appeared in the world as an author, in answer to the earl of Orrery’s “Remarks on the Life and Writings of Dr. Swift.” Many of Su ill’s zealous admirers were not a little displeased with the representations which the noble lord had given of him in various respects. Of this number was Dr. Delany, who determined therefore to do justice to the memory of his old friend; for which few were better qualified, having been in the habits of intimacy with the dean of St. Patrick’s, from his first coming over to Ireland, and long before lord Orrery could have known any thing concerning him. On the whole, it was thought that this production of the doctor’s enabled the public to form a far more clear estimation of the real character of the dean of St. Patrick’s, than any account of him which had hitherto been given to the world; yet perhaps the fairest estimate must be made by a comparison of both. However zealous Dr. Delany might be for the honour of his friend, he did not satisfy Deane Swift, esq. who, in his Essay upon the life, writings, and character of his relation, treated our author with extreme ill manners and gross abuse; to which he thought proper to give an answer, in a letter to Mr. Swift, published in 1755. In this letter the doctor justified himself; and he did it with so much temper and ingenuity, so much candour, and yet with so much spirit, that the polite gentleman, and the worthy divine, were apparent in every page of his little pamphlet. The year 1754 also produced another volume of sermons; the larger part of them are practical, and these are entitled to great commendation, particularly two discourses on the folly, iniquity, ad absurdity of duelling. During this part of Dr. Delany’s life, he was involved in a law-suit of great consequence, and which, from its commencement to its final termination, lasted more than nine years. It related to the personal estate of his first lady; and although a shade was cast on his character by the decision of the Irish court of chancery, his conduct was completely vindicated by that decree being reversed in the house of lords in England. But he was not so deeply engaged in the prosecution of his law-suit as entirely to forget his disposition to be often appearing in. the world as an author. In 1757 he began a periodical paper called “The Humanist,” whicli was carried on through 15 numbers, and then dropped. In 1761 Dr. Delany published a tract, entitled “An humble apology for Christian Orthodoxy,” and several sermons. It was in 1763, after an interval of nearly thirty years from the publication of his former volumes, that he gave to the world the third and last volume of his “Revelation examined with candour.” In the preface the doctor has indulged himself in some peevish remarks upon Reviewers of works of literature; but from complaints of this kind few writers have ever derived any material advantage. With regard to the volume itself, it has been thought to exhibit more numerous instances of the prevalence of imagination, over judgment than had occurred in the former part of the undertaking. In 1766 Dr. Delany published a sermon against transubstantiation; which was succeeded in the same year by his last publication, which was a volume containing 18 discourses. Dr. Delany departed this life at Bath, in May 1763, in the 83d year of his age. Though in general he was an inhabitant of Ireland, it appears from several circumstances, and especially from his writings, almost all of which were published in London, that he frequently came over to England, and occasionally resided there for a considerable time. Of his literary character an estimate may be formed from what has been already said. With regard to two of his principal works, the “Revelation examined with candour,” and the “Life of David,” they contain so many fanciful ^ul doubtful positions, that all the ability and learning i.,i., played in them will scarcely suffice to hand them down, with any eminent degree of reputation, to future ages. It is on his sermons, and particularly on those which relate to social duties, that will principally depend the perpetuity of his fame. With respect to his personal character, he appears to have been a gentleman of unquestionable piety and goodness, and of an uncommon warmth of heart. This warmth of heart was, however, accompanied with some inequality, impetuosity, and irritability of temper. Few excelled him in charity, generosity, and hospitality. His income, which for the last twenty years of his life was 3006J. per annum, sunk under the exercise of these virtues, and he left little behind him besides books, plate, and furniture. Of a literary diligence, protracted to above fourscore years, Dr. Delany has afforded a striking example; though it may possibly be thought, that if, wben his body and mind grew enfeebled, he had remembered the solve senescentem equum, it would hate been of no disadvantage to his reputation.

, the second wife of the preceding, and a lady of distinguished ingenuity and merit, was born at a small country house of her father’s at Coulton in Wiltshire, May, 14, 1700. She was the daughter of Bernard Granville, esq. afterward lord Lansdowne, a nobleraan whose abilities and virtues, whose character as a poet, whose friendship with Pope, Swift, and other eminent writers of the time, and whose general patronage of men eyf genius and literature, have often been recorded in biographical productions. As the child of such a family, sh^ could not fail of receiving the best education. It was at Long-Leat, the seat of the Weymouth family, which was occupied by lord Lansdowne during the minority of the heir of that family, that Miss Granville first saw Alexander Pendarves, esq. a gentleman of large property at Roscrow in Cornwall, and who immediately paid his addresses to her; which were so strenuously supported by her uncle, whom she had not the courage to deny, that she gave a reluctant consent to the match; and accordingly it took place in the compass of two or three weeks, she being then in the seventeenth year of her age. From a great disparity of years, and other causes, she was very unhappy during the time which this connexion lasted, but endeavoured to make the best of her situation. The retirement to which she was confined was wisely employed in the farther cultivation of a naturally vigorous understanding: and the good use she made of her leisure hours, was eminently evinced in the charms of her conversation, and in her letters to her friends. That quick feeling of the elegant and beautiful which constitutes taste, she possessed in an eminent degree, and was therefore peculiarly fitted for succeeding in the fine arts. At the period we are speaking of, she made a great proficiency in music, but painting, which afterwards she most loved, and in which she principally excelled, had not yet engaged her practical attention. in 1724 Mrs. Pendarves became a widow; upon which occasion she quitted Cornwall, and fixed her principal residence in London. For several years, between 1730 and 1736, she maintained a correspondence with Dr. Swift. In 1743, as we have seen in the former article, Mrs. Pendarves was married to Dr. Delany, with whom it appears that she had long been acquainted; and for whom he had many years entertained a very high esteem. She had been a widow nineteen years when this connexion, which was a very happy one, took place, and her husband is said to fcave regarded her almost to adoration. Upon his decease in ftiay 1768, she intended to fix herself at Bath, and was in quest of a house for that purpose. But the duchess dowager of Portland, hearing of her design, went down to the place; and, having in her earl v years formed an intimacy with Mrs. Delany, wished to have near her a lady from whom she had necessarily, for several years, been much separated, and whose heart and talents she knew would in the highest degree add to thejiappiness of her own life. Her <*race succeeded in her solicitalions, and Mrs. Delany now passed her time between London and Bulstrode. On the death of the duchess-dowager of Portland, his present majesty, who had frequently seen and honoured Mrs Delany with his notice at Bulstrode, assigned her for her summer residence the use of a house completely furnished, in St. Alhan’s-street, Windsor, adjoining to the entrance of the castle: and, that the having two houses on her hands might not produce any inconvenience with regard to the expence of her living, his majesty, as a farther mark of his royal favour, conferred on her a pension of three hundred pounds a year. On the 15th of April, 1788, after a short indisposition, she departed this life, at her house in St. James’s-place, having nearly completed the 88th year of her age. The circumstance that has principally entitled Mrs. Delany to a place in this work is her skill in painting, and in other ingenious arts, one of which was entirely her own. With respect to painting, she was late in her application to it. She did not learn to draw till she was more than thirty years of age, when she put herself under the instruction of Goupy, a fashionable master of that time, and much employed by Frederic prince of Wales. To oil-painting she did not take till she was past forty. So strong was her passion for this art, that she has frequently been known to employ herself in it, day after day, from six o'clock in the morning till dinner time, allowing only a short interval for breakfast. She was principally a copyist; but a very fine one. The only considerable original work of hers in oil was the Kaising of Lazarus, in the possession of her friend lady JBute. The number of pictures painted by her, considering how late it was in life before she applied to the art, was very great. Her own house was full of them; and others are among the chief ornaments of Calswich, Welsborn, and Ham, the respective residences of her nephews, Mr. Granville and Mr. Dewes, and of her niece Mrs. Port. Mrs. Delany, among her other accomplishments, excelled in embroidery and shell-work; and, in the course of her life, produced many elegant specimens of her skill in these respects. But, what is more remarkable, at the age of 74 she invented a new and beautiful mode of exercising her ingenuity. This was by the construction of a Flora, of a most singular kind, formed by applying coloured papers together, and which might, not improperly, be called a species of mosaic work. Being perfectly mistress of her scissars, the plant or flower which she purposed to imitate she cut out; that is, she cut out its various leaves and parts in such coloured Chinese paper as suited her subject; and, when she could not meet with a colour to correspond with the one she wanted, she dyed her own paper to answer her wishes. She used a black ground, as best calculated to throw out her flower; and not the least astonishing part of her art was, that though she never employed her pencil to trace out the form or shape of her plant, yet when she had applied all the p eces which composed it, it hung so loosely and gracefully, that every one was persuaded that it must previously have been drawn out, and repeatedly corrected by a most judicious hand, before it could have attained the ease and air of truth which, without any impeachment of the honour of this accomplished lady, might justly be called a forgery of nature’s works. The effect was superior to what painting could have produced; and so imposing was her art, that she would sometimes put a real leaf of a plant by the side of one of her own creation, which the eye could not detect, even when she herself pointed it out. Mrs. Delany continued in the prosecution of her design till the 83d year of her age, when the dimness of her sight obliged her to lay it aside. However, by her unwearied perseverance, she became authoress of far the completest Flora that ever was executed by the same hand. The number of plants finished bv her amounted to nine hundred and eighty. This invaluable Flora was bequeathed by her to her nephew Court Dewes, esq. and is now in the possession of Barnard Dewes, esq. of Welsborn in Warwickshire. The liberality of Mrs. Delany’s mind rendered her at all times ready to communicate her art. She frequently pursued her work in company; was desirous of shewing to her friends how easy it was to execute; and was often heard to lament that so few would attempt it. It required, however, great patience and great knowledge in botanical drawing. She began to write poetry at 80 years of age, and her verses shew at least a pious disposition. Her private character is thus given by her friend, Mr. Keate. “She had every virtue that could adorn the human heart, with a mind so pure, and so uncontaminated by the world, that it was matter of astonishment how she could have lived in its more splendid scenes without being tainted with one single atom of its folly or indiscretion. The strength of her understanding received, in the fullest degree, its polish, but its weakness never reached her. Her life was conducted by the sentiments of true piety; her way of thinking, on every occasion, was upright and just; her conversation was lively, pleasant, and instructive. She was warm, delicate, and sincere in her friendships; full of philanthropy and benevolence, and loved and respected by every person who had the happiness to know her. That sun-shine and serenity of mind which the good can only enjoy, and which had thrown so much attraction on her life, remained without a shadow to the last; not less bright in its setting, than in its meridian lustre. That form which in youth had claimed admiration, in age challenged respect. It presented a noble ruin, become venerable by the decay of time. Her faculties remained unimpaired to the last; and she quitted this mortal state to receive in a better world the crown of a well-spent life.”

, a French monk, was born at Montet in Auvergne, in 1637, and became a monk of Clermont in 1656, where he recommended himself to the notice and respect of his superiors by his application and talents. He was fixed on, at the instigation of the celebrated Arnaud, to give a new edition of the works of St. Augustine, and had made considerable preparation for the publication, when an anonymous tract, entitled “L' Abbe commandataire,” exposing certain ecclesiastical abuses, was imputed to him, it is said unjustly. He must, however, have had no means of disproving the charge, as he was banished for it to Lower Bretagne. He was shortly after called upon to preach at Brest, on some public occasion, when the vessel in which he took his passage was wrecked, and he was among the number of those that were drowned, in October 1676, in the thirty-ninth year of his age. He was author of several works, of little importance now, if we except an historical eulogy, entitled “The Epitaph of Casimir, king of Poland, who, after having abdicated his crown, retired into France, and became abbot of St. Germain de Pres.”

His next publication is said to have proceeded from his aversion to superstition, but it is scarcely reconcileable to decorum in style or matter. This was his “History of the Flagellants; or, Memorials of Human Superstition,” 1783, 4to. His attention being afterwards more usefully called to the subject of the legislative union between England and Scotland, by an intended re-publication of De Foe’s history of that memorable transaction, he wrote, in 1787, a judicious essay, calculated for an introduction to that work. In the following year he published observations relative to the tax upon window-lights, the shop-tax, and the impost upon hawkers and pedlars. In these he urges his objections with humour as well as argument. When the question of the regency agitated the minds of the public, he wrote, in 1789, “Observations upon the National Embarrassment, and the proceedings in parliament relative to the same.” In this pamphlet ho coincides with the plan proposed by Mr. Pitt, and adopted by the par^ liament, with the concurrence of the gre::t majority or the nation. These are supposed to be all Mr. De Lolme’s avowed publications; but he wrote some letters in the newspapers, particularly, we remember, a very ingenious paper on the question, “whether the impeachment of Mr. Hastings abated by a dissolution of parliament?” At what time he left England we have not been able to discover, but he died in Swisserland in 1807, leaving a name certainly of considerable eminence in the annals of literature. His perception was acute, and his mind vigorous. Not content with a hasty or superficial observation of the characters of men and the affairs of states, he examined them with a philosophic spirit and a discerning eye. He could ably speculate on the different modes of government, develope the disguised views of princes and ministers, and detect, the arts and intrigues of demagogues and pseudopatriots. His work on the Constitution of England has been generally supposed the most rational and enlightened survey of the subject; and his last editor is of opinion that even the labours of professor Millar and other British writers do not appear to have discredited or falsified this high character of the work.

, a peripatetic philosopher, and an illustrious ornament of that school, lived in the time of Alexander the Great, and was a scholar of Theophrastus. He is represented as a flowery, rather than a persuasive speaker, and as one who aimed at grace rather than manner. Cicero says he amused the Athenians rather than warmed them; yet such was the influence of his harangues, that at Athens he was almost absolute for ten years. Three hundred and sixty statues were erected in his honour; and not undeservedly, since he is said to have augmented the revenues of it, as well as to have improved and polished its buildings. But envy at length conspiring against him, his statues were pulled down, and himself threatened with death; but he escaped into Egypt, and was protected by Ptolemy Soter. This king, it is said, asked his advice concerning the succession of his children to the throne, viz. whether he ought to prefer those he had by Eurydice to Ptolemy Philadelphus, whom he had by Berenice; and Demetrius advised him to leave his crown to the former. This displeased Philadelphia so much, that, his father being dead, he banished Demetrius, who, unable to support the repeated misfortunes he had met with, put an end to his life, by the bite of an asp. Demetrius composed more works in prose and verse, than any other peripatetic of his time; and his writings consisted of poetry, history, politics, rhetoric, harangues, and embassies. None of his works are extant for as to the piece “De Interpretatione,” which goes under his name, and is usually printed with the “Rhetores Selecti,” there are several internal marks, which shew that it is probably of a later date. He is supposed to be the same with him that collected together 200,000 volumes into the library of Ptolemy Philadelphus, who, to make it complete, caused that translation of the Bible out of Hebrew into Greek to be made, which is commonly called the Septuagint. And if it should be objected, that Demetrius could not possibly be the manager of this affair, since he was banished by Philadelphus as soon as he came to the crown, it has generally been thought sufficient to say, that these books were collected, and this translation made, while Ptolemy Philadelphus reigned with his father Ptolemy Soter. But this story is now generally discredited, and the Septuagint is ascribed to the private labour of the Jews, who were at this time resident in Egypt. When Demetrius was born, and when he died, we know not; but his disgrace at Athens is said to have happened about the year of Rome 436, that is, somewhat about 300 years before Christ.

The fundamental difference between the doctrine of Democritus, and that of former philosophers, concerning atoms, is, that the latter conceived small particles endued with various qualities; whereas this philosopher conceived the qualities of bodies to be, as we have already said, the mere effect of arrangement. Democritus, in his whole system, pays no regard to an external efficient cause, but absurdly supposes, that the intrinsic necessity, which gives motion to atoms, is alone sufficient to account for the phaenomena of nature. Whatever he is said to have taught concerning nature, fate, or providence, he merely asserted, that the fire, which resulted from the combination of certain subtle atoms, and which has been called the soul of the world, is a mechanical agent in nature, causing by its rapid motion the changes which take place in the universe. Plutarch says, that Democritus considered the sun and moon as ignited plates of stone; but this is not consistent with his general system, and with his knowledge of nature. The belief of the materiality of the soul was the natural result of the atomic system; for if the soul be a mere composition of atoms, when these are dispersed, it must perish; As to the reviviscence of human bodies, he can only be supposed to mean, that the atoms composing any human soul, would, after their dispersion, coalesce again, in some distant period, and recover their former life. The term eiJaXov^ or image, seems to have had, in his use of it, two different significations: it denoted those images which he supposed to flow from external objects, and, striking upon the senses, excite ideas in the mind, and also, those divine beings that existed in the air, and which he called gods. Although Democritus rejected the notion of Deity, and allowed him no share in the creation or government of the world, he endeavoured to conceal his impiety, by admitting the popular belief of divinities inhabiting the aerial regions, and teaching that they make themselves visible to some favoured mortals, and enable them to predict future events.

On Mr. Dennis’s character as a political writer it is not necessary to enlarge. It is probable that, in this capacity, he may have been the author of several tracts, which are now forgotten, and with regard to which there would be no utility in endeavouring to rescue them from oblivion. In his select works are inserted the productions of this kind which he himself thought of the most consequence, and the most worthy of preservation. The first of them was published in 1702, and is an answer to a discourse of the famous Henry Sacheverell, called “The Political Union.' 7 Dennis’s piece is entitled” Priestcraft dangerous to Religion and Government;“and is a defence of low-church principles and toleration. In 1703 he printed” A Proposal for putting a speedy End to the War, by ruining the commerce of the French and Spaniards, and securing our own, without any additional expence to the uation.“The scheme was, to form such a junction of the English and Dutch fleets, and such a combination and disposition of a large number of smaller armed vessels, as should effectually carry into execution the purpose intended. Our author has explained his project with sufficient ingenuity; but, like many other projects which voluntary politicians have been so ready to contrive for the public good, it met with no degree of regard. Indeed, the views and measures of die then subsisting ministry were more directed to exertions by land than at sea. In 1711 he produced” An. Essay upon Public Spirit; being a Satire, in prose, upon the manners and luxury of the times, the chief sources of our present parties and divisions," a violent and not very judicious declamation against the vices of his own age, in contrast with the virtues of our remote ancestors.

We are now to consider Mr. Dennis in his critical capacity, in which he so frequently exerted himself that he came to be called the Critic, by way of distinction. For sustaining this character he was not ill qualified by his knowledge, learning, and judgment. He maintained it likewise with reputation for some time; but at length he displayed this talent with so little judgment or delicacy, and against men of such eminence and superiority, that they succeeded in reducing him to a low degree of estimation with the public. His first criticism was entitled “Observations on Blackmore’s Prince Arthur;” the third edition of which poem was printed in 1696, and which might afford sufficient scope for a variety of strictures but that in this instance he was more mild than usual, is probable, from his afterwards corresponding with sir Richard Blackmnore on very friendly terms. In 1696 or 1697, he published “Letters upon several occasions,” written partly by himself, and partly by Mr. Dryden, Mr. Wycherley, Mr. Moyle, and Mr. Congreve. The subjects of them are in some degree miscellaneous; but chiefly critical; and, among other things, they contain Mr. Congreve’s Observations concerning Humour in Comedy. A very high opinion of our author was at this time entertained by Dryden and Congreve. In 1701 he gave to the public a critical discourse, entitled “The Advancement and Reformation of modern Poetry,” divided into two parts the design of the first of which is to shew,that the principal reason why the ancients excelled the moderns in the higher species of poetry was, because they mixed religion with it. In the second, Mr. Dennis endeavours to prove, that by joining poetry with the religion revealed to us in sacred writ, the modern poets might equal the ancient. Whether he has entirely succeeded in the positions he maintains, may, perhaps, be doubtful; but he has supported them with some ingenuity and ability.

, an excellent philosopher and divine, was born at Stoughton near Worcester, Nov. 26, 1657; and educated in grammar-learning at Ulockley in. that county. In May 1675 he was admitted of Trinity college, Oxford and when he took his degree of B. A. was already distinguished for his learning and exemplary character. He was ordained deacon by Compton bishop of London, in May 1681; priest by Ward bishop of Salisbury, in July 1682; and was the same month presented to the vicarage of Wargrave in Berkshire. August 1689, he was presented to the valuable rectory of Upminster in Essex: which living, lying at a moderate distance from London, afforded him an opportunity of conversing and corresponding with the most eminent philosophers of the nation. Here in a retirement suitable to his contemplative and philosophical temper, he applied himself with great eagerness to the study of nature, and to mathematics and experimental philosophy; in which he became so eminent, that in 1702 he was chosen F. R. S. He proved one of the most useful and industrious members of this society, frequently publishing in the Philosophical Transactions curious observations and valuable pieces, as may be seen by their Index. In his younger years he published separately, “The artificial Clock-maker; or, a treatise of watch and clock-work, shewing to the meanest capacities the art of calculating numbers to all sorts of movements; the way to alter clock-work; to make chimes, and set them to musical notes; and to calculate and correct the motion of pendulums. Also numbers for divers movements: with the ancient and modern history of clockwork; and many instruments, tables, and other matters, never before published in any other book.” The fourth edition of this book, with large emendations, was published in 1734, 12mo. In 1711 and 1712 he preached “Sixteen Sermons” at Boyle’s lectures; which, with suitable alterations in the form, and notes, he published in 1713 under the title “Physico-theology; or, a demonstration of the beine: and attributes of God from his works of creation,” 8vo. In pursuance of the same design, he published, in 1714, “Astro-theology or, a demonstrationof the being and attributes of God from a survey of the heavens,” illustrated with copper-plates, 8vo. These works, the former especially, have been highly and justly valued, translated into French and several other languages, and have undergone several editions. In 1716 he was made a canon of Windsor, being at that time chaplain to the prince of Wales; and in 1730 received the degree of D. D. from the university of Oxford by diploma, on account of his learning, and the services he had done to religion by his culture of natural knowledge “Ob libros,” as the terms of the diploma run, “ab ipso editos, quibus physicam & mathesin auctiorem reddidit, & ad religionem veramque fidem exornandam revocavit.” When Eleazer Albin published his natural history of birds and English insects, in 4 vols. 4to, with many beautiful cut?, it was accompanied with very curious notes and observations by our learned author. He also revised the “Miscellanea Curiosa,” published in three volumes, 1726, 8vo. He next published “Christo-theology or, a demonstration of the divine authority of the Christian religion, being the substance of a sermon preached at Bath, Nov. 2, 1729, and published at the earnest request of the auditory, 1730,” 8vo. The last work of his own composition was “A Defence of the Churches right in Leasehold Estates. In answer to a book called ‘An Inquiry into the customary estates and TenantRights of those who hold lands of the Church and other Foundations,’ published under the name of Everard Fleetwood, esq.” 1731, 8vo. But, besides his own, he published some pieces of Mr. Ray, and gave new editions of others, with great additions from the author’s own Mss. To him the world is likewise indebted for the “Philosophical Experiments and observations of the late eminent Dr. Robert Hooke, and other eminent virtuosos in his time, 1726,” 8vo; and he communicated to the royal society several pieces, which he received from his learned correspondents.

Dermody’s first publication was a small volume of poems, written in his thirteenth year, and printed in 1792. In 1793 he published a pamphlet on the subject of the French revolution, entitled “The Rights of Justice, or Rational Liberty,” to which was annexed a poem called “The Reform.” At this time, we are told, “his state became so desperate that he would have undertaken to defend or promote any cause which promised to afford the least immediate supply.” During his residence in London, he published a volume of poems in 1800, a second in 1801; and afterwards a poem called “The Battle of the Bards,” occasioned by the rencounter between Dr. Wolcot, alias Peter Pindar, and a brother bard. In 1806, Mr. James Grant Raymond published 2 vols. cr. 8vo, “The Life of Thomas Dermody,” to which we are indebted for the particulars in the above sketch.

, a native of Ireland, was born in 1724. Being intended for trade, he was some time placed with a linen-draper in Dublin; but disliking his business, he quitted it and his country about 1751, and commenced author in London. Soon after he arrived at the metropolis, he indulged an inclination which he had imbibed for the stage, and appeared in the character of Gloucester in “Jane Shore,” but with so little success, that he never repeated the experiment. After this attempt he subsisted chiefly by his writings; but being of an expensive disposition, running into the follies and excesses of gallantry and gaming, he lived almost all his time the slave of dependence, or the sport of chance. His acquaintance with people of fashion, on beau Nash’s death, procured him at length a more permanent subsistence. He was chosen to succeed that gentleman in his offices of master of the ceremonies at Bath and Tunbridge. By the profits of these he might have been enabled to place himself with ceconomy in a less precarious state; but his want of conduct continued after he was in the possession of a considerable income, by which means he was at the time of his death, March 7, 1769, as necessitous as he had been at any period of his life. He translated one piece from the French of the king of Prussia, called “Sylla,” a dramatic entertainment, 1753, 8vo; “A Voyage to the Moon,” from the French of Bergerac, 1753; “Memoirs of the Count de Beauval,” from the French of the marquis d'Argens,“1754, 12mo;” The third Satire of Juvenal translated intoJEnglish VC.rse,“1755, 4to and he edited an edition of Dryclen’s poetical works, with a life and notes, 1762, 4 vols. ^vo, a beautifully printed work, which had very little success. In 1759 he published a” View of the Stage,“under the na^e of Wilkes in 1762,” The Battle of Lora,“a poem in 1763,” A Collection of Voyages,“2 vols. 12mo, and some other compilations, with and without his name, which, indeed, in ibe literary world, was of little consequence. The most amffsing of his works, was his” Letters written from Liverpool, CilSSter, &c." 2 vols. 12mo. Derrick lived rather to amuse than instruct the public, and his vanity and absurdities were for many years the standing topics of the newspaper wits. A few, not unfavourable, anecdotes of Derrick are given in Boswell’s Life of Johnson.

On the 29th of July 1714, he was elected a fellow of the royal society, of which he became a very useful member, and was much respected by the president, sir Isaac Newton. His first paper which appeared in the Philosophical Transactions, was published in the 348th number, and contained an account of some experiments of sir Isaac Newton on light and colours, which had been repeated by Mr. Desaguliers, in order to confirm sir Isaac’s theory. He soon after communicated to the society (Transactions, No. 361) a method by which myopes might use telescopes without eye-glasses. Of some experiments which he made with Mr. Villette’s burning-glass, in conjunction with Dr. J. Harris, an account was also published in the Transactions. In 1716 he published a piece entitled “Fires improved; being a new method of building Chimnies, so as to prevent their smoaking.” This was a translation from the French, and involved him in some dispute with Edmund Curll, whom he had employed as his publisher, and admitted to have a share in the book. Curll, in order to promote the sale, had puffed it off in a very gross manner; which induced Mr. Desaguliers to publish a letter in a periodical paper, called “The Town-Talk,” begun at that time by sir Richard Steele, in which he informed the public, that, whenever his name hereafter “was, or should be printed, with that egregious flatterer Mr. CurlPs, either in an advertisement, or at the title-page of a book, except that of Fires improved, he entirely disowned it.”

, a French nobleman, born at Paris in 1602, was, like the English lord Rochester, a great wit, a great libertine, and a great penitent. He made a vast progress in his studies under the Jesuits, who, perceiving his genius, endeavoured to get him into their society; but his family would not listen to their proposal, and he soon himself began to treat them with ridicule. While very young, his father procured him the place of a counsellor in the parliament of Paris, where his wit was aumired but he would never report a cause; for he used to say that it was a sordid occupation, and unworthy of a man of parts, to read wrangling papers with attention, and to endeavour to understand them. It is said, indeed, that on one occasion, when his clients were urgent for a decision, he sent for both parties, burnt the papers before them, and paid down the sum that was the cause of the dispute, to the amount of four or five hundred livres. One account says, that he left this place from the following cause. Cardinal Richelieu falling in love with the celebrated beauty Marion de Lorme, whose affections were entirely placed on our Des Barreaux, proposed to him by a third hand, that if he would resign his mistress, he should have whatever he should desire. Des Barreaux answered the proposal in a jesting way, feigning to believe the cardinal incapable of so much weakness. This enraged the minister so highly, that he persecuted Des Barreaux as long as he lived, and forced him not only to quit his place, but even to leave the kingdom. But another account says that his resignation of the bar was voluntary, and with a view to become a man of pleasure, which appears to be more probable. During his career, however, he made a great number of Latin and French verses, and. some pleasing songs; but never pursued any thing seriously, except good cheer and diversions, and being very entertaining in company, he was in high request with men of wit and taste. He had his particular friends in the several provinces of France, whom he frequently visited, and it was his practice to shift his quarters, according to the seasons of the year. In winter, he went to seek the sun on the coasts of Provence; and passed the three worst months in the year at Marseilles. The house which he called his favourite, was that of the count de Clermont de Lodeve, in Languedoc; where, he used to say, good cheer and liberty were on their throne. Sometimes he went to Balzac, on the banks of the Charante but his chief residence was at Chenailles on the Loire. His general view in these ramblings was to search out the best fruits and the best wines in the climates: but sometimes, to do him justice, his object was more intellectual, as, when he went into Holland, on purpose to see Des Cartes, and to improve hr the instructions of that great genius. His friends do not deny that he was a great libertine; but pretend, that fame, according to custom, had said more of him than is true, and that, in the latter part of his life, he was convinced of the reality of religion. They say, that he did not disapprove the truths of Christianity, and wished to be fully convinced of them; but he thought nothing was so dim'cult to a man of wit as to be a true believer. He was born a catholic, but paid little attention either to the worship or doctrines of the Romish religion; and he used to say, that if the Scriptures are to be the rule of our actions and of our belief, there was no better religion than the protestant. Four or five years before his death, we are told that he entirely forsook his vicious courses, paid his debts, and, having never been married, gave up the remainder of his estate to his sisters; reserving to himself for life an annuity of 4000 livres. He then retired to Chalon on the Soane, which he said was the best and purest air in France; hired a small house, and was visited by the better sort of people, particularly by the bishop, who afterwards spoke well of him. He died in that city, May 9. 1673, having made the famous devout sonnet two or three years before his death, which begins, “Grand Dieu, tes jugemens,” &c. But Voltaire has endeavoured to deprive him of the merit of this, by ascribing it to the abbe de Levau. It is, however, the only one of Des Barreaux’s poems, which in general were in the style of Sarazin and Chapelle, that has obtained approbation, Dreux du Radier, in his “Recreations historiques,” asserts that it is an imitation of a sonnet by Desportes, who published it in 1G03; and if so, the imitation must be allowed greatly to surpass the original.

, the first earl of Essex of this name and family, a general equally distinguished for his courage and conduct, and a nobleman not more illustrious by his titles than by his birth, was descended from a most ancient and noble farrr!“, being the son of sir Richard Devereux, knight, by Do 'thy, daughter of George earl of Huntingdon, and gra.idson of Walter viscount of Hereford, so created by king Edward the Sixth. He was born about 1540, at his grandfather’s castle in Carmarthenshire, and during his education applied himself to his studies with great diligence and success. He succeeded to the titles of viscount Hereford and lord Ferrers of Chartley, in the nineteenth year of his age, and being early distinguished for his modesty, learning, and loyalty, stood in higii favour with his sovereign, queen Elizabeth. In 1569, upon the breaking out of the rebellion in the north, under the earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland, he raised a considerable body of forces, which joining those belonging to the lord admiral and the earl of Lincoln, he was declared marshal of the army, and obliged the rebels to disperse. This so highly recommended him to the queen, that in 1572 she honoured him with the garter, and on the 4th of May, the same year, created him earl of Essex, as being descended by his great grandmother from the noble family of Bourchier, long before honoured with the same title. In the month of January following, he was one of the peers that sat in judgment upon the duke of Norfolk. At this time he was such a favourite with the queen, that some, who were for confining her good graces to themselves, endeavoured to remove him by encouraging an inclination he shewed to adventure both his person and fortune for her majesty’s service in Ireland. Accordingly, on the 16th of August, 1573, he embarked at Liverpool, accompanied by lord Darcy, lord Rich, and many other persons of distinction, together with a multitude of volunteers, who were incited by the hopes of preferment, and his lordship’s known reputation. His reception in Ireland was not very auspicious landing at Knockfergus on the 16th of September, he found the chiefs of the rebels inclined apparently to submit; but having gained time, they broke out again into open rebellion. Lord Rich was called away by his own affairs, and by degrees, most of those who went abroad with the earl, came home again upon a variety of pretences. In this situation Essex desired the queen to carry on the service in her own name, and by her own command, though he should be at one half of the expence. Afterwards he applied to the earls of Sussex and Leicester, and the lord Burleigh, to induce the queen to pay one hundred horse and six hundred foot; which, however, did not take effect; but the queen, perceiving the slight put upon him, and that the lord deputy had delayed sending him his commission, was inclined to recal him out of Ulster, if Leicester and others, who had promoted his removal, had not dissuaded her. The lord deputy, at last, in 1574, sent him his patent, but with positive orders to pursue the earl of Desmond one way, while himself pressed him another. The earl of Essex reluctantly obeyed, and either forced or persuaded the earl of Desmond to submission; and it is highly probable, would have performed more essential service, if he had not been thwarted. The same misfortune attended his subsequent attempts; and, excepting the zeal of his attendants, the affection of the English soldiers, and the esteem of the native Irish, he gained nothing by all his pains. Worn out at length with these fruitless fatigues, he, the next year, desired leave to conclude upon honourable terms an accommodation with Turlough Oneile, which was refused him. He then surrendered the government of Ulster into the lord deputy’s hands, believing the forces allowed him altogether insufficient for its defence; but the lord deputy obliged him to resume it, and to majrch against Turlough, Oneile, which he accordingly did; and his enterprize” being in a fair way of succeeding, he was surprized to receive instructions, which peremptorily required him to make peace. This likewise he concluded, without loss of honour, and then turned his arms against the Scots from the western islands, who had invaded and taken possession, of his country. These he quickly drove out, and, by the help of Norris, followed them into one of their islands; and was preparing to dispossess them of other posts, when he was required to give up his command, and afterwards to serve at the head of a small body of three hundred men, with no other title than their captain. All this he owed to Leicester; but, notwithstanding his chagrin, he continued to perform his duty, without any shew of resentment, out of respect to the queen’s service. In the spring of the succeeding year he came over to England, and did not hesitate to express his indignation against the all-powerful favourite, for the usage he had met xvith. But as it was the custom of that great man to debase his enemies by exalting them, so he procured an order for the earl of Essex’s return into Ireland, with the sounding title of earl -marshal of that kingdom, and with promises that he should be left more at liberty than in times past; but, upon his arrival at Ireland, he found his situation so little altered for the better, that he pined away with grief and sorrow, which at length proved fatal to him, and brought him to his end. There is nothing more certain, either from the public histories, or private memoirs and letters of that age, than the excellent character of this noble earl, as a brave soldier, a loyal subject, and a disinterested patriot; and in private life he was of a chearful temper, kind, affectionate, and beneficent to all who were about him. He was taken ill of a flux on the 21st of August, and in great pain and misery languished to the 22d of September, 1576, when he departed this life at Dublin, being scarcely thirty-five years old. There was a very strong report at the time, of his being poisoned; but for this there seems little foundation, yet it must have been suspected, as an inquiry was immediately made by authority, and sir Henry Sidney, then lord deputy of Ireland, wrote very fully upon this subject to the privy-council in England, and to one of the members of that council in particular. The corpse of the earl was speedily brought over to England, carried to the place of his nativity, Carmarthen, and buried there with great solemnity, and with most extraordinary i< monies of the unfeigned sorrow of all the country round about. A funeral sermon was preached on this occasion, Nov. 26, 1576, and printed at London 1577, 4to. He married Lettice, daughter to sir Frances Knolles, knight of the garter, who survived him many years, and whose speedy marriage after his death to the earl of Leicester, upon whom common fame threw the charge of hastening his death, perhaps might encourage that report. By this lady he had two sons, Robert and Walter, and two daughters, Penelope, first married to Robert lord Rich, and then to Charles Blount, earl of Devonshire; and Dorothy, who becoming the widow of sir Thomas Perrot, knight, espoused for her second husband Henry Percy earl of Northumberland.

It was as a prose-writer that the earl of Essex excelled, and not as a poet. He is said to have translated one of Ovid’s Epistles; and a few of his sonnets are preserved in the Ashmolean museum. They display, however, no marks of poetic genius. “But if Essex,” says Mr. Warton, “was no poet, few noblemen of his age were more courted by poets. From Spenser to the lowest rhymer he was the subject of numerous sonnets, or popular ballads. I will not except Sydney. I could produce evidence to prove, that he scarcely ever went out of England, or even left London, on the most frivolous enterprize, without a pastoral in his praise, or a panegyric in metre, which were sold and sung in the streets. Having interested himself in the fashionable poetry of the times, he was placed high in the ideal Arcadia now just established; and, among other instances which might be brought, on his return from Portugal in 1589 he was complimented with a poem called” An Egloge gratulatorie entituled to the right honorable and renowned shepherd of Albion’s Arcadia, Robert earl of Essex, and for his returne lately into England.“This is a light in which lord Essex is seldom viewed. I know not if the queen’s fatal partiality, or his own inherent attractions, his love of literature, his heroism, integrity, and generosity, qualities which abundantly overbalance his presumption, his vanity, and impetuosity, had the greater share in dictating these praises. If adulation were any where justifiable, it must be when paid to the man who endeavoured to save Spenser from starving in the streets of Dublin, and who buried him in Westminster-abbey with becoming solemnity. Spenser was persecuted by Burleigh because he was patronised by Essex.”

, son to the former, and third earl of Essex, was born in 1592, at Essex-house, in the Strand; and at the time of his father’s unhappy death, was under the care of his grandmother, by whom he was sent to Eton school, where he was first educated. In the month of January 1602, he was entered a gentleman-commoner of Merton- college, Oxford, where he had an apartment in the warden’s lodgings, then Mr. Savile, afterwards the celebrated sir Henry Savile, his father’s dear friend, and who, for his sake, was exceedingly careful in seeing that he was learnedly and religiously educated. The year following, he was restored to his hereditary honours; and in 1605, when king James visited the university of Oxford, our young earl of Essex was created M. A. on the 30th of August, for the first tirne, which very probably he had forgotten, or he would not have received the same honour above thirty years afterwards. He was already in possession of his father’s high spirit, of which he gave a sufficient indication in a quarrel which he had with prince Henry. Some dispute arose between them at a game at tennis; the prince called his companion the son of a traitor; who retaliated by giving him a severe blow with his racket; and the king was obliged to interfere to restore peace. At the age of fourteen, he was betrothed to lady Frances Howard, who was still younger than himself; but he immediately set out on his travels, and during his absence the affections of his young wife were estranged from him, and fixed upon the king’s favourite, Carr, afterwards earl of Somerset. The consequence was a suit instituted against the husband for impotency, in which, to the disgrace of the age, the king interfered, and which ended in a divorce. The earl of Essex, feeling himself disgraced by the sentence, retired to his country seat, and spent some years in rural sports and amusements. In 120, being wearied of a state of inaction, he joined the earl of Oxford in a military expedition to the Palatinate, where they served with companies of their own raising, under sir Horatio Vere, and in the following year they served in Holland, under prince Maurice, In the course of the winter they returned to England, and lord Essex appeared in the ranks of the opposition in parliament. On this account he was not favourably received at court, which was the mean of attaching him the more closely to foreign service. He commanded a regiment raised in England for the United States in 1624, and though nothing very important was atchieved by the English auxiliaries, yet he acquired experience, and distinguished himself among the nobility of the time. On the accession of Charles I. he was employed as vice-admiral in an expedition against Spain, which proved unsuccessful. In 1626, he made another campaign in the Low Countries, and shortly after he formed another unhappy match, by marrying the daughter of sir William Paulet, from whom, owing to her misconduct, he was divorced within two years. He now resolved to give himself up entirely to public life; he courted popularity, and made friends among the officers of the army and the puritan ministers. He was, however, employed by the king in various important services; but when the king and court left the metropolis, lord Essex pleaded in excuse his obligation to attend in his place as a peer of the realm, and was accordingly deprived of all his employments; a step which alone seemed wanting to fix him in opposition to the king; and in July 1642 he accepted the post of general of the parliamentary army. He opposed the king in person at Edge-hill, where the victory was so indecisive, that each party claimed it as his own. After this he was successful in some few instances, but in other important trusts he did little to recommend him to the persons in whose interests he was employed. He was, however, treated with external respect, until the self-denying ordinance threw him entirely out of the command: he resigned his commission, but not without visible marks of discontent. Unwilling to lose him altogether, the parliament voted that he should be raised to a dukedom, and be allowed 10,000l. per annum, to support his new dignity; but these were vented by a sudden death, which, as in the case of his grandfather, was by some attributed to unfair means. He died September 14, 1646. Parliament directed a public funeral for him, which was performed with great solemnity in the following month, at Westminster abbey. In his conduct, the particulars of which may be seen in the history of the times, a want of steadiness is to be discovered, which candour would refer to the extraordinary circumstances in which public men were then placed. Personal affronts at court, whether provoked or not, led him to go a certain length with those who, he did not perceive, wanted to go much farther, and although he appeared in arms against his sovereign, no party was pleased with his efforts to preserve a balance; yet, with all his er/ors, Hume and other historians, not friendly to the republican cause, have considered his death as a public misfortune. Hume says, that fully sensible of the excesses to which affairs had been carried, and of the worse consequences which were still to be apprehended, he had resolved to conciliate a peace, and to remedy as far as possible all those ills to which, from mistake rather than any bad intention, he had himself so much contributed. The presbyterian, or the moderate party among the commons, found themselves considerably weakened by his death; and the small remains of authority which still adhered to the house of peers, were in a manner wholly extinguished.

, a learned physician, and voluminous writer on medicine and natural philosophy, was born at Meurs, in the duchy of Juliers, October 16th, 4612. After studying the classics and the Arabic and Persian languages, he went to Leyden, where he completed his education by taking the degree of M. D. in 1634; and three years after was appointed professor in mathematics at Meurs. In 1639, he was called to succeed Isaac Pontanus in the chair of natural philosophy and mathematics; and in 1642 to that of medicine, at Hardenvick, to which was added the office of physician to the city. From Harderwick he went to Groningen, where he was not only professor of medicine, but rector of the university, and ancient of the church. Amid the business which such accumulated duties heaped upon him, he found leisure to write a greater number of treatises on the different parts of medicine and philosophy than have fallen from the pen. of almost any other man. Haller and Manget have given a list of fifty-four, but a small number of these are on practical subjects, many of them being metaphysical and controversial. Those relating to his controversy with Silvius, are written with great acrimony; though the subjects, which are mostly physiological, do not seem calculated to excite so much rancour as we see infused into them. Among these are, “Joannes Cloppenburgius, Heautontimorumenos, seu retorsio injuriarum de libello falsidico, cui titulus, Res judicata, cumulatarum,” 1643, 4to. The subject of dispute is the nature of the soul, and on the intelligences that direct the course of the stars.

, the famous pensionary of Holland, was the second son of Jacob De Witt, burgomaster of Dort, and deputy to the states of Holland; and born in 1625. He was educated at Dort, and made so great a progress in his studies, that at twenty-three he published “Elementa Curvarum Linearum” one of the ablest books in mathematics that had appeared in those days. After he had taken the degree of LL. D. he travelled for some years; and, on his return in 1650, became a pensionary of Dort, and distinguished himself early in the management of public affairs. He opposed with all his power the war between the English and Dutch, representing in strong colours the necessary ill consequences of it to the republic: and, when the events justified his predictions, gained so great credit, that he was unanimously chosen pensionary of Holland; first to officiate provisionally, and afterwards absolutely into the office. On this occasion, some of his friends, reminding him of the fate of his predecessor Barnevelt, he replied, that “human life was liable to trouble and danger; and that he thought it honourable to serve his country, which he was resolved to do, whatever returns he might meet with.” The continuance of the war was so visibly destructive to the commerce and interest of the republic, that the pensionary with his friends used all their skill to produce a negociation. Ambassadors were sent to Cromwell, who by this time had called a new parliament. To this assembly the Dutch ministers were directed to apply, but quickly found them very different people from those with whom they had been accustomed to deal; for they entertained the ambassadors with long prayers, and discovered a total ignorance of the business, telling Cromwell, that, if he would assume the supreme authority, they might soon come to a right understanding. This was precisely what he wanted; and though he rejected their advice in words, declaring himself an humble creature of the parliament, yet he soon after found means to get rid of them, and took upon him the government under the title of protector. He then made a peace with the Dutch; the most remarkable condition of which was, the adding a secret article for the exclusion of the house of Orange, to which the States consented by a solemn act. But the article of the exclusion raised a great clamour in Holland: it was insinuated to be suggested to Cromwell by De Witt; and the pensionary and his friends found it difficult to carry points absolutely necessary for the service of the people. The clergy too began to meddle with affairs of state in their pulpits; and, instead of instructing the people how to serve God, were for directing their superiors how to govern their subjects. But his firmness got the better of these difficulties; and so far overcame all prejudices, that when the time of his high office was expired, he was unanimously continued in it, by a resolution of the States, Sept. 15, 1663.

He seemed now to have vanquished even Envy herself. In all difficult cases, his ministry was employed: and when the prince of East-Friesland quarrelled with his subjects, he was put at the head of the deputation to terminate the disputes. When war with England, alter the king’s restoration, became necessary, he was one of the deputies that prevailed on the states of Guelder and Overyssel to furnish their quota: he was appointed one of the commissioners for the direction of the navy, and made such vigorous dispositions, that he had a fleet in much better condition, and more ready for sea, than the admirals themselves imagined possible; though naval affairs were quite new to him. When it was thought expedient, after Opdam’s defeat and death, that some of their own deputies should command the fleet, he was one of those three that were put in commission. When he came on board, the fleet was shut up in the Texel, and, in order to secure the outward-bound East India fleet, it was necessary for it to put to sea; which, as the wind then stood, the sailors declared impossible. It was the received doctrine, that there were but 10 points of the compass from which the wind could carry ships out, and that 22 were against them. The pensionary was alone of another opinion; and, as he was a great mathematician, soon discovered the falsity of this notion: he discovered, that there were in reality no less than 28 points for them, and but four against them. He engaged to carry one of their greatest ships through the Spaniard’s-gat with the wind at S. S. W. which he performed Aug. 16, 1665; the greatest part of the fleet followed him without the least accident, and the passage has since been called Witt’s-diep. They met with a dreadful storm on the coast of Norway, which lasted two days: De Witt remained upon deck all the time, never changed his cloaths, nor took any refreshment, but in common with the men; and, when he saw a want of hands, obliged his officers to work by his own example. He wrote a plain and accurate relation of all that happened during the expedition, and at his return verified every article of this account so fully to the States, that they gave him solemn thanks for his good services, and offered him a considerable present, which, however, he declined to accept.

, of the academy of Berlin, an eminent French writer, was the son of a cutler, and was bora at Langres, in 1713. The Jesuits, with whom he went through a course of study, were desirous of having him in their order, and one of his uncles designing him for a canonry which he had in his gift, made him take the tonsure. But his father, seeing that he was not inclined to be either a Jesuit or a canon, sent him to Paris to prosegute his studies. He then placed him with a lawyer, to whose instructions young Diderot paid little attention, but employed himself in general literature, which not coinciding with the views of his father, he stopped the remittance of his pecuniary allowance, and seemed for some time to have abandoned him. The talents of the young man, however, supplied him with a maintenance, and gradually made him known. He had employed his mind on physics, geometry, metaphysics, ethics, belles-lettres, from the time he began to read with reflection, and although a bold and elevated imagination seemed to give him a turn for poetry, he neglected it for the more serious sciences. He settled at an early period at Paris, where the natural eloquence which animated his conversation procured him friends and patrons. What first gave him reputation among a certain class of readers, unfortunately for France, too numerous in that country, was a little collection of “Pensees philosophiques,” reprinted afterwards under the title of “Etrennes aux esprits-forts.” This book appeared in 1746, 12mo. The adepts of the new philosophy compared it, for perspicuity, elegance, and force of diction, to the “Pensees de Pascal.” But the aim of the two authors was widely different. Pascal employed his talents, and erudition, which was profound and various, in support of the truths of religion, which Diderot attacked by all the arts of an unprincipled sophist. The “Pensées philosophiques,” however, became a toiletbook. The author was thought to be always in the right, because he always dealt in assertions. Diderot was more usefully employed in 1746, in publishing a “Dictionnaire universelle de Medecine,” with Messrs. Eidous and Toussaint, in G vols. folio. Not that this compilation, says his biographer, is without its defects in many points of view, or that it contains no superficial and inaccurate articles; but it is not without examples of deep investigation; and the work was well received. A more recent account, however, informs us that this was merely a translation of Dr. James’s Medical Dictionary, published in this country in 1743; and that Diderot was next advised to translate Chambers’ s Dictionary; but instead of acting so inferior a part, he conceived the project of a more extensive undertaking, the “Dictionnaire Encyclopedique.” So great a monument not being to be raised by a single architect, D'Alembert, the friend of Diderot, shared with him the honours and the dangers of the enterprise, in which they were promised the assistance of several literati, and a variety of artists. Diderot took upon himself alone the description of arts and trades, one of the most important parts, and most acceptable to the public. To the particulars of the several processes of the workmen, he sometimes added reflections, speculations, and principles adapted to their elucidation. Independently of the part of arts and trades, this chief of the encyclopedists furnished in the different sciences a considerable number of articles that were wanting; but even his countrymen are inclined to wish that in a work of such a vast extent, and of such general use, he had learned to compress his matter, and had been less verbose, less of the dissertator, and less inclined to digressions. He has also been censured for employing needlessly a scientific language, and for having recourse to metaphysical doctrines, frequently unintelligible, which occasioned him to be called the Lycophron. of philosophy; for having introduced a number of definitions incapable of enlightening the ignorant, and which he seems to have invented for no other purpose than to have it thought that he had great ideas, while in fact, he had not the art of expressing perspicuously and simply the ideas of others. As to the body of the work, Diderot himself agreed that the edifice wanted an entire reparation; and when two booksellers intended to give a new edition of the Encyclopedic, he thus addressed them on the subject of the faults with which it abounds: “The imperfection of this work originated in a great variety of causes. We had not time to be very scrupulous in the choice of the coadjutors. Among some excellent persons, there were others weak, indifferent, and altogether bad. Hence that motley appearance of the work, where we see the rude attempt of a school-boy by the side of a piece from the hand of a master; and a piece of nonsense next neighbour to a sublime performance. Some working for no pay, soon lost their first fervour; others badly recompensed, served us accordingly. The Encyclopedic was a gulf into which all kinds of scribblers promiscuously threw their contributions: their pieces were ill-conceived, and worse digested; good, bad, contemptible, true, false, uncertain, and always incoherent and unequal; the references that belonged to the very parts assigned to a person, were never filled up by him. A refutation is often found where we should naturally expect a proof; and there was no exact correspondence between the letter-press and the plates. To remedy this defect, recourse was had to long explications. But how many unintelligible machines, for want of letters to denote the parts!” To this sincere confession Diderot added particular details on various parts; such as proved that there were in the Encyclopedic subjects to be not only re-touched, but to be composed afresh; and this was what a new company of literati and artists undertook, but have not yet completed. The first edition, however, which had been delivering to the public from 1751 to 1767, was soon sold off, because its defects were compensated in part by many well-executed articles, and because uncommon pains were taken to recommend it to the public.

, an eminent French printer, who deserves a more satisfactory article than the French biographers have as yet enabled us to give him, was born at Paris in 1730, and was the son of a printer and bookseller, who provided him with an excellent classical education before he introduced him into business. Full of enthusiasm for the advancement of the art of printing, young Didot determined to rival those celebrated printers, Joachim Ibarra of Spain, and Baskerville of England, and lived to surpass both. He soon brought his press to a state of excellence unattained by any of his contemporaries; and extended his skill to every branch connected with it. Among the number of improvements perfected by his exertions, is the construction of mills for making fine paper, which he assisted not only by his zeal and activity, but by pecuniary contribution. He also invented a press by which the workman is enabled to print, equally and at once the whole extent of a sheet; and he was the inventor of many other machines and instruments now commonly used in printing offices, all which have powerfully contributed to the modern advancement of the typographical art. The elegant editions of the classics published by order of Louis XIV. for the education of the Dauphin, were the production of the Didots 1 press, as well as the collection of romances called the D'Artois, in 64 vols. 18mo; the Theatrical Selections by Corneille, the works of Racine, Telemachus, Tasso’s Jerusalem, two superb Bibles, and a multiplicity of other inestimable works, each of which, on its publication, seemed to make nearer approaches to perfection. Didot sedulously endeavoured to unite in his family every talent auxiliary to the printing art; one of his sons became a celebrated type-founder; and the voice of fame announces the superior rank which they both deservedly hold among the printers of the age. The fond father delighted to observe that he was excelled by his children; while they dutifully ascribed their success to the force of his instruction, and the benefit of his example. The life of JDidot was the life of honour; his abilities were universally known and respected; and the following anecdote will prove the goodness of his heart: in one of his journeys to the paper mills of Anonay, he met an artist who had introduced in France an improvement in the application of cylinders, &c. and believing that his ingenuity merited reward, exerted all his interest with government; but unfortunately, when he was on the point of succeeding, the artist died, leaving two girls in the helpless state of infancy. Didot took the orphans in his arms, proclaimed himself their father, and kept his word. At the age of seventy-three, Didot read over five times, and carefully corrected, before it was sent to the press, every sheet of the stereotype edition of Montague, printed by his sons. At four o'clock in the morning he was pursuing this fatiguing occupation. The correctness of the text will therefore render this work particularly valuable among the productions of the modern press. About eighteen months previous to his death, he projected an alphabetical index of every subject treated upon in Montague’s Essays. He had collected all his materials, at which he laboured unceasingly; and perhaps too strict an application to this favourite study accelerated the death of this eminent artist and benevolent man, which took place July 10, 1804. His business is still successfully carried on by his sons, Peter and Firmia Didot. The reputation of the elder Didot was much assisted by the labours of his brother, Peter Francis, who died in 1795, and to whom we owe the beautiful editions of Thomas a Kempis, fol. of Telemachus, 4to the “Tableau de l'empire Ottoman,” &c.

, a governor of the Dutch East India settlements, was born at Kuilenburg. He went, in early life, in a low military capacity to India, where he was chiefly employed in writing petitions for the soldiers; but being afterwards promoted to a post under government, which required some skill in accounts, he became a merchant, and afterwards accountant-general of the Dutch settlements in India. In 1625, he was appointed a member of the supreme council, and in 1631 he returned to Holland as commander of the India fleet. He remained but a few months in Europe, and when he went back to India many important offices devolved on him. In 1642, he sent out two ships to explore the unknown countries to the south, part of which, forming the southern extremity of New Holland, was, in honour of him, distinguished by the appellation of “Van Diemen’s Land.” He died in April 1645, having held, with much reputation, the supreme power in India upwards of nine years. Van Diemen’s land is an island in the form of an oblong square, about I Go British miles long, by half that breadth, separated by a strait, or rather channel, more than 30 leagues wide, called, in recent maps, Bass’s strait, and containing a chain of small islands, running N. and S. from New Holland. From the time it was originally discovered, says capt. Cook, it had escaped all farther notice by European navigators, till captain Furneaux touched at it in March 1773; but he did not know at that time that capt. Marion, after having remained here for some time, sailed from thence on the 10th of March, 1772. It was again visited by captain Cook in January 1777.

, an artist, was born at Bois-le-Duc, in 1607, and was at first a painter on glass, in which he was accounted excellent, and even superior to any of his time; yet he discontinued it, on account of a variety of discouraging accidents that happened to him, in his preparations for that kind of work. He studied for some time in Italy, and found there good employment as a glass painter; but he turned his thoughts entirely to painting in oil; and, to obtain the best knowledge of colouring, entered himself in the school of Rubens, where he improved exceedingly, and was considered as one of the good disciples of that great master; yet, notwithstanding the opportunity he had of refining his national taste, during his residence in Italy, he never altered his original style of design; for all his subsequent compositions were too much loaded, and not very correct. His invention was fertile, and shewed genius, and his execution was full of spirit; but it was no inconsiderable prejudice to him, to have been engaged in such a number of designs as were perpetually thrown in his way, and which he was obliged to strike out in a hurry, without competent time allowed for judgment to revise, digest, and correct them. Designs for title-pages, for theses, and devotional subjects, engrossed the greatest part of his time and his labour; or designs for the decoration of books; of which kind, that called the “Temple of the Muses,” 1662, afforded him great employment, and added much honour to the artist, merely as a designer. His designs, indeed, of the Bellerophon, the Orpheus, the Dioscuri, the Leander, the Ixion, Tantalus, and Sisyphus, have never been excelled by the conception of the best masters of the best schools. He was one of the few scholars of Rubens that came to England, where he was much employed by William Cavendish, duke of Newcastle, whose managed horses he drew from the life; from whence were engraved the cuts that adorn that nobleman’s book of horsemanship. Several of the original pictures are, or very lately were, in the hall at Welbeck. Diepenbeck drew views of the duke’s seats in Nottinghamshire and Derbyshire, and portraits of the duke, duchess, and his children, and gave designs for several plates prefixed to the works of both their graces. At Cassiobery is the story of Dido and Æneas by him.

, protestant minister of Leyden, and professor in the Walloon college of that city, a man of great abilities, and uncommonly versed in the oriental languages, was born April 7, 1590, at Flushing, where his father Daniel de Dieu was minister. Daniel was a man of great merit, and a native of Brussels, where he had been a minister twenty: two years. He removed from thence in 1585, to serve the church at Flushing, after the duke of Parma had taken Brussels. He understood Greek and the oriental languages, and could preach with the applause of his auditors in German, Italian, French, and English. The churches of the Netherlands sent him, in 1588, over to queen Elizabeth, to inform her of the designs of the duke of Parma, who secretly made her proposals of peace, while the king of Spain was equipping a formidable fleet against England. Lewis, his son, studied under Daniel Colonius, his uncle by his mother’s side, who was professor at Leyden in the Walloon college. He was two years minister of the French church at Flushing; and might have been court-minister at the Hague, if his natural aversion to the manners of a court had not restrained him from accepting that place. There are some circumstances relating to that affair which deserve to be remembered. Prince Maurice, being in Zealand, heard Lewis de Dieu preach, who was yet but a student; and some time after sent for him to court. The young man modestly excused himself, declaring, that he designed to satisfy his conscience in the exercise of his ministry, and to censure freely what he should find deserved censure; a liberty, he said, which courts did not care to allow. Besides, he thought the post which was offered him more proper for a man in years than a student. The prince, conscious that he was in the right, commended his modesty and prudence. He was called to Leyden in 1619 to teach, with his uncle Colonius, in the Walloon college; and he discharged the duty of that employment with great diligence till his death, which happened in 1642. He refused the post, which was offered him, of divinity-professor in the new university of Utrecht; but, if he had lived long enough, he would have been advanced to the same post in that of Leyden. He married the daughter of a counsellor of Flushing, by whom he had eleven children.

After some stay at Paris, he spent the summer of 1656 at Toulouse, where he conversed with several learned and ingenious men, to whom he communicated, not only mathematical, physical, and philosophical discoveries of his own, but also any matters of this nature he received from. his friends in different parts of Europe. Among these was a relation he had obtained of a city in Barbary under the king of Tripoli, which was said to be turned into stone in a very few hours by a petrifying vapour out of the earth; that is, men, beasts, trees, houses, utensils, and the like, remaining all in the same posture as when alive. He had this account from Fitton, an Englishman residing in Flo rence as library-keeper to the grand duke of Tuscany; and Fitton from the grand duke, who a little before had written to the pasha of Tripoli to know the truth. Sir Keuelm sent it to a friend in England; and it was at length inserted in the “Mercurius Politicus.” This drew a very severe censure upon our author from the famous Henry Stubbes, who called him, on that account, “The Pliny of his age for lying.” It has, however, been offered, in his vindication, that accounts have been given of such a city by modern writers; and that these accounts are in some measure confirmed by a paper delivered to Richard Waller, esq. F. R. S. by Mr. Baker, who was the English consul at Tripoli, Nov. 12, 1713. This paper is to be found in the “Philosophical Observations and Experiments of Dr. Robert Hooke,” published by Derham in 1726, 8vo; and it begins thus: “About forty days journey S. E. from Tripoli, and about seven days from the nearest sea-coast, there is a place called Ougila, in which there are found the bodies of men, women, and children, beasts and plants, all petrified of hard stone, like marble.” And we are afterwards told, in the course of the relation, that “the figure of a man petrified was conveyed to Leghorn, and from thence to England; and that it was carried to secretary Thurloe.”

, only son of the preceding Leonard Digges, after a liberal education at home, studied for some time at Oxford; and partly by the improvements he made there, and the previous instructions of his learned father, became one of the greatest mathematicians of his age. Of his history, however, we only know that when queen Elizabeth sent some forces to assist the oppressed inhabitants of the Netherlands, he was appointed muster-­master general, by which he hud an opportunity of becoming skilled in military affairs. The greater part of his life must have been spent in his favourite studies, as besides the revising, correcting, and enlarging some pieces of his father’s, already mentioned, he wrote and published the following learned works himself: 1. “Alæ sive scalæ mathematicæ; or mathematical wings or ladders,” 1573, 4to; containing several demonstrations for finding the parallaxes of any comet or other celestial body; with a correction of the errors in the use of the radius astronomicus. 2. “An arithmetical military treatise, containing so much of arithmetic as is necessary towards military discipline,” 1579, 4to. 3. “A geometrical treatise, named Stratioticos, requisite for the perfection of soldiers,” 1579, 4to. This was begun by his father, but finished by himself. They were both reprinted together in 1590, with several amendments and additions, under this title: “An arithmetical warlike treatise, named Stratioticos; compendiously teaching the science of numbers, as well in fractions as integers, and so much of the rules and equations algebraical, and art of numbers cossical, as are requisite for the profession of a souldier. Together with the moderne militaire discipline, offices, lawes, and orders in every well-governed campe and armie, inviolably to be observed.” At the end of this work there are two pieces; the first entitled “A briefe and true report of the proceedings of the earle of Leycester, for the reliefe of the towne of Sluce, from his arrival at Vlishing, about the end of June 1587, untill the surrendrie thereof, 26 Julii next ensuing. Whereby it shall plainlie appear his excellencie was not in anie fault for the losse of that towne;” the second, “A briefe discourse what orders were best for repulsing of foraine forces, if at any time they should invade us by sea in Kent, or elsesvhere.” 4. “A perfect description of the celestial orbs, according to the most ancient doctrine of the Pythagoreans,” &c. This was placed at the end of his father’s “Prognostication everlasting, &c.” printed in 1592, 4to. 5, “Humble motives for association to maintain the religion established,” 1601, 8vo. To which is added, his “Letter to the same purpose to the archbishops and bishops of England.” 6. “England’s Defence; or a treatise concerning invasion.” This is a tract of the same nature with that printed at the end of his Stratioticos, and called, “A briefe discourse,” &c. It was written in 1599, but not published till 1686. 7. A letter printed before Dr. John Dee’s “Parallaticce commentationis praxeosque nucleus quidam,” 1573, 4to. Besides these and his “Nova Corpora,” he had by him several mathematical treatises ready for the press; but lawsuits, which probably descended upon him with his patrimony, and were productive of pecuniary embarrassments, broke in upon his studies, and embittered his days. He died Aug. 24, 1595, and was buried in the chancel of the church of Aldermanbury, London. Among his unpublished works, was a Plan for the improvement of the Haven and Mole of Dover, in 1582, which was communicated to the Society of Antiquaries, and is printed in the “Archaeologia,” vol. XI. He married Agnes, daughter of sir William St. Leger, knt.

, eldest son of Thomas Digges, just mentioned, was born in 1583, and entered a gentleman-commoner of University-college, in Oxford, 1598. Having taken the degree of B. A. in 1601, he studied for some time at the inns of court; and then travelled beyond sea, having before received the honour of knighthood. On his return he led a retired life till 1618, when he was sent by James I. ambassador to the tzar, or emperor of Russia. Two years after he was commissioned with sir Maurice Abbot to go to Holland, in order to obtain the restitution of goods taken by the Dutch from some Englishmen in the East Indies. He was a member of the third parliament of James I. which met at Westminster, Jan. 30, 1621; but was so rule compliant with the court measures, as to be ranked among those whom the king called ill-tempered spirits. he was likewise a member of the first parliament of Charles 1. in 1626; and not only joined with those eminent patriots, who were for bringing Villiers duke of Buckingham to an account, but was indeed one of the most active managers in that affair, for which he was committed to the Tower, though soon released. He was again member of the third parliament of Charles I. in 1628, being one of the knights of the shire for Kent; but seemed to be more moderate in his opposition to the court than he was in the two last, and voted for the dispatch of the subsidies, yet opposed all attempts which he conceived to be hostile to the liberties of his country, or the constitution of parliament. Thus, when sir John Finch, speaker of the house of commons, on June 5, 1628, interrupted sir John Elliot in the house, saying, “There is a command laid upon me, that I must command you not to proceed;” sir Dudley Digges vented his uneasiness in these words: “I am as much grieved as ever. Must we not proceed? Let us sit in silence: we are miserable: we know not what to do.” In April of the same year, he opened the grand conference between the commons and lords, “concerning the liberty of the person of every freeman,” with a speech, in which he made many excellent observations, tending to establish the liberties of the subject. In all his parliamentary proceedings, he appeared of such consequence, that the court thought it worth their while to gain him over; and accordingly they tempted him with the advantageous and honourable office of master of the rolls, of which he had a reversionary grant Nov. 29, 1630, and became possessed of it April 20, 1636, upon the death of sir Julius Cæsar. But he did not enjoy it quite three years; for he died March 8, 1639, and his death was reckoned among the public calamities of those times. He was buried at Chilham church, in Kent, in which parish he had a good estate, and built a noble house.

, an eminent botanist, who settled in England, was born at Darmstadt, in Germany, in 1681. He was early intended for the study of physic, and had the principal part of his education at the university of Giessen, a city of Upper Hesse. Of all the parts of science connected with the medical profession, he was most attached to the cultivation of botany; by which he soon obtained so much reputation, that early in life he was chosen a member of the Academia Curiosorum Germanise. How well he deserved this honour, was apparent in his papers published in the “Miscellanea Curiosa.” The first of his communications that we are acquainted with, and which could not have been written later than 1715, was a dissertation concerning the plants of America that are naturalized in Europe. The subject is curious, and is still capable of much farther illustration. A diligent inquiry into it would unquestionably prove that a far greater number of plants than is usually imagined, and which are now thought to be indigenous in Europe, were of foreign origin. Besides the most obvious increase of them, owing to their passage from the garden to the dunghill, and thence to the field, they have been augmented in consequence of various other causes, no small number of them having been introduced and dispersed by the importation of grain, the package of merchandise, and the clearing out of ships. The English Flora of this kind, in its present state, cannot perhaps contain fewer than sixty acknowledged species; and a critical examination would probably add greatly to the catalogue. Another paper of Diiienius’s, published in the “Miscellanea Curiosa,” was a critical dissertation on the coffee of the Arabians, and on European coffee, or such as may be prepared from grain or pulse. In this dissertation he gives the result of his own preparations made with pease, beans, and kidneybeans; but says, that from rye is produced what comes the nearest to true coffee. In another paper he relates the experiment which he made concerning some opium which he had prepared himself from the poppy of Europe growth. In the same collection he shews himself as a / logist, in a paper on leeches, and in a description of t species of the Papilio genus. In 1719, Dillenius excited the notice of naturalists by the publication of his Catalogue of plants growing in the neighbourhood of Giesseu. Nothing can more strongly display the early skill and indefatigable industry of Dillenius, than his being able to produce so great a number of plants in so small a time He enumerates not fewer than 980 species of what were then called the more perfect plants; that is, exclusive of the mushroom class, and all the mosses. By the [news] of this performance, the character of Dillenius, as a truly scientific botanist, was fixed; and henceforward he attracted the notice of all the eminent professors and admirers of the science. To this science no one was more ardently devoted at that time in England, than William Sherard, esq. who had been British consul at Smyrna, from which place he had returned to his own country in 1718; and who, soon after, had the honorary degree of LL. D. conferred on him by the university of Oxford. Being particularly enamoured with Dillenius’s discoveries in the cryptogamia class, he entered into a correspondence with him, which ripened into a close friendship. In 1721, Dr. Sherard, in the pursuit of his botanical researches, made the tour of Holland, France, and Italy, much to the advantage of the science; but what in an especial manner rendered his travels of consequence to the study of nature in our own country, was, that on his return he brought Dillenius with him to England. It was in the month of August in the same year that this event took place; and Dillenius had not long resided in England before he undertook a work that was much desired, a new edition of the “Synopsis stirpium Britannicarum” of Ray, which was become scarce. This edition of the “Synopsis” seems to have been the most popular of all his publications.

, or Ding, a native of Mugello in Tuscany, was a very learned lawyer and professor of law at Bologna, in the thirteenth century, and indeed accounted the first man of his time for knowledge, eloquence, and style both of speaking and writing. Pope Boniface VIII. employed him in compiling the fourth book of the Decretals, called the Sextus. He died at Bologna in 1303, as it is said, of chagrin. He had entered into the church, and been disappointed of rising according to what he thought his deserts. Of his works, his “Commentarium in regulas juris Pontificii,” 8vo, was so valuable that Alciat reckoned it one of those books which a student ought to get by heart, a character which it ceased to support when Charles du Moulin pointed out a great many errors in it. His other publication is entitled “De glossis contrariis,” 2 vols. fol.

or Dion Cassius, an ancient historian, known also by the surnames of Cocceius or Cocceianus, was born at Nicsea, a city of Bithyuia, and flourished in the third century. His father Aproniatius, a man of consular dignity, was governor of Dalmatia, and some time after proconsul of Cilicia, under the emperors Trajan and Adrian. Dio was with his father in Cilicia; and from thence went to Rome, where he distinguished himself by public pleadings. From the reign of Commodus he was a senator of Rome; was made prtetor of the city under Pertinax; and raised at length to the consulship, which he held twice, and exercised the second time, jointly with the emperor Alexander Severus. He had passed through several great employments under the preceding emperors. Macrinus had made him governor of Pergamus and Smyrna; he commanded some time in Africa; and afterwards had the administration of Austria and Hungary, then called Pannonia, committed to him. He undertook the task of writing history, as he informs us himself, because he was admonished and commanded to do it by a vision from heaven; and he tells us also, that he spent ten years in collecting materials for it, and twelve more in composing it. His history began from the building of Rome, and proceeded to the reign of Alexander Severus. It was divided into So books, or eight decades; many of which are not now extant. The first 34 books are lost, with part of the 35th. The 25 following are preserved intire; but instead of the last 20, of which nothing more than fragments remain, we have only the epitome, which Xiphtliuus, a monk of Coustantinople, has given of them. Photius observes, that he wrote his Roman history, as others had also done, not from the foundation of Rome only, but from the descent of Æneas into Italy; which he continued to the year of Home 982, and of Christ 228, when, as we have observed, he was consul a second time with the emperor Alexander Severus. What we now have of it, begins with the expedition of Lucullus against Mithridates king of Pontus, about the year of Rome 684, and ends with the death of the emperor Claudius about the year 806.

, the son of Pasicrates, was born at Prusa in Bithynia. We have just seen that Dio Cassius had the name of Cocceius or Cocceianus, and according to Mr. Wakefield, Dio Chrysostom had the same name' from his patron Cocceius; but as an entire century intervened between these two Dio’s, it is impossible that Cassius could have derived that name from the same cause. It is more certain, however, that the subject of the present article was called Chrysostom, or golden mouthed, from the elegance and purity of his compositions. This name has occasioned a frequent confusion of our Dio Chrysostom with John Chrysostom, the Christian preacher, so denominated for the same solid and splendid excellencies of his style. Dio Chrysostom, under Nero and Vespasian, maintained the profession of a sophist: and frequently inveighed, in a declamatory and luxuriant style, against the most illustrious poets and philosophers of antiquity; which obliged him to leave Rome, and withdraw to Egypt. He then assumed the character of a stoic philosopher; embellishing, however, his philosophical discourses that treated of moral topics, with the graces of eloquence. As his character corresponded to his principles of virtue, he was a bold censor of vice, and spared no individual on account of his rank. By his freedom of speech he offended Domitian, and being obliged to become a voluntary exile irr Thrace, he lived in great poverty, and supported himself by private labour. After the death of this emperor, he returned to Rome, and for some time remained concealed; but when he found the soldiers inclined to sedition, he brought to their recollection Dio the orator and philosopher, by haranguing them in a strain of manly eloquence, which soon subdued the tumult. He was admitted into the confidence of Nerva and Trajan, and distinguished by the former with tokens of favour. He lived to old acre, but the time of his death cannot be ascertained. His “Orations” are still extant, from which we may infer that he was a man of sound judgment and lively fancy, and that he blended in his style the qualities of animation and sweetness. The first edition of his works was published at Milan, 1476, 4to. The principal subsequent editions are, Venice, 15.51, 8vo; Paris, 1604, fol. and Paris, 1533, 4to, In 1800 the late Rev. Gilbert Wakefield published “Select Essays of Dio Chrysostom, translated into English, from the Greek, with notes critical and illustrative,” 8vo, a work, however,- rather calculated for political allusion, to which the translator was unhappily addicted, than for classical illustration.

, a very eminent divine, descended of a noble family of Lucca, was born June 6, 1576; but of his early years we have no information. When, however, he was only nineteen years of age, we find him appointed professor of Hebrew at Geneva. In 1619 the church of Geneva sent him to the synod of Dort, with his colleague Theodore Tronchin. Diodati gained so much reputation in this synod, that he was chosen, with five other divines, to prepare the Belgic confession of faith. He was esteemed an excellent divine, and a good preacher. His death happened at Geneva, Oct. 3, 1649, in his seventy-third year, and was considered as a public loss. He has rendered himself noticed by some works which he published, but particularly by his translation of the whole Bible into Italian, the first edition of which he published, with notes, in 1607, at Geneva, and reprinted in 16 n. The New Testament was printed separately at Geneva in 1608, and at Amsterdam and Haerlem in 1665. M. Simon observes, that his method is rather that of a divine and a preacher, than of a critic, by which he means only, that his work is more of a practical than a critical kind. He translated the Bible also into French, but not being so intimate with that language, he is not thought to have succeeded so well as in the Italian. This translation was printed in folio, at Geneva, in 1664. He was also the first who translated into French father Paul’s “History of the Council of Trent,” and many have esteemed this a more faithful translation than de la Houssaye’s, although less elegant in language. He also is said to have translated sir Edwin Sandys’ book on the “State of Religion in the West.” But the work by which he is best known in this country is his Annotations on the Bible, translated into English, of which the third and best edition was published in 1651, fol. He is said to have begun writing these annotations in 1606, at which time it was expected that Venice would have shaken off the popish yoke, a measure to which he was favourable; and he went on improving them in his editions of the Italian and French translations. This work was at one time time very popular in England, and many of the notes of the Bible, called the “Assembly of Divines’ Annotations,” were taken from Diodati literally. Diodati was at onetime in England, as we learn from the life of bishop Bedell, whom he was desirous to become acquainted with, and introduced him to Dr. Morton, bishop of Durham. From Morrice’s “State Letters of the right hon. the earl of Orrery,” we learn that when invited to preach at Venice, he was obliged to equip himself in a trooper’s habit, a scarlet cloak with a sword, and in that garb he mounted the pulpit; but was obliged to escape again to Geneva, from the wrath of a Venetian nobleman, whose mistress, affected by one of Diqdati'a sermons, had refused to continue her connection with her keeper. The celebrated Milton, also, contracted a friendship for Diodati, when on his travels; and some of his Latin elegies are addressed to Charles Diodati, the nepheiv of the divine. This diaries was one of Milton’s most intimate friends, and was the son of Theodore Diodati, who, although originally of Lucca, as well as his brother, married an English lady, and his son in every respect became an Englishman. He was also an excellent scholar, and being educated to his father’s profession, practised physic in Cheshire. He was at St. Paul’s school, with Milton, and afterwards, in 1621, entered of Trinity-college, Oxford. He died in 1638.

, of Caria, a philosopher of the Megaric school, flourished about 2SO years B. C. and was a famous adept in the verbal quibbles so common at that time, and which Aristotle called Kristic syllogisms. A dialectic question was proposed to him in the presence of Ptolemy Soter, at whose court he was, by Stilpo, another quibbler like himself; and Diodorus acknowledging himself incapable of giving an immediate answer, requested time for the solution; on which the king himself, we presume a wit, ridiculed his want of ingenuity, and gave him the surname of Chronus. Mortified at this defeat, he retired from the court, wrote a book upon the question, and at last, foolishly enough, died of vexation. He is said to have invented the famous argument against motion: “if any body be moved, it is either moved in the place where it is, or in a place where it is not; but it is not moved in the place where it is, for where it is, it remains; nor is it moved in a place where it is not, for nothing can either act or suffer where it is not; therefore there is no such thing as motion.” Diodorus, after the invention of this wonderful argument, was very properly repaid for his ingenuity. Having had the misfortune to dislocate his shoulder, the surgeon whom he sent for to replace it, kept him for some time in torture, whilst he proved to him, from his own method of reasoning, that the bone could not have moved out of its place. Diodorus has been ranked among the atomic philosophers, because he held the doctrine of small indivisible bodies, infinite in number, but finite in magnitude; but it does not appear that he conceived the idea which distinguishes the atomic doctrine, as it was taught by Democritus and others, that the first atoms are destitute of all properties except extension and figures.

, called the Babylonian, from his birthplace, Seleucia, near Babylon, flourished in the second century B. C. He was the disciple of Chrysippus, and the successor of Zeno of Tarsus, where he taught the principles of his sect with unwearied diligence, and a high reputation. He was the author of several works on divination, the laws, learning, &c. which have been quoted with respect by Cicero and others. He is said to have lived to the age of eighty-eight years, and philosophized to the last. That he was highly esteemed by his contemporaries, is evident from his being appointed in conjunction with Carneades, the head of the academies, and Critolaus, the chief of the peripatetic school, to the embassy to Home and as a proof how well his practice conformed to his principles, we are told, that when he was once discoursing against anger, an insolent young man, with the hope of exposing him to the ridicule of his audience, spat upon him, and otherwise contumeliously treated him, upon which the philosopher observed with meekness, “I am not angry, but I am doubtful whether I ought not to be so.”

, so called from Laerta, or Laertes, a town of Cilicia, where he is supposed to have been born, is an ancient Greek author, who wrote ten books of the Lives of the Philosophers, still extant. In what age he flourished, is not easy to determine. The oldest writers who mention him are Sopater Alexandrinus, who lived in the time of Constantine the Great, and Hesychius Milesius, who lived under Justinian. Diogenes often speaks in terms of approbation of Plutarch and Phavorinus; and therefore, as Plutarch lived under Trajan, and Phavorinus under Hadrian, it is certain that he could not flourish before the reigns of those emperors. Menage has fixed him to the time of Severus; that is, about the year of Christ 200; and from certain expressions in his works, some have fancied him to have been a Christian; however, as Menage observes, the immoderate praises he bestows upon Epicurus will not suffer us to believe this, but incline us rather to suppose that he was an Epicurean. He divided his Lives into books, and inscribed them to a learned lady of the Platonic school, as he himself intimates in his life of Plato. Montaigne was so fond of this author, that, instead of one Laertius, he wishes we had a dozen; and Vossius says, that his work is as precious as old gold. Without doubt we are greatly obliged to him for what we know of the ancient philosophers; and if he had been as exact in the execution, as he was judicious in the choice of his subject, we had been more obliged to him still. Bishop Burnet, in the preface to his Life of sir Matthew Hale, justly speaks of him in the following manner: “There is no hook the ancients have left us,” says he, “which might have informed us more than Diogenes Laertius’s Lives of the Philosophers, if he had had the art of writing equal to that great subject which he undertook: for if he had given the world such an account of them, as Gassendus has done of Peiresc, how great a stock of knowledge might we have had, which by his unskilfulness is in a great measure lost! since we must now depend only on him, because we have no other and better author who has written on that argument.” He is no where observed to be a rigid affecter or favourer of any sect; which makes it somewhat probable, that he was a follower of Potomon of Alexandria, who, after all the rest, and a little before his time, established a sect which were called Eclectics, from their choosing out of every sect what they thought the best. His books shew him to have been a man of universal reading; but as a writer he is very exceptionable, both as to the disposal and the defect of his materials. Brucker, whose opinion must be of sterling value, in estimating the merits of Diogenes Laertius, says, that “he has collected from the ancients with little judgment, patched together contradictory accounts, relied upon doubtful authorities, admitted as facts many tales which were produced in the schools of the sophists, and has been inattentive to methodical arrangement.” Diogenes also composed a book of epigrams, to which he refers. The best edition is that of Meibomius, Amst. 1692, 2 vols. 4to; yet Rossius, in his “Commentationes Laertianae,” has convicted Meibomius of innumerable errors.

, was an ancient poet and geographer, concerning whom we have no certain information but what we derive from the elder Pliny. Pliny, speaking of the Persian Alexandria, afterwards called Antioch, and at last Charrax, could not miss the opportunity of paying his respects to a person who had so much obliged him, and whom he professes to follow above all men in the geographical part of his work. He tells us, that *' Dionysius was a native of this Alexandria, and that he had the honour to be sent by Augustus to survey the eastern part of the world, and to make reports and observations about its state and condition, for the use of the emperor’s eldest son, who was at that time preparing an expedition into Armenia, Parthia, and Arabia.“This passage, though seemingly explicit enough, has not been thought sufficient by the critics to determine the time when Dionysius lived, whether under the first Augustus Caesar, or under some of the later emperors, who assumed his name: Vossius and others are of opinion, that the former is the emperor meant by Pliny; but Scaliger and Salmasius think he lived under Severus, or Marcus Aurelias, about A. D. 130 or 150. Dionysius wrote a great number of pieces, enumerated by Suidas and his commentator Eustathius: but his” Periegesis," or survey of the world, is the only one we have remaining; and it would be superfluous to say, that this is one of the most exact systems of ancient geography, when it has been already observed, that Pliny himself proposed it for his pattern. It is written in Greek hexameters; but some think that Dionysius is no more to be reckoned a poet, than any of those authors who have included precepts in numbers, for the sake of assisting the memory. Yet, although his book is more valuable for matter than manner, it has been thought that he had a genius capable of more sublime undertakings, and that he constantly made the Muses the companions, though not the guides, of his travels. As proofs of this, we are referred to his descriptions of the island of Lucca, inhabited by departed heroes; of the monstrous and terrible whales in Taprobana; of the poor Scythians that dwelt by the Meotic lake; to the account of himself, when he comes to describe the Caspian sea, and of the swans and bacchanals on the banks of Cayster, which shew him to have possessed no small share of poetic spirit.

, bishop of Alexandria, a man of great renown in the church, was born a heathen, and of an ancient and illustrious family. He was a diligent inquirer after truth, which he looked for in vain among the sects of philosophers; but at last found it in Christianity, in which he was probably confirmed by his preceptor Origen. He was made a presbyter of the church of Alexandria in the year 232; and in the year 247 was raised to that see upon the death of Heracles. When the Decian persecution arose, he was seized by the soldiers and sent to Taposiris, a little town between Alexandria and Canopus; but he escaped without being hurt, of which there is an extraordinary account in the fragments of one of his letters, which Eusebius has preserved. He was less fortunate under the Valerian persecution, which began in the year 257, being then forcibly hurried off in the midst of a dangerous illness, and banished to Cephrus, a most desert and uncultivated region of Libya, in which terrible situation he remained for three years. Afterwards, when Gallienus published an edict of toleration to the Christians, he returned to Alexandria, and applied himself diligently to the offices of his function, as well by converting heathens, as by suppressing heretics. To the Novatian heresy he laboured to put a stop; he endeavoured to quiet the dispute, which was risen to some height, between Stephen and Cyprian, concerning the re-baptization of heretics: both which he attempted with Christian moderation and candour, and it must be acknowledged to his credit, that he seems to have possessed more of that spirit of gentleness and meekness than was usually to be found in those zealous times. He does not indeed appear to have been quite so moderate in the next congress which he had with Sabellius, who had asserted, that “the substance in the trinity was nothing more than one person distinguished by three names;” which Dionysius opposed with such zeal and ardour, as to fall into the Arian opinion, and maintain, that there was “not only a distinction of persons, but of essence or substance also, and even an inequality of power and glory in them.” Cave, however, excuses this error, or “blindness,” as he calls it, in him, because it flowed from his intemperate zeal and hatred of heretics, and because Dionysius was in all other respects a very sound and orthodox bishop. A little before his death he was called to a synod at Antioch, to defend the divinity of Jesus Christ against Paul of Samosata, bishop of Antioch: but he could not appear by reason of his great age and infirmities. He wrote a letter, however, to that church, in which he explained his own opinion of the matter, and refuted Paul, whom he thought so very blameable for advancing such an error, that he did not deign to salute him even by name. He died in the year 267; and though his writings were very numerous, yet scarce any of them are come down to us, except some fragments preserved by Eusebius.

, surnamed Exiguus, or Little, on account of his stature, was a monk by profession, and born in Scythia, where he is supposed to have died about the year 540, as Dupin reckons, or 556, according to Cave. He understood Greek and Latin, and was well acquainted with the holy scriptures. Cassiodorus, who was intimate with him, wrote his panegyric in the 23d chapter of his book on divine learning. At the desire of Stephen, bishop of Salone, he made a collection of canons, which contains, besides those which were in the code of the universal church, the fifty first canons of the apostles, those of the council of Sardica, and 138 canons of the council of Africa. This code of canons was approved and received by the church of Rome, and France, and by the Latin churches; and was printed by Justel in 1628, with a version of the letter of St. Cyril, and of the council of Alexandria against Nestorius, which is also the translation of Dionysius Exiguus. He afterwards joined these with the decretals of the popes from Syricius to Anastasius, to which have been, since added those of Hilary, Simplicius, and other popes, to St. Gregory. This second collection was printed by Justel in his Bibliotheca of Canon law. Dionysius was the first who introduced the way of counting the years from the birth of Jesus Christ, and who fixed it according to the epocha of the vulgar sera. He wrote also two letters upon Easter in the years 525 and 526, which were published by Petavius and Buchevius; and made a cycle of 95 years. Father Mabillon published a letter of his written to Eugippius, about the translation which he made of a work of Gregory Nyssen, concerning the creation of man. With respect to the epoch which he invented, he began his account from the conception or incarnation, usually called the Annunciation, or Lady-day which method obtained in the dominions of Great Britain till 1752, before which time the Dionysian was the same as the English epoch but in that year the Gregorian calendar having been admitted by act of parliament, they now reckon from the first of January, as in the other parts of Europe, except in the court of Rome, where the epoch of the Incarnation still obtains for the date of their bulls.

, a Greek poet and musician, was the author of the words and music of three hymns, of which the first is addressed to Calliope, the second to Apollo, and the third to Nemesis. Of these the music has been preserved and published by Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, in 1672. This precious manuscript, which was found in Ireland, among the papers of the famous archbishop Usher, was bought, after his decease, by Mr. Bernard, fellow of St. John’s college, who communicated it to the editor, together with remarks and illustrations by the rev. Mr. Edmund Chilmead, of Christ church, who likewise redueed the ancient musical characters to those in common, use. It appears by the notes, that the music of these hymns was composed in the Lydian mode, and diatonic genus. Vincenzo Galilei, father of the great Galileo, first published these hymns with their Greek notes, in his “Dialogues upon Ancient and Modern Music,” printed at Florence, 1581, folio. He assures us, that he had them from a Florentine gentleman, who copied them very accurately from an ancient Greek manuscript, preserved in th library of cardinal St. Angelo, at Rome, which ms. likewise contained the treatises of music by Aristides Quintilianus, and Bryennius, since published by Meibomius and Dr. Wallis. The Florentine edition of these hymns entirely agrees with that printed at Oxford. In 1602, Hercules Bottrigari mentioned the same hymns in his harmonical discourse, called “Melone,” printed at Ferrara, in 4to. But he derived his knowlege of these pieces only from the Dialogues of Galilei; however, he inserted, in the beginning of his book, some fragments of them in common notes; but they were disfigured by a number of typographical errors. At length, in 1720, M. Burette published these three hymns in the “Memoirs of the Academy of Inscriptions,” ton), v. from a copy found at the end of a Greek manuscript in the king of France’s library at Paris, No. 3221, which likewise contained the musical treatises of Aristides Quintilianus, and of Bacchius senior'. But though the words were confused, and confounded one with another, they appeared much more complete in this manuscript than elsewhere, particularly the hymn to Apollo, which had six verses more at the beginning; and that to Nemesis, which, though deficient at the end in all the other editions, was here entire, having fourteen verses, exclusive of the six first.

He wrote thirteen books of arithmetic, or algebra, which, Regiomontanus in his preface to Alfraganus tells us, are still preserved in manuscript in the Vatican library. Indeed Diophantus himself tells us that his work consisted of thirteen books, viz. at the end of his address to Dionysius, placed at the beginning of the work; and from hence Regiomontanus might be led to say the thirteen books were in that library. No more than six whole books, with part of a seventh, have ever been published; and it is probable there are no more in being; indeed Bombelli, in the preface to his Algebra, written in 1572, says there were but six of the books then in the library, and that he and another were about a translation of them. Those six books, with the imperfect seventh, were first published at Basil by Xylander in 1575, but in a Latin version only, with the Greek scholia of Maximus Planudes upon the two first books, and observations of his own. The same books were afterwards published in Greek and Latin at Paris in 1G2I, by Bachet, an ingenious and learned Frenchman, who made a new Latin version of the work, and enriched it with very learned commentaries. Bachet did not entirely neglect the notes of Xylander in his edition, but he treated the scholiast Planudes with the utmost contempt. He seems to intimate, in what he says upon the 28th question of the second book, that the six books which we have of Diophantus may be nothing more than a collection made by some novice, of such propositions as he judged proper, out of the whole thirteen but Fabricius thinks there is no just ground for such a supposition. From him certain questions relating to square and cubic numbers, and to right-angled triangles, have been called Diophantine problems, because the nature of them was first and chiefly treated of by him in his arithmetic, or rather algebra.

, an eminent physician of Anaxarba, since called Ceesarea, in Cilicia, flourished in the reign of Nero, in the first century, and composed five books of the Materia Medica. Fabricius is certain, that he composed these books before Pliny wrote his Natural History, although he supposes Pliny might reach the age of Dioscorides. Pliny has indeed made no mention of him, and yet relates many things of a very similar nature; which circumstances Fabricius imputes to their both having collected their materials from the same store-house, and to Pliny’s not having seen the books of Dioscorides. This physician tells us, in the preface of his first book, that he had consulted all who had written upon the Materia Medica before him; that to the information he had received from others, he had joined great application of his own; that he had travelled over many countries, for the sake of confirming by observation what he had learned from books; that he had corrected many errors of others, added many new things of his own, and digested the whole into a regular order. Salmasius considers all this as so much boasting, and treats Dioscorides as merely a laborious compiler, or pillager of others; but Galen has pronounced these books of Dioscorides to be the best that had been written upon the subject, and it is evident that in the early stages of botanical science he was looked up to with a reverence which is no longer paid. His object being solely the Materia Medica, he discusses each subject specifically, and in a separate chapter, dividing the whole into five books; in which, as far as any order takes place, they arrange into aromatic, alimentary, and medicinal plants. His descriptions are chiefly taken from colour, size, mode of growing, comparison of the leaves and roots, with other plants well known, and therefore left undescribed. In general they are short, and frequently insufficient to determine the species; and hence arise the endless and irreconcileable contentions among his commentators. In this manner, however, he has described near 700 plants; to which he subjoins the virtues and uses; and to him all posterity have appealed as decisive on the subject.

His works were published together in 1747, 5 vols. 4to, and, notwithstanding his many extravagancies and absurdities, many have considered him as an eminent teacher of true piety and wisdom. He probably deserved more praise as a physician and chemist. He is said to have invented Prussian blue; and there is still an oil called DippePs oil, which he first discovered, a powerful-sudorific, and deserving of more notice than it now receives.

Mr. Ditton published many mathematical and other tracts. His first works were a paper on the Tangents of Curves, and a treatise on Spherical Catoptrics, both which were published in the “Philosophical Transactions.” This last was written in the Latin language, and was so highly approved, that it was republished in a foreign periodical work, called the “Acta Eruditortim,” in 1707; and was afterwards printed in the “Memoirs of the Academy of Sciences at Paris.” In 1706 he published a treatise, entitled, “An Institution of Fluxions, containing the first principles, operations, and applications of that admirable method, as invented by sir Isaac Newton.” This work, with additions and alterations, was again published by Mr. John Clarke, in 1726, some years after Mr. Ditton’s death. The same year, 1 706, Mr. Ditton also published a treatise on the laws of nature and motion. Of this the celebrated Wolfius makes mention, and asserts, that it illustrates and renders easy the writings of Galileo, Huygens, and the “Principia” of sir Isaac Newton. It is also noticed by De la Roche, in “The Memoiresde Literature,” vol. VIII. p. 46. In 1709 he published the “Synopsis Algebraicum” of John Alexander Bernatus Helvetius; with many additions and corrections. His treatise on Perspective was published in 1712. In this work he explained the principles of that art mathematically; and besides teaching the methods then generally practised, gave the first hints of the new method afterward enlarged upon and improved by Dr. Brook Taylor; and which was published in 1715. Several publications of Mr. Ditton’s appeared in 1714, one of which was a “Discourse upon the Resurrection of Jesus Christ;” the truth of which he here endeavoured to demonstrate. This work went through four editions, and was translated into several of the modern languages. Tindal, Collins, and some other authors, opposed it, and endeavoured to confute the reasoning; to whom Ditton had begun an answer, but died before it was finished; and his friends, upon revising it, found it too incomplete to hazard its publication. Another of his works that appeared in the same year, was, “The new law of Fluids; or, a Discourse concerning the ascent of liquids, in exact geometrical figures, between two nearly contiguous surfaces.” To this was annexed a tract, to demonstrate the impossibility of thinking or perception being the result of any combination of the parts of matter and motion; a subject much agitated in those days by the free-thinkers and their opponents. There was also adjoined to this work an advertisement from him and Mr. Whiston, concerning a method for discovering the longitude; which, it appears, they had published about half a year before. This attempt, it is thought, cost Mr. Ditton his life; for, although it was approved and countenanced by sir Isaac Newton, previously to its being presented to the Board of longitude, and the method lias been since successfully put in practice, in finding the longitude between Paris and Vienna, yet that board then determined against it. Such a disappointment, together with the public ridicule incurred, is supposed to have affected his health, but this we think unlikely, as his death was occasioned by a putrid fever, which proved fatal Oct. 15, 1715, in the fortieth year of his age. He was much regretted by the philosophical literati of that time, who expected from his assiduity, learning, and penetrating genius, many useful and ingenious discoveries. In an account of Mr. Ditton, prefixed to the German translation of his Discourse on the Resurrection, it is said, that he had published, in his own name only, another method for finding the longitude; but which Mr. Whiston denied. However, Raphael Levi, a learned Jew, who bad studied under Leibnitz, informed the German editor that he well knew that Ditton and Leibnitz hud corresponded upon the subject; and that Ditton had sent to Leibnitz a delineation of a machine he had invented that purpose; which was a piece of mechanism con with many wheels, like a clock, and which Leibnitz highly approved of for land use, but doubted whether it wouldanswer on ship-board, on account of the motion of the ship.

, a Polish historian, was born in Ml 5, at Brzeznich, a town in Poland, of which his father was governor. In his sixth year, his father being appointed governor of Korczyn, he was removed thither with the family, and began his education, which was continued in the different places of which his father was successively appointed governor, until he was sent to Cracow. Here and at other places he pursued his studies, with very little encouragement from his father, but found a friend in Zbigneus, bishop of Cracow, who was a patron of learned men. This prelate first placed him at the head of his chancery, after that of his house, and at last made him general manager of his affairs; and he acquitted himself so much to the satisfaction of the bishop, that on his death-bed he appointed him one of his executors. He had also ordained him priest at the age of twenty-five, and gave him some church preferment, particularly the living of St. Martin of Klobuczk, and a canonry of Cracow. He was afterwards promoted to be chanter, and treasurer of the church of Vissicza, canon of Sendomir, and got some other preferments less considerable. The only use he made of the wealth arising from these benefices, was to share it with poorer clergymen of talents and character;. or to bestow it on the poor, on the repairs of churches, and other pious purposes. Eugene IV. having appointed Zbigneus to the dignity of cardinal, and several impediments being thrown in the way of this preferment, Dlugoss went to Rome in 1449, and had these difficulties removed. Pope Nicholas V. employed him to carry the cardinal’s cap to the bishop, which he had the honour to put on his head in the cathedral of Cracovr, in the same year. In 1450 he took a journey to the land of Palestine, where he contemplated with veneration the places dignified by being the site of Scripture history. On his return to Poland, king Casimir IV. appointed him tutor to his sons, which office he filled for many years with great reputation. On the death of his early patron, cardinal Zbigneus, in April 1455, Dlugoss was accused by the brother of the deceased for having abused his confidence, a charge which he had little difficulty in repelling, but was less successful with the king, whose displeasure he incurred by espousing the cause of an ecclesiastic whom the pope had nominated bishop of Cracow, while the king had nominated another; and for this slight reason Dlugoss was exiled for the space of three years; at the end of which, however, he was recalled, and his majesty restored him to his favour, and not only consulted him on many public affairs of importance, but employed him to negociate in various parts of Europe, on matters respecting the interests of Poland. At length he was appointed archbishop of Leopold, but died before his consecration, May 29, 1480. His principal historical work is entitled “Historia Polonica,” the first volume of which was printed in 1615, fol. This edition, which is of rare occurrence, is one of the few scarce books which proceed from the private press of Herburt of Dobromil, It contains, however, only the first six books, bringing the history down to 1240; the rest remained in manuscript until 1711, when they were printed at Francfort, along with the preceding, under the title “J. Dlugossi historiie Polonicoe Hbri duodecim, &c.” This hrings the history down to 1444, but a continuation was published by J. G. Krause, which he called the thirteenth book, at Leipsic, 1712, folio, and which extends to 1480, the year of the author’s death. He is esteemed a very correct historian, although not free from the barbarism of his age. His other works are, 1. “Vita St. Stanislai episcopi et martyns,” Cracow, 1611 and 1666. 2. “Plocensium episcoporuin vita 1” which is inserted in “Stanislai Lubienski opera posthum^,” Antwerp, 1643, fol. 3.“Vitae episcoporum Postnajiiensium,” 1G'24, 4to and some other lives of bishops.

, usually styled the Decalogist, from his Commentary on the commandments, and called by Fuller, the “last of the Puritans,” was a native of Shotledge, in. Cheshire; in which county there were several ancient families of the Dods; but to which of them he belonged, we have not been able to ascertain. He was born, the youngest of seventeen children, in 1547, and sent to school at WestChester, but Mr. Cole says he was educated at Winchester, a name which he probably transcribed hastily for the other. In 1561, when he was fourteen years of age, he was entered of Jesus college, Cambridge, of which he was chosen fellow in 1585, according to a ms note of Mr. Baker; and Mr. Cole adds, that he was junior proctor in 1614; both which dates must belong to some other person, as it does not appear that he remained in all more than sixteen years at college. At what time he took his master’s degree is uncertain, but a few years after, being appointed to oppose in the philosophy act at the commencement, he exhibited such a display of talents, as highly gratified his hearers, and in consequence, he had liberal offers to remove to Oxford. These he declined, but was incorporated M. A. in that university in 1585. Associating much with Drs. Fulke, Chaclerton, and Whitaker, he imbibed the principles and strictness for which they were famous, and conceived an early dislike to some of the ceremonies or discipline of the church, but to what we are not told. After taking orders, he first preached a weekly lecture at Ely, until invited by sir Anthony Cope to be minister of Hanwell, in Oxfordshire, in 1577, where he became a constant and diligent preacher, and highly popular. Nor was his hospitality Jess conspicuous, as he kept an open table on Sundays and Wednesdays lecture days, generally entertaining on these occasions from eight to twelve persons at dinner. At Hanwell he remained twenty years, in the course cf which he married, and had a large family; but, owing to his nonconformity in some points, he was suspended by Dr. Bridges, bishop of Oxford. After this, he preached for some time at Fenny-Compton, in Warwickshire, and from thence was called to Cannons Ashby, in Northamptonshire, where he was patronized by sir Erasmus Dryden but here again he was silenced, in consequence of a complaint made by bishop Neale to king James, who commanded archbishop Abbot to pronounce that sentence. During this suspension of his public services, he appears to have written his Commentary on the Decalogue and Proverbs, which he published in conjunction with one Robert Cleaver, probably another silenced puritan, of whom we can find no account. At length, by the interest of the family of Knightley, of Northamptonshire, after the death of king James, he was presented in 1624, to the living of Fawesley, in that county. Here he recommended himself as before, not more by his earnest and affectionate services in the pulpit, than by his charity and hospitality, and particularly by his frequent visits and advice which last he delivered in a manner peculiarly striking. A great many of his sayings became almost proverbial, and remained so for above a century, being, as may yet be remembered, frequently printed in a small tract, or on a broad sheet, and suspended in every cottage. On the commencement of the rebellion he suffered considerably, his house being plundered, as the house of a puritan, although he was a decided enemy to the proceedings of the republicans. When they were about to abolish the order of bishops, &c. Dr. Brownrig sent to Mr. Dod, for his opinion, who answered, that “he had been scandalized with the proud and tyrannical practises of the Marian bishops; but now, after more than sixty years’ experience of many protestant bishops, that had been worthy preachers, learned and orthodox writers, great champions for the protestant cause, he wished all his friends not to be any impediment to them, and exhorted all men not to take up arms against the king; which was his doctrine, he said, upon the fifth commandment, and he would never depart from it.” He died in August, 1645, at the very advanced age of ninety-seven, and was buried on the I9th of that month, at Fawesley, in Northamptonshire. Fuller says, “with him the Old Puritan seemed to expire, and in his grave to be interred. Humble, meek, patient, charitable as in his censures of, so in his alms to others. Would I could truly say but half so much of the next generation!” “He was,” says the same author, “a passive nonconformist, not loving any one the worse for difference in judgment about ceremonies, but all the better for their unity of affections in grace and goodness. He used to retrench some hot spirits when inveighing against bishops, telling them how God under that government had given a marvellous increase to the gospel, and that godly men might comfortably comport therewith, under which learning and religion had so manifest an improvement.” He was an excellent scholar, particularly in the Hebrew language, which he taught to the celebrated John Gregory, of Christchurch, Oxford. The no less celebrated Dr. Wilkins was his grandson, and born in his house at Fawesley, in 1614, a date which seems to interfere with that given above as the date of Mr. Dod’s presentation to Fawesley, which we have taken from the register in Bridges’s Northamptonshire, but he might probably have resided there previous to the living becoming vacant. Of his works we know only that which conferred on him the name of the Decalogist, “A plain and familiar Exposition of the Ten Commandments,” London, 1606, 4to; and “A plain and familiar Exposition” of certain chapters of the Book of Proverbs, 1606, 4to, published at different times; and the prefaces signed by Dod and Cleaver. There are some original letters by Dod in the British Museum, (Ayscough, No. 4275), addressed to lady Vere. They consist chiefly of pious exhortations respecting the confused state of public affairs. In one of them, dated Dec. 20, 1642, he says, he is “not far off ninety-five years old,” which has enabled us to ascertain his age, hitherto incorrectly given by his biographers.

, doctor regent of the faculty of medicine at Paris, where he was born in 1634, was educated not only in the learned languages, but in painting, music, and other elegant accomplishments, and exhibited early such traits of genius and learning, that Guy Patin, not in general very lavish of praise, considered him as one of the most learned men of his time. In a letter to a friend, he called him “Monstrnm sine Vitio,” a character which Adrian Turnebus applied to Scaliger; and in another letter, Patin redoubles his praise of young Dodart, Having in 1660 taken his degree of doctor, he soon attained to distinction in his profession, being the following year called to attend the princess dowager of Conti, and the princes, her children; and some time after he was appointed physician to the king, Louis XIV. In 1673 he was made a member of the academy of sciences, and in compliance with their wishes, he wrote a preface to the “Memoires pour servir a l'Histoire de Flantes,” published by the academy, in 1676, which Chamberlayne in his Lives of the Academicians strangely mistakes for “Memoirs to serve for the History of France!” and gravely argues upon his fitness for the work. Dodart employed some labour in making chemical analyses of plants, with the view of acquiring a more intimate knowlege of their medical virtues, agreeably to the opinions that then prevailed, but which further experience has shewn not to be well founded. He pursued his statical experiments, to find the proportion that perspiration bears to the other excretions, for more than thirty years. The results first appeared in 1699, in the Memoirs of the academy, and were afterwards published separately, under the title of “Medicina Statica Gallica.” In the course of those experiments, he found that during the Lent in one year, he had lost in weight eight pounds five ounces: returning to his ordinary way of living, he recovered what he had lost in a very short time. He once purposed writing a history of music, but only finished a memoir on the voice, which is published among the Memoirs of the Academy. He was of a grave disposition, Fontenelle says, pious and abstemius; and his death, which happened Nov. 5th, 1707, was much regretted.

, an ingenious divine, of unfortunate memory, was born in 1729, at Bourne in Lincolnshire; of which place his father, of the same names, was many years vicar. After being educated at a private school in classical learning, he was admitted a sizar of Clare-hall in Cambridge in 1745, where he gave early proofs of parts and scholarship, and so early as in 1747 began to publish little pieces of poetry. In this year he published (without his name) “A Pastoral on the Distemper among the horned cattle;” in 174y, “The African prince, now in England, to Zara at his father’s court,” and “Zara’s answer;” in 1750, “A day in Vacation at College,” a mock-heroic poem in blank verse abridgments of Grotius “De jure belli et pacis,” and of Clarke on the being and attributes of God, with sir Jeffrey Gilbert’s Abstract of Locke on the human understanding, all inscribed to Dr. Keene, then vice-chancellor of the university, and afterwards bishop of Ely, under the title “Synopsis compendiaria Librorum H. Gfotii de jure belli et pacis, S. Clarkii de Dei existentia et attributes, et J. Lockii de intellectu humano.” He published also, while at Cambridge, “A new Book of the Dunciad, occasioned by Mr. Warburton’s edition of the Dunciad complete,” in which “Warburton is made the hero. About the same time he published proposals for a translation, by subscription, of the Hymns of Callimaehus, the fragments of Orpheus, &c. from the Greek; and wrote a tragedy, with choruses, called” The Syracusan.“He continued to make frequent publications in this light way, in which there were always marks of sprightliness and ingenuity; but at the same time imbibed that taste for expence and dissipation which finally proved his ruin. In January 1750 he took the degree of 13. A. with reputation; and that of master in 1757. Before he was in orders he had begun and finished his selection of 4< The Beauties of Shakspeare,” which he published soon after in 2 vols. 12mo, and, at the conclusion of the preface, tells us, as if resigning all pursuits of the profane kind, that “better and more important things henceforth demanded his attention:” nevertheless, in 1755, he published his translation of the hymns of Callimachus, in English verse; in the preface to which he was assisted by Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Home, bishop of Norwich. Happy would it have been, had he remained longer in the friendship of that excellent man, whom, however, he soon disgusted by his vanity and unbecoming conduct. His “Callimachus” was dedicated to the duke of Newcastle, by tile recommendation of Dr. Keene, bishop of Chester; who, having conceived a good opinion of Dodd at the university, was desirous of bringing him forward into the world.

Still, however, he preserved theological appearances; and he now meditated a design of publishing a large commentary on the Bible. In order to give the greater éclat to this undertaking, and draw the public attention upon it, it was, announced, that lord Masham presented him with Mss. of Mr. Locke, found in his lordship’s library at Oates; and that he had helps also from Mss. of lord Clarendon, Dr. Watcrland, Gilbert West, and other celebrated men. He began to publish this commentary, 1765, in weekly and monthly numbers; and continued to publish it regularly till it was completed in 3 vols. folio. It was dedicated to his patron bishop Squire, who died in May the year following, 1766; and was lamented (we believe very sincerely) by our commentator, in a funeral sermon dedicated to his widow. This year he took the degree of LL. D. at Cambridge, having been made a chaplain to the king some time before. His next publication was a volume of his poems, in 8vo. In 1769 he published a translation from the French, of “Sermons preached before Lewis XV. during his minority, by Massillon, bishop of Clermont.” They were called “Sermons on the duties of the great,” and inscribed to the prince of Wales. In 1771 he published “Sermons to Young Men,” 3 vols. 12mo. These he dedicated to his pupils Charles Ernst and Philip Stanhope, now earl of Chesterfield, he having become tutor to the latter, by the recommendation of bishop Squire.

Before concluding this part of his history, we shall enumerate such of his publications as remain unnoticed. These were, “An Elegy on the death of the Prince of Wales” “The Sisters, or the History of Lucy and Caroline Sanson,” 2 vols. 12mo, a work very unfriendly to morals; several occasional Sermons; three on “The Wisdom and Goodness of God in the Vegetable Creation,” preached before the Apothecaries’ Company “Thoughts on the glorious Epiphany of our Lord Jesus Christ,” a poem, 1758; “Sermons on the Parables and Miracles;” “Account of the Rise, Progress, &c. of the Magdalen Charity” “A Familiar Explanation of the Poetical Works of Milton,” 1762 “Reflections on Death,” 1763; “Comfort for the Afflicted under every affliction, with suitable devotions,” 1764, 12mo; “The Visitor,” a collection of essays originally printed in the Public Ledger, 1766, 2 vols. 12mo an edition of what is called “Locke’s Common- place book to the Bible,” 4to and in 1776 he issued proposals for a History of Free- Masonry, to be comprized in 2 vols. 4to and had projected an edition of Shakspeare, from which he had great expectations. But of all his works the most curious are, his “Thoughts in Prison, in five parts, viz. the Imprisonment, the Retrospect, public Punishment, the Trial, Futurity:” to which are added, his speech in court before sentence was pronounced on him; his last prayer, written the night before his death; the convict’s address to his unhappy brethren, and other miscellaneous pieces, some of which were written for him by Dr. Johnson. Prefixed to the ms. is the ensuing note by himself: “April 23, 1777. I began these thoughts merely from the impression of my mind, without plan, purpose, or motive, more than the situation and state of my soul. I continued them on a thoughtful and regular plan: and I have been enabled wonderfully in a state, which in better days I should have supposed would have destroyed all power of reflection to bring them nearly to a conclusion. I dedicate them to God, and to the reflecting serious amongst my fellow-creatures; and I bless the Almighty for the ability to go through them, amidst the terrors of this dire place, and the bitter anguish of my disconsolate mind. The thinking will easily pardon all inaccuracies, as I am neither able nor willing to read over these melancholy lines with a curious and critical eye. They are imperfect, but the language of the heart and, had I time and inclination, might and should be improved. But W. D.”

, an eminent English lawyer, the son of Richard Doddridge, of a Devonshire family, was born at Barnstaple in 1555. In 1572 he was entered of Exeter college, Oxford, where he studied four years; after which he was removed to the Middle Temple, London, where he became a great proficient in the law, and a noted counsellor. In the forty-fifth year of the reign of queen Elizabeth he was Lent reader of that house; and on the 20th of January, 1603-4, he was called to the degree of serjeant-at-law, at which time he had the honour of being appointed serjeant to Henry prince of Wales. From this employment he was raised, in the succeeding year, to be solicitor-general to the king, and on the 25th of June 1607, he was constituted his majesty’s principal serjeantat-law, and was knighted on the fifth of July following. In February 1612-13, he was created M. A. at his chambers in Serjeants Inn by the vice-chancellor, the two proctors, and five other members of the university of Oxford. This peculiar honour was conferred upon him in gratitude for the great service he had done to the university in several law-suits depending between the city of Oxford and the university. On the 22d of April 1013, he was appointed one of the judges of the court of king’s bench, in which, office he continued till his death. In this station he appears to have conducted himself with great integrity as well as ability. However, in April, 162, he and the other judges of the court were called upon to assign their reasons in the house of lords, for having given judgment against admitting five gentlemen to bail, who had been imprisoned for refusing the loan which had lately been demanded by the crown. Sir Nicholas Hyde, lord chief justice, sir John Doddridge, Mr. Justice Jones, and Mr. Justice Whitlocke, each of them spoke upon the occasion, and made the best defence which the nature of the case would admit. If they were guilty of a mistake, which cannot now reasonably be doubted, they seem to have been led into it in the sincerity of their hearts, from the notions they entertained of regal power, and probably from their perceiving the drift of parliament in these proceedings. Sir John Doddridge, in his speech, asserts the,

index. Faulkner’s Hist, of Fulham. Park’s Royal and Noble Authors. Cumberland’s Life. Some account of his uncle, Knight’s Life ofColet. Hawkins’s Life of Johnson. Dodsley’s, Pcareh’s, and NiclioU's Poems. Bowles’s edition of Pope’s Works, Louoj^r’s Common-place li^ok, vol. 1. Cose’s Life of purity of his own character in the following terms: “It is no more fit for a judge to decline to give an account of his doings than for a Christian of his faith. God knoweth I have endeavoured always to keep a good conscience; for a troubled one who can bear? I have now sat in this court fifteen years, and I should know something. Surely, if I had gone in a mill so long, dust would cleave to my clothes. I am old, and have one foot in the grave; therefore I will look to the better part as near as 1 can. But omnia haberc in memoria, et in nullo errarc, divinum potius est quain human um.” He died Sept. 13, 1628, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in the ambulatory before the door of the library, formerly called Lady Mary’s Chapel, in the cathedral church of Exeter. Within that library is a very sumptuous monument erected to his memory, containing his figure and that of his wife, cut in alabaster, under a stately arch supported by marble pillars. This learned judge, by his happy education, accompanied with excellent natural parts and unremitted industry, became so general a scholar, that it was said of him, that it was difficult to determine whether he were the better artist, divine, civil or common lawyer. Among his other studies, he was a great lover of antiquities, and attained to such an eminence of knowledge and skill in that department of literature, that he was regarded as one of the ablest members of the famous society of antiquaries, which may be said to have begun in 1571, but which more particularly flourished from 1590 to 1614. Rewrote, I. “The Lawyer’s Light; or, due direction for the study of the Law,” London, 1629, 4to. 2. “A complete Parson, or a description of advowsons and church livings, delivered in several readings, in an inn of chancery called the New Inn,” printed 1602, 1603, 1630, 4to. 3. “The History of the ancient and modern estate of the principality of Wales, duchy of Cornwall, and earldom of Chester,” 1630, 4to. 4. “The English Lawyer, a treatise describing a method for the managing of the Laws of this Land, and expressing the best qualities requisite in the student, practiser, judges, &c.” London, 1631, 4to. 5. “Opinion touching the antiquity, power, order, state, manner, persons, and proceedings, of the High Courts of Parliament in England,” London, 1658, 8vo. 6. “A Treatise of particular Estates,” London, 1677, duodecimo, printed at the end of the fourth edition of William Noy’s Works, entitled, “The Ground and Maxims of the Law.” 7. “A true representation of forepassed Parliaments to the view of the present times and posterity.” This still remains in manuscript. Sir John Doddridge also enlarged a book called “The Magazine of Honour,” London, 1642. 7'he same book was afterwards published under his name by the title of “The Law of Nobility and Peerage,” Lond. 16S7, 1658, 8vo. In the Collection of curious Discourses, written by eminent antiquaries, are two dissertations by our judge; one of which is on the dimensions of the land of England, and the other on the office and duty of heralds in this country. Mr. Bridgman, in his “Legal Bibliography,” informs us that many valuable works have been attributed to sir John Doddridge, which in their title-pages have borne the names of others. He mentions particularly Sheppard’s “Law of Common Assurances touching Deeds in general,” and “Wentworth’s office and dutie of Executors;” both which are said to have been written by Doddridge.

From the course of Dr. Doddridge’s life, and the multiplicity of his labours, his application must have been incessant, and with little time for exercise and recreation. His constitution was always feeble, and his friends deprecated the injurious effects of his unintermitting assiduity and exertion. By degrees, however, his delicate frame was so impaired, that it could not bear the attack of disease. In December 1750, he went to St. Alban’s to preach the funeral sermon of his friend Dr. Clark, and in the course of his journey he caught a cold, which brought on a pulmonary complaint, that resisted every remedy. But notwithstanding the advice and remonstrances of those who apprehended his death, and wished to prolong his usefulness, he would not decline or diminish the employments in the academy, and with his congregation, in which he* took great delight. At length he was obliged to submit; and to withdraw from all public services to the house of his friend Mr. Orton, at Shrewsbury. Notwithstanding some relief which his recess from business afforded him, his disorder gained ground; and his medical friends advised him to make trial of the Bristol waters. The physicians of this place afforded him little hope of lasting benefit; and he received their report of his case with Christian fortitude and resignation. As the last resort in his case, he was advised to pass the winter in a warmer climate; and at length he was prevailed upon to go to Lisbon, where he met with every attention which friendship and medical skill could afford him. But his case was hopeless. Arriving at Lisbon on the 13th of October, the rainy season came on, and prevented his deriving any benefit from air and exercise, and in a few days he was seized with a colliquative diarrhoea, which rapidly exhausted his remaining strength. He preserved, however, to the last the same calmness, vigour, and joy of mind, which he had felt and expressed through the whole of his disease. The only anxiety he seemed to feel was occasioned by the situation in which Mrs. Doddridge would be left upon his removal. To his children, his congregation, and his friends in general, he desired to be remembered in the most affectionate manner; nor did he forget a single person, not even his servant, in the effusions of his benevolence. Many devout sentiments and aspirations were uttered by him on the last day but one preceding that of his death. At length, his release took place on the 26th of October, O. S. about 3 o'clock in the morning; and though he died in a foreign land, and in a certain sense among strangers, his decease was embalmed with many tears, nor was he molested, in his last moments, by the officious zeal of any of the priests of the church of Rome. His body was opened, and his lungs were found to be in a very ulcerated state. His remains were deposited in the most respectful manner in the burying-ground belonging to the British factory at Lisbon. His congregation erected in his meeting-house a handsome monument to his memory, on which is an inscription drawn up by his much esteemed and ingenious friend, Gilbert West, esq. Dr. Doddridge left four children, one son and three daughters, and his widow survived him more than forty years. His funeral sermon was preached by Mr. Orton from I Cor. xv. 54; and it was extensively circulated under the title of “The Christian’s triumph over death.” His character stands high among the dissenters, no man with equal powers and equal popularity having appeared among them in the course of last century, Dr. Watts excepied. Dr. Doddridge was an indefatigable student, and his mind was furnished with a rich stock of various learning. His acquaintance with books, ancient and modern, was very extensive and if not a profound scholar, he was sufficiently acquainted with the learned languages to make a considerable figure as a critic and commentator. To history, ecclesiastical as well as civil, he had paid no small degree of attention; and while from his disposition he was led to cultivate a taste for polite literature in general, more than for the abstruser parts of science, he was far from being a stranger to mathematical and philosophical studies. But the favourite object of his pursuit, and that in which his chief excellence lay, was divinity, taking that word in its largest sense. As a preacher. Dr. Doddridge was much esteemed and very popular. But his biographers have had some difficulty in vindicating him from the charge of being what is called a trimmer^ that is, accommodating his discourses to congregations of different sentiments nor do we think they have succeeded in proving him exempt from the appearance at least of inconsistency, or obsequious timidity. We are informed, however, that his piety was ardent, unaffected, and cheerful, and particularly displayed in the resignation and serenity with which he bore his affliction. His moral conduct was not only irreproachable, but in every respect exemplary. To his piety he joined the warmest benevolence towards his fellow- creatures, which was manifested in the most active exertions for their welfare within the compass of his abilities or influence. His private manners were polite, affable, and engaging; which rendered him the delight of those who had the happii. of his acquaintance. No man exercised more candour and moderation towards those who differed from him in religious opinions. Of these qualities there are abundant proofs in the extensive correspondence he carried on with many eminent divines in the establishment, and of other persuasions.

The volume contains the “Epistle to Stephen Duck” “Kitty,” a pastoral “The Petition” “Rome’s pardon,” under the title of “The Devil is a Dunce” “Religion,” a simile “The Epithalamium,” called here, an Entertainment designed for the Wedding of governor Lowther and miss Pennington; and the “Advice,” which were reprinted in his volume of Trifles."

Almost from the commencement of trade, Dodsley became a speculator in various literary undertakings, either original or compiled. So rapid was his success, that before he had been three years in business, he became a purchaser of copyrights; and it is among the most striking of those occurrences which diversify the lives of men of literary eminence, that, in 1738, the truly illustrious Dr. Samuel Johnson was glad to sell his first original publication to humble Robert Dodsley, for the small sum of ten guineas. We find by Mr. Boswell’s very interesting account of this transaction, that Dodsley was the first to discover the merits of Johnson’s “London,” and was desirous to purchase an article of which as a tradesman he had not miscalculated the value. But before this time Dodsley’s shop must have been in considerable reputation, as in April 1737 he published Pope’s “Second Epistle of the Second Book of Horace,” and in the following month Pope assigned over to him the sole property of his “Letters,” and afterwards that of vols. V. and VI. of his Works, and some of his detached pieces. Not long after, Young and Akenside published their works at his shop, and as early as March 1738-9, he became a partner with some of his brethren in the copyright of established authors. The first of his literary schemes was a periodical journal, which appears to have escaped the researches of his biographers, entitled “The Public Register, or Weekly Magazine,” begun Jan. 3, 1741, each number of which consisted of sixteen 4to pages, handsomely printed, and was sold for three-pence. Although Dodsley appears to have lived on friendly terms with Cave, the printer, who referred Johnson to him as a lit publisher of the “London,” yet this Register was undoubtedly one of the many attempts made at that time to rival me uncommon and much envied success of the Gentleman’s Magazine, and like them was soon obliged to yield to the superior popularity of that valuable miscellany. Dodsley and Cave abused one another a little, as rival projectors, but were probably reconciled when the cause was removed. The contents of Dodsley’s “Public Register” were original letters and essays in prose and verse records of literature; the substance of the parliamentary debates, with news foreign and domestic, and advertisements relating to books. The original essays were contributed by his mends, and many of them probably by himself. It proceeded as far as the twenty-fourth number, when the editor thought proper to stop. He urges in his farewell address, “the additional expense he was at in stamping it, and the ungenerous usage he met with from one of the proprietors of u certain monthly pamphlet, who prevailed with most of the common newspapers not to advertise it.” In 1745, he wrote a little poetical piece called “Rex et Pontifcx,” which he meant as an attempt to introduce a new species of ^pantomime upon the stage. It was not, however, received by any of the theatres, and probably was considered only as a political effusion for a temporary purpose. In 1746, he projected another periodical work, entitled “The Museum, or the Literary and Historical Register,” published every fortnight, in an 8vo size. Of this concern he had only a fourth share, the rest being the property of Mess. Longman, Shewell, Hitch, and Rivington. It extended to three volumes, and contains a greater variety of original essays of real merit than any similar undertaking within our memory, nor will this be doubted, when it is added that among the contributors were Spence, Horace Walpole, the two Wartons, Akenside, Lowth, Smart, Gilbert Cooper, William Whitehead, Merrick, and Campbell. This last wrote those political papers which he afterwards collected, enlarged, and published under the title of “The Present State of Europe.”

, an English barrister, was the son of the Rev. John Dodson, M. A. a dissenting minister of Marlborough, in Wiltshire, and of Elizabeth, one of the daughters of Mr. Foster, an attorney-at-law of the same place. He was born at Marlborough on the 20th or 21st Sept. 1732, and educated partly under the care of his father, and partly at the grammar-school of that town; and under the direction of his maternal uncle, sir Michael Foster, he was brought up to the profession of the law. After being admitted of the Middle Temple, London, August 31, 1754, he practised many years with considerable reputation, as a special pleader. His natural modesty and cliffiJence discouraged him from attending the courts, and therefore he did not proceed to be called to the bar till July 4, 1783. This measure contributed, as was intended, more to the diminution than to the increase of professional business. He was appointed one of the commissioners of bankrupts in 1770, during the chancellorship of lord Camden, and was continued in that situation till the time of his death. On December 31, 1778, Mr. Dodson married miss Elizabeth Hawkes, his cousin-german, and eldest daughter of Mr. Hawkes, of Marlborough. He enjoyed a life of uninterrupted good health, and indeed little alteration was observeable in his strength or general habits till nearly the last year of his life. It was not till the month of October 1799, that he began more sensibly to feel the effect of disease; and, after a confinement to his room of about a fortnight, he died of a dropsy in his chest, at his house in Boswell-court, Carey-street, London, on the 13th of November of that year; and was buried in Bunhillfields the 21st of the same month. Mr. Dodson’s legal knowledge and discrimination were deservedly estimated by those to whom he was known, and who had occasion to confer with him upon questions of law. He was deliberate in forming his opinion, and diffident in delivering it, but always clear in the principles and reasons on which it was founded. His general acquaintance with the laws, and veneration for the constitution of his country, evinced his extensive acquaintance with the principles of jurisprudence, and his regard for the permanence of the liberties of Britain. In 1762, Mr. Justice Foster published his book, entitled, “A Report of some proceedings on the commission for the trial of the Rebels in the year 1746, in the county of Surrey; and of other crown cases; to which are added, Discourses upon a few branches of the Crown Law.” This work will be to him, said Mr. Dodson, “monumeutum aere perennius.” The impression being large, and a pirated edition being made in Ireland, a new edition, was not soon wanted in England; but in 1776 Mr. Dodson published a second edition with some improvements, and with remarks in his preface on some objections made by Mr. Barrington in his “Observations on the more ancient Statutes.” In 1792 he published a third edition, with an appendix, containing three new cases, which the author had intended to insert in the first edition, and had caused to be transcribed for that purpose. In 1795 Mr. Dobson drew up a life of his truly learned and venerable uncle sir Michael Faster, which was to have formed a part of the sixth volume of the new edition of the Biographia Britannica. It has since been printed separately in 1811, 8vo. But the public are in possession of more ample documents of Mr. Dodson’s deep research and critical judgment in biblical literature, than in legal disquisitions. He had very attentively and dispassionately examined th evidences of revelation, and was firmly convinced of the truth of its pretensions. He was zealous for the true and rational interpretation of its scriptures, because he was strongly persuaded of the great influence such interpretation would have on its reception in the world, and on the consequent happiness of mankind. But having a turn for biblical criticism, and having embraced the principles of the Unitarians, he published many papers in a work entitled “Commentaries and Essays,” written by the members of a small “Society for promoting the knowledge of the Scriptures.” Mr. Dodson was a very early member of this society, not only communicating some papers of his own, but conducting through the press some of the contributions of others. In 1790 he laid before the public, as the result of many years’ study, “New translation of Isaiah, with notes supplementary to those of Dr. Lowth, late bishop of London, and containing remarks on many parts of his Translation and Notes, by a Layman.” In this he has taken more freedoms than can be justified by the principles of sound criticism; which drew forth an able answer from the pen of Dr. Sturges, in “Short remarks on a new Translation of Isaiah,” 8vo. To this Mr. Dodson replied, with urbanity and candour, in “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Sturges, &c.” 8vo, 179 1.

Mr. Dodwell came the same year to England, and resjded at Oxford for the sake of the public library. Thence he returned to his native country, and in 1672 published, at Dublin, in 8vo, a posthumous treatise of his late learned tutor John Steam, M. D. to which he put a preface of his own. He entitled this book, “De Obstinatione: Opus posthumum Pietatem Chrisdano-Stoicam scholastico more suadens:” and his own preface, “prolegomena Apologetica, de usu Dogmatum Philosophicorum,” &c. in which he apologizes for his tutor; who, by quoting so often and setting a high value upon the writings and maxims of the heathen philosophers, might seem to depreciate the Holy Scriptures. Mr. Dodwell therefore premises first, that the author’s design in that work is only to recommend moral duties, and enforce the practice of them by the authority of the ancient philosophers; and that he does not meddle with the great mysteries of Christianity, which are discoverable only by divine revelation. His second work was, “Two letters of advice. 1. For the Susception of Holy Orders. 2. For Studies Theological, especially such as are rational.” To the second edition of which, in 1681, was added, “A Discourse concerning the Phoenician History of Sanchoniathon,” in which he considers Philo-Byblius as the author of that history. In 1673, he wrote a preface, without his name, to “An introduction to a Devout Life,” by Francis de Sales, the last bishop and prince of Geneva; which was published at Dublin, in English, this same year, in 12mo. He came over again to England in 1674, and settled in London; where he became acquainted with several learned men; particularly, in 1675, with Dr. William Lloyd, afterwards successively bishop of St. Asaph, Litchfield and Coventry, and Worcester . With that eminent divine he contracted so great a friendship and intimacy, that he attended him to Holland, when he was appointed chaplain to the princess of Orange. He was also with him at Salisbury, when he kept his residence there as canon of that church; and spent afterwards a good deal of time with him at St. Asaph. In 1675 he published “Some Considerations of present Concernment; how far the Romanists may be trusted by princes of another persuasion,” in 8vo, levelled against the persons concerned in the Irish remonstrance, which occasioned a kind of schism among the Irish Roman catholics. The year following he published “Two short Discourses against the Romanists. 1. An Account of the fundamental Principle of Popery, and of the insufficiency of the proofs which they have for it. 2. An Answer to six Queries proposed to a gentlewoman of the Church of England, by an emissary of the Church of Rome,” 12mo, but reprinted in 1688, 4to, with “A new preface relating to the bishop of Meaux, and other modern complainers of misrepresentation.” In 1679, he published, in 4to, “Separation of Churches from episcopal government, as practised by the present non-conformists, proved schismatical, from such principles as are least controverted, and do withal most popularly explain the sinfulness and mischief of schism.” This, being animadverted upon by R. Baxter, was vindicated, in 1681, by Mr. Dodwell, in “A Reply to Mr. Baxter’s pretended confutation of a book, entitled, Sepafration of Churches,” &c. To which were added, “Three Letters to Mr. Baxter, written in 1673, concerning the Possibility of Discipline under a Diocesan Government,” &c. 8vo. In 1682 came out his “Dissertations on St. Cyprian,” composed at the reqviest of Dr. Fell, bishop of Oxford, when he was about to publish his edition of that father. They were printed in the same size, but reprinted at Oxford in 1684, 8vo, under the title “Dissertationes Cyprianse.” The eleventh dissertation, in which he endeavours to lessen the number of the early Christian martyrs, brought upon him the censure of bishop Burnet, and not altogether unjustly. The year following, he published “A Discovirse concerning the One Altar, and the One Priesthood, insisted on by the ancients in the disputes against Schism ,” Lond. 8vo. In 1684, a dissertation of his on a passage of Lactantius, was inserted in the new edition of that author at Oxford, by Thomas Spark, in 8vo. His treatise “Of the Priesthood of Laicks,” appeared in 1686, in 8vo. The title was “De jure Laicorum,” &c. It was written in answer to a book published by William Baxter, the antiquary, and entitled “AntiDodwellism, being two curious tracts formerly written by H. Grotius, concerning a solution of the question, whether the eucharist may be administered in the absence of, or want of pastors.” About the same time he was preparing for the press the posthumous works of the learned Dr. John Pearson, bishop of Chester, Lond. 1688, 4to. He published also,“Dissertations on Irenseus,” 1689, 8vo. On the 2d of April, 1688, he was elected, by the university of Oxford, Camden’s professor of history, without any application of his own, and when he was at a great distance from Oxford; and the 21st of May was incorporated master of arts in that university. But this beneficial and creditable employment of professor he did not enjoy long; being deprived of it in November, 1691, for refusing to take the oaths of allegiance to king William and queen Mary. When their majesties had suspended those bishops who would not acknowledge their authority, Mr. Dodwell published “A cautionary discourse of Schism, with a particular regard to the case of the bishops, who are suspended for refusing to take the new oath,” London, 8vo. And when those bishops were actually deprived, and others put in their sees, he joined the former, looking upon the new bishops, and their adherents, as schismatics. He wrote likewise “A Vindication of the deprived Bishops:” and “A Defence of the same,” 1692, 4to, being an answer to Dr. Hody’s “Unreasonableness of Separation,” &c. After having lost his professorship, he continued for some time in Oxford, and then retired to Cookham, a village near Maidenhead, about an equal distance between Oxford and London; and therefore convenient to maintain a correspondence in each place, and to consult friends and books, as he should have occasion. While he lived there, he became acquainted with Mr. Francis Cherry of Shottesbrooke, a person of great learning and virtue, for the sake of whose conversation he removed to Shottesbrooke, where he chiefly spent the remainder of his days. In 1692, he published his Camdenian lectures read at Oxford; and, in 1694, “An Invitation to Gentlemen to acquaint themselves with ancient History” being a preface to Degory Whear’s “Method of reading history,” translated into English by Mr. Bohun. About this time having lost one or more of the Dodwells, his kinsmen, whom he designed for his heirs, he married on the 24th of June, 1694, in the 52d year of his age, a person, in whose father’s house at Cookham he had boarded several times, and by her had ten children . In 1696 he drew up the annals of Thucydides and Xenophon, to accompany the editions of those two authors by Dr. John Hudson and Mr. Edward Wells. Having likewise compiled the annals of Velleius Paterculus, and of Quintilian, and Statius, he published them altogether in 1698, in one volume, 8vo. About the same time he wrote an account of tUe lesser Geographers, published by Dr. Hudson; and “A Treatise concerning the lawfulness of instrumental music in holy offices:” occasioned by an organ being set up at Tiverton in 1696: with some other things on chronology, inserted in “Grabe’s Spicilegium.” In 1701, he published his account of the Greek and Roman cycles, which was the most elaborate of all his pieces, and seems to have been the work of the greatest part of his life. The same year was published a letter of his, inserted in Richardson’s “Canon of the New Testament,” &c. concerning Mr. Toland’s disingenuous treatment of him. The year following appeared “A Discourse [of his] concerning the obligation to marry within the true communion, following from their style of being called a Holy Seed;” and “An Apology for the philosophical writings of Cicero,” against the objections of Mr. Petit; prefixed to Tally’s five books De Finibus, or, of Moral Ends, translated into English by Samuel Parker, gent, as also the annals of Thucydides and Xenophon, Oxoa. 4to. In 1703 he published “A Letter concerning the Immortality of the Soul, against Mr. Henry Layton’s Hypothesis,” 4to and, “A Letter to Dr. Tillotson about Schism,” 8vo, written in 1691.The year following came out, his “Chronology of DionX'Sius Halicarnasseus,” in the Oxford edition of that historian by Dr. Hudson, folio; his “Two Dissertations on the age of Phalaris and Pythagoras,” occasioned by the dispute between Bentley and Boyle; and his “Admonition to Foreigners, concerning the late Schism in England.” This, which was written in Latin, regarded the deprivation of the nonjuring bishops. When the bill for preventing occasional conformity was depending in parliament, he wrote a treatise, entitled, “Occasional Communion fundamentally destructive of the discipline of the primitive catholic Church, and contrary to the doctrine of the latest Scriptures concerning Church Communion;” London, 1705, 8vo. About the same time, observing that the deprived bishops were reduced to a small number, he wrote, “A Case in View considered in a Discourse, proving that (in case our present invalidly deprived fathers shall leave all their sees vacant, either by death or resignation) we shall not then be obliged to keep up our separation from those bishops, who are as yet involved in the guilt of the present unhappy schism,” Lond. 1705, 8vo. Some time after, he published “A farther prospect of the Case in View, in answer to some new objections not then considered,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. Hitherto Mr. Dodwell had acted in such a manner as had procured him the applause of all, excepting such as disliked the nonjurors; but, about this time, he published some opinions that drew upon him almost universal censure. For, in order to exalt the powers and dignity of the priesthood, in that one communion, which he imagined to be the pecuHum of God, and to which he had joined himself, he endeavoured to prove, with his usual perplexity of learning, that the doctrine of the soul’s natural mortality was the true and original doctrine; and that immortality was only at baptism conferred upon the soul, by the gift of God, through the hands of one set of regularly-ordained clergy. In support of this opinion, he wrote “An Epistolary Discourse, proving, from the scriptures and the first fathers, that the soul is a principle naturally mortal; but immortalized actually by the pleasure of God, to punishment, or to reward, by its union with the divine baptismal spirit. Wherein is proved, that none have the power of giving this divine immortalizing spirit, since the apostles, but only the bishops,” Lond. 1706, 8vo. At the end of the preface to the reader is a- dissertation, to prove “that Sacerdotal Absolution is necessary for the Remission of Sins, even of those who are truly penitent.” This discourse being attacked by several persons, particularly Chishull, Clarke, Norris, and Mills afterwards bishop of Waterford, our author endeavoured to vindicate himself in the three following pieces: 1. “A Preliminary Defence of the Epistolary Discourse, concerning the distinction between Soul and Spirit: in two parts. I. Against the charge of favouring Impiety. II. Against the charge of favouring Heresy,” Lond. 1707, 8vo. 2. “The Scripture account of the Eternal Rewards or Punishments of all that hear of the Gospel, without an immortality necessarily resulting from the nature of the souls themselves that are concerned in those rewards or punishments. Shewing particularly, I. How much of this account was discovered by the best philosophers. II. How far the accounts of those philosophers were corrected, and improved, by the Hellenistical Jews, assisted by the Revelations of the Old Testament. III. How far the discoveries fore-mentioned were improved by the revelations of the Gospel. Wherein the testimonies also of S. Irenaens and Tertullian are occasionally considered,” Lond. 1708, 8vo. And, 3. “An Explication of a famous passage in the Dialogue of S. Justin Martyr with Tryphon, concerning the immortality of human souls. With an Appendix, consisting of a letter to the rev. Mr. John Norris, of Bemerton; and an expostulation relating to the late insults of Mr. Clarke and Mr. Chishull,” Lond. 1708, 8vo. Upon the death of Dr. William Lloyd, the deprived bishop of Norwich, on the first of January 1710-11, Mr. Dodwell, with some other friends, wrote to Dr. Thomas Kenn, of Bath and Wells, the only surviving deprived bishop, to know, whether he challenged their subjection? He returned for answer, that he did not: and signified his desire that the breach might be closed by their joining with the bishops possessed of their sees; giving his reasons for it. Accordingly, Mr. Dodwell, and several of his friends, joined in communion with them. But others refusing this, Mr. Dodwell was exceedingly concerned, and wrote, “The case in view now in fact. Proving, that the continuance of a separate communion, without substitutes in any of the late invalidlydeprived sees, since the death of William late lord bishop of Norwich, is schismatical. With an Appendix, proving, that our late invalidly-deprived fathers had no right to substitute successors, who might legitimate the separation, after that the schism had been concluded by the decease of the last survivor of those same fathers,” Lond. 1711, 8vo. Our author wrote some few other things, besides what have been already mentioned *. At length, after a

, was born at Shottesbrooke, in Berkshire, June 17, 1709, and was educated at Trinity college, Oxford, where he took the degree of master of arts, on the 8th of June, 1732. In the course of his life, he obtained several considerable preferments. He was rector of Shottesbrooke, and vicar of Bucklesbury and of White-Waltham. Dr. Sherlock, when bishop of Salisbury, gave him a prebendal stall in that cathedral, and he afterwards became a canon of the same church. Bishop Thomas promoted him to the archdeaconry of Berks. The principal works by which he was distinguished, were, “A Free Answer to Dr. Middleton’s Free Enquiry,” published in 1749; and “A full and final Reply to Mr. Toll’s Defence of Dr. Middleton,” which appeared in 1751. Both these works were written with temper, as well as with learning. Our author was judged to have performed such good service to the cause of religion by his answer to Dr. Middleton, that the university of Oxford conferred upon him the degree of doctor in divinity by diploma, in full convocation on Feb. 23, 1749-50. He published also, “Two Sermons on the eternity of future punishment, in answer to Whiston with a Preface,” Oxford, 1743; “Visitation Sermon on the desireableness of the Christian Faith, published at the request of bishop Sherlock,” Oxford, 1741 “Two Sermons on a rational faith,” Oxford, 1745 “Sermon on the practical influence of the doctrine of the Holy Trinity,” Oxford, 1715; “Dissertation on Jepthah’s Vow, occasioned by Romaine’s Sermon on that subject,” London, 1745; “Practical Discourses (14) on moral subjects, vol.1.” London, 1748. A Dedication to his patron Arthur Vanittart, esq. of Shottesbrooke, precedes a masterly preface of considerable length, stating the great duties of morality, c. “Vol. II. London, 1749, containing 14 more;” and preceded by a Dedication to bishop Sherlock, whose “unsolicited testimony of favour” to him laid him “under personal obligations. Such a testimony from such a patron, and the obliging manner of conferring it, added much to the value of the favour itself.” “Assize Sermon on Human Laws,” Oxford, 1750; “Sermon on St. Paul’s Wish,” Oxford, 1752; “Two Sermons on Superstition,” Oxford, 1754; “Assize Sermon on the equal and impartial discharge of Justice,” Oxford, 1756 “Letter to the Author of Considerations on the Act to prevent Clandestine Marriages; with a Postscript occasioned by Stebbing’s Enquiry into the annulling Causes,” &c. London, 1755. This Letter *' by a Country Clergyman“was known, at the time, as Dr. DodwelPs;” Two Sermons on the Doctrine of the Divine Visitation by Earthquakes,“Oxford, 1756;” Assize Sermon on the False Witness, Oxford, 1758; “Sermon at the Meeting of the Charity Schools,” London, 1758; “Two Sermons on a particular Providence,” Oxford, 1760 “Sermon before the Sons of the Clergy,” London, 1760; “Charge to the Clergy of the archdeaconry of Berks,” London, 1764-; “Sermon at the Consecration of Bishop Moss, in 1766,” London, 1767; “The Sick Man’s Companion; or the Clergyman’s Assistant in visiting the Sick; with a Dissertation on Prayer,” London, 1767; “The Prayer, on laying the foundation stone of the Salisbury infirmary, subjoined to dean Greene’s Infirmary Sermon,” Salisbury, 1767; “Infirmary Sermon,” Salisbury, 1768. In 1302, the eldest son of our author permitted the “Three Charges on the Athanasian Creed,” in consequence of the request of some Oxford friends, to see the light. They were accordingly printed at the university press; and contributed, as the author expresses himself in his second page, “to obviate all real mistakes, to silence all wilful misrepresentations, to remove prejudices, to confirm the faith of others, and to vindicate our own sincerity in the profession of it” and it was considered by him as “not unseasonable or unuseful to review and justify that which is called the Athanasian Creed not, we well know, as composed by him whose name it bears, but as explaining the doctrine which he so strenuously maintained.”

, a most laborious Italian writer, was born at Venice in 1508. His family was one of the most ancient in the republic, but reduced in circumstances. Lewis remained the whole of his life in his native city, occupied in his numerous literary undertakings, which procured him some personal esteem, but little reputation or wealth. Perhaps his best employment was that of cor-, rector of the press to the celebrated printer Gabriel Giolito, whose editions are so much admired for the beauties of type and paper, and yet with the advantage of Dolce’s attention, are not so correct as could be wished. As an original author, Dolce embraced the whole circle of polite literature and science, being a grammarian, rhetorician, orator, historian, philosopher, editor, translator, and commentator; and as a poet, he wrote tragedies, comedies, epics, lyrics, and satires. All that can be called events in his life, were some literary squabbles, particularly with Ruscelli, who was likewise a corrector of Giolito’s press. He died of a dropsical complaint in 1569, according to Apostolo Zeno, and, according to Tiraboschi, in 1566. Baillet, unlike most critics, says he was one of the best writers of his age. His style is flowing, pure, and elegant; but he was forced by hunger to spin out his works, and to neglect that frequent revisal which is so necessary to the finishing of a piece. Of his numerous works, a list of which may be seen in Niceron, or Moreri, the following are in some reputation: 1. “Dialogo della pittura, intitolato I'Aretino,” Venice, 1557, 8vo. This work was reprinted, with the French on the opposite page, at Florence, 1735. 2. “Cinque priini canti del Sacripante,” Vinegia^ 1535, 8vo. 3. “Primaleone,” 1562, 4to. 4. “Achilles; 1 * and” Jineas,“1570, 4to. 5.” La prima imprese del conte Orlando," 1572, 4to. 6. Poems in different collections, among others in that of Berni. And the Lives of Charles V. and Ferdinand the First.

The first years of Mr. Doliond’s life were employed at the loom; but, being of a very studious and philosophic turn of mind, his leisure hours were engaged in mathematical pursuits; and though by the death of his father, which happened in his infancy, his education gave way to the necessities of his family, yet at the age of fifteen, before he had an opportunity of seeing works of science or elementary treatises, he amused himself by constructing sun-dials, drawing geometrical schemes, and solving problems. An early marriage and an increasing family afforded him little opportunity of pursuing his favourite studies but such are the powers of the human mind when called into action, that difficulties, which appear to the casual observer insurmountable, yield and retire before perseverance and genius; even under the pressure of a close application to business for the support of his family, he found time, by abridging the hours of his rest, to extend his mathematical knowledge, and made a considerable proficiency in optics and astronomy, to which he now principally devoted his attention, having, in the earlier stages of his life, prepared himself for the higher parts qjf those subjects by a perfect knowledge of algebra and geometry.

Having sent off his second collection to Europe, Dombey returned to Huanuco, in the end of December 1780, where he had shortly after the mortification of hearing that his first collection had been taken by the English, and redeemed at Lisbon, by the Spanish government, consequently that the antiquities were now detained in Spain, and that duplicates only of the. dried plants and seeds had been forwarded to Paris. Dombey in the mean while, leaving his more recent acquisitions in safety at Lima, undertook a journey to Chili, and although his journey was necessarily attended with vast expence, his character was now so well known, that he readily met with assistance. He arrived at La Conception in the beginning of 1782, where, the town being afflicted with a pestilential fever, he devoted himself to the exercise of his medical skill, assisting the poor with advice, food, and medicine. This example having the effect to restore the public courage, the grateful people wished to retain him, with a handsome stipend, as their physician; and the bishop of La Conception endeavoured to promote his union with a young lady of great beauty and riches, on whom his merit had made impressions as honourable to herself as to him; but neither of these temptations prevailed. Having added greatly to his collection of drawings, shells, and minerals, as welt as of plants, and having discovered a new and most valuable mine of quicksilver, and another of gold, he revisited Lima, to take his passage for Europe. A journey of 100 leagues among the Cordilleras, made at his own expence, had much impaired his finances and his health, but he refused the repayment which the country offered him, saying, that “though he was devoted to the service of Spain, it was for his own sovereign, who had sent him, to pay his expences.” In Chili he discovered the majestic tree, of the tribe of Pines, 150 feet high, now named after him, Dombeya, of which the Norfolk-island pine is another species. While he still remained at Lima, the labours of arranging and packing his collections of natural history, added to the fatigues he had already undergone, and the petty jealousies and contradictions he experienced from some of the Spaniards in power, preyed upon his health and spirits; and under the idea that he might possibly never reach Europe, he wrote to his friend Thouin, to take the necessary precautions for the safety of his treasures on their arrival in a Spanish port. He survived, however, to undergo far greater distresses than he had yet known. After narrowly escaping shipwreck at Cape Horn, and being obliged to wait at the Brasils till his ship could be refitted, which last circumstance indeed was favourable to his scientific pursuits and acquisitions, he reached Cadiz on the 22d of February, 1785; but, instead of the reception he expected and deserved, he was not only tormented with the most pettifogging and dishonest behaviour concerning the property of his collections, but those collections were exposed, without discrimination or precaution, to the rude and useless scrutiny of the barbarians at the custom-house, so as to be rendered useless, in a great measure, even to those who meant to plunder them. The whole were thrown afterwards into damp warehouses, where their true owner was forbidden to enter. Here they lay for the plants to rot, and the inestimable collections of seeds to lose their powers of vegetation, till certain forms were gone through, which forms, as it afterwards appeared, tended chiefly to the rendering their plunder useless to others, rather than valuable to their own nation. In the first place, as much of these treasures had suffered by this ill-treatment, Dombey was required to repair the injury from his own allotment, or from that of his master, the king of France. With this he could not of himself comply; but an order was, for some political reason, procured from the French court, and he was obliged to submit. He could never, however, obtain that the seeds should be committed to the earth so as to be of use; and hence the gardens of Europe have been enriched with scarcely half a score of his botanical discoveries, among which are the magnificent Datura arborea, the beautiful Salvia formosa, and the fragrant Verbena triphylla, or, as it ought to have been called, citrea. This last will be a “monumentum sere perennins” with those who shall ever know his history. What had been given him for his own use hy the vice-roy of the Brasils, underwent the same treatment as the rest. Finally, he was required to fix a price upon the sad remains of his collections, which, as a great part was French national property, it was obvious he could not do. He remained at Cadiz, without money and without friends. His only hope was that he might hereafter publish his discoveries, so as to secure some benefit to the world and some honour to himself. But this last consolation was denied him. Anxious to revisit his native land, he would have compounded for his liberty with the loss of all but his manuscripts; but he was not allowed to depart until his persecutors had copied all those manuscripts, and bound him by a written promise never to publish any thing till the return of his travelling companions. In the mean while, those very companions were detained by authority in Peru; and in after-times the original botanical descriptions of Dombey have, many of them, appeared verbatim, without acknowledgment, in the pompous Flora of Peru and Chili, which thence derives a great part of its value. Thus chagrined and oppressed, the unhappy Dombey sunk into despair, till, no longer useful or formidable to his oppressors, he was allowed to return, with such parts of his collections as they condescended to leave him, to Paris.

, a Saint of the Romish calendar, founder of the order of the Dominicans, and as some say, of that horrible engine of tyranny, the Inquisition, was born in 1170, at Calarogo, in old Castille, in the diocese of Osma. He was of the family of the Guzmans, and educated at first under a priest, his uncle; but at fourteen years, was sent to the public schools of Palentia, where he became a great proficient in rhetoric, philosophy, and divinity, and was also distinguished by austere mortifications and charity to the poor. When he had finished his studies and taken his degrees, he explained the Holy Scriptures in the schools, and preached at Palentia. In 1198 he was made a canon of Osma. After five years he accompanied the bishop of Osma on an embassy to the earl of La Marche, and in his journey was grievously afflicted to behold the spread of what he called heresy among the Albigenses, and conceived the design of converting them, and at first appears to have used only argument, accompanied with the deception of pretended miracles; but finding these unsuccessful, joined the secular power in a bloody crusade against the Albigenses, which he encouraged by prayers and miracles. During these labours, he instituted the devotion of the Rosary, consisting of fifteen Pater Hosiers, and an hundred and fifty Ave Marias, in honour of the fifteen principal mysteries of the life and sufferings of Christ, and of the virgin Mary, which our saint thought the people might be made to honour by this foolish expedient. In 1206 he founded the nunnery of our lady of Prouille, near Faujaux, which he put under* the rule of St. Austin, and afterwards established an institute called his third order, some of the members of which live in monasteries, and are properly nuns; others live in their own houses, adding religious to civil duties, and serving the poor in hospitals and prisons.

St. Dominic had spent ten years in preaching in Languedoc, when, in 1215, he founded the celebrated order of preaching friars, or Dominicans, as they were afterwards called. The same year it was approved of by Innocent III. and confirmed in 1216, by a bull of Honorius III. under the title of St. Augustin; to which Dominic added several austere precepts and observances, obliging the brethren to tuke a vow of absolute poverty, and to abandon entirely all their revenues and possessions; and they were called preaching friars, because public instruction was the main end of their institution. The first convent was founded at Tholouse by the bishop thereof, and Simon de Montfort. Two years afterwards they had another at Paris, near the bishop’s house and iome time after, viz. in 1218, a third in the rue St Jaques, St. James’s- street, whence the denomination of Jacobins. Just before his death, Dominic sent Gilbert de Fresney, with twelve of the brethren, into England, where they founded their first monastery at Oxford, in 1221, and soon after another at London. In 1276, the mayor and aldermen of the city of London gave them two whole streets by the river Thames, where they erected a very commodious convent, whence that place is still called Black Friars, from the name by which the Dominican? were called in England. St. Dominic, at first, only took the habit of the regular canons, that is, a black cassock, and rochet; but this he quited in 1219, for that which they now wear, which, it is pretended, was shewn by the blessed Virgin herself to the beatiiied Renaud d'Orleans. This order is diffused throughout the whole known world. It has forty-five provinces under the general, who resides at Rome; and twelve particular congregations, or reforms, governed by vicars-general. They reckon three popes of this order, above sixty cardinals, several patriarchs, a hundred and fifty archbishops, and about eight hundred bishops; beside masters of the sacred palace, whose office has been constantly discharged by a religious of this order, ever since St. Dominic, who held it under Honorius III. in 1218. The Dominicans are also inquisitors in many places. Of all the monastic orders, none enjoyed a higher degree of power and authority than the Dominican friars, whose credit was great and their influence universal. Nor will this appear surprising, when we consider that they filled very eminent stations in the church, presided every where over the terrible tribunal of the inquisition, and had the care of souls, with the function of confessors in all the courts of Europe, which circumstance, in those times of ignorance and superstition, manifestly tended to put most of the European princes in their power. But the measures they used, in order to maintain and extend their authority, were so perfidious and cruel, that their influence began tq decline towards the beginning of the sixteenth century. The tragic story of Jetzer, conducted at Bern in 1501), for determining the uninteresting dispute between them and the Franciscans, relating to the immaculate conception, will reflect indelible infamy on this order. They were indeed perpetually employed in stigmatizing with the opprobrious name of heresy numbers of learned and pious men; in encroaching upon the rights and properties of others, to augment their possessions; and in laying the most iniquitous snares and stratagems for the destruction of their adversaries. They were the principal counsellors, by whose instigation and advice LeoX. was determined to the public condemnation of Luther. The papal see never had more active and useful abettors than this order and that of the Jesuits. The dogmata of the Dominicans are usually opposite to those of the Franciscans. They concurred with the Jesuits in maintaining, that the sacraments have in themselves an instrumental and official powe". by virtue of which they work in the soul (independently of its previous preparation or propensities) a disposition to receive the divine grace; and this is what is commonly called the opus operatum of the sacraments. Thus, according to their doctrine, neither knowledge, wisdom, humility, faith, nor devotion, are necessary to the efficacy of the sacraments, whose victorious energy nothing but a mortal sin can resist.

After establishing this important order, St Dominic, who had deservedly become a favourite at the court of Home, was detained for several months to preach in that city and by his advice the pope created the new office, already mentioned, that of master of the sacred palace, who is by virtue of this office the pope’s domestic theologian or chaplain; and St. Dominic was appointed to it. It has ever since been held by one of his order. The rest of his history at Rome consists of his miracles, and may well be spared. In 1218 he took a journey from Rome through Languedoc into Spain, and founded two convents; thence he went in 1219 to Toulouse and Paris, at which last place he founded his convent in St. James’s-street, whence his order were called Jacobins, and inhabited a house since memorable in the history of the French revolution. After this, and the foundation of other convents, he arrived at Bologna, where he principally resided during the remainder of his life, which ended August 6, 1221. He was canonized by pope Gregory IX. in 1234.

Notwithstanding the severities they suffered, it appears that they had a very considerable number of churches, towards the close of the fourth century; and could number among them no less than 400 bishops; but at this time they began to decline, on account of a schism among themselves, occasioned by the election of two bishops, in the room of Parmenian, the successor of Donatus; one party elected Primian, and were called Primianists, and another Maximian, and were called Maximianists. The decline was also precipitated by the zealous opposition of St. Augustin, and by the violent measures which were pursued against them by order of the emperor Honorius, at the solicitation of two councils held at Carthage; the one in the year 404, and the other in the year 411. Many of them were fined, their bishops were banisiied, and some put to death. This sect revived and multiplied under the protection of the Vandals, who invaded Africa in the year 427, and took possession of this province but it sunk again under new severities, when their empire was overturned in the year 534. Nevertheless, they remained in a separate body till the close of the sixth century, when Gregory, the Roman pontiff, used various methods for suppressing them; and there are few traces to be found of the Donatists after this period. They were distinguished by other appellations; as Circumce/liones, Montenses, or mountaineers, Campites, Rupites, &c. They held three councils, or conciliabules; one at Cirta, in Numidia, and two at Carthage.

, a Bolognese artist, born in 1575, was called II Mastelletta, from his father’s trade, that of a pail-maker; and seems to have been born a painter. He was a pupil of the Caracci, but did not attend to their suggestions on the necessity of acquiring a competent foundation for drawing, and contrived to catch the eye by a more compendious method; surrounding a splendid centre by impenetrable darkness, which absorbed every trace of outline. It is probable that his success greatly contributed to encourage that set of painters distinguished by the name of Tenebrosi, shade-hunters, so numerous afterwards in the Venetian and Lombard schools. Donducci was distinguished, though not by correctness, by a great spirit of design, a sufficient imitation of Parmigiano, whom he exclusively admired, and a certain native facility which enabled him to colour the largest dimensions of canvas in a little time. He failed in his attempts at changing this manner, as he grew older and more impatient of the praise bestowed on an open style. Light, no longer supported by obscurity, served only to expose his weakness and the two miracles of S. Domenico, in the church of that saint, which had been considered as his master-pieces, became by alteration the meanest of his works. The same diversity of manner is observable in his smaller pictures; those of the first, such as the Miracle of the Manna, in the Spada palace, are as highly valuable as his landscapes, which in many galleries would be taken for works of the Caracci, were they not discriminated by that original shade that stamps the genuine style of Mastelletta. The time of his death is not ascertained.

Dr. Donne’s reputation as a poet, was higher in his own time than it has been since. Dryden fixed his character with his usual judgment; as “the greatest wit, though not the best poet of our nation.” He says afterwards , that “he affects the metaphysics, not only in his satires, but in his amorous verses, where Nature only should reign, and perplexes the minds of the fair sex with nice speculations of philosophy, when he should engage their hearts, and entertain them with the softnesses of love.” Dryden has also pronounced that if his satires were to be translated into numbers, they would yet be wanting in dignity of expression. From comparing the originals and translations in Pope’s works, the reader will probably think that Pope has made them so much his own, as to throw very little lighten Donne’s powers. He every where elevates the expression, and in very few instances retains a whole line. Pope, in his classification of poets, places Donne at the head of a school, that school from which Dr. Johnson has given so many remarkable specimens of absurdity, in his life of Covyley, and which, following Dryden, he terms the metaphysical school. Gray, in the sketch which he sent to Mr. Warton, considers it as a third Italian school, full of conceit, begun in queen Elizabeth’s reign, continued under James and Charles I. by Donne, Crashaw, Cleiveland, carried to its height by CowJey, and ending perhaps in Sprat. Donne’s numbers, if they may be so called, are certainly the most rugged and uncouth of any of our poets. He appears either to have had no ear, or to have been utterly regardless of harmony. Yet Spenser preceded him, and Drummond, the first polished versifier, was his contemporary; but it must be allowed that before Drummond appeared, Donne had relinquished his pursuit of the Muses, nor would it be just to include the whole of his poetry under the general censure which has been usually passed. Dr. Warton seems to think that if he had taken pains, he might not have proved so inferior to his contemporaries; but what inducement could he have to take pains, as he published nothing, and seems not desirous of public fame? He was certainly not ignorant or unskilled in the higher attributes of style, for he wrote elegantly in Latin, and displays considerable taste in some of his smaller pieces and epigrams. At what time he wrote his poems has not been ascertained; but of a few the dates may be recovered by the corresponding events of his life. Ben Jonson affirmed that he wrote all his best pieces before he was twenty-five years of age. His satires, in which there are some strokes levelled at the reformation, must have been written very early, as he was but a young man when he renounced the errors of popery. His poems were first published in 4to, 1633, and 12mo, 1635, 1651, 1669, and 1719. His son was the editor of the early editions.

, an ingenious botanist, and the author of some discoveries in the indigenous botany, was a native of Staffordshire, which he left to settle in London as an apothecary. He was chosen superintendant and demonstrator of the gardens at Chelsea, an office which he held some years before his death, which took place in 1706. In 1695 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and was the contemporary and friend of Ray, PluJkenet, and Sloane, who all bear testimony to his merit. As he lived in London, and there is reason to believe was in very considerable business, his excursions could not ordinarily extend far from that city; but in its neighbourhood, his diligence was beyond any other example. He struck out a new path in botany, by leading to the study of that tribe which comprehends the imperfect plants, now called the Cryptogamia class. In this branch he made the most numerous discoveries of any man in that age, and in the knowledge of it stood clearly unrivalled. The early editions of Ray’s Synopsis were much amplified by his labours; and he is represented by Mr. Ray, as a man of uncommon sagacity in discovering and discriminating plants in general. The learned successor of Tournefort, M. Jussieu, speaks of him as “inter Pharmacopceos Londinenses sui temporis Coryphaeus.” In truth he was the Dillenius of his time. There is a long list of rare plants, many of them new, and first discovered by Mr. Doody, published in the second edition of Ray’s Synopsis, accompanied with observations on other species. There is also “The case of a dropsy of the breast,” written by him, and printed in the Philosophical Transactions, in 1697, vol. XX. Some of his Mss. on medical and botanical subjects are in the British Museum.

, a physician, orator, and poet, born at Zigenrick in Voiglitland, died in 1631, in an advanced age, counsellor and physician to the princes of Brieg and Lignitz. He is the author of several works, which have been called learned fooleries. The most known of them are, 1. “Amplritheatrum sapientiae Socraticie,” Hanover, 1619, 2 vols. fol. 2. “Homo diabolus hocest: Auctorum veterum et recentiorum de calumnias natura et remediis, sua lingua editorum, sylloge” Frankfort, 1618, 4to 3. “De increment dominationis Turcicae,” &c.

, a reputed magician of Samaria, of the first century, who pretended to be the Messiah, is looked upon as the first heresiarch, but was more properly an enemy to Christianity. He applied to himself all the prophecies which are held by the church to regard Jesus Christ. He had in his train thirty disciples, as many as there are days in the month, and would not have any more. He admitted among them a woman whom he called the Moon. He observed the rite of circumcision, and fasted often. To gain belief that he was taken from the earth by an ascension into heaven, he retired into a cavern, where, far from the prying eyes of the world, he starved himself to death. The sect of the Dosithecans made great account of their chastity, and regarded with contempt the rest of mankind. A Uosithaean would not associate with any one who did not think and live like him. They had some singular practices, to which they were strongly attached: such as that of remaining for twenty-four hours in the same posture they happened to be in when the sabbath began, which they pretended to be founded upon the prohibition of working during the sabbath. In consequence of such practices the Dosithseans thought themselves superior to the most enlightened men, to the most virtuous citizens, to the most beneficent of men. This sect subsisted in jEgypt till some time in the sixth century, but ecclesiastical historians are much divided as to the history of Dosithoeus and his sect.

, a French Jesuit, a native of Vernon, who died at Orleans Sept. 21, 1716, filled several high offices belonging to his order, and was said to have been the author of the famous problem levelled at the cardinal de Noailles, “Whom are we to believe? M. de Noailles, archbishop of Paris, condemning the exposition of faith, or M. de Noailles, bishop of Chalons, approving the moral reflections?” alluding to an apparent change in Noailles* opinions of the disputes between the Jansenists and Jesuits. Doucin was a member of the club or cabal which the Jansenists called the Norman cabal, and which was composed of the Jesuits Tellier, Lallemand, and Daniel; and his zeal and activity were of great service to them. During the dispute on the famous bull Unigenitus, he was sent to Rome, and was a powerful advocate for that measure. He wrote a very curious piece of ecclesiastical history, entitled “Histoire de Nestorianisme,” Paris, 1698, 4to another, entitled “Histoire de I'Origenisme,” 4to, and “Memorial abrege touchant l'etat et les progres de Jansenistne en Hollande,” written in 1697, when he accompanied the count de Creci to the congress at Ryswick. He was also the author of many pamphlets of the controversial kind, strongly imbued with the spirit of party.

Bishop Douglas is styled by Mr. Warton, one “of the distinguished luminaries that marked the restoration of letters in Scotland, at the commencement of the sixteenth century, not only by a general eminence in elegant erudition, but by a cultivation of the vernacular poetry of his country.” He translated the Æneid of Virgil into Scottish heroics, with the additional thirteenth book by Mapheus Vegius, at the request of Henry, earl of Sinclair, to whom he was related. It was printed at London, in 1553, 4to, under the following title: “The XIII Bukes of Eneados of the fainose poete Virgill, translatet out of Latyne verses into Scottish metir, bi the reverend father in God, Mayster Gawin Douglas, bishop of Dunkel, and unkil to the erle of Angus every Buke having his perticular prologe.” “This translation,” says Mr. Warton, “is executed with equal spirit and fidelity and is a proof that the lowland Scotch and English languages were now nearly the same. I mean the style of composition; more especially in the glaring affectation of anglicising Latin words.” It certainly has great merit, though it was executed in the space of about sixteen months. It appears, that he had projected this translation so early as the year 1501, but did not complete it till about eleven years after. Besides this work, bishop Douglas also wrote an original poem, called *' The Palice of Honour,“which was printed at London, 1553, 4to, and Edinburgh, 1579, 4to. Mr. Warton observes of this poem, that” it is a moral vision written in 1501, planned on the design of the Tablet of Cebes, and imitated in the elegant Latin dialogue * De Tranquillitate Anitni' of his countryman Florence Wilson, or Florentius Volusenus. The object of this allegory is to show the instability and insufficiency of worldly pomp; and to prove, that a constant and undeviating habit of virtue is the only way to true honour and happiness. The allegory is illustrated by a variety of examples of illustrious personages; not only of those who by a regular perseverance in honourable deeds gained admittance into this splendid habitation, but of those who were excluded from it, by debasing the dignity of their eminent stations with a vicious and unmanly behaviour. It is addressed, as an apologue for the conduct of a king, to James the Fourth, is adorned with many pleasing incidents and adventures, and abounds with genius and learning." Both the editions which have been printed of this poem are extremely scarce.

He also wrote an allegorical poem, called “King Hart,” which was first published from an original manuscript by Mr. Pinkerton, in 1786, in his “Ancient Scotish Poems.” A new edition of bishop Douglas’s translation of Virgil was printed at Edinburgh, in 1710, in small folio, to which a large and valuable glossary was added by the celebrated printer Ruddiman, and a life of the author by the rev. John Sage, who acknowledges the assistance he had from bishop Nicolson, sir Robert Sibbald, Dr. Pitcairne, and Mr. Urry.

In the Easter term of this year he took his doctor’s degree, and was presented by lord Bath to the perpetual curacy of Kenley, in Shropshire. In 1759, he published “The Conduct of a late noble commander candidly considered,” as good a defence as the case would admit, of lord George Sackville. It was suggested solely by the attack so unfairly made on him by Ruff head, before it could possibly be known whether he deserved censure. No person was privy to Dr. Douglas’s being the author of this Defence, except his bookseller, Andrew Millar, to whom he made a present of the copy. In the same mouth he wrote and published, “A Letter to two great men on the approach of peace,” a pamphlet which excited great attention, and was generally attributed to lord Bath. In 1760 he wrote the preface to the translation of Hooke’s “Negociations in Scotland.” He was this year appointed one of his majesty’s chaplains. In 1761 he published his “Seasonable Hints from an honest man,” as an exposition of lord Bath’s sentiments. In November 1762, he was, through the interest of lord Bath, made canon of Windsor. In December of that year, on the day on which the preliminaries of peace were to be taken into consideration in parliament, he wrote a paper called “The Sentiments of a Frenchman,” which was printed on a sheet, pasted on the walls in every part of London, and distributed among the members of parliament, as they entered the house.

Dousa’s three other sons, George, Francis, and Theodore, were all of them men of learning, though not so eminent as Janus. George was a good linguist; travelled to Constantinople; and published a relation of his journey, with several inscriptions which he found there and elsewhere. Also, in 1607, he printed George Cedrenus’s book, entitled, “De originibus urbis Constantinopolitanae,” with Meursius’s notes. Francis was far from wanting learning: for in 1600 he published the epistles of Julius Caesar Scaliger; his annotations upon Aristotle’s history of Animals; and some fragments of Lucilius, with notes of his own upon them. Theodore, lord of Barkenstyen, published the “Chronicon” of George Logotheta with notes, in 1614; and in 1638 wrote a treatise, called “Farrago echoica variarum linguarum, variorumque auctorum,” &c.

, an English divine, the eldest son of Calybute Downing of Shennington, in Gloucestershire, gent, was born in 1606, and in 1623 became a commoner of Oriel college, Oxford, where he took one degree in arts. His master’s degree, according to Wood, he took at Cambridge, or abroad; after which, entering into orders, he held the vicarage of Hackney, near London, with the parsonage of Hickford, in Buckinghamshire. But these not being sufficient for his ambition, he stood in competition with Dr. Gilbert Sheldon for the wardenship of All -soul’s; and losing that, was a suitor to be chaplain to the earl of Strafford, lord lieutenant of Ireland, thinking that road might lead to a bishopric. But failing there also, he joined the parliament party, and became a great promoter of their designs; and in a sermon preached before the artillery-company, Sept. 1, 1640, delivered this doctrine: “That for the defence of religion, and reformation of the church, it was lawful to take up arms against the king” but fearing to be called in question for this assertion, he retired to the house of Robert earl of Warwick, at Little Lees, in Essex. After this he became chaplain to the lord Robert’s regiment, and in 1643 was one of the assembly of divines; but died in the midst of his career, in 1644. He has some political discourses and sermons in print, enumerated by Wood. He was father of sir George Downing, made by king Charles II. secretary to the treasury, and one of the commissioners for the customs.

, a celebrated enthusiast, was born about 1587, at Straiisiiitz, in Moravia, where his father was burgomaster. He was admitted minister in 1616, and exercised his function at Drakotutz; and when he was obliged to seek a retreat in foreign countries, on account of the severe edicts of the emperor against the protestant religion, he retired to Leidnitz, a town in Hungary, in 1629. Having no hopes of being restored to his church, he turned woollen-draper; in which occupation his wife, who was the daughter of one, was of great service to him. Afterwards he forgot the decorum of his former character so much, that he decame a hard drinker; and the other ministers, justly scandalized at his conduct, informed their superiors of it, who, in a synod called in Poland, examined into the affair, and resolved that Drabicius should be suspended from the ministry, if he did not live in a more edifying manner. This obliged him to behave himself with more decency, in public at least.

His success in this expedition, joined to his honourable behaviour towards his owners, gained him high reputation, which was increased by the use he made of his riches. For, fitting out three stout frigates at his own expence, he sailed with them into Ireland, where, under Walter earl of Essex, the father of the famous unfortunate earl, he served as a volunteer, and performed many gallant exploits. After the death of his noble patron, he returned into England; where sir Christopher Hatton, vice-chamberlain to queen Elizabeth, and privy-counsellor, introduced him to her majesty, and procured him countenance and protection at court. By this means he acquired a capacity of undertaking that grand expedition, which will render his name immortal. The first thing he proposed was a voyage into the South-seas, through the Straits of Magellan, which hitherto no Englishman had ever attempted. The project was well received at court; the queen furnished him with means; and his own fame quickly drew together a force sufficient. The fleet with which he sailed on this extraordinary undertaking, consisted only of five small vessels, compared with modern ships, and no more than 164 able men. He sailed from England, Dec. 13, 1577; on the 25th fell in with the coast of Barbary, and on the 29th with Cape Verd. March 13, he passed the equinoctial, made the coast of Brazil April 5, 1578, and entered the river de la Plata, where he lost the company of two of his ships; but meeting them again, and taking out their provisions, he turned them adrift. May 29, he entered the port of St. Julian, where he continued two months, for the sake of laying in provisions; Aug. 20> he entered the Straits of Magellan; and Sept. 25 passed them, having then only his own ship. Nov. 25, he came to Machao, which he had appointed for a place of rendezvous, in case his ships separated: but captain Winter, his vice-admiral, having repassed the Straits, was returned to England. Thence he continued his voyage along the coasts of Chili and Peru, taking all opportunities of seizing Spanish ships, and attacking them on shore, till his crew were sated with plunder; and then coasting North-America to the height of 48 degrees, he endeavoured, but in vain, to find a passage back into our seas on that side. He landed, however, and called the country New Albion, taking possession of it in the name and for the use of queen Elizabeth; and, having careened his ship, set sail from thence Sept. 29, 1579, for the Moluccas. He is supposed to have chosen this passage round, partly to avoid being attacked by the Spaniards at a disadvantage, and partly from the lateness of the season, when dangerous storms and hurricanes were to be apprehended. Oct. 13, he fell in with certain islands, inhabited by the most barbarous people he had met with in all his voyage; and, Nov. 4, he had sight of the Moluccas, and, coming to Ternate, was extremely well received by the king thereof, who appears, from the most authentic relations of this voyage, to have been a wise and polite prince. Dec. 10, he made Celebes, where his ship unfortunately ran upon a rock Jan. 9th following; from which, beyond all expectation, and in a manner miraculously, they got off, and continued their course. March 16, he arrived at Java Major, and from thence intended to have directed his course to Malacca; but founrf himself obliged to alter his purpose, and to think of returning home. March 25, 1580, he put this design in execution; and June 15, doubled the cape of Good Hope, having then on board 57 men, and but three casks of water. July 12, he passed the Line, reached the coast of Guinea the 16th, and there watered. Sept. 11, he made the island of Tercera; and Nov. 3, entered the harbour of Plymouth. This voyage round the globe was performed in two years and about ten months. His success in this voyage, and the immense mass of wealth he brought home, raised much discourse throughout the kingdom; some highly commending-, and some as loudly decrying him. The former alleged, that his exploit >vas not only honourable to himself, but to his country that it would establish our reputation for maritime skill in foreign nations, and raise an useful spirit of emulation at home; and that, as to the money, our merchants having suffered much from the faithless practices of the Spaniards, there was nothing more just, than that the nation should receive the benefit of Drake’s reprisals. The other party alleged, that in fact he was no better than a pirate; that, of all others, it least became a trading nation to encourage such practices; that it was not only a direct breach of all our late treaties with Spain, but likewise of our old leagues with the house of Burgundy; and that the consequences would be much more fatal than the benefits reaped from it could be advantageous. This difference of opinion continued during the remainder of 1580, and the spring of the succeeding year; but at length justice was done to Drake’s services; for, April 4, 1581, her majesty, going to Deptford, went on board his ship; where, after dinner, she conferred on him the honour of knighthood, and declared her absolute approbation of all he had done. She likewise gave directions for the preservation of his ship, that it might remain a monument of his own and his country’s glory. Camden, in his Britannia, has taken notice of an extraordinary circumstance relating to this ship of Drake’s, where, speaking of the shire of Buchan, in Scotland, he says, “It is hardly worth while to mention the clayks, a sort of geese, which are believed by some with great admiration, to grow upon trees on this coast, and in other places, and when they are ripe, they fall down into the sea, because neither their nests nor eggs can any where be found. But they who saw the ship in which sir Francis Drake sailed round the world, when it was laid up in the river Thames, could testify that little birds breed in the old rotten keels of ships, since a great number of such, without life and feathers, stuck close to the outside of the keel of that ship.” This celebrated ship, which had been contemplated many years at Deptford, at length decaying, it was broke p; and a chair made out of the planks was presented to the* university of Oxford. In 1585 he sailed with a fleet to the West Indies, and took the cities of St. Jago, St. Domingo, Carthagena, and St. Augustin. In 1587 he went to Lisbon with a fleet of 30 sail; and, having intelligence of a great fleet assembled in the bay of Cadiz, which was to have made part of the armada, he with great courage entered that port, and burnt there upwards of 10,000 tons of shipping: which he afterwards merrily called, “burning the king of Spain’s beard.” In 1558, when the armada from Spain was approaching our coasts, he was appointed vice-admiral under Charles lord Howard of Efringham, high-admiral of England, where fortune favoured him as remarkably as ever: for he made prize of a very large galleon, commanded by don Pedro de Valdez, who was reputed the projector of this invasion. This affair happened in the following manner July 22, sir Francis, observing a great Spanish ship floating at a distance from both fleets, sent his pinnace to summon the commander to yield. Valdez replied, with much Spanish solemnity, that they were 450 strong, that he himself was don Pedro, and stood much upon his honour, and propounded several conditions, upon which he was willing to yield: but the vice-admiral replied, that he had no leisure to parley, but if he thought fit instantly to yield he might; if not, he should soon find that Drake was no coward. Pedro, hearing the name of Drake, immediately yielded, and with 46 of his attendants came aboard Drake’s ship. This don Pedro remained above two years his prisoner in England; and, when he was released, paid him. for his own and his captain’s liberties, a ransom of 3500l. Drake’s soldiers were well recompensed with the plunder of this ship: for they found in it 55,000 ducats of gold, which was divided among them.

Besides the performances already mentioned, he made an English translation of Herodotus, which was never published. He wrote a comedy called “The Sham- Lawyer, or the Lucky Extravagant” which was acted at the theatre royal in 1697. It is chiefly borrowed from two of Fletcher’s plays, namely, “The Spanish Curate,” and “Wit without Money.” He was the editor of Historia Anglo-Scotica, 1703, 8vo, which was burnt by the hands of the hangman at Edinburgh: in the dedication he says, that, “upon a diligent revisal, in order, if possible, to discover the name of the author, and the age of his writing, he found, that it was written in, or at least not finished till, the time of king Charles I.” But he says nothing more ol? the ms. nor how it came into his hands. But whatever merit there might be in his political writings, or however they might distinguish him in his life-time, he is chiefly known now by his medical works: by his new “System of Anatomy” particularly, which was finished a little before his decease, and published in 1707, with a preface by W. Wagstaffe, M. D. reader of anatomy at Surgeons’-hall. Dr. Wagstaffe tells us, that Drake “eminently excelled in giving the rationale of tilings, and inquiring into the nature and causes of phsenomena. He does not,” says he, “behave himself like a mere describer of the parts, but like an unprejudiced inquirer into nature, and an absolute master of his profession. And if Dr. Lower has been so much and so deservedly esteemed for his solution of the systole of the heart, Dr. Drake, by accounting for the diastole, ought certainly to be allowed his share of reputation, and to be admitted as a partner of his glory.” A second edition of this work was published in 1717, in 2 vols. 8vo; and an appendix in 1728, 8vo, which is usually bound np with the second volume. The plates, which are very numerous, are accurately drawn, and well engraved. Some of them are taken from Swammerdam. Dr. Drake added notes to the English translation of Le Clerc’s “History of Physic,” printed in 1699, tfvo; and there is also, in the Philosophical Transactions, a discourse of his concerning some influence of respiration on the motion of the heart hitherto unobserved. The “Memorial of the Church of England,” &c. was reprinted in 8vo, in 1711 to which is added, an introductory preface, containing the life and death of the author; from which this present account is chiefly drawn.

, an English divine and poet, of the sixteenth century, was educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took his degree of bachelor in divinity in 1569. The same year he was admitted to the prebend of Firles in the cathedral of Chichester, June 27, and on July 2 to that of Chamberlaynward in St. Paul’s, and March 9 following, he was installed archdeacon of Lewes. He seems to have been chaplain to Grindall, when archbishop of York. He was a tolerable Latin poet, and translated the Ecclesiastes into Latin hexameters, 1572, 4to, and published two miscellanies of Latin poetry, the one entitled “Sylva,” and the other “Poemata varia et externa,” the last printed at Paris. In the “Sylva,” he mentions his new version of David’s psalms, which Wartou supposes to have been in English, and says, he had begun to translate the Iliad, but had gone no further than the fourth book. In 1566 he published what he called “A medicinable Morall, that is, the two bookes of Horace his satyres Englished, according to the prescription of St. Hierome,” &c. Lond. and in the following year appeared “Horace, his arte of Poetrie, Pistles, and Satyrs Englished.” This version, which Drant undertook in the character of a grave divine, and as a teacher of morality, is very paraphrastic, and sometimes parodical. His other publications are, 1. “Gregory Nazianzen his Epigrams and spiritual sentences,” 1568, 8vo. 2. “Shaklocki, epigrammatis in mortem Cuthberti Scoti, apomaxis,” Lond. 1565, 4to which occurs in Herbert’s Antiquities under the title “An Epygrame of the death of Cuthberte Skotte some tyme beshoppe of Chester, by Roger Shacklocke, and replyed against by Thomas Drant.” 3. “Thomae Drantae Angli, Advordingamiae Praesul,” 1575, 4to. These two last are in the British Museum. 4. “Three godly and learned Sermons, very necessary to be read and regarded of all men,” 1584, 8vo. Extracts from these are given in the Bibliographer. The time of his death is no where mentioned, but as the archdeaconry of Lewes was vacant in 1578, it might have been in consequence of that event.

, minister of the Calvinist church of Paris, was born July 1595, at Sedan; where his father had a considerable post. He passed through the study of polite literature and divinity at Sedan, but was sent to Saumur, to go through a course of philosophy there under professor Duncan. He was admitted minister in 1618, and discharged his function near Langres, till he was called by the church of Paris in 1620. He had all the qualifications requisite to a great minister. His sermons were very edifying; he was assiduous and successful in comforting the sick; and he managed the atTairs of the church with such skill, that he never failed of being consulted upon every important occasion. His first essay was a “Treatise of Preparation for the Lord’s Supper.” This, and his “Catechism,” the “Short View of Controversies,” and “Consolations against the fears of Death,” have, of all his works, been the most frequently reprinted. Some of them, his book upon death in particular, have passed through above forty editions; and have been translated into several languages, as German, Dutch, Italian, and English. His “Charitable Visits,” in 5 volumes, have served for a continual consolation to private persons, and for a source of materials and models to ministers. He published three volumes of sermons, in which, as in all the forementioned pieces, there is a vein of piety very affecting to religious minds. His controversial works are 1. “The Jubilee” 2. “The Roman Combat” 3. “The Jesuit’s Owl” 4. “An Answer to father Coussin” 5. “Disputes with the bishop of Bellai, concerning the honour due to the Holy Virgin” 6. “An answer to La Milletierre” 7. “Dialogues, against the Missionaries,” in several volumes 8. “The False Pastor Convicted,” 9. ; 'The False Face of Antiquity;“10.” The Pretended Nullities of the Reformation;“11.” An Answer to prince Ernest of Hesse;“12.” An Answer to the speech of the clergy spoken by the archbishop of Sens;“13.” A Defence of Calvin." He wrote some letters, which have been printed; one to the duchess of Tremouille, upon her husband’s departure from the protestant religion; one of consolation, addressed to Madam de la Tabariere; one upon the restoration of Charles II. king of Great Britain; some upon the English episcopacy, &c. He published also certain prayers, some of which were made for the king, others for the queen, and others for the dauphin. Bayle tells us, that what he wrote against the church of Rome, confirmed the protestants more than can be expressed; for with the arms with which he furnished them, such as wanted the advantage of learning, were enabled to oppose the monks and parish priests, and to contend with the missionaries. His writings made him considered as the scourge of the papists; yet, like mons. Claude, he was much esteemed, and even beloved by them. For it was well known that he had an easy access to the secretaries of state, the first president, the king’s advocate, and the civil lieutenant; though he never made any other use of his interest with them than to assist the afflicted churches. He was highly esteemed by the great persons of his own religion; by the duke de la Force, the marshals Chatillon, Gascon, Turenne, and by the duchess of Tremouille. They sent for him to their palaces, and honoured him from time to time with their visits. Foreign princes and noblemen, the ambassadors of England and France, did the same; and he was particularly esteemed by the house of Hesse, as appears from the books he dedicated to the princes and princesses of that name. He died Nov. 3, 1669.

, was born on the 24th of December, 1680, in a small cabin near the present corner of Walnut and Second Streets in the city of Philadelphia. His parents came from a place called Beverly, in Massachusetts Bay. The banks of the Delaware, on which the city of Philadelphia now stands, were inhabited, at the time of his birth, by Indians, and a few Swedes and Hollanders. He often talked to his companions of picking wortleberries, and catching rabbits, on spots now the most populous and improved of the city. He recollected the second time William Penn came to Pennsylvania, and used to point to the place where the cabin stood, in which he and his friends that accompanied him were accommodated upon their arrival. At twelve years of age he went to Boston, where he served an apprenticeship to a cabinetmaker. In the year 1745 he returned to Philadelphia with his family, where he lived till the time of his death. He was four times married, and had eighteen children, all of whom were by his first wife. At one time of his life he sat down at his own table with fourteen children. Not long before his death he heard of the birth of a grand-child to one of his grand-children, the fifth in succession from himself.

The subject of this article was remarkably sober and temperate. Neither hard labour, nor company, nor the usual afflictions of human life, nor the wastes of nature, ever led him to an improper or excessive use of strong drink. For the last twenty-five years of his life he drank twice every day a draught of toddy, made with two tablespoons-full of spirit, in half a pint of water. His son, a man of fifty-nine years of age, said he had never seen him intoxicated. The time and manner in which he used spirituous liquors, perhaps, contributed to lighten the weight of his years, and probably to prolong his life. He enjoyed an uncommon share of health, insomuch that in the course of his long life he was never confined more than three days to his bed. He often declared that he had no idea of that most distressing- pain called the head-ach. His sleep was interrupted a little in the last years of his life with a defluxion in his breast, which produced what is commonly called the old man’s cough.

During the civil war, his attachment to the king and church induced him to write many pieces in support of the establishment, which involved him with the revolutionary party, who not only called him to a severe account, but compelled him to furnish his quota of men and arms to fight against the cause which he espoused. It is said that "his estate lying in three different counties, he had not occasion to send one whole man, but halves and quarters, and such-like fractions; upon which he wrote extempore the following verses to his majesty:

, a celebrated monk in the abbey of Corby, in the ninth century, was born in Aquitaine, and afterwards taught in the monasteries of Stavelo and Malmedy, in the diocese of Leige. He was very learned for the age he lived in, and left a commentary on St. Matthew, Strasburg, 1514; or Haguenau, 1530, fol. and in the library of the fathers, which contained some opinions respecting transubstantiation that were favourable to the protestant faith. The second edition is scarce, but the first much more so. At the end of each is part of a Commentary on St. Luke and St. John, which he did not finish. The scarcity of his work may be accounted for from its being suppressed, in consequence of his opinions on transubstantiation. Dupin says that his commentaries are short, historical, easy, and without allegories or tropes; and adds, that Druthmar was called the Grammarian, on account of his skill in the languages, particularly Greek and Latin, which he always interpreted literally.

In 1671 he was publicly ridiculed on the stage under the character of Bays, in the duke of Buckingham’s famous comedy called the “Rehearsal.” The character of Bays, as we are told ia the key printed with that satirical performance in 17 '55, was originally intended for sir Robert Howard, under the name of Bilboa: but a stop being put to the representation by the breaking out of the plague in 1665, it was laid by for several years, and not exhibited on the stage till Dec. 7, 1671. During this interval, Dryden being advanced to the laurel, the noble author changed the name of his poet from Bilboa to Bays; and made great alterations in his play, in order to ridicule several dramatic performances, which had appeared since the first writing of it, and particularly some of Dry den’s. he affected to despise the satire, as appears from his dedication of the translation of Juvenal and Persius; where, speaking of the many lampoons and libels that had been written against him, he says: “I answered not the Rehearsal, because I knew the author sat to himself, when he drew the picture, and was the very Bayes of his own farce; because also I knew, that my betters were more concerned, than I was, in that satire; and lastly, because Mr. Smith and Mr. Johnson, the main pillars of it, were two such languishing gentlemen in their conversation, that I could liken them to nothing but their own relations, those noble characters of men of wit and pleasure about town.” Insensible, however, as he affected to be, he did not fail to take a full revenge on its author, under the character of Zimri, in his “Absalom and Achitophel.”

In 1673, his tragi-comedies, entitled the “Conquest of Granada” by the Spaniards, in two parts, were attacked by Richard Leigh, a player belonging to the duke of York’s theatre, in a pamphlet called “A Censure of the Rota,” &c. which occasioned several other pamphlets to be written. Elkanah Settle likewise criticised these plays; and it is remarkable that Settle, though in reality a mean and inconsiderable poet, was the mighty rival of Dryden, and for many years bore his reputation above him. To the first part of the “Conquest of Granada,” Dryden prefixed an essay on Heroic Plays, and subjoined to the second a Defence of the Epilogue; or, an essay on the dramatic poetry of the last age. In 1679 was published an “Essay on Satire,” written jointly by the earl of Mulgrave and Dryden. This piece, which was handed about in ms. contained severe reflections on the duchess of Portsmouth and the earl of Rochester; and they, suspecting Dryden to be the author of it, hired three men to cudgel him; who, as Wood relates, effected their business as he was returning from Will’s coffee-house through Rose-street, Covent-gardeu, to his own house in Gerrard-street, Soho, at eight o'clock at night, on the 16th of December, 1679. In 1680 came out an English translation in verse of Ovid’s epistles by several hands two of which, viz. Canace to Macareus, and Dido to Æneas, were translated by Dryden, who also wrote the general preface and the epistle of Helen to Paris by Dryden and the earl of Mulgrave.

The same year, 1681, he published his Medal, a satire against sedition. This poem was occasioned by the striking of a medal, on account of the indictment against the earl of Shaftesbury for high-treason being found ignoramus by the grand jury at the Old Bailey, November 1611, for which the whig-party made great rejoicings by ringing of bells, bonfires, &c. in all parts of London. The whole poem is a severe invective against the earl of Shaftesbury and the whigs to whom the author addresses himself, ina satirical epistle prefixed to it, thus “I have one favour to desire of you at parting, that, when you think of answering this poem, you would employ the same pens against it, who have combated with so much success against Absalom and Achitophel; for then you may assure yourselves of a clear victory without the least reply. Rail at me abundantly; and, not to break a custom, do it without wit. If God has not blessed you with the talent of rhyming, make use of my poor stock and welcome: let your verses run upon my feet; and for the utmost refuge of notorious blockheads, reduced to the last extremity of sense, turn my own lines upon me, and, in utter despair of your own satire, make me satirize myself.” Settle wrote an answer to this poem, entitled “The Medal reversed;” and is erroneously said to have written a poem called “Azariah and Hushal,” against “Absalom and Achitophel.” This last was the production of one Pordage, a dramatic writer. In 1682, Dryden published a poem, called “Religio Laici; or, the Layman’s Faith.” This piece is intended as a defence of revealed religion, and of the excellency and authority of the scriptures, as the only rule of faith and manners, against deists, papists, and presbyterians. The author tells us in the preface, that it was written for an ingenious young gentleman, his friend, upon his translation of father Simon’s “Critical History of the Old Testament.” In October of this year, he also published his Mac Flecnoe, an exquisite satire against the poet Shad well.

His tragedy of the “Duke of Guise,” much altered, with the assistance of Lee, appeared again in 168S, dedicated to Lawrence earl of Rochester, and gave great offence to the whigs. It was attacked in a pamphlet, entitled “A Defence of the charter and municipal rights of the city of London, and the rights of other municipal cities and towns of England. Directed to the citizens of London. By Thomas Hunt.” In this piece, Dryden is charged with condemning the charter of the city of London, and executing its magistrates in effigy, in his “Duke of Guise;” frequently acted and applauded, says Hunt, and intended most certainly to provoke the rahhle into tumults and disorders. Hunt then makes several remarks upon the design of the play, and asserts, that our poet’s purpose was to corrupt the manners of the nation, and lay waste their morals; to extinguish the little remains of virtue among us by bold impieties, to confound virtue and vice, good and evil, and to leave us without consciences. About the same time were printed also “Some Reflections upon the pretended Parallel in the play called The Duke of Guise” the author of which pamphlet tells us, that he was wearied with the dulness of this play, and extremely incensed at the wicked and barbarous design it was intended for; that the fiercest tories were ashamed of it; and, in short, that he never saw any thing that could be called a play, more deficient in wit, good character, and entertainment, than this. In answer to this and Hunt’s pamphlet, Dryden published “The Vindication: or, The Parallel of the French holy league and the English league and covenant, turned into a seditious libel against the king and his royal highness, by Thomas Hunt and the author of the Reflections, &c.” In this Vindication, which is printed at the end of the play, he tells us that in the year of the restoration, the first play he undertook was the “Duke of Guise,” as the fairest way which the act of indemnity had then left of setting forth the rise of the late rebellion; that at first it was thrown aside by the advice of some friends, who thought it not perfect enough to be published; but that, at the earnest request of Mr. Lee, it was afterwards produced between them; and that only the first scene, the whole fourth act, and somewhat more than half the fifth, belonged to him, all the rest being Mr. Lee’s. He acquaints us also occasionally, that Mr. Thomas Shadwell, the poet, made the rough draught of this pamphlet against him, and that Mr. Hunt finished it.

Dr. Johnson conceived, that no description of Dryden’s person had been transmitted to us but, on the contrary, there are few English poets, of whose external appearance more particulars have been recorded. We have not indeed any original whole-length portrait of him, such as that very curious delineation of Pope, with which we have been lately gratified, whence a more perfect notion of that poet’s external appearance may be obtained than from all the friendly drawings of Richardson; yet from various descriptions of Dryden’s person that have come down to us, a very adequate idea of it may be formed. He was certainly a short, fat, florid man, “corpore quadrato,” as lord Hailes some years ago observed to Mr. Malone, “a description which ^neas Sylvius applied to James the First of Scotland” The same gentleman remarked, that that at one time he wore his hair in large quantity, and that it inclined to gray, even before his misfortunes; a circumstance which, he said, he had learned from a portrait of Dry den, painted by Kneller, formerly in the possession of the late Mr. James West. But perhaps his lordship here is not quite accurate. By “before his misfortunes” was meant before the Revolution; but the portrait in question was probably painted at a later period. From other documents, however, it appears that he became gray before he was deprived of the laurel. In Riley’s portrait, painted in 1683, he wears a very large wig: so also in that by Closterman, done at a late period. By Tom Brown he is always called “little Bayes,” and by Rochester, when he quarrelled with, and wished to depreciate him, he was nick-named “poet Squab.” The earliest portrait of Dryden hitherto discovered is that in the picture gallery, Oxford, but the painter is not known. It is engraved in Mr. Malone’s Life.

, one of the martyrs to the cause of the protestant religion in France, in the sixteenth century, was a native of Auvergne, sou to Stephen du Bourg, comptroller general of the customs in Languedoc, and brother to Anthony du Bourg, president of the parliament of Paris, and afterwards chancellor of France. He was born in 1521, designed for the church, and ordained priest; but embracing the protestant religion, was honoured with the crown of martyrdom. He was a man of great learning, especially in the law, which he taught at Orleans with much reputation, and was appointed counsellor-clerk to the parliament of Paris in October 1557. In this high station, he declared himself the protector of the protestants, and endeavoured either to prevent or soften the punishments inflicted upon them. This alarmed some of Henry II.'s counsellors, who advised that monarch to get rid of the protestants, and told him that he should begin by punishing those judges who secretly favoured them, or others who employed their credit and recommendations to screen them from punishment. They likewise suggested that the king should make his appearance unexpectedly in the parliament which was to be assembled on the subject of the Mercurials, or Checks, a kind of board of censure against the magistrates instituted by Charles VIII. and called Mercurials from the day on which they were to be held (Wednesday). The king accordingly came to parliament in June 1559, when Du Bourg spoke with great freedom in his defence, and went so far as to attack the licentious manners of the court; on which the king ordered him to be arrested. On the 19th he was tried, and declared a heretic by the bishop of Paris, ordered to be degraded from the character of priest, and to be delivered into the hand of the secular power; but the king’s death, in July, delayed the execution until December, *vhen he was again condemned by the bishop of Paris, and the archbishop of Lyons, his appeals being rejected by the parliament. Frederick, elector Palatine, and other protestant princes of Germany, solicited his pardon, and probably might have succeeded, had it not been for the assassination, at this time, of the president M in art, whom Du Bourg had challenged on his trial; and it was not therefore difficult, however unjust, to persuade his persecutors that he had a hand in this assassination. He was accordingly hanged, and his body burnt Dec. 2O, 1559; leaving behind him the character of a pious and learned man, an upright magistrate, and a steady friend. At his execution he avowed his principles with great spirit; and the popish biographers are forced to allow that the firmness and constancy shown by him and others, about the same time, tended only to “make new heretics, instead of intimidating the old.”

, an eminent antiquary and medailist, was born in 1721 at Housseau, in the canton of Soleure in Switzerland, whence, at nine years of age, he was sent to Denmark, and entered soon after as a student in the university of Copenhagen. Having completed his stud'es in that seminary, he repaired to France, which he considered from that moment as his adopted country, and entered into a Swiss regiment, in the service of it. In his military capacity his conduct was such as to merit and receive the esteem of his superior officers. At the battle of Fontenoy, he received two musket-shots, but still remained in his station, and could not be prevailed upon to leave the field of action, until his leg and part of his thigh had been carried off by a cannon-ball. Being thus rendered unfit for service, he was obliged to take refuge in the hospital for invalids, where he first resolved to extend his knowledge by cultivating foreign languages. After an obstinate pursuit of his object, which occupied all his thoughts, and occasioned several journies among the northern nations, expressly for the purpose of acquiring proficiency in this favourite study, he arrived at such a degree of eminence, as justly to merit the office of interpreter to the royal library for the English, Dutch, German, and Flemish, as well as the Swedish, Danish, and Russian languages. He fulfilled the duties of this important station with so much probity and exactness, that the council of the admiralty appointed him to occupy the same functions in the maritime department; and, during the thirtytwo years in which he filled this office, he gave repeated proofs of his integrity and disinterestedness. Possessing a mind equally unclouded by ambition and the love of pleasure, he employed all his leisure hours in the study of coins and medals, in which he acquired great proficiency. He began with considering and collecting such as had been struck during sieges, and in times of necessity; a pursuit analogous to his taste, and to the profession to which his early life had been devoted. Having completed this task, he undertook to form and to publish a more complete collection of the different species of money struck by the barons of France, than any that had hitherto appeared. In this, which may be called a national work, not content with consulting all the authors who had treated on the subject, he also searched a number of different cabinets, on purpose to verify the original pieces, and to satisfy himself as to their existence and authenticity. But while occupied in drawing up an account of the coins of the first, second, and third race of the kings of France, he was snatched from his favourite avocations by the hand of death, Nov. 19, 1782, when his family were left to mourn the loss of a good husband and father, society to regret an estimable and a modest man, and the sciences to lament an able and an indefatigable investigator. In 1790, the works he had finished were published in a splendid form in 3 vols, imperial 4to, with many plates, at Paris, under the title, “The Works of the late Mr. P. A. T. Duby, &c.” containing in vol. I. a general collection of pieces struck during sieges, or in times of necessity; and in vols. II. and III. a treatise on the money coined by the peers, bishops, abbots, &c. of France. The coins in these volumes are admirably executed, and the whole is a strong proof of the author’s skill in antiquities and general knowledge of every branch connected with his subject.

, a French ecclesiastic of the eighteenth century, was a priest of the diocese of Rouen, and vicar of St. Lawrence in that city, where his talents and religious conduct being conspicuous, notwithstanding his modesty, he was appointed to the curacy of Trouville in Caux, which he would have declined, had not the lord of that parish, and the curate of St. Lawrence, represented to him the great need there was of a diligent and well-informed ecclesiastic in that situation, not only to recover the inhabitants from their extreme ignorance of religion, but to inspire the neighbouring curates with a disposition for employing their time to the advantage of their flocks. M. le Due succeeded in these respects beyond expectation; but, after having done all the good he could in his cure, which he called his mission, left it to the great regret of his parishioners, and went to Paris, where he was obliged to accept the vicarship of St. Paul, out of respect to M. Gueret, who succeeded M. Bourret, and had drawn him to that parish. In this situation he laboured with good success during fifteen years, but being interdicted by M. de Vintimelle, 1731, on account of his opposition to some of the decrees of the church, he retired to the parish of St. Severin, and there died, May 3, 1744. An abridgment of his life appeared in 1745, at Paris, 12mo, in which the following works are attributed to him: “L‘Anne’e Ecclesiastique,” 15 vols. 12mo; an “Imitation, with Reflexions, Exercises, and Prayers,” 12mo; a translation of cardinal Bona’s “Way to Heaven, and shortest Way to go to God,” 12mo; the translation of several hymns in the Paris Breviary and part of the translation of M. de Thou, 16 vols. 4to.

, was an artist who flourished in the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries, but in what school he was educated is uncertain. Sigismondo Tizio, of Castiglione, who lived at Siena from 1482 to 1528, in his histories, speaks of him as the first artist of his time, (1311), and makes him a pupil of Segna, a name as celebrated once as now obscure. The works of Duccio are from 1275, the year in which he received a commission for S. Maria Novella at Florence, to 1311, the period at which he was employed in the cathedral of Siena, to paint the principal altar-piece, a work that still exists, which marks probably an epoch of art, at which he laboured three years, and for which he was paid upward of 3000 scudi d'oro, the expence of gilding and ultramarine included. That part of it which faced the audience, represented in large figures the Madonna and various saints; that which fronted the choir, divided into many compartments, exhibited numerous compositions of gospel subjects in figures of small proportions: it cannot be denied, that with all its copiousness, the whole savours strongly of the Greek manner. Duccio is celebrated as the restorer of that inlaid kind of Mosaic, called “lavoro di commesso,” which composes the floor of the dome of Siena.

In 1733 the queen made him one of the yeomen of the guards, from which situation, by a singular, and, we think, absurd transition, he was admitted into orders, and preferred to the living of Byfleet in Surrey. The only qualification for this office which his biographers mention, is a small knowledge of Latin, not enough surely to justify such an abuse of church patronage. Before this he was appointed keeper of the queen’s select library at Richmond, called Merlin’s Cave, where he had apartments, which were continued to his daughter after his decease. Here and at Byfleet he continued for many years to make poems and sermons, and was much followed by the people as a preacher; till, falling at length into a low-spirited melancholy way, he flung himself into the Thames from a bridge near Reading, or, as some say, into a trout stream, which is near Reading, and was drowned. This unhappy accident, for he was perfectly lunatic, befell him some time in March or April, 1756. In the preface to his poems he makes his acknowledgments to some gentleman who “first took notice of him in the midst of poverty and labour.” What those gentlemen did was highly generous and praise-worthy, and it was but gratitude in Stephen to acknowledge it yet it is more than probable, that if he had been suffered to pass the remainder of his lite, after he had spent so much of it, in poverty and labour, he had lived and died more happily. It was thought that his melancholy proceeded from a notion that he had not been sufficiently provided for, and if so, his injudicious patrons must have flattered him into a very false estimate of his merit. Warton says that Spence, who wrote Duck’s life and published his poems, was the means of his obtaining the living of Byfleet; and such was the taste of the courtiers of queen Caroline, that they actually wished to set up this poor versifier as a rival to Pope. But although, to use Warburton’s sarcastic language, “queen Caroline, who moderated, as a sovereign, between the two great philosophers, Clarke and Leibnitz, in the most sublime points in metaphysics and natural philosophy, chose this man for her favourite poet,” it was beneath such a man as Spence to persuade poor Duck that he merited the higher rewards of genius. Few men, if we may judge from his works, had ever less pretensions.

, son of John duke of Northumberland, afterwards baron L‘Isle, and earl of Warwick, was born about 1530, and carefully educated in his father’s family. He attended his father into Norfolk against the rebels in 1549, and, for his distinguished courage, obtained, as is probable, the honour of knighthood. He was always very high in king Edward’s favour: afterwards, being concerned in the cause of lady Jane, he was attainted, received sentence of death, and remained a prisoner till Oct. the 18th, 1554; when he was discharged, and pardoned for life. In 1557, in company with both his brothers, Robert and Henry, he engaged in an expedition to the Low Countries, and joined the Spanish army that lay then before St. Q.uintin’s. He had his share in the famous victory over the French, who came to the relief of that place; but had the misfortune to lose there his youngest brother Henry, who was a person of great hopes, and had been a singular favourite with king Edward. This matter was so represented to queen Mary, that, in consideration oftheir faithful services, she restored the whole family in blood and accordingly an act passed this year for that purpose. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he became immediately one of the most distinguished persons at her court; and was called, as in the days of her brother, lord Ambrose Dudley. He was afterwards created first baron L’Isle, and then earl of Warwick. He was advanced to several high places, and distinguished by numerous honours; and we find him in all the great and public services during this active and busy reign; but, what is greatly to his credit, never in any of the intrigues with which it was blemished: for he was a man of great sweetness of temper, and of an unexceptionable character; so that he was beloved by all parties, and hated by none. In the last years of his life he endured great pain and misery from a wound received in his leg, when he defended New Haven against the French in 1562; and this bringing him very low, he at last submitted to an amputation, of which he died in Feb. 1589. He was thrice married, but had no issue. He was generally called “The good earl of Warwick.”

In July 1575, as the queen was upon her progress, she made the earl a visit at his castle of Kenilworth in Warwickshire. This manor and castle had formerly belonged to the crown; but lord Leicester having obtained it from the queen, spared no expence in enlarging and adorning it: and Dugdale says, that he laid out no less than 60,000l. upon it. Here, due preparation being made, he entertained the queen and her court for seventeen days with a magnificence, of which, being characteristic of the times, the following account from Dugdale may be not unamusing. That historian tells us (Antiquities of Warwickshire, p. 249), that the queen at her entrance was surprised with the sight of a floating island on the large pool there, bright blazing with torches; on which were clad in silks the lady of the lake, and two nymphs waiting on her, who made a speech to the queen in metre, of the antiquity and owners of that castle, which was closed with cornets and other music. Within the base-court was erected a stately bridge, twenty feet wide, and seventy feet long, over which the queen was to pass: and on each side stood columns, with presents upon them to her majesty from the gods. Sylvanus offered a cage of wild fowl, and Pomona divers sorts of fruits Ceres gave corn, and Bacchus wine Neptune presented sea- fish Mars the hahiliments of war; and Phcebus all kinds of musical instruments. During her stay, variety of shows and sports were daily exhibited. In the chace, there was a savage man with satyrs; there were bear-baiting and fire-works, Italian tumblers, and a country bride-ale, running at the quintin, and morrice-dancing. And, that nothing might be wanting which those parts could afford, the Coventry men came and acted the ancient play, called Hock’s Thursday, representing the destruction of the Danes in the reign of king Ethelred; which pleased the queen so much, that she gave them a brace of bucks, and five marks in money, to bear the charges of a feast. There were, besides, on the pool, a triton riding on a mermaid eighteen feet long, as also Anon on a dolphin, with excellent music. The expences and costs of these entertainments may be guessed at by the quantity of beer then drunk, which amounted to 320 hogsheads of the ordinary sort: and, for the greater honour and grace thereof, sir Thomas Cecil, son to the treasurer Burleigh, and three more gentlemen, were then knighted; and, the next ensuing year, the earl obtained a grant of the queen fora weekly market at Kenihvorth, with a fair yearly on Midsummer-day. So far Dugdale. There is also in. Strype’s Annals, p. 341, a long and circumstantial narrative of all that passed at this royal visit, by one who was present; which strongly illustrates the temper of the queen, and the manners of those times.

In 1576 happened the death of Walter, earl of Essex, which drew upon lord Leicester many suspicions, after his marriage with the countess of Essex took place, which, however, was not until two years after. In 1578, when the duke of Anjou pressed the match that had been proposed between himself and the queen, his agent, believing lord Leicester to be the greatest bar to the duke’s pretensions, informed the queen of his marriage with lady Essex; upon which her majesty was so enraged, that, as Camden relates, she commanded him not to stir from the castle of Greenwich, and would have committed him to the Tower, if she had not been dissuaded from it by the earl of Sussex. Lord Leicester being now in the very height of power and influence, many attempts were made upon his character, in order to take him down: and in 1584 came out a most virulent book against him, commonly called “Leicester’s Commonwealth,” the purpose of which was to shew, that the English constitution was subverted, and a new form imperceptibly introduced, to which no name could be so properly given, as that of a “Leicestrian Commonwealth.” In proof of this, the earl was represented as an atheist in point of religion, a secret traitor to the queen, an oppressor of her people 1 an inveterate enemy to the nobility, a complete monster with regard to ambition, cruelty, and Just; and not only so, but as having thrown all offices of trust into the hands of his creatures, and usurped all the power of the kingdom. The queen, however, did not fail to countenance and protect her favourite; and to remove as much as possible the impression this performance made upon the vulgar, caused letters to be issued from the privycouncil, in which all the facts contained therein were declared to he absolutely false, not only to the knowledge of those who signed them, but also of the queen herself. Nevertheless, this book was universally read, and the contents of it generally received for true: and the great secrecy with which it was written, printed, and published, induced a suspicion, that some very able heads were concerned either in drawing it up, or at least in furnishing the materials. It is not well known what the original title of it was, but supposed to be “A Dialogue between a scholar, a gentleman, and a lawyer;” though it was afterwards called “Leicester’s Commonwealth.” It has been several times reprinted, particularly in 1600, 8vo; in 1631, 8vo, the running-title being “A letter of state to a scholar of Cambridge;” in 1641, 4to, and 8vo, with the addition of “Leicester’s Ghost;” and again in 1706, 8vo, under the title of “Secret Memoirs of Robert Dudley earl of Leicester,” with a preface by Dr. Drake, (see Drake) who pretended it to be printed from an old manuscript. The design of reprinting it in 1641, was, to give a bad impression of the government of Charles I.; and the same was supposed to be the design of Dr. Drake in his publication. In Dec. 1585, lord Leicester embarked for the protestant Low Countries, whither he arrived in quality of governor. At this time the affairs of those countries were in a perplexed situation; and the States thought that nothing could contribute so much to their recovery, as prevailing upon queen Elizabeth to send over some person of great distinction, whom they might set at the head of their concerns civil and military: which proposition, says Camden, so much flattered the ambition of this potent earl, that he willingly consented to pass the seas upon this occasion, as being well assured of most ample powers. Before his departure, the queen admonished him to have a special regard to her honour, and to attempt nothing inconsistent with the great employment to which he was advanced: yet, she was so displeased with some proceedings of his and the States, that the year after she sent over very severe letters to them, which drew explanations from the former, and deep submissions from the latter. The purport of the queen’s letter was, to reprimand the States “for having conferred the absolute government of the confederate provinces upon Leicester, her subject, though she had refused it herself;” and Leicester, for having presumed to take it upon him. He returned to England Nov. 1585; and, notwithstanding what was past, was well received by the queen. What contributed to make her majesty forget his offence in the Low Countries, was the pleasure of having him near her, at a time when she very much wanted his counsel: for now the affair of Mary queen of Scots was upon the carpet, and the point was, how to have her taken off with the least discredit to the queen. The earl according to report, which we could wish to be able to contradict, thought it best to have her poisoned; but that scheme was not found practicable, so that they were obliged to have recourse to violence. The earl set out for the Low Countries in June 1587; but, great discontents arising on all sides, he was recalled in November. Camden relates, that on his return, finding an accusation preparing against him for mal-administration there, and that he w^as summoned to appear before the council, he privately implored the queen’s protection, and besought her “not to receive him with disgrace upon his return, whom at his first departure she had sent out with honour; nor bring down alive to the grave, whom her former goodness had raised from the dust.” Which expressions of humility and sorrow wrought so far upon her, that he was admitted into her former grace and favour.

Sir Robert Dudley was not only admired by princes, but also by the learned; among whom he held a very high rank, as well on account of his skill in philosophy, chemistry, and physic, as his perfect acquaintance with all the branches of the mathematics, and the means of applying them for the service and benefit of mankind. He wrote several things. We have mentioned the account of his voyage. His principal work is, “Del arcano del mare,” &c. Fiorenze, 1630, 1646, fol. There is a copy in the British Museum, dated 1661, and called the second edition. This work has been always so scarce, as seldom to have found a place even in the catalogues that have been published of rare books. It is full of schemes, charts, plans, and other marks of its author’s mathematical learning; but is chiefly valuable for the projects contained therein, for the improvement of navigation and the extending of commerce. Wood tells us, that he wrote also a medical treatise, entitled “Catholicon,” which was well esteemed by the faculty. There is still another piece, the title of which, as it stands in Rushworth’s Collections, runs thus: “A proposition for his majesty’s service, to bridle the impertinency of parliaments. Afterwards questioned in the Star-chamber.” After he had lived some time in exile, he still cherished hopes of returning to England: to facilitate which, and to ingratiate himself with king James, he drew up “a proposition, as he calls it, in two parts: the one to secure the state, and to bridle the impertinency of parliaments; the other, to increase his majesty’s revenue much more than it is.” This scheme, falling into the hands of some persons of great distinction, and being some years after by them made public, was considered as of so pernicious a nature, as to occasion their imprisonment: but they were released upon the discovery of the true author. (See Cotton, Sir Robert). It was written about 1613, and sent to king James, to teach him how most effectually to enslave his subjects: for, in that light, it is certainly as singular and as dangerous a paper as ever fell from the pen of man. It was turned to the prejudice of James I. and Charles I.; for though neither they, nor their ministers, made use of it, or intended to make use of it, yet occasion was taken from thence to excite the people to a hatred of statesmen who were capable of contriving such destructive projects. Lastly, he was the author of a famous powder, called “Pulvis comitis Warwicensis,” or the earl of Warwick’s powder, which is thus made: “Take of scammony, prepared with the fumes of sulphur, two ounces; of diaphoretic antimony, an ounce; of the crystals of tartar, half an ounce; mix them all together into a powder.”

In May 1677, our antiquary was solemnly created Garter principal king at arms, and the day after received from his majesty the honour of knighthood, much against his will, on account of the smallness of his estate. In 1681 he published “A short View of the late Troubles in England; briefly setting forth their rise, growth, and tragical conclusion, &c.” folio. This is perhaps the least valued of all his works, or rather the only one which is not very much valued. He published also at the same time, “The ancient usage in bearing of such ensigns of honour as are co'i.monly called Arms, &,c.” 8vo a second edition of which was published in the beginning of the year following, with large additions. The last work he published, was, “A perfect copy of all summons of the nobility to the great councils and parliaments of this realm, from the 49th of king Henry III. until these present times, &e.” 1685, folio. He wrote some other pieces relating to the same subjects, which were never published; and was likewise the chief promoter of the Saxon Dictionary by Mr. William Somner, printed at Oxford in 1659. His collections of materials for the Antiquities of Warwickshire, and Baronage of England, all written with his own hand, contained in 27 vols, in folio, he gave by will to the university of Oxford; together with sixteen other volumes, some of his own hand-writing; which are now preserved in Ashmole’s Museum. He gave likewise several books to the Heralds’ office, in London, and procured many more for their library.

At length, however, his merit burst through the cloud which had so long obscured it from public view. In February 1795, he received an appointment constituting him commander in chief in what is called the North Seas, the limits of his power extending from the North Foreland, even to the Ultima Thule of the ancients, or as far beyond as the operations of the enemy he was sent to encounter should render necessary. He accordingly hoisted his flag on board the Prince George, of 98 guns, at Chatham: but that ship being considered too large for the particular quarter in which the admiral was destined to act, he removed soon afterwards into the Venerable of 74 guns, and proceeded to carry into execution the very important trust which was confided in him.

In person, lord Duncan was of a manly, athletic form, six feet four inches high, erect and graceful, with a countenance that indicated great intelligence and benevolence. It would, perhaps, be difficult to find in modern history another man, in whom, with so much meekness, modesty, and unaffected dignity of mind, were united so much genuine spirit, so much of the skill and fire of professional genius; such vigorous, active wisdom such alacrity and ability for great achievements, with such entire indifference for their success, except so far as it might contribute to the good of his country. His private character was that of a most affectionate relative, and a steady friend; and, what crowns the whole with a lustre superior to all other qualities or distinctions, a man of great and unaffected piety. The latter virtue may excite, in some persons, a smile of contempt: but the liberal-minded will be pleased to read that lord Duncan felt it an honour to be a Christian. He encouraged religion by his own practice; and the public observance of it has always been kept up wherever he held the command. When the victory was decided, which has immortalized his name, his lordship ordered the crew of his ship to be called together; and, at their head, upon his bended knees, in the presence of the Dutch admiral (who was greatly affected with the scene), he solemnly and pathetically offered up praise to the God of battles. Let it be added here, that his demeanour, when all eyes were upon him, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s on the day of general thanksgiving, in December following, was so humble, modest, and devout, as greatly to increase that admiration which his services had gained him. In short, lord Duncan was one more instance of the truth of the assertion, that piety and courage ought to be inseparably allied; and that the latter, without the former, loses its principal virtue.

In 1748, Mr. Robert Dodsley published that work so well adapted to the education of youth, entitled “The Preceptor;” and that it might be executed in the best manner, called in the assistance of some of the ablest men of the age, among whom may be reckoned the names of David Fordyce, Dr. John Campbell, and Dr. Samuel Johnson. The part of logic was assigned to Mr. Duncan, and he discharged the task with an ability that excited general approbation. He has treated logic like one who was a thorough master of it. Disdaining to copy servilely after those who had gone before him, he struck out a plan of his own, and managed it with so much perspicuity and judgment, gave so clear and distinct a view of the furniture of our minds for the discovery of truth, and laid down such excellent rules for the attainment of it, that his work was reckoned one of the best introductions to the study of philosophy and the mathematics in our own, or perhaps any other language. Mr. Duncan’s last production was a translation of Ciesar’s Coaimentaries, which appeared in the latter end of 1752, in one vol. folio. This work had a double title to a favourable reception from the public, being recommended both by its external and internal merit. It is beautifully printed, and richly adorned with a variety of fine cuts; and as to the translation, it is acknowledged to be the best that has been given in our tongue of the Commentaries of Caesar. Mr. Duncan has in a great measure caught the spirit of the original author, and has preserved his turn of phrase and expression as far as the nature of our language would permit. Previously to our author’s publication of this work, he had been appointed professor of philosophy in the Alarischal college, Aberdeen. The royal presentation, which conferred this office upon him, was signed by the king at Hanover, May 18, 1752. Mr. Duncan, however, remained in London till the summer of 1753, and was not admitted to his professorship of natural and experimental philosophy till Aug. 21, of the same year. While Mr. Duncan resided in the metropolis, he was in the habits of intimacy with several of the learned men who flourished at that time; and among others, George Lewis Scot, and Dr. Armstrong, were his particular friends. Indeed he was held in general esteem on account of his private, as well as his literary character. The sedentary life he had led before he came into the college at Aberdeen, had a good deal affected his constitution, and particularly his nerves; in consequence of which he was subject to an occasional depression of spirits. By this he was unfitted for great exertions, but not for his ordinary employment, or for enjoying the company of his friends. He died a bachelor. May 1, 1760, in the fortythird year of his age. Mr. Duncan cannot so much be said to have possessed genius, as good sense and taste; and his parts were rather solid than shining. His temper was social, his manners easy and agreeable, and his conversation entertaining and often lively. In his instructions as a professor he was diligent and very accurate. His conduct was irreproachable, and he was regular in his attendance on the various institutions of public worship. Soon after his settlement in the Marischal college, he was admitted an elder of the consistory or church session of Aberdeen, and continued to officiate as such till his death.

In the summer of 1732, Mr. Buncombe’s tragedy of “Lucius Junius Brutus” was read and approved by“the author’s friend, Mr. Mills senior, and by him introduced to the theatrical triumvirate, Booth, Gibber, and Wilks, who also approved it, and promised it should be performed. Booth regretted he could not act in it; and Wilks undertook the part of Titus; unfortunately he died in September following; and the revolt of the players, with the confusion that ensued, prevented its being brought on the stage till two years after, when Mr. Duncombe, unadvisedly, consented to Mr. Fleetwood’s proposal of bringing it on at Drury-lane in November, when the town was empty, the parliament not sitting, and Farinelli, the singer, highly popular at the Hay-market. The consequence was natural and obvious.” The quavering Italian eunuch (to use our author’s own words) proved too powerful for the rigid Roman consul.“Yet it was acted six nights with applause, and repeated in February following, and at the same time was printed in 8vo, with a dedication to lord chief justice Hardwicke. A second edition, in 12mo, with a translation of M. de Voltaire’s” Essay on Tragedy“prefixed, was published in 1747. In April 1735, Mr. Duncombe published, by subscription, in two volumes 12rno, the” Poems,“&c. of his deceased brother-in-law, John Hughes, esq. which were received by his friends and the public with the esteem due to Hughes’s merit. In January, 1735-6, our author’s domestic happiness received a severe shock by the death of his wife, which happened at Spring Grove, in Middlesex, the seat of his first cousin, Mrs. Ofley. In 1737 he collected and published, in one volume 8vo, the” Miscellanies in verse and prose“of Mr. Jabez Hughes, for the benefit of his widow, but the dedication (in her name) to the duchess of Bedford, was drawn up by the rev. Mr. Copping, dean of Clogher. In 1743, on the death of his learned friend, Mr. Samuel Say, a dissenting minister in Westminster, Mr. Duncombe undertook, for the benefit of his widow and daughter, to revise and prepare for the press some of his poems, and two prose essays, which were accordingly published in one volume 4to, in 1745. In 1744, the” Siege of Damascus,“and some other moral plays, having been acted by several persons of distinction for their amusement, Mr. Duncombe was induced to publish” An Oration on the usefulness of Dramatic Interludes in the education of youth,“translated from the Latin of M. Werenfels, by whom it was spoken before the masters and scholars of the university of Basil. On the breaking-out of the rebellion in 1745, our author endeavoured to second his honoured friend, the archbishop of York, by reprinting” A Sermon“(now known to have been written by Dr. Arbuthnot), supposed to be” preached to the people at the Mercat- cross of Edinburgh, on the subject of the union in 1706,“and to the sermon prefixed a preface, without his name, setting forth the advantages which have accrued to the kingdom of Scotland by its union with England. About the same time he also printed, with a preface, a tract, entitled,” The complicated Guilt of the Rebellion,“which had been written by Mr. Hughes in 1716, but was then suppressed, as the insurrection it related to was soon after quelled: this tract was judged by Mr. Duncombe to be equally applicable to the transactions of 1740. In the summer of 1749, being with his relation, Mr. Brooke, at York, Mr. Duncombe was accidentally instrumental to the detection of Archibald Bower, by transmitting to archbishop Herring an account of that adventurer’s escape from the inquisition, taken by memory from his own mouth, which being published the year following by Mr. Barron, a dissenting minister, was disavowed by Bower; though, when called upon, the mistakes which he was able to specify, were found to be few and trifling. This was the first impeachment of his integrity, and exposed him to the attacks of Dr. Douglas, who had before detected Lauder. To the periodical publication called” The World,“Mr. Duncombe contributed one paper, No. 84,” Prosperity and Adversity, an allegory." la

After the death of bishop Squire, he was nominated chaplain to lord Corke, with whom he and his father had the honour of a particular friendship, as appears by that nobleman’s “Letters from Italy.” He was presented, in 1757, by archbishop Herring, to the united livings of St. Andrew and St. Mary Bredman, in Canterbury. This benefice was bestowed in the most friendly manner by his patron, who called it only something to begin with: but the archbishop lived not above two months afterwards; and with his life the prospect of future advancement seemed to disappear. However, no complaint against the slow preferment from his respected friend and patron, no murmur against the daily dispositions of benefices, to which he must be conscious his merit often gave him equal claim, ever was suffered to escape in conversation.

He was suddenly taken ill in the night, June 2!, 1785. A suffocation was rapidly coming on; but a surgeon being called, he was almost instantly relieved by bleeding a good sleep ensued, but he waked in the morning almost speechless; a paralytic stroke on the organs of articulation only, seemed to have taken place; medical assistance was applied; he partly recovered articulation; but great debility was perceivable, and he could no longer write as usual: however, by slow degrees he regained strength, beyond the expectation of iiis distressed friends; and appeared after the summer passed at Herne, to be quite restored to health and spirits, and pursued every avocation as before the stroke, and with the same power of mind; but those who were most constantly with him, and watched with the tender eye of affection, never lost the alarm, never rested without apprehension, and perceived, by some suaden starts, and nervous complaints, that all was not sound within. In January following he coughed much, two or three days, but without any dangerous symptom, till, on the night of the 18th, a suffocation as before came on; assistance was immediately procured, but not with the former success; the disorder increased, and loss of life ensued. His gentle spirit, as he had lived, departed, easy to himself in his exit; distressful alone to all that knew him, to those most who knew him best. His family, his friends, the servants, and the poor, all by their affliction spoke his real worth. He left one daughter. His temper never changed by any deprivation of the world’s enjoyments, nor by any bodily suffering; no peevishness, no complaints escaped; though it is observed that a great alteration often attends such disorders, and warps the temper naturally good. But he silently used his piety to the laudable purpose of regulating not only his actions, but his words; yet this was discovered rather from observation than from his own profession, as he was remarkably modest and humble on religious topics; and, for fear of ostentation on that subject, might rather err on the opposite side, from an awful timidity, which might not always give a just idea of his unaffected zeal and real faith. His friendship, where professed, was ardent; and he had a spirit in a friend’s cause that rarely appeared on other occasions. He was amiable, affectionate, and tender, as a husband and father; kind and indulgent as a master; and a protector and advocate of the poor; benevolent to all, as far as his fortune could afford.

, of Arniston, son of the preceding, was born July 18, 1713. He received the earlier parts of his education under a domestic tutor, and afterwards pursued the usual course of academical studies in the university of Edinburgh. In the end of the year 1733, he went to Utrecht, where the lectures on the Roman law were at that time in considerable reputation. He remained abroad for four years; and during the recess of study at the university, he spent a considerable time at Paris, and in visiting several of the principal towns of France and the Low Countries. Returning to Scotland in 1737, he was called to the bar in the beginning of the following year and, in his earliest public appearances, gave ample proof of his inheriting, in their utmost extent, the abilities and genius of his family. His eloquence was copious and animated; in argument he displayed a wonderful fertility of invention, tempered by a discriminating judgment, which gave, even to his unpremeditated harangues, a methodical arrangement; in consultation, he possessed a quickness of apprehension beyond all example; and his memory, which was most singularly tenacious, enabled him to treasure up, and to produce instantaneously, every case or precedent which was applicable to the matter before him.

There were indeed other occasions, on which his feelings were most keenly awakened, and on which he gave vent to a becoming spirit of indignation. He treated with the greatest severity every instance, either of malversation in the officers of the law, or of chicanery in the inferior practitioners of the court. No calumnious or iniquitous prosecution, no attempt to pervert the forms of law to the purposes of oppression, ever eluded his penetration, or escaped his just resentment. Thus, perpetually watchful, and earnestly solicitous to maintain both the dignity and the rectitude of that sup'reme tribunal over which he presided, the influence of these endeavours extended itself to every inferior court of judicature as the motion of the heart is felt in the remotest artery. In reviewing the sentences ui inferior judges, he constantly expressed his desire of supporting the just authority of every rank and order of magistrates; but these were taught at the same time to walk with circumspection, to guard their conduct with the most scrupulous exactness, and to dread the slightest deviation from the narrow path of their duty. With these endowments of mind, and high sense of the duties of his office, it is not surprising, that amidst all the differences of sentiment which the jarring interests of individuals, or the more powerful influence of political faction, give rise to, thete should be but one opinion of the character of this eminent man, which is, that from the period of the institution of that court over which he presided, however conspicuous in particular departments might have been the merit of some of his predecessors, no man ever occupied the president’s chair, who combined in himself so many of the essential requisites for the discharge of that important office. But while we allow the merits of this great man in possessing, in their utmost extent, the most essential requisites for the station which he filled, it is but a small derogation from the confessed eminence of his character when we acknowledge a deficiency in some subordinate qualities. Of these, what was chiefly to be regretted, and was alone wanting to the perfection of his mental accomplishments, was, that he appeared to give too little weight or value to those studies which are properly termed literary. This was the more remarkable in him, that, in the early period of his life, he had prosecuted himself those studies with advantage and success. In his youth he had made great proficiency in classical learning; and his memory retaining faithfully whatever he had once acquired, it was not unusual with him, even in his speeches on the bench, to cite, and to apply with much propriety, the most striking passages of the ancient authors. But for these studies, though qualified to succeed in them, it does not appear that he ever possessed a strong bent or inclination. If he ever felt it, the weightier duties of active life, which he was early called to exercise, precluded the opportunity of frequently indulging it; and perhaps even a knowledge of the fascinating power of those pursuits, in alienating the mind from the severer but more necessary occupations, might have inclined him at last to disrelish from habit, what it had taught him at first to resist from principle. That this principle was erroneous, it is unnecessary to consume time in proving. It is sufficient to say, that as jurisprudence can never hope for any material advancement as a science, if separated from the spirit of philosophy, so that spirit cannot exist, independent of the cultivation of literature. That the studies of polite literature, and an acquaintance with the principles of general erudition, while they improve the science, add lustre and dignity to the profession of the law, cannot be denied. So thought all the greatest lawyers of antiquity. So thought, among the moderns, that able judge and most accomplished man, of whose character we have traced some imperfect features, lord Arniston, the father of the late lord president; of which his inaugural oration, as it stands upon the records of the faculty of advocates, bears ample testimony. His son, it is true, afforded a strong proof, that the force of natural talents alone may conduct to eminence and celebrity. He was rich in native genius, and therefore felt not the want of acquired endowments. But in this he left an example to be admired, not imitated. Few inherit from nature equal powers with his; and even of himself it must be allowed, that if he was a great man without the aids of general literature, or of cultivated taste, be must have been still a greater, had he availed himself of those lights which they furnish, and that improvement which they bestow. His useful and valuable life was terminated on the 13th of December 1787. His last illness, which, though of short continuance, was violent in its nature, he bore with the greatest magnanimity. He died in the seventy-fifth year of his age, in the perfect enjoyment of all his faculties; at a time when his long services might have justly entitled him to ease and repose, but which the strong sense of his duty would not permit him to seek while his power of usefulness continued; at that period, in short, when a wise man would wish to finish his course; too soon indeed for the public good, but not too late for his own reputation.

In 1791, Mr. Dundas became a member of the cabinet, as secretary of state for the home department, an office which he filled with peculiar energy and vigour, when it became necessary to adopt measures for the internal defence of the country against a portion of revolutionary spirit derived from the temporary successes of the French in what they called reforming the vices of their government. To Mr. Dundas has also been ascribed the origin of the volunteer system, which has unquestionably served to display the loyalty and energies of the nation in a manner which its greatest enemy has felt severely. In 1794, when the duke of Portland, with a large proportion of the whig party, joined the administration, Mr. Dundas resigned his office of secretary for the home department to his grace, and was made secretary of the war department. The whole of his transactions in this, as well, indeed, as in his former office, belong so strictly to history, that we know not how to separate them, and even if our limits permitted, the leading events of that most eventful period are too recent to admit of any detail superior in authority to the annals of the day. A man so long in possession of uncommon power must necessarily have excited much envy and malice; and few had more of it than Mr. Dundas. They who disapprove of the political system pursued by Mr. Pitt, will of course be equally unfriendly to his coadjutor, and, in many measures, certainly his adviser; but, on the other hand, a large number of comprehensive minds will consider him a powerful and efficient statesman, who, if he was sometimes excessive in his profusion, and too careless in his means and instruments, lost nothing by a cold, narrow, and unwise œconomy, which, for the sake of small savings, sacrifices mighty and productive ends; which is entangled by the minute formalities of office; and wrapping itself up in forbidding ceremonies, and hanging fearfully over the precedents of the file, is unable to look abroad, when the storm is out, and the banks and mounds are thrown down. The candid biographer from whom we have borrowed these remarks adds, with great justice, that until it shall he proved, that the evils, which even this country has suffered from the French revolution, would not have been a thousand times worse by Battering and yielding to it, surely nothing is proved against the wisdom of Mr. Pitt’s administration.

Here he is said to have been admitted an attorney in the court of King’s-bench, but remained for some time in obscurity, until the consciousness of his own powers, as it may be presumed, prompted him to consider his sphere of action as too confined for his genius, and occasioned him to study with a view of being called to the bar. His application to this pursuit was singular and unremitting. He had chambers up two pair of stairs, in Pump-court, Middle-temple, where it was his custom, both then, and some years after he was called to the bar, to read from an early hour in the morning till late in the evening, without ever going out of his chambers, or permitting any visits from his fellow students. He then dined, (or rather made his dinner and supper together,) either at the Grecian or at George’s coffee-house. In this way he accumulated a vast stock of knowledge, which, however, for a considerable time he had no opportunity of displaying. When admitted to the bar, he travelled the western circuit, but had not a single brief; and the historian of Devonshire says, had Lavater been at Exeter in 1759, he must have sent counsellor Dunning to the hospital of idiots. Not a feature marked him for the son of wisdom. Practice came in so slowly, that he was three years at the bar before he received one hundred guineas; but at length he was enabled to emerge from this state of obscurity, and commence that career which led to fame, opulence, and honours.

Previous to this, however, in 1766, he was chosen recorder of the city of Bristol, a place that scarcely pays the expences of the half-yearly visitation, but which has always been considered as an honourable preferment. On Dec. S3, 1767, he was appointed solicitor-general in the room of Edward Willes, esq. then promoted to the King’s-bench. In this office he continued until May 1770, when he resigned it, along with his friend and patron lord Shelburne, afterwards marquis of Lansdowne, and returned to his original situation at the bar, without any distinction from the rest of his brethren but what he was entitled to from the time of his admission into the profession. In 1771, he was presented with the freedom of the city of London, a favour which he acknowledged in a letter written with elegance, yet caution. From the period of his resignation he was considered as adhering to the party in opposition to the administration which conducted the American war, and distinguished himself by many able speeches in parliament, of which he was first chosen member for Calne in 1768, and continued to represent the same borough until he was called to the peerage.

Few men, in a career requiring the gifts of voice, person, and manner, had ever more difficulties to struggle with than the late lord Ashburton. He was a thick, short, compact man, with a sallow countenance, turned-up nose, a constant shake of the head, with a hectic cough which so frequently interrupted the stream of his eloquence, that to any other man this single defect would be a material impediment in his profession; and yet, with all these personal drawbacks, he no sooner opened a cause which required any exertion of talent, than his mind, like the sun, broke forth in the full meridian of its brightness. His elocution was at once fluent, elegant, and substantial, and partook more of the knowledge of constitutional law than that derived from the old books and reporters; not that he wasdeficient in all the depths of his profession, when an absolute necessity called him out (his praise being that of the best common lawyer as well as the best orator of his time); but his general eloquence partook more of the spirit than the letter of laws. His diction was of the purest and most. classical kind not borrowed from any living model of his time, either in the senate or at the bar it was his own particular formation and if it had any shade, it was perhaps its not being familiar enough, at times, to the common ear: he was, however, master of various kind of styles, and possessed abundance of wit and humour, which often not only '; set the court in a roar," but drew smiles from the gravity of the bench. His more finished speeches in the house of commons, and as a pleader before the bar of the house of lords, were many of them fine models of eloquence: he possessed the copia verbprum so fully that he seldom wanted a word; and when he did, he had great Jinesse in concealing it from his auditory, by repeating some parts of his last sentences by way of illustration: nobody had this management better, as by it he recovered the proper arrangement of his ideas, without any visible interruption in his discourse.

He preserved the dignity of a barrister very much in court, and frequently kept even the judges in check. When lord Mansfield, who had great quickness in discovering the jut of a cause, used to take up a newspaper by way of amusing himself, whilst Dunning was speaking, the latter would make a dead stop. This would rouse his lordship to say, “Pray go on, Mr. Dunning.” “No, my lord, not till your lordship has finished.” His reputation was as high with his fellow-barristers as with the public; he lived very much with the former, and had their affection and esteem. When lord Thurlow gave his first dinner as lord chancellor, he called Dunning to his right hand at table, in preference to all the great law otBcers; and when he hesitated to take the place, the other called out in his blunt way, “Why will you keep the dinner cooling in this manner?” He had that integrity in his practice, that on the opening of any cause, which he found by the evidence partook of any notorious fraud or chicanery, he would throw his brief over the bar with great contempt, and resort to his bag for a fresh paper. Whilst he was in the height of his practice, his father came to the treasurer’s office in the Middle Temple, to be one of the joint securities for a student performing his terms, <kc. Wh<-n he signed the bond, the clerk, seeing the name, asked him with some eagerness, whether he was any relation to the great Dunning? The old man felt the praise of his son with great sensibility, and modestly replied, “I am John Dunning’s father, Sir.” Few lawyers, without any considerable paternal estate at starting, and dying so young as lord Ashburton did, ever left such a fortune behind him; the whole amounting to no less than one hundred and eighty thousand pounds! Nor was this the hoard of a miser, for he always lived like a gentleman in the most liberal sense of the word, though, from his immense practice, he had no time to indulge in the arrangements of a regular establishment. During his illness, as a last resource he was advised to try his native air, and in going down to Devonshire accidentally met, at the same inn, his old colleague Wallace, lately attorneygeneral, coming to town on the same melancholy errand, to be near the best medical assistance. It was the lot of both to be either legal or political antagonists through the whole course of their lives, in which much keenness, and much dexterity of argument, were used on both sides: here, however, they met as friends, hastening to that goal, where the race of toil, contention, and ambition, was soon to have a final close. They supped together with as much conviviality as the nature of their conditions would admit, and in the morning parted wiih mutual promises of visiting each other early in the winter. These promises, however, were never performed: Dunning died in August, and Wallace in November.

, a brave French officer, count of Orleans and of Longueville, and the natural son of Louis duke of Orleans, who was assassinated by the duke of Burgundy, was born Nov. 23, 1407, and began his career, during the war which the English carried on in France, by the defeat of the earls of Warwick and Suffolk, whom he pursued to the gates of Paris. Orleans being besieged by the English, he bravely defended that town, until Joan of Arc was enabled to bring him succours. The raising of the siege was followed by a train of successes, and Dunois had almost the whole honour of driving the enemy out of Normandy and la Guienne. He gave them the fatal blow at Castillon, in 1451, after having taken from them Blaie, Fronsac, Bourdeaux,and Bayonne. Charles VII. owed his throne to the sword of Dunois; nor was he ungrateful, for he bestowed on him the title of restorer of his country, made him a present of the comté of Longueville, and honoured him with the office of grand chamberlain of France. He was held in equal esteem by Louis XI. Count cle Dunois, under the reign of that prince, entered into the league of what was called the Public-good, of which, by his conduct and experience, he became the principal supporter. The hero died Nov. 24, 1468, aged 61, regarded as a second du Guesclin, and not less dreaded by the enemies of his country, than respected by his fellowcitizens, for his valour, which was always guided by prudence, for his magnanimity, his beneficence, and every rirtue that enters into the character of a truly great man.

, surnamed Sgotus, an eminent scholastic divine, who flourished in the latter end of the thirteenth and the beginning of the fourteenth century, was born at Dunstance, in the parish of Emildun or Embleton, near Alnwick in Northumberland. Some writers have contended that he was a Scotsman, and that the place of his birth was Duns, a village eight miles from England, and others have asserted that he was an Irishman. He is, however, treated as an Englishman by all the early authors who speak of him; and the conclusion of the ms copy of his works in Merton college, gives his name, country, and the place where he was born, as stated above. When a youth, he joined himself to the minorite friars of Newcastle; and, being sent by them to Oxford, he was admitted into Merton college, of which, in due time, he became fellow. Here, besides the character he attained in scholastic theology, he is said to have been very eminent for his knowledge in the civil and canon law, in logic, natural philosophy, metaphysics, mathematics, and astronomy. Upon the removal of William Varron from Oxford to Paris, in 1301, Duns Scotus was chosen to supply his place in the theological chair; which office he sustained with such reputation, that more than thirty-thousand scholars came to the university to be his hearers, a number which, though confidently asserted by several writers, we admit with great hesitation. After John Duns had lectured three years at Oxford, he was called, in 1304, to Paris, where he was honoured with the degrees, first of bachelor, and then of doctor in divinity. At a meeting of the monks of his order at Tholouse, in 1307, he was created regent; and about the same time he was placed at the head of the theological schools at Paris. Here he is affirmed to have first broached the doctrine of the immaculate conception of the Virgin Mary, and to have supported his position by two hundred arguments, which appeared so conclusive, that the members of the university of Paris embraced the opinion; instituted the feast of the immaculate conception; and issued an edict, that no one, who did not embrace the same opinion, should be admitted to academical degrees. In 1308, Duns Scotus was ordered by Gonsalvo, the general of the Minorites, to remove to Cologn, on the road to which he was met in solemn pomp, and conducted thither by the whole body of the citizens. Not long after his arrival in this city, he was seized with an apoplexy, which carried him off, on the eighth of November, 1308, in the forty-third, or, as others say, in the thirty-fourth, year of his age. Paul Jovius’s account of the mode of his death is, that when he fell down of his apoplexy he was immediately interred as dead; but that, afterwards coming to his senses, he languished in a most miserable manner in his coffin, beating his head and hands against its sides, till he died. This story, though generally treated as a fable, is hinted at by Mr. Whavton, who says, “Apoplexia correptus, et festinato nimis, ut volunt, funere elatus,” and whether true or not, gave occasion to the following epitaph:

John Duns was at first a follower of Thomas Aquinas; but, differing from his master on the question concerning the efficacy of divine grace, he formed a distinct sect, and hence the denominations of the Thomists and Scotists, who were engaged for centuries in eager and trifling disputes, and the nances of the two sects still subsist in some of the Roman Catholic schools. On account of Scotus’s acuteness in disputation, he was called “the most subtile Doctor;” but his ingenuity was wholly employed in embarrassing, with new fictions of abstraction, and with other scholastic chimeras, subjects already sufficiently perplexed. He was the author of a. vast number of works, several of which have been separately published, and in 1474, the English Franciscans printed a collection of the larger part. At length, the whole of them (some few still remaining in manuscript excepted) were collected together by Luke Wadding, illustrated with notes, and published at Lyons in 1639, in 12 vols. folio. Absurd as many of the questions were which called forth the exertions of his talents, it is probable that in a more enlightened age, genius and abilities like his might have been of lasting benefit to posterity.

, bookseller and miscellaneous writer, was born at Graff bam, in Huntingdonshire, the 14th of May, 1659; the son of John Dunton, fellow of Trinity-college, Cambridge, and rector of Graft ham, whose works he published in 8vo, embellished with very curious engravings. Dunton was in business upwards of twenty years, during which time he traded considerably in the Stationers’ company; but, about the beginning of the last century, he failed, and commenced author; and in 1701, was amanuensis to the editor of a periodical paper called the “Post Angel.” He soon after set up as a writer for the entertainment of the public; and projected and carried on, with the assistance of others, the “Athenian Mercury,” or a scheme to answer a series of questions monthly, the querist remaining concealed. This work was continued to about 20 volumes; and afterwards reprinted by Bell, under the title of the “Athenian Oracle,” 4 vols. 8vo. It forms a strange jumble of knowledge and ignorance, sense and nonsense, curiosity and impertinence. In 1710 he published his “Athenianism,” or the projects of Mr. John Dunton, author of the “Essay on the hazard of a deathbed repentance.” This contains, amidst a prodigious variety of matter, six hundred treatises in prose and verse, by which he appears to have been, with equal facility, a philosopher, physician, poet, civilian, divine, humourist, &c. To this work he has prefixed his portrait, engraved by M. Vander Gucht; and in a preface, which breathes all the pride of self-consequence, informs his readers he does not write to flatter, or for hire. As a specimen of this miscellaneous farrago, the reader may take the following heads of subjects: 1. The Funeral of Mankind, a paradox, proving we are all dead and buried. 2. The spiritual hedge-hog; or, a new and surprising thought. 3. The double life, or a new way to redeem time, by living over to-morrow before it comes. 4. Dunton preaching to himself; or every man his own parson. 5. His creed, or the religion of a bookseller, in imitation of Brown’s Religio Medici, which h.is some humour and merit. This he dedicated to the Stationers’ company. As a satirist, he appears to most advantage in his poems entitled the “Beggar mounted” the “Dissenting Doctors;” “Parnassus hoa!” or frolics in verse “Dunton’s shadow,” or the character of a summer friend but in all his writings he is exceedingly prolix and tedious, and sometimes obscure. His “Case is altered, or Dunton’s remarriage to his own wife,” has some singular notions, but very little merit in the composition. For further particulars of this heterogeneous genius, see “Dunton’s Life and Errors,” a work now grown somewhat scarce, or, what will perhaps be more satisfactory, the account of him in our authority. Dunton died in 1733.

, a political writer of much note in France and England, and a citizen of Geneva, was born in 1749, of an ancient family in Switzerland, who had been distinguished as magistrates and scholars. At the age of twenty-two he was appointed, through the interest of Voltaire, professor of belles-lettres at Cassel, and about that time he published two or three historical tracts. He was afterwards concerned with Linguet in the publication of the “Annales Politiques,” at Lausanne. In 1783 he went to Paris, where, during the three years’ sitting of the first French assembly, he published an analysis of their debates, which was read throughout all Europe, and considered as a model of discussion no less luminous than impartial. While he intrepidly attacked the various factions, he neither dissembled the faults nor the exaggerations of their adversaries. In the month of April, 1792, he left Paris on a confidential mission from the king to his brothers, and the emperor of Germany. In consequence of his quitting Paris, his estate in France, and his personal property, were confiscated; and among other losses, he had to regret that of a valuable library, and a collection of Mss. including a work of his own, nearly ready for the press, on the political state of Europe before the French revolution. Whilst resident at Brussels with the archduke Charles, in 1793, he published a work on the French revolution, which was warmly admired by Mr. Burke, as congenial with his own sentiments, and indeed by every other person not influenced by the delusions which brought about that great event. In 1794 he returned to Switzerland, which he was obliged to leave in 1798, the French, to whom he had rendered himself obnoxious by his writings, having demanded his expulsion. The same year he came to England, where he published a well-known periodical journal called the “Mercure Britannique,” which came out once a fortnight, nearly to the time of his death. This event took place at the house of his friend count Lally Tollendal, at Richmond, May 10, 1800. His “Mercure,” and other works, although of a temporary nature, contain facts, and profound views of the leading events of his time, which will be of great importance to future historians, and during publication contributed much to enlighten the public mind.

Dupin’s works, besides his Ecclesiastical History, were* l.“De antiqua Ecclesiee Disciplina, dissertationes historicge,” Paris, 1686, 4to; the best edition, as some important passages were omitted in the subsequent ones. 2. “Liber Psalmorumcum notis,” ibid. 1691, 8vo. 3. A French translation of the preceding, ibid, same year, and in. 17.10. 4. “La juste Defense du Sieur Dupin, -pour sefvir de reponse a un Libelle anonyme contre Les Pseaumes,” Cologne, 1693, 4to. 5. “S.Optati de Schismate Donatistarum, libri Septem, ad Mss. codices et veteres editiones collati,” Paris, 1700, fol. 6. “Notas in Pentateuchem,” ibid. 1710, 2 vols. 8vo; short notes like those he wrote on the Psalms. 7. “Defense de la Censure de la Facultie de Theologie de Paris, contre les Memoires de la Chine,” ibid. 1701, 8 vO. This is a defence of the censure of the Sorbonne against Le Compte’s “Memoires de la Chine.” 8. A preface to Arnaud’s work “De la necessite de la Foi en Jesus Christ, &c.” 1701, 2 vols. 8vo. 9. “Dialogues posthumes du Sieur de la Bruyeresur le Quietisme,” Paris, 1699, 12mo. Seven of these dialogues are by Bruyere, and two by Dupin, which are not inferior to the former in style and manner. 10. “Traite de la Doctrine Chretienne et orthodox,” ibid. 1703, 8vo; containing the preliminary matter to a body of divinity, which he did not complete. 11. An edition of the “Opera Gersoni,” 1703, Amst. 5 vols. fol. which, Dupin says, would have been more correct had it been printed under his inspection. 10. “Histoire d'Apollone de Tyane convaincue de faussete” et d'imposture,“Paris, 1705, 12mo, which Dupin published under the name of De Claireval. 13.” Traite de la puissance ecclesiastique ettemporelle,“ibid. 1707, 8vo. 14.” Bibliotheque Universelle des Historiens,“ibid. 1707, 2 vols. 8vo. Dupin did not proceed far in this undertaking, but these two volumes were translated and printed at London, under the title of” The Universal Library of Historians,“1709. 15.” Lettre sur l'ancienne discipline de TEglise touchant la celebradoH de la Messe.“Paris, 1708, 12mo. 16.” Histoire des Juifs,“&c. Paris, 7 vcrfs. 12mo. This is, in fact, Basnage’s History of the Jews, with alterations, and as Dupin omitted Basnage’s name, the latter complained, and asserted his property. It is rather surprising Dupin should have committed such a breach of decorum. 17.” Dissertations historiques, chronologiques, et critiques sur la Bible,“vol. I. ibid. 1711, 8vo. These relate only to the book of Genesis, and were not continued. 18.” Histoire de TEglise en abrege,“ibid. 1714, 4 vols. 4to. This, although highly praised by the writers of the Journal de Trevoux, is in the objectionable form of question and answer. A translation was made of it into Italian, suppressing Dupin’s name, which was not very popular at Rome, and substituting that of Salvaggio Canturani. 19.” Histoire profane depuis son commencement jusqu'a present,“Paris, 1714 1716, 6 vols. 12mo; reprinted most incorrectly at Antwerp, 1717, 6 vols. 12mo. 20.” Analyse de l'Apocalypse,“Paris, 1714, 2 vols. 12mo. 21.” Traite“historique des Excommunications,” ibid, 1715, 12mo. 22. “Methode pour etudier la Theologie,” ibid. 1716, 12mo. 23. “Denonciation a M. le Procureur General, &c.” respecting the constitution Unigenitus, 12mo. 24. “Defense de la monarchic de Sicile contre les enterprises de la cour de Rome,” Amst. (Lyons) 1716, 8vo, and Amst. same year, 12mo. 25. “Traite philosophique et theologique sur l'amour de Dieu,” Paris, 1717, 12mo. 26. “Continuation du Traite de l'amour de Dieu, &c.” ibid. 3717, 8vo. 27. “Bibliotheque des auteurs separez de la communion Romaine de XVI et XVII siecle,” ibicl. 1718, 4 vols. 8vo. The author, we have seen, was offended with the character given of this work in the journal called “Europe Savante,” and returned a sharp answer. Besides these works, Dupin was employed in the earlier editions of Moreri’s Dictionary, and frequently, as we have already remarked, contributed to new editions of valuable works.

, a celebrated French cardinal, sprung of a noble family of Issoire, in Auvergne, appeared first at the bar of Paris. he was afterwards made lieutenant-general of the bailiwic of JMontferrant, then attoiv ney-general at the parliament of Toulouse. Rising from one post to another, he came to be first president of the parliament of Paris in 1507, and chancellor of France in 1515. He set out, it is said, by being solicitor at Cognac for the countess of Angouleme, mother of Francis I. This princess entrusted to him the education of her son, whose confidence he happily gained. Some historians pretend that Duprat owed his fortune and his fame to a bold and singular stroke. Perceiving that the count d'Angouleme, his pupil, was smitten with the charms of Mary, sister of Henry VIII. king of England, the young and beautiful wife of Louis XII. an infirm husband, who was childless; and finding that the queen had made an appointment with the young prince, who stole to her apartment during the night, by a back staircase; just as he was entering the chamber of Mary, he was seized all at once by a stout man, who carried him off confounded and dumb. The man immediately made himself known it was Duprat. “What!” said he sharply to the count, “you want to give yourself a master! and you are going to sacrifice a throne to the pleasure of a moment!” The count d'Angouleme, far from taking this lesson amiss, presently recollected himself; and, on coming to the crown, gave him marks of his gratitude. To settle himself in the good graces of this prince, who was continually in quest of money, and did not always find it, he suggested to him many illegal and tyrannical expedients, such as selling the offices of the judicature, and of creating a new chamber to the parliament of Paris, which, composed of twenty counsellors, formed what was called la Tournelle. By his influence also the taxes were augmented, and new imposts established, contrary to the ancient constitution of the kingdom, all which measures he pursued without fear or restraint Having attended Francis I. into Italy, he persuaded that prince to abolish the Pragmatic Sanction, and to make the Concordat, by which the pope bestowed on the king the right of nominating to the benefices of France, and the king granted to the pope the annates of the grand benefices on the footing of current revenue. While this concordat, which was signed Dec. 16, 1515, rendered him odious to the magistrates and ecclesiastics, he soon reaped the fruits of his devotion to the court of Rome; for, having embraced the ecclesiastical profession, he was successively raised to the bishoprics of Meaux, of Albi, of Valence, of Die, of Gap, to the archbishopric of Sens, and at last to the purple, in 1527. Being appointed legate a latere in France, he performed the coronation of queen Eleonora of Austria. He is said to have aspired to the papacy in 1534, upon the death of Clement VII.; but his biographers are inclined to doubt this fact, as he was now in years and very infirm. He retired, as the end of his days approached, to the chateau de Nantouillet, where he died July 9, 1535, corroded by remorse, and consumed by diseases. His own interests were almost always his only law. He sacrificed every thing to them; he separated the interests of the king from the good of the public, and sowed discord between the council and the parliament; while he did nothing for the dioceses committed to his charge. He was a long time archbishop of Sens, without ever appearing there once. Accordingly his death excited no regret, not even among his servile dependents. However, he built, at the HotelDieu of Paris, the hall still called the legate’s-hall. “It would have been much larger,” said the king, “if it could contain all the poor he has made.”

, so called from a town in Auvergne, a learned French divine of the fourteenth century, entered the Dominican order, took a doctor’s degree at Paris, was master of the sacred palace, bishop of Puy in Velay, and afterwards bishop of Meaux, where he died in 1333. Durand was one of the most eminent divines of his age he left Commentaries on the four books of Sentence, Paris, 1550, 2 vols. fol. and “Trait de TOrigine des Jurisdictions,” 4to. He frequently combats the opinions of St. Thomas, being an adherent of Scotus, and displayed so much ingenuity in his disputes, as to be called the Most resolute Doctor. Although the Thomists could not conquer him in his life, one of the number contrived to dispose of him after death, in these lines:

, a learned divine in the seventeenth century, who wrote several pieces in vindication of the Church of England, was born at St. Helier’s in the Isle of Jersey, in 1625. About the end of 1640, he was entered of Merton-college in Oxford; but when that city came to be garrisoned for king Charles I. he retired into France: and, having studied for some time at Caen in Normandy, took the degree of master of arts, in the Sylvanian college of that place, on the 8th of July 1664. Then he applied himself to the study of divinity, for above two years, at Saumur, under the celebrated Amyrault, divinity reader in that Protestant university. In 1647 he returned to Jersey, and continued for some time until the reduction of that island by the parliament-forces in 1651, when on account of his being in the defence of it for the king, he was forced to withdraw, or rather was expelled thence. He then went to Paris, and received episcopal ordination in the chapel of sir Richard Browne, knt. his majesty’s resident in France, from the hands of Thomas, bishop of Galloway. From Paris, he removed to St. Malo’s, whence the reformed church of Caen invited him to be one of their ministers, in the absence of the learned Samuel Bochart, who was going into Sweden. Not long after, the landgrave of Hesse having written to the ministers of Paris, to send him a minister to preach in French at his highness’s court, he was by them recommended to that prince, but preferred being chaplain to the duke de la Force, father to the princess of Turenne; in which station he continued above eight years. Upon the restoration he came over to England, and was very instrumental in setting up the new episcopal French church at the Savoy in London, in which he officiated first on Sunday, 14 July, 1661, and continued there for some years after, much to the satisfaction of his hearers. In April 1663, he was made prebendary of North Auiton, in the cathedral of Salisbury, being then chaplain in ordinary to his majesty; and, the llth of February following, succeeded to a canonry of Windsor. On the 1st of July, 1668, he was installed into the fourth prebend of Durham, and had a rich donative conferred on him. The 28th of February, 1669-70, he was actually created doctor of divinity, by virtue of the chancellor’s letters. In 1677, king Charles II. gave him the deanery of Windsor, vacant by the death of Dr. Bruno Ryves, into which he was installed July 27. He had also the great living of Witney in Oxfordshire conferred on him, all which preferments he obtained, partly through his own qualifications, being not only a good scholar, but also “a perfect courtier, skilful in the arts of getting into the favour of great men;” and partly through his great interest with king Charles II., to whom he was personally known both in Jersey and France. Mr. Wood thinks, that, had he lived some years longer, he would undoubtedly have been promoted to a bishopric. He published several things; and, among the rest, 1. “The Liturgy of the Church of England asserted, in a Sermon, preached [in French] at the chapel of the Savov, before the French Congregation, which usually assembles in that place, upon the first day that divine service was there celebrated according to the Liturgy of the Church of England.” Translated into English by G. B. doctor in physic, Lond. 1662, 4to. 2. “A View of the Government and public Worship of God in the reformed churches of England, as it is established by the act of uniformity,” Lond. 1662, 4to. Exceptions having been made to this book by the nonconformists, partly m a book called “Apologia pro ministris trt Anglia (vulgo) noneonformistis,” by an anonymous author, supposed to be Henry Hickman, he published, 3. “Sanctae Ecclesise Anglicanao ad versus iniquas atque inverecundas Schismaticorum Criminationes, Vindiciae.” The presbyterians, taking great offence at it, published these answers: 1. “Bonasus Vapulans or some castigations given to Mr. John Durel for fouling himself and others in his English and Latin book,” Loud. 1672, 8vo, reprinted in 1676 under this title, “The Nonconformists vindicated from the Abuses put upon them by Mr. Durel and Mr. Scrivner.” 2. Dr. Lewis Du Moulin published also this answer thereto: “Patronus bonre fidei, in causa Puritanorum,” &c Lond. 1672, 8vo. Besides these, Dr. Durel published his “Theoremata philosophise,” consisting of some theses maintained at the university of Caen; a French and Latin edition of the Common Prayer Book; and a French translation of the Whole Duty of Man, partly written by his wife.

The incidents of Albert Durer’s life have been variously represented, and modern critics have entertained various opinions of his skill. Referring to our authorities for some of these, we shall conclude this article with what has been advanced by his latest critic, Mr. Fuseli. He seems, says this artist, to have had a general capacity, not only for every branch of his art, but for every science that stood in some relation with it. He was perhaps the best engraver of his time. He wrote treatises on proportion, perspective, geometry, civil and military architecture. He was a man of extreme ingenuity, without being a genius. He studied, and as far as his penetration reached, established rtain proportions of the human frame, but he did not invent or compose a permanent standard of style. Every work of his is a proof that he wanted the power of imitation; of concluding from what he saw, to what he did not see; that he copied rather than imitated the forms of individuals, and tacked deformity and meagreness to fulness, and sometimes to beauty. Such is his design. In composition, copious without taste, anxiously precise in parts, and unmindful of the whole, he has rather shewn us what to avoid than what to follow: in conception he sometimes had a glimpse of the sublime, but it was only a glimpse. Such is the expressive attitude of his Christ in the Garden, and the figure of Melancholy as the Mother of Invention. His Knight attended by Death and the Fiend, is more capricious than terrible, and his Adam and Eve are two common models, hemmed in by rocks. If he approached genius in any part of the art, it was in colour. His colour went beyond his age, and in easel-pictures, as far excelled the oil-colour of Raphael for juice and breadth, and handling, as Raphael excels him in every other quality. His drapery is broad, though much too angular, and rather snapt than folded. Albert is called the Father of the German school, and if numerous copyists of his faults can confer that honour, he was. That the exportation of his works to Italy should have effected a temporary change in the principles of some Tuscan artists, in Andrea del Sarto and Jacopo da Pontormo, who had studied Michel Angelo, is a fact which proves that minds at certain periods may be as subject to epidemic influence, as bodies.

, a gentleman of considerable literary and political knowledge, was descended from a protestant family in France, which his father left about the beginning of the last century, in order to reside in England, where he had an opulent brother, but not finding the climate agree with him, returned to France. There he married, and became the father of seven children, one of whom, the subject of this memoir, was born in 1729, and assumed the name of Duchiiion from a small estate so called, which had long been the property of his ancestors. His talents, according to his own account, were extraordinary; in his fifth year he was a proficient at chess; and at ten, he composed comedies for his amusement, enigmas for the Mercure de France, epigrams in the news of the day, and madrigals for the ladies. He read much in romances, belles lettres, poetry, history, and morality, and though somewhat roving and unsettled in his disposition, had evidently laid in a very large stock of general knowledge. After various youthful adventures, which form a very amusing part of his “Memoires d'un Voyageur,” &c. which he published a few years before his death, we find him appointed, in 1758, chaplain (for he was then in orders) and secretary to the hon. Stuart M'Kenzie, envoy extraordinary to the court of Turin.

Before he quitted Turin, Mr. M'Kenzie’s interest with the duke of Northumberland, then lord lieutenant of Ireland, procured him the promise of a deanery in that kingdom, which he declined accepting; but soon after received from the same noble patron a presentation to the rectory of Elsdon in Northumberland, then worth 800l. a year; which induced him, in 1766, to return to England, where he received a present of 1000l. from the king, and was highly delighted with the reception he met with at Northumberland-house. In 1768 he performed an extensive tour through the continent with lord Algernon Percy, the duke of Northumberland’s son. In the course of this tour, some conversation at Genoa with the marchioness of Babbi, gave rise to a work which Mr. Dutens afterwards published at Rome under the title of “The Tocsin,” and afterwards at Paris, under the title of “Appel au bons sens.” After this tour was finished, he resided for some time at Paris, where he published several works, and lived in a perpetual round of splendid amusements. In 1776 he returned to London, and lived much with the Northumberland family, and with his early patron Mr. M'Kenzie, until lord Montstuart was appointed envoy-extraordinary to the court of Turin, whom he accompanied as his friend, but without any official situation, except that when lord Montstuart was called to England upon private business, he again acted for a short time as charge des affaires. After this, according to his memoirs, his time was divided for many years between a residence in London, and occasional tours to the continent, with the political affairs of which he seems always anxious to keep up an intimate acquaintance. At length the death of his first friend and patron placed him in easy if not opulent circumstances, as that gentleman left him executor and residuary legatee with his two nephews, lord Bute and the primate of Ireland. The value of this legacy has been estimated at 15,000l. which enabled Mr. Dutens to pass the remainder of his life in literary retirement and social intercourse, for which he was admirably qualified, not only by an extensive knowledge, but by manners easy and accommodating. In the complimentary strain of a courtier few men exceeded him, although his profuse liberality in this article was sometimes thought to lessen its value. He died at his house in Mount-street, Grosvenor-square, May 23, 1812, in his eighty-third year. Not many days before his death, he called, in a coach, on many persons of eminence with whom he had corresponded, for the sole purpose of returning the letters he had received from them. His publications, not already noticed were, 1 “Explications des quelques Medailles de peuple, de villes, et des rois Grecques et Pheniciennes,” 1773, 4to. 2. The same translated. 3. “Itineraire des Routes les plus frequentées; ou Journal d‘un Voyage aux Villes principales de l’Europe,” often reprinted. 4. “Histoire de ce qui s’est passe” pour establissement d'une Regence en Angleterre. Par M. L. D. Ne D. R. D. L. Ge. Be.“1789, 8vo; in which he adopted the sentiments of Mr. Pitt’s administration on the important question of the regency, which, he says, lost him the favour of a great personage. 5.” Recherches sur le terns le plus recule de l'usage des Voutes chez les Anciens,“1795. He wrote also the French text of the second volume of the Marlborough gems, a task for which he was well qualified, as he was an excellent classical antiquary and medallist. In 1771 he translated” The manner of securing all sorts of brick buildings from fire,“&c. from the French of count d'Espie. His last publication, in 1805, was his own history, in” Memoires d'un Voyageur," &c. of which we have availed ourselves in this sketch but, although this work may often amuse the reader, and add something to the knowledge of human nature, it will not perhaps create an unmixed regard for the character of the writer.

, an eminent English lawyer, was descended from an ancient and honourable family in Somersetshire, of the same family with sir Edward Dyer, the poet, who was fourth in descent from sir James Dyer’s great-grandfather. Sir James was the second son of Richard Dyer, esq. of Wincalton and Roundhill in Somersetshire, at the latter of which places he was born about the year 1512. Wood says he was a commoner of Broadgate-hall (now Pembroke college), Oxford, and that he left it, without taking a degree, probably about 1530, when he went to the Middle Temple. Here he appears to have rendered himself conspicuous for learning anil talents, as in 1552 he performed the office of autumnal reader to that society; a distinction which was at that time conferred only upon such as were eminent in their profession. He had, on May 10 preceding, been called to the degree of serjeant at law, and in the following November his abilities were rewarded with the post of king’s Serjeant. On the meeting of the last parliament of Edward VI. 1552-3, Dyer was chosen speaker of the house of commons (that office being considered in those days as peculiarly appropriated to lawyers of eminence), and in this capacity, on Saturday afternoon, March 4, made “an ornate oration before the king.” This is the only particular concerning the speaker which occurs in the Journals of that short parliament, which sat only for one month; and the dissolution of which was quickly followed by the death of that excellent young prince; whose successor, though in most respects she pursued measures totally opposite to those of his reign, continued the royal favour to Dyer, whom, Oct. 19, 1553, she appointed one of her serjeants, In this office his name appears as one of the commissioners. on the singular trial of sir Nicholas Throckmorton; when his jury, with a freedom rarely exercised in that unhappy period, ventured to acquit the prisoner. Our author’s behaviour on that occasion is not disgraced by any servile compliances with the views of the court; yet his regard for his own character was tempered with so much discretion, as not to occasion any diminution of her majesty’s protection; for on May 20, 1557, being at that time recorder of Cambridge, and a knight, he was appointed a judge of the common pleas, whence on April 23 of the next year, he was promoted to the queen’s bench, where he sat (though of the reformed religion) during the remainder of this reign as a puisne judge.

, an English poet, was born in 1700, the second son of Robert Dyer, of Aberglasney, in Caermarthenshire, a solicitor of great capacity and note. He passed through Westminster-school under the care of Dr. Freind, and was then called home to be instructed in his father’s profession. His genius, however, led him a different way; for, besides his early taste for poetry, having a passion no less strong for the arts of design, he determined to make painting his profession. With this view, having studied awhile under his master, he became, as he tells his friend, an itinerant painter, and wandered about South Wales and the parts adjacent; and about 1727 printed “Grongar Hill,” a poem which Dr. Johnson says, “is not very accurately written but the scenes which it displays are so pleasing, the images which they raise so welcome to the mind, and the reflections of the writer so consonant to the general sense or experience of mankind, that when it is once read, it will be read again.” Being probably unsatisfied with his own proficiency, he made the tour of Italy; where, besides the usual study of the remains of antiquity, and the works of the great masters, he frequently spent whole days in the country about Rome and Florence, sketching those picturesque prospects with facility and spirit. Images from hence naturally transferred themselves into his poetical compositions; the principal beauties of the “Ruins of Rome,” are perhaps of this kind, and the various landscapes in the “Fleece” have been particularly admired. On his return to England, he published the “Ruins of Rome,” 1740; but soon found that he could not relish a town life, nor submit to the assiduity required in his profession; his talent indeed, was rather for sketching than finishing; so he contentedly sat down in the country with his little fortune, painting now and then a portrait or a landscape, as his fancy led him. As his turn of mind was rather serious, and his conduct and behaviour always irreproachable, he was advised by his friends to enter into orders; and it is presumed, though his education had not been regular, that he found no difficulty in obtaining them. He was ordained by the bishop of Lincoln, and had a law degree conferred on him.

About the same time he married a lady of Coleshill, named Ensor; “whose grandmother,” says he, “was a Shakspeare, descended from a brother of every body’s Shakspeare.” His ecclesiastical provision was a long time but slender. His first patron, Mr. Harper, gave him in 1741, Calthorp in Leicestershire, of 80l. a year, on which he lived ten years; and in April 1757, exchanged it for Belchford, in Lincolnshire, of 75l. which was given him by lord-chancellor Hardwicke, on the recommendation of a friend to virtue and the muses. His condition now began to mend. In the year 1752 sir John Heathcote gave him Coningsby, of 140l. a-year; and in 1756, when he was LL. B. without any solicitation of his own, obtained for him, from the chancellor, Kirkby-on-Bane, of 110l. “I was glad of this,” says Mr. Dyer, in 1756, “on account of its nearness to me, though I think myself a loser by the exchange, through the expence of the seal, dispensations , journies, &c. and the charge of an old house, half of which I am going to pull down” The house, which is a very good one, owes much of its improvement to Mr. Dyer. His study, a little room with white walls, ascended by two steps, had a handsome window to the church-yard, which he stopped up, and opened a less, that gave him a full view of the fine church and castle at Tateshall, about a mile off, and of the road leading to it. He also improved the garden. In May 1757 he was employed in rebuilding a Lirge barn, which a late wind had blown down, and gathering materials for re-building above half the parsonage-house at Kirkby. “These,” he says, “some years ago, I should have called trifles but the evil days are come, and the lightest thing, even the grasshopper, is a burden upon the shoulders of the old and fickly.” He had then just published “The Fleece,” his greatest poetical work; of which Dr. Johnson relates this ludicrous story: Dodsley the bookseller was one day mentioning it to a critical visitor, with more expectation of success than the other could easily admit. In the conversation the author’s age was asked: and being represented as advanced in life, “he will,” said the critic, “be buried in woollen.” He did not indeed long outlive that publication, nor long enjoy the increase of his pre; ments; for a consumptive disorder, with which he had long struggled, carried him off at length, July 24, 1758. Mr. Gough, who visited Coningsby Sept.5, 17S2, could find no memorial erected to him in the church. Mr--. Dyer, on her husband’s decease, retired to her friends in Caernarvonshire. In 17.56 they had four children living, three girls and a boy. Of these, Sarah died single. The son, a youth of the most amiable disposition, heir to his father’s truly classical taste, and to his uncle’s estate of 300l. or 400l. a year in Suffolk, devoted the principal part of his time to travelling; and died in London, as he was preparing to set out on a tour to Italy, in April 1782, at the age of thirty-two. This young gentleman’s fortune was divided between two surviving sisters; one of them married to alderman Hewitt, of Coventry; the other, Elizabeth, to the rev. John Gaunt, of Birmingham. Mr. Dyer had some brothers, all of whom were dead in 1756, except one, who was a clergyman, yeoman of his majesty’s almonry, lived at Marybone, and had then a numerous family.

, successively bishop of Worcester and Salisbury, was born at York in the year 1601, and entered of Merton-college, Oxford, in 1620, where hebecame M. A. in 1624, was senior proctor in 1631, and about that time was created chaplain to Philip earl of Pembroke, who presented him with the living of Bishopston, in Wiltshire. He was afterwards appointed chaplain and tutor to prince Charles, and chancellor of the cathedral of Salisbury. For his steady adherence to the royal cause, he was deprived of every thing he possessed, and at length was compelled to fly into exile with Charles II. who made him his chaplain, and clerk of the closet. He was intimate with Dr. Morley, afterwards bishop of Winchester, and lived with him a year at Antwerp, in sir Charles Cotterel’s house, who was master of the ceremonies; thence he went into France, and attended James, duke of York. On the restoration he was made dean of Westminster, and on Nov. 30, 1662, was consecrated bishop of Worcester, and in Sept of the following year, was removed to the see of Salisbury, on the translation of Dr. Henchman to London. In 1665 he attended the king and queen to Oxford, who had left London on account of the plague. Here he lodged in University-college, and died Nov. 17, of the same year. He was buried in Mertoncollege chapel, near the high altar, where, on a monument of black and white marble, is a Latin inscription to his memory. Walton sums up his character by saying that since the death of the celebrated Hooker, none have lived “whom God hath blest with more innocent wisdom, more sanctified learning, or a more pious, peaceable, primitive temper.” When the nonconformist clergy stepped forward to administer to the relief of the dying in the great plague, what is called the Five-mile Act was passed, forbidding them, unless they took an oath against taking up arms on any pretence whatever, &c. to come within five miles of any city or town. Our prelate before his death declared himself much against this act. Burnet, who informs us of this, adds, that “he was the man of all the clergy for whom the king had the greatest esteem.”

, a Swedish divine, who became professor of philosophy at the university of Halle, and died at Stockholm, Jan. 6, 171)6, in the sixty-ninth year of his age, was a member of several learned societies, and owed much of his reputation to a work he published in German, called “An Inquiry into the doctrine respecting the salvation of Heathens,” or “The New apology for Socrates,” which was translated from German into French by Dumas, and published at Amsterdam in 1773, 8vo. It contains also a defence of Marmontel’s “Belisarius,” which at that time had occasioned a controversy in Holland and Germany. Eberhard had among his countrymen the reputation of a man who was a powerful advocate for revealed religion in its original simplicity.

, one of the early reformers, was born at Kitzingen in Franconia, Nov. 8, 1511, and was first educated in the college at Anspach. In 1525 he went to Nuremberg, and in 1532 the senate of that city sent him to Wittemberg, where he took his master’s degree in 1536. 'As he wrote a fair hand, Melancthon employed him as his amanuensis, and finding in him talents of a superior order, consulted him on all his undertakings, which made him be called by some, “Philip’s Repertory.” In 1544 he was appointed to the professorship of philosophy, and in 1556 to that of Hebrew, and this last year he took orders. Some time after he was sent to the college of Worms, along with Melancthon; and in 1558 was appointed first pastor of Wittemberg, in the room of Bugenhagius. He took the degree of doctor in 1559, and in 1568 went to Anspach, with Paul Crellius, to allay some disputes that had arisen among the clergy of that place. In this attempt he gave so much satisfaction to prince George Frederick, that he rewarded him liberally, and settled a pension on his son. He died Dec. 20, 1589. After the death of Melancthon, he was regarded as the firat of his disciples who were usually called Crypto-Calvinists, from being somewhat tacit and moderate in their principles. He was a man of great learning, and an eloquent preacher. The only works mentioned by his biographers are: “Expositio Evangelior. Dominicalium;” “Calendarium Historicum,” Wittem. 1550, 8vo, reprinted at Basil the same year; “Historia populi Judaici a reditu Babylonico ad Hierosolymae excidium;” and “Hymni sacri vernacule editi,” for the use of his church, where they long continued to be sung.

, from whom the sect of the Ebionites are called, lived about the year 72, and against him, as some say, St. John wrote his gospel. Others are of opinion, that they did not derive their name from the head of their sect, but from the Hebrew word ebion, which signifies a poor despicable man; either because they were poor themselves, or because they had low and dishonourable sentiments of Jesus Christ. Irenscus, in describing the heresy of the Ebionites, takes no notice of Ebion: and the silence of this father, together with the testimonies of Eusebius and Origen, make it probable that Ebion is only an imaginary name, or might possibly belong to Cerinthus. For Epiphanius, speaking of Ebion, tells the same story of him that is told of Cerinthus, viz. that of St. John’s hastening out of the bath when Cerinthus came in, for fear the building should fall upon him; and assures us also of his preaching in Palestine and Asia, which likewise agrees with Cerinthus’s history.

The Ebionites maintained, that Jesus Christ was only a mere man, descended from Joseph and Mary. They received no other gospel than that of St. Matthew, which they had in Hebrew, but very maimed and interpolated; and this they called the Gospel according to the Hebrews. They rejected the rest of the New Testament, and especially the epistles of Paul, looking upon this apostle as an apostate from the law: for they held, that every body was obliged to observe the Mosaic law. They made Saturday and Sunday equal holidays: they bathed themselves every day like the Jews, and worshipped Jerusalem as the house of God. They called their meetings synagogues, and not churches; and celebrated their mysteries every year with unleavened bread. They received the Pentateuch for canonical scripture, but not all of it. They had a veneration for the old patriarchs, but despised the prophets. They made use of forged Acts of the Apostles, as St. Peter’s travels, and many other apocryphal books. They held also the superstitions of their ancestors, and the ceremonies and traditions which the Pharisees presumptuously added to the law. The learned Mr. Jones looked upon the Ebionites and Nazarenes as differing very little from one another. He attributes to them both much the same doctrines, and alleges, that the Ebionites had only made some small additions to the old Nazarene system.

Many authors have preserved accounts of this prince’s writings. Cardan talks much of his parts and learning. Holland affirms that he not only wrote notes from the lectures or sermons he heard, but composed a comedy, entitled “The Whore of Babylon,” in Latin. It is more certain, howevar, that he wrote “The Sum of a conference with the Lord Admiral,” which, in his own hand, is extant among the Ashmolean Mss.; “A method for the proceedings in the council,” in the Cottonian library; and “King Edward VIth’s own arguments against the pope’s supremacy, &c.” translated out of the original, written with the king’s own hand in French, and still preserved. To which are added some remarks upon his life and reign, in vindication of his memory from Dr. Heylin’s severe and unjust censure, Lond. 1682. He drew himself the rough draught of a sumptuary law, which is preserved by Strype; and an account of a progress he made, which he sent to one of his particular favourites, called Barnahy Fiupatrick, then in France. The same author has given some specimens of his Latin epistles and orations, and an account of two books written by him; the first before he was twelve years of age, called “L'Encontre les Abus du Monde,” a tract of thirty-seven leaves in French, against the abuses of popery; it is dedicated to the protector, his uncle; is corrected by his French tutor, and attested by him to be of the king’s own composition. An original copy of this tract is noiv in the British Museum. The other, preserved in the library of Trinity college, Cambridge, is, “A Translation into French of several passages of Scripture, which forbid idolatry, or worshipping of false gods.” Tanner giresa list of Edward’s letters that are extant; and there is a large folio ms. in the British Museum, containing his exercises in Greek, Latin, and English, with his signature to each of them, as king of England. Cardan says that at die age of fifteen, our prince had learned seven languages, and was perfect in English, French, and Latin. Cardan adds, " he spoke Latin with as much readiness and elegance as myself. He was a pretty good logician; he understood natural philosophy and music, and played upon the lute. The good and the learned had formed the highest expectations of him, from the sweetness of his disposition, and the excellence of his talents. He had begun to favour learning before he was a great scholar himself, and to be acquainted with it before he could make use of it. Alas! how prophetically did he once repeat to me,

In 1759, a younger, and the only brother of his good uncle, came to England, and settling in London, took him to reside with him, in a high and elegant style of life. He was a representative in parliament for Abingdon, and afterward for his native town. This gentleman, in the latter end of the same year, sent him to Jamaica; which proved the happiest and most fortunate change in his life, as his uncle, to the most enlarged and enlightened mind, added the sweetest temper, and the most generous disposition. His tenderness toward Mr. Edwards was excessive, and he in return regarded him with more than filial affection and veneration. Observing his passion for books, and thinking favourably of his capacity, his uncle engaged a clergyman, a Mr. Teale, to reside in his family, chiefly to supply by his instructions Mr. Edwards’s deficiency in the learned languages. Mr. Teale had been master of a free grammar school, and beside being a most accomplished scholar, possessed an exquisite taste for poetry, of which the reader will be convinced by referring to the Gentleman’s Magazine for August 1771, the beautiful copy of verses, there first published, called “The Compliment of the Day,” being of his composition. Mr. Edwards, however, according to his own account, did not make any great progress in the languages under his tuition. He acquired “small Latin, and less Greek;” and never found it easy to read the Roman poets in their own language. Not having been grounded in the Latin grammar at an early period of life, he found the study of it insupportably disgusting, after he had acquired a taste for the beauties of fine writing. Poetry, however, was their chief amusement; for Mr. Teale, as well as himself, preferred the charms of Dryden and Pope, to the dull drudgery of poring over syntax and prosody. They preferred belles lettres; and laughed away many an hour over the plays of Moliere, and wrote verses on local and temporary subjects, which thev sometimes published in the Colonial newspapers. Yet the Latin classics were not altogether neglected; Mr. Teale delighted to point out to his pupil the beauties of Horace, and would frequently impose on him the task of translating an ode into English verse, which, with his assistance in construing the words, he sometimes accomplished.

, a famous presbyterian writer in the seventeenth century, and a bitter enemy to the independents, who then bore sway in this kingdom, was educated in Trinity-college, in Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1605, and that of M. A. in 1609. He was incorporated M. A. at Oxford, July 14, 1623. Where and what his preferments were, we do not find; but we learn from himself, that though he conformed, yet he was always a puritan in his heart. He exercised his ministry, chiefly as a lecturer, at Hertford, and at several places in and about London; and was sometimes brought into trouble for opposing the received doctrines, or not complying duly with the established church. When the long parliament declared against Charles I. our author espoused their cause, and by all his actions, sermons, prayers, praises, and discourses, earnestly promoted their interest. But, when the independent party began to assume the supreme authority, he became as furious against them as he had been against the royalists, and wrote the following pieces against them: 1. “Reasons against the Independent Government of particular Congregations,” &c. Lond. 1641, 4to which was answered the same year by a woman called Catherine Chidley. 2. “Antapologia,” or a full answer to the “Apologeticall Narration of Mr. Goodwin, Mr. Nye, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Burroughs, Mr. Bridge, members of the assembly of divines. Wherein is handled many of the controversies of these times; viz. I. Of a particular visible church. II. Of classes and synods. III. Of the Scriptures, how farre a rule for church government. IV. Of formes of prayer. V. Of the qualifications of church members. 6.” Of submission and noncommunion. VII. Of excommunication. VIII. Of the power of the civill magistrate in ecclesiasticals. IX. Of separation and schisme. X. Of tolerations, and particularly of the toleration of independencie. XI. Of suspension from the Lord’s supper. XII. Of ordination of ministers by the people. XIII. Of church covenant. XIV. Of non-residencie of church-members,“Lond. 1644, 4to. 3.” Gangnrna: or a catalogue and discovery of many of the errours, heresies, blasphemies, and pernicious practices of the sectaries of this time, vented and acted in England in these four last years as also a particular narration of divers stories, remarkable passages, letters an extract of many letters, concerning the present sects together with some observations upon, and corollaries from, all the forenamed premisses,“Lond. 1G46, 4to, reprinted afterwards. 4.” The second part of C'angrjena,“&c. Lond. 1646, 4to. 5.” The third part of Gangracna; or, A new and higher discovery of the errors, heresies, blasphemies, and insolent proceedings of the sectaries of these times; with some animadversions, by way of confutation, upon many of the errors and heresies named.“In these three parts of Gangrsena, he gives catalogues of the errors of the independents, and exposes the errors of the other sectaries of his time, in a manner which could not fail to render him particularly obnoxious to them, but at the same time in such a spirit of bitter invective, as must render many of his facts doubtful. He also published,' 6.” The casting down of the last and strongest hold of Satan; or, a Treatise against Toleration,“Part I. Lond. 1647, 4to. 7.” Of the particular visibility of the Church.“8.” A treatise of the Civil Power of Ecclesiasticals, and of suspension, from the Lord’s supper,“Lond. 1642, 1644. He promised several other pieces, but it does not appear that he published them; particularly, 1. A fourth Part of his Gangracna. 2. An Historical Narration of all the proceedings and ways of the English Sectaries. 3. Catalogue of the Judgments of God upon the Sectaries within these four years last past. 4. Many Tractates against the errors of the times. He promised likewise to resemble that tree spoken of in the Revelation, to yield fruit every month i. e. to be often setting forth one tractate or other but we do not hear of more than have been enumerated. As for his character, he professes himself” a plain, open-hearted man, who hated tricks, reserves, and designs;" zealous for the assembly of divines, the directory, the use of the Lord’s Prayer, singing of Psalms, &c. and so earnest for what he took to be truth, that he was usually called in Cambridge, young Luther.

, president of the college of New Jersey, and a divine of very considerable fame in America, was descended from English parents who emigrated in the reign of queen Elizabeth, and was born, Oct. 5, 1703, at Windsor, in the province of Connecticut in North- America. In 1716 he became a student of Yale college, and received the degree of B. A. in 1720, before he had completed his seventeenth year. His mental powers are said to have opened themselves so early and so strong, that he read Locke’s “Essay on the Human Understanding” with delight, in his second year at this college. After taking his bachelor’s degree he remained two years more at college preparing himself for the ministry, and after the usual trials, was licensed to preach. In August 1722 he was invited to preach to the English presbyterians at New York, where he continued with approbation above eight months; but as this society was too small to maintain a preacher, he returned in the spring of 1723 to his father’s house at Connecticut, where, for some time, he applied to his studies with great industry and perseverance; and severe application became habitual to him, although he was of a delicate constitution. In the spring of 1724, having taken his master’s degree, he was appointed tutor of Yale college, and notwithstanding his youth, and the time necessary to be devoted to his own improvement, he filled this office for two years in a manner which afforded his superiors no reason to repent of their choice. He would probably have remained longer here, had he not received, in Sept. 1726, an invitation from the people of Northampton in Connecticut, to become assistant to his mother’s father, Mr. Stoddard, who was the settled minister of the town. Having accepted this offer, he was ordained colleague to Mr. Stoddard, Feb. 15, 1727, when only in his twenty-fourth year, and continued pastor of this congregation until June 1750, at which time his congregation dismissed him with every mark of contempt and insult. This, however, will appear to reflect no discredit on Mr. Edwards, when the reader is told that the first cause of complaint against him was, his having detected and endeavoured to expose a combination of youths who had imported obscene books, and were corrupting one another’s principles with great eagerness. So many of these young men were connected with the best families, that the parents declared their children should not be called to an account, and all inquiry was stifled. Still, however, they could not have proceeded to expel their preacher, if they had not soon afterwards laid hold of another pretext, which arose from Mr. Edwards’s refusing to administer the sacrament to persons of notoriously loose lives. Meetings were held, in which he endeavoured to justify his opinions; but upon a decision, on the question of continuing him their pastor, he was left in a minority of 180, after a residence among them of twenty-four years, and a character of unimpeachable integrity and piety. As it is impossible to suppose that all his hearers joined in the above decision, he appears to have been supported for some time, by the kindness of those who admired his character, until sent on a mission to the Indians at Stockbridge, in the western part of Massachusett’s bay, about sixty miles from his former residence. Here he arrived in 1751, and enjoying a quiet retirement, employed himself at his leisure hours in composing the principal part of his works, until 1757, when, on the death of Mr. Aaron Burr, he was chosen president of New Jersey college. He had not, however, long commenced the business of his new office when the small-pox raging with great virulence, he caught the infection, although after inoculation, and died of the disorder March 22, 1758. Mr. Edwards was a man of extensive learning, principally in theology, and his avidity for knowledge was insatiable. He commonly spent thirteen hours a day in his study, and yet did not neglect the necessary exercises of walking and riding. He read all the books, especially in divinity, that he could procure, from which he could hope to get any help in his pursuit of knowledge. And in this, he did not confine himself to authors of any particular sect or denomination; but took much pains to procure the works of the most noted writers who advanced a scheme of divinity most contrary to his own, which was nearly that termed Calvinistic.

, a critic and poetical writer, was born in 1691), in or near the city of London, and was a younger son of Edwards, esq. a gentleman in the profession of the law. His grandfather had been of the same profession. The principal part of his grammatical education he is said to have received at a private school, and never was a member of either of the universities. At a proper age he was entered of Lincoln’s Inn and, in due time, was called to the bar but, having a considerable hesitation in his speech, he was discouraged from engaging much in the practice of the law. Although he never appears to have fallen into that dissipation which is sometimes chargeable upon young gentlemen of the inns of court, it may be conjectured, from his subsequent publications, that he applied himself more assiduously to the cultivation of the belles lettres than to the severer studies belonging to his profession. Shakspeare, in particular, was the object of his warmest admiration and most sedulous attention; and to this circumstance Mr. Edwards is principally indebted for his literary reputation. His first appearance from the press was in a pamphlet published, in 1744, and entitled “A Letter to the author of a late Epistolary Dedication, addressed to Mr. Warburton.” This was the beginning of our author’s attack upon that famous writer; which was followed, in 1747, by “A Supplement to Mr. Warburton’s edition of Shakspeare,” a performance so well received, that two impressions of it were printed in the same year. A third edition of it appeared in 1748, under the title of “The Canons of Criticism, and a Glossary, being a Supplement to Mr. Warburton’s edition of Shaky speare. Collected from the notes in that celebrated work, and proper to be bound up with it. By the other gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn;” which title the book has ever since retained. The expression of “the other gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn,” refers to a previous controversy of Warburton’s, upon a different topic, with another member of that society. Mr. Warburton, in the preface to his edition of Shakspeare, declares that it had been once his design to give the reader a body of canons for literary criticism, drawn out in form, together with a glossary; but that he had laid aside his purpose, as these uses might be well supplied by what he had occasionally said upon the subject in the course of his remarks. This idea Mr. Edwards humourously took up, and from the notes and corrections of Warburton’s Shakspeare, has framed a set of canons ridiculously absurd, each of which is confirmed and illustrated by examples taken from the edition in question; and it cannot be denied that Mr. Edwards has perfectly succeeded in his attempt, and that through the whole of his work he has displayed his wit, his learning, and his intimate acquaintance with Shakspeare; but such an attack upon Warburton, though conducted with pleasantry rather than ill-nature, was too formidable to avoid exciting resentment. Accordingly, Warburton introduced Mr. Edwards into the next edition of Pope’s “Dunciad” in a note under the following lines in the fourth book of that work:

, an enterprising Danish missionary, was a native of Denmark, horn Jan. 31, 1686, and was for some time a preacher at Trundheim, in Norway. Having heard that lung before his time some families of Norway had established themselves in Greenland, where the Christian religion was propagated by them, and even churches and convents built, be felt himself interested in the welfare of this colony, and curious to know its actual state; and although he was told that the ice rendered that country intolerable, that the people were savages, and that no traces were now to be found of the religion which they had been taught, he still persisted in his design of reviving an establishment there, and for some years made many unsuccessful attempts to procure the necessary means. At length Frederic IV. king of Denmark seemed disposed to second his efforts, and called together the body of merchants of Bergen, to know what assignee and what privileges they would grant to a company disposed to make the experiment of establishing a colony in Greenland. But these merchants could not be made to comprehend the utility of the plan, and nothing was done by them as a body. Egede, however, was not wholly disheartened, but visited the merchants individually, and by dint of solicitation, obtained a subscription amounting to 10,000 crowns, to which he added 300, which wasthe whole of his own property. He then built vessels fit for the voyage, and provided all necessaries the king appointed him missionary, with a salary of 300 crowns, and in May 1721, Egede Bet sail with his wife and children, full of ardent hopes. After many dangers, he landed on the Baals river, in West Greenland, and built a house. He now endeavoured to gain the confidence of the natives by kind approaches; be learned their language, and took every method to soften their manners, and enlighten their understandings. He also, as a very necessary step towards civilization, endeavoured to form a commercial establishment with them, and, some time after, the king sent other vessels and two more ecclesiastics to assist Egede in his undertaking. The colony then began to prosper; above 150 children were baptised and taught the principles of the Christian religion, and every thing wore a promising appearance, when, on the accession of Christian VI. to the throne, an order came to discontinue their proceedings. On this the greater part of the colonists returned home; but Egede persisted in remaining on the spot, and having persuaded about a dozen seamen to share his lot, he renewed his endeavours with success, and the following year a vessel arrived from the mother-country with provisions and men, and an order to persevere in the objects of the mission. Every succeeding year a vessel arrived with similar assistance, and Egede received 2000 crowns by each, for the annual expences of the colony, in the promotion of which he continued to labour with great zeal, until old age and infirmities obliged him to desist, when his eldest son, Paul, was appointed his successor. After a residence of fifteen years, the good old man returned to Copenhagen, and employed the remainder of his days in teaching the Greenland language to young missionaries. He died in the island of Falster, Nov. 5, 1758. A short time before this event, he published his “Description and Natural History of Greenland,” of which there has been a French translation by Roches de Parthenay, printed at Geneva, 1763, 8vo, and the same year a German translation by Knrnitz. There is also a German translation of “The Journal of his Mission,” printed at Hamburgh, 1740, 4to. His son Paul, who died in 1789, wrote an “Account of his own Mission,” which appeared in 1789, 8vo.

At the death of Dr. Bancroft, archbishop of Canterbury, who was chancellor of the university of Oxford, on the 2d of Nov. 1610, lord Ellesmere was the next day unanimously elected into that honourable office; and on the 10th, installed in the bishop of Durham’s house in London. At this period, that university was in a very flourishing tate in point of the number of its members, which amounted to more than 2420 but many of> them, and those of the senior part, were tainted with factious principles, both of a civil and religious nature. Convinced how destructive these ideas and principles, inculcated on the minds of the youth of the university, who were to be called forth to fill the several departments of church and state, would be of the future health and prosperity of the constitution, he bent his earliest attention to eradicate and correct them.

Neither the infirmities of. old age, nor the active exertions of a long and laborious life, devoted to the service of their country, are always a privilege which can shelter men from unmerited persecution. On the 19th of January, 1615, the lord chancellor being much indisposed, and novr in his seventy-fifth year, a professional attack from that great lawyer the lord chief justice Coke, though unable to damp the firmness of his spirit, threw an additional weight of anxiety upon his minfl. Sir Edward Coke had heard and determined a cause at common law, but there was some collusion in the matter; for, the witness that knew, and should have related the truth, was prevailed upon to absent himself, on condition that some person would undertake to excuse his non-appearance. A fellow of the party undertook it, in a whimsical manner: he went with the witness to a tavern, called for a gallon of sack, and bade bim drink; and, leaving him in the act of drinking, went immediately into court. This witness was called for, on, whose evidence the issue of the cause depended, when the fellow answered upon oath, “that he left him in such a condition, that, if be continued in it but a quarter of an hour, he was a dead man.” This evidence of the witness’s incapacity to appear in court lost the cause. The plaintiffs removed it into chancery; and the defendants, having ajreadj ha4 judgment at common law, refused to obey tUe orders of that court; on which the chancellor, for contempt of cdurt, committed them to prison. Thejr preferred two indictments against his Jordship the last day of Hilary term, and he was threatened with a preemunire in the star-chamber upon the statutes 27 Edw. III. and 4 Hen. IV. The lord chancellor being recovered of his indisposition, pursued this affair in Easter Term with great spirit and alacrity; and, it being brought to a hearing before the king as supreme judge of the jurisdiction of courts, he referred the matter to sir Francis Bacon and sir Henry Yelverton, his attorney and solicitor, sir Henry Montague and sir Ranulph Crewe, his Serjeants, and Mr. Walter, the prince’s attorney, all eminent men in their profession, who, upon a serious consideration of the statutes, and the occasion of making them, and of the precedents since that tirne^ in April 1616 presented the king with their opinions and reasons why they conceived these statutes did not extend to the court of chancery. Consonant to this resolution^ his majesty, upon farther advice, gave judgment in July following. “That the statute of 27 E. III. ch. 1. and 4 Hen. IV. did not extend to the court of chancery: for the first was enacted against those who sued at Rome, and the latter was 'designed to settle possessions against disturbances, and not to take away remedy in equity.” Upon this, his majesty ordered the case, the certificate, and the transactions thereupon, to be enrolled in the court of chancery.

His lordship left four manuscripts of choice collections. 1. “The Prerogative Royal. 2. The Privileges of Parliament. 3. Proceedings in Chancery. 4. The Power of the Star-Chamber;” and, when he was lying upon his death-bed, to testify his affection to his chaplain Williams, he desired him to chuse what most acceptable legacy he should leave him; when Williams requested only these four books, and having been the principal instruments of his future fortunes, he so highly valued as to deem them a present fit to be offered to king James, to whom he gave them. In lord chancellor Egctrton’s life-time was printed in quarto, in sixteen sheets, Lond. 1609, his “Speech in the Exchequer-chamber,” in Robert C'alvine’s cause, son and heir-apparent of James lord Calvine, of Colcross, in the realm of Scotland, commonly called the case of the postnati. In 1641 was printed at London “The Previleges and Prerogatives of the high court of Chancery, written by the right honourable Thomas lord Ellesmere, late lord chancellor of England.” In 1651 there was published at London a small octavo book, entitled “Certaine Observations concerning the office of Lord Chancellor,” composed by the right honourable and most learned Thomas lord Ellesmere, late lord chancellor of England, small octavo, extracted chiefly from records. And Mr. George Paul published some papers found amongst the manuscripts of Mr. Laughton, of Cambridge, which were said to have been written with the lord chancellor Egerton’s own hand. These were entitled “The lord chancellor Egerton’s Observations on the lord Coke’s Reports, particularly in the debate of causes relating to the Right of the Church, the Power of the king’s Prerogative, the Jurisdiction of Courts, or the Interest of the Subject;” but it is not generally agreed that these papers are truly ascribed to lord chancellor Egerton. There is, however, in Mr. Hargrave’s collection of law manuscripts, a piece entitled “Abridgment of the lord Coke’s Reports under the lord Egerton’s own hand.” It contains a short account of each case in the eleven volumes of Reports published by lord Coke himself; and, probably, was a labour undergone by lord chancellor Egerton, as a preliminary to his observations on lord Coke’s Reports. There is also in Mr. Hargrave’s collection a piece with tbis title, “Observations upon lord Coke’s Reports, made by the lord chancellor Egerton, taken by me out of his own papers, written with his own hand.” These observations are not the same as those in print, but seem to be additional. Who the transcriber was does not appear.

, third duke of Bridgewater, was born in 1736, and was the fifth son of Scroop, the first duke of Bridgewater, by lady Rachel Russel: by the death of his brothers, he succeeded, on the demise of his brother John, second duke, in 1748, to the Lille and estates. Of those illustrious characters that have done honour to the British peerage, the duke of Bridgewater deserves to be placed in the first rank. That time and fortune which too many others have devoted to purposes, if not injurious to society, at least useless, his grace spent in pursuits that entitle him to be called the benefactor of his country.

, a very eminent antiquary, and particularly conversant in Greek, Roman, and German antiquities, was born at Bremen May 23, 1639, of a distinguished family. He studied at various seminaries, principally those of Helmstadt and Leipsic, and travelled into Swisserland, Italy, Spain, and France. On his return to his native country in 1679, he was received into the college called the college of ancients, and was deputed by the members of it to go to the imperial court, in order to explain some differences which had arisen between the magistrates and burgesses of Bremen. In this he acquitted himself so much to their satisfaction, that when he returned, in 1679, he was appointed secretary to the republic, an office which he held with great reputation until his death, Feb. 15, 1713. His antiquarian pursuits produced, I. “De nuinismatibus quibusdam abstrusis Neronis, cum Car. Patino per epistolas disquisitio,” Bremen, 1681, 4 to. 2. “Mysteria Cereris et Bacchi, in vasculo ex uno onyche,” ibid. 1682, 4to, reprinted by Gronovius in vol. VII. of his Greek Thesaurus. 3. “Discussio calumniarum Fellerianarum,” 1687, 4to, which Feller had provoked by his “Epicrisis,” and by his “Vindicise adversus Eggelingium,” published at Leipsic, 1685. 4. “De orbe stagneo Antinoi, epistola,” 1691, 4to. 5. “De Miscellaneis Germanise antiquitatibus exercitationes quinque,” 1694 1700.

, in Latin Elichius, lived at the beginning of the seventeenth century, and probably was born at Marpurg. He there maintained a public dispute on diabolical magic, in which he implicitly believed, and would have printed a book on the same subject, if the magistrates had not taken care to prevent it; who, on searching his house, found several books on which he had written immoral and impious notes. The books were confiscated, and he was cited before the judges; to whom he promised upon oath and in writing, that he would renounce such frivolous studies for the future; yet he published his book at Francfort in 1607, under the title of ' De dapmoijomagia, de daemonis cacurgia, et lamiarum c-ner-gia,“with a very angry preface against the academical senate of Marpurg. In this work he arrogantly contends against those who doubt of the truth of what is related of witches, hd of their being really conveyed through the air to their meetings. He particularly attacks Tobias Tandler, professor of medicine at Wirtemberg, who had published an oration” De fascino et incantatione,“in 1606. This Tandler reprinted in 1607, with some other tracts of the same nature, and added a short reply to the calumnies of Elichius,” Repulsio calumniarum Elichii,“from which Bayle took the materials of this article. Elichius, being informed that he was to be called to account for his book, made his escape, and turned Roman catholic. He is said by Bayle to have published at Francfort, in 1609, another book, entitled” Innocentius; sive de miseria hominis, libri tres, in ignominiam et confusionem superborum editi.“But Moreri thinks he was only the editor, and that it is the same which is attributed to Innocent III. and of which there is a Paris edition of 1645, entitled” D. Innocentiae papre, de contemptu mundi, sive de miseria humans conditionis, libri tres."

, a Jewish rabbi in high repute among them, wrote a book called the “Chapters of Eliezer,” which was partly historical, and partly allegorical. The Jews, who consider it as one of their most ancient books, would refer the time of this author to the first century; but father Worin has very ably proved that he lived in the seventh, and that he was an impostor who assumed the ancient name of Eliezer to give currency to his work, which is a collection of fables from the Talmud, &c. Vorstius translated this work into Latin, and published it in 1644, 4to, with notes, &c. and although he allows that it contains much fabulous matter, yet thinks it may be useful in explaining some parts of the history and traditions of the Jews.

Mr. Eliott returned in his seventeenth year to his native country of Scotland, and was in the same year, 1735, introduced by his father, sir Gilbert, to lieutenant-colonel Peers of the 23d regiment of foot, or royal Welsh fuzileers, then lying in Edinburgh. Sir Gilbert presented him as a youth anxious to bear arms for his king and country. He was accordingly entered as a volunteer in that regiment, and continued for a twelvemonth or more. At this time he gave a promise of his future military talents, and shewed that he was at least a soldier in heart. From the 23d he went into the engineer corps at Woolwich, and made great progress in that study, until his uncle, colonel Eliott, introduced him as adjutant of the 2d troop of horsegrenadiers. In this situation he conducted himself with the most exemplary attention, and laid the foundation of that discipline which has rendered those two troops the finest corps of heavy cavalry in Europe. With these troops he went upon service to Germany, in the war before last, and was with them in a variety of actions, particulars’ at the battle of Dettingen, where he was wounded. In this regiment he first bought the rank of captain and major, and afterwards purchased the lieutenant-colonelcy from colonel Brewerton, who succeeded to his uncle. On arriving at this rank he resigned his commission as an engineer, which he had enjoyed along with his other rank, and in which service be had been actively employed very much to the advantage of his country. He bad received the instructions of the famous engineer Bellidor, and made himself completely master of the science of gunnery. Had he not so disinterestedly resigned his rank in the engineer department, he would now by regular progression have been at the head of that corps. Soon after this he was. appointed aid-de-camp to king George II. and was already distinguished for his military skill and discipline. In 1759 be quitted the second troop of horse grenadier guards, being selected to raise, form, and discipline the first regiment of light horse, called after him Eliott’s. As soon as they were raised and formed, he was appointed to the command of the cavalry, in the expedition on the coasts of France, with the rank of brigadier- general and after this he passed into Germany, where he was employed on the staff, and greatly distinguished himself in a variety of movements, while his regiment displayed a strictness of discipline, an activity, and enterprise, which gained them signal honour; and indeed they have been the pattern regiment, both in regard to discipline and appointment, to the many light dragoon troops that have been since raised in our service. From Germany he was recalled for the purpose of being employed as second in command in the memorable expedition against the Havannah. The circumstances of that conquest are well known. It seems as if our brave veteran had always in his eye the gallant Lewis de Velasco, who maintained his station to the last extremity, and, when his garrison were flying from his side, or falling at his feet, disdained to retire or call for quarter, but fell gloriously exercising his sword upon his conquerors. A circumstance which occurred immediately after the reduction shews, that in the very heat and outrages of war the general was not unmindful of the rights of humanity. He was particularly eminent among the conquerors of the Havannah, for his disinterested procedure, and for checking the horrors of indiscriminate plunder. To him, therefore, appeals were most frequently made. A Frenchman, who had suffered greatly by the depredations of the soldiery, made application to him, and begged, in bad English, that he would interfere to have his property restored. The petitioner’s wife, who was present, a woman of great spirit, was angry at the husband for the intercession, and said, “Comment pouvez vous demander de grace a uu homme qui vient vous de‘pouilliefr N’en esperez pas.” The husband persisting in his application, his wife grew more loud in the censure, and said, “Vous n'étes pas François!” The general, who was busy writing at the time, turned to the woman, and said smiling, “Madame, ne vous échauffez pas; ce que votre mari demande lui sera accordé!”—“Oh, faut-il pour surcroit de malheur,” exclaimed the woman, “que le barbare parle le François!” The general was so very much pleased with the woman’s spirit, that he not only procured them their property again, but also took pains to accommodate them in every respect; and such was through life the manly characteristic of the general: if he would not suffer his troops to extend, for the sake of plunder, the ravages of war, he never impoverished them by unjust exactions. He would never consent that his quarter-master’s place should be sold, “not only,” says he, “because I think it the reward of an honest veteran soldier; but also because I could not so directly exercise my authority in his dismission should he behave ill.”

He was undoubtedly one of the most useful persons of his age in the infant state of America; -and such was his charity that he distributed all he received from his own congregation among the Indians. He wrote several pamphlets, giving accounts of the “Progress of the Gospel among the Indians in New England,” 4to, which were regularly sent over to the corporation in London, and printed by them. He published also an “Indian Grammar,” Camb. 1666, 4to; and “The Logiek Primer for the use of the Indians,” 1672, 16mo. We are also told that he was the author of a tract or volume called “The Christian Republic,” which is said to have been published in England about 1660, but that the governor and council of Massachusetts, conceiving that it militated against the established governments, and especially against the monarchy of the mother country, insisted upon its being suppressed, and that the author should retract his sentiments. This he is said to have done, by allowing that a government by king, lords, and commons, has nothing in it hostile to Christianity. Other works ace ascribed to him, which, we do not find mentioned by any of his biographers.

, a physician of Prussia, was born at Pletzaw, in the principality of Anhalt-Bernburgh, in 1689. He received the first rudiments of education at home under a private tutor, and was then sent to the university of Quedlinburgh, and thence to Jena, in 1709. His father intended him for the law; but a passion which he expressed for mathematical and physical researches, soon altered that design, and determined young Eller to follow the profession of physic. As Jena afforded no opportunity for the study of anatomy, he was removed to Halle, and soon after to Ley den, to finish his education under the celebrated Albinus, and the learned Sengerd and Boerhaave. Thence he passed to Amsterdam for the advantage of hearing the lectures of Rau, and examining the preparations of iluysch, and he followed Rau to Leyden, on the latter being appointed to succeed professor Bidloe. Having quitted Leyden, he spent some time in the mines of Saxony and Hartz, where he completed his chemical studies, and made astonishing progress in metallurgy and other parts of natural knowledge. On his visiting Paris, he attended several new courses in chemistry, under Lemery and Homberg, while he was pursuing his anatomical studies under the direction of Pecquet, du Verney, Winslow, and acquiring physiological and practical knowledge by the assistance of Astruc, Helvetius, Jussieu, &c. Though every branch of medical knowledge, and particularly surgery, was successfully practised in Paris, the reputation of Cheselden’s operation for the stone, and the ambition of being known to the immortal Newton, drew Mr. Eller to England, where he arrived in company with the earl of Peterborough, and remained five months. Leaving London in 1721, he returned to his own country, and was immediately honoured with the place of first physician to his sovereign the prince of Anhalt-Bernburgh; but he afterwards removed to Magdeburgh, where he soon attracted the notice of the king of Prussia, Frederick I. by whom he was made physician in ordinary, counsellor of the court, professor of the royal college of physic and surgery at Berlin, physician to the army, and perpetual dean of the superior college of medicine; employments equally honourable and lucrative. On the accession of Frederick II. he was farther promoted, and in 1755 was created a privy counsellor, the greatest honour to which he could possibly arrive, in his career as a scholar; and the same year he was appointed director of the academy called “Curieux de la nature,” where, according to the custom of the society, he was introduced by the name of Euphorbio. These employments and dignities he retained to his death in 1759. After his death was published a work by him, entitled “Observationes de cognoscendis et curandis morbis, praescrtim acutis, 1762, 8vo, which was translated into French by Le Roy, 1774, 12mo. This work is chiefly founded on the results of his long practice. He wrote also various papers in the Transactions of the Academy of Berlin, for the years 1748, 1749, and 1752, which with other pieces by him were collected and published, in German, under the title of” Physical, chemical, and medical treatises," Berlin, 1764, 2 vols. 8vo.

, an artist, was the son of an able physician, and was born at Gottemburg the I 8th of September 1633, according to Houbraken, and in 1632 by Weyermann’s account. Ottomar’s father centred all his views in making his son a scholar, and he therefore put him to study the languages under the most famous professors. It was soon perceived that he relaxed in his progress in every other of his lessons, in proportion as his taste for painting was unfolded: and that in the very classes and school-hours he was secretly practising with the crayon. Chastisements were even found ineffectual to his correction, notwithstanding the obstinacy of his mother in not altering her purpose. A lucky accident delivered our young man from this disagreeable situation. One day a poor person desired to speak in private with the physician: the beggar displayed to him his extreme distress in several languages. The wife of the physician, who was present at this conversation, said to her husband, “Since I see that there are men of learning in indigence as well as painters, I think it altogether indifferent to which profession my son applies; let him satisfy his own inclination.” Elliger was then placed at Antwerp in the school of Daniel Segers, the Jesuit; where he learnt to paint flowers and fruit, and at length equalled his master. He was called to the court of Berlin, where he was highly honoured for his talents, and the elector Frederic William appointed him his principal painter. This prince found great amusement in conversing with Elliger, and his smart replies on all occasions pleased him so much, that he made frequent visits to his lodgings. This agreeable life, in which he found much profit as well as pleasure, continued till his death, the year of which is not known. Elliger’s works, which are as much sought after as those of his master, are principally in Germany, where they are preserved with the utmost care.

In botany Ellis distinguished himself by an account of two new genera, the Halesia and Gardenia, both American shrubs, the former named after his learned friend the Rev. Dr. Hales, the latter named after Dr. Garden, long resident in Carolina. He published also a pamphlet on the Venus’s Fly-trap; and was the author of a fourth new genus, Gordonia, named after Mr. Gordon of Mile-end, which was described in the 60th vol. of the Philosophical Transactions, along with a new species of Illicium, or Starry Anise, from West Florida. In the 57th vol. of the Trans. Mr. Ellis describes some Confervae, hitherto unknown. One of his most favourite botanical objects was to ascertain the true Varnish-tree of Japan, which he contends, in opposition to Miller (See Philos. Trans, vols. XLIX. and L.), to be distinct from the American Toxicodendron, and the point seems not yet well determined. Our author published separately an historical account of Coffee, with remarks oa its culture and use, and a plate of the shrub; also a description of theMangostan and Bread-fruit, with four plates. These are quarto pamphlets, and the latter contains many useful “directions to voyagers, for bringing over these and other vegetable productions.” This last subject frequently engaged Mr. Ellis’s attention, and makes a separate quarto pamphlet, published in 1770. In the 51st and 58th volumes of the Phil. Trans, are papers of his on the preservation of seeds. Nor were these all the scientific pursuits of his indefatigable mind. He wrote also in the Trans, various other papers on Corals, Sea Pens, and other animals of the same tribe, as well as on the Cochineal insect; on the Coluber cerastes, or horned viper of Egypt; on that singular animal, found by his friend Garden in Carolina, the Siren lacertina of Linnæus, now esteemed a Muracna; on the structure of the windpipes in several birds and in the land tortoise; and even on the method of making sal ammoniac in Egypt. It appears, moreover, by many specimens of his collecting, that he was an assiduous observer of the internal structure or anatomy of vegetables. In Nov. 1768, sir Godfrey Copley’s medal was delivered to him by sir John Pringle, then president; and it being usual to single out some one or two papers in particular for such a compliment, one “on the animal nature of the genus of Zoophytes called Corallina,” in a letter to Linnæus, and another “on the Actinia Sociata,” in a letter to the earl of Hillsborough, both printed in the 57ih vol. of the Transactions, were selected for this purpose.

The last year of his life was that which his friends look back to with concern. Having entrusted a sum of money to an artful person who was declared a bankrupt, he became alarmed, and apprehensive that he should be left to want in his old age. With a degree of delicacy which belongs only to those who think above the vulgar, it is feared that he suffered these doubts to prey upon his mind, without disclosing the state of it to any of those whose assistance he had every reason to rely on. At length an accident brought his situation to the notice of one of his friends, and measures were taken to make him easy in his circumstances for the remainder of his life, by means which would certainly have been effectual. From this time he resigned the conduct of himself to his friends, and resumed his accustomed cheerfulness. He received visits, and conversed with the same gaiety he had been used to in his best days; and from the vigour of his constitution, afforded hopes that he would pass a few years with comfort. These expectations were not realized: nature at length gave way. On the 17th of December, 1791, he had a fit, from which he recovered, and was well enough on the 20th to remove to lodgings which had been taken for him. For a few days he seemed to be well, and at ease both in mind and body, but shortly after appeared to have caught a cold, and gradually grew worse. On the SjOth he was cold, his lips black, and his countenance much altered. To a friend who called on him be said he had lost his feeling; and being told it was probable it would return, he replied “That I don't know.” His friend then said, “As it has always been your maxim, sir, to look on the brightest side, we may draw this conclusion, that if you have no feeling, you feel no pain;” to which he answered with great earnestness, “'Tis very true.” The next day, about 12 o'clock, sitting in his chair, he without any struggle leaned his head back, and expired. On the 5th day of January he was buried in the parish church of St. Bartholomew, Exchange, accordingto the directions of his will, and was attended by the majority of the common-council, who voluntarily acted as pall-bearers, to pay respect to his memory. A mural tablet, with an inscription to his memory, has since been erected.

, a learned prelate of the church of England, was born in 1693. Who his parents were, and what was the place of his birth, we are not informed, nor have any reason to suppose him related to the subject of the following article. After having gone through a proper course of grammatical education, he was entered of Clarehall, in the university of Cambridge, where he took his bachelor’s degree in 1712, and that of master of arts in 1716. It is highly probable that he likewise became a fellow of his college. Some time after, having taken holy orders, ne was in 1724 promoted to the vicarage of St. Olave, Jewry, and to the rectory of St. Martin, Iremonger lane, which is united to the former. In 1725, he was presented, by the lord chancellor Macclesfield, whose chaplain he is said to have been, to a prebendal stall in the cathedral church of Gloucester. On the 25th of April, 1728, when king George the Second paid a visit to the university of Cambridge, Mr. Ellys was created doctor of divinity, being one of those who were named in the chancellor’s list upon that occasion. In 1736, when the protestant dissenters were engaged in endeavouring to obtain a repeal of the corporation and test acts, Dr. Ellys appeared in opposition to that measure, and published a work, entitled “A Plea for the Sacramental Test, as a just security to the Church established, and very conducive to the welfare of the State,” 4to, an elaborate performance, written with great ability and learning. In 1749, Dr. Ellys published a sermon, which he preached before the house of commons on the thirtieth of January. This discourse, the text of which was Mat. xxii. 21, was printed, as then was customary, at the request of the house. Our author’s next publication was early in 1752, being “Remarks on an Essay concerning Miracles, published by David Hume, esq, among his Philosophical Essays,” 4to. In this small piece, which was written in a sensible and genteel manner, Dr. Ellys considered what Mr. Hume had advanced, relating to miracles, in a somewhat different light from what had been done by Dr. Rutherforth and Mr. Adams; but the tract being anonympus, and coming after what Mr. Adams had so admirably written on the same subject, it did not, perhaps, excite that attention which, it deserved. In October, 1752, Dr. Ellys was promoted to the see of St. David’s, in the room of the honourable Dr. Richard Trevor, translated to the bishopric of Durham, and was consecrated February 28, 1753. It had for many years been understood, that our author was engaged in preparing, and had frequently declared his intention of publishing, a work, the design of which should be to illustrate, confirm, and vindicate, the principles of religious liberty, and the reformation from popery, founded upon them. This design recommended him to the notice of the excellent persons at that time in administration, and particularly to archbishop Herring; and it was the reputation of being employed in the accomplishment of it, that occasioned Dr. Ellys’s advancement to the high station which he held in the church. Why our prelate never completed his design during his life-time, and why he received no farther marks of favour, from the great personages who first countenanced him, is not known. Dr. Ellys, after his promotion to the bishopric of St. )avid’s, continued to bold his prebend of Gloucester, and his city living in commendam; and besides his other preferments, he was vicar of Great Marlow, Bucks. In 1754, he published the sermon which he had preached before the house of lords on the thirteenth of January. The text was 1 Pet. ii. 16. In 1758, he was called to a similar service, before the tame house, on the twenty-ninth of May, being the anniversary of king Charles the Second’s restoration. The last discourse published by him was in 1759, having been delivered, from John xv. 8. before the society for propagating the gospel in foreign parts. On the seventeenth of January, 1761, our prelate died at Gloucester, and was buried in the South aile of the cathedral there, where a neat pyramidal monument is erected to his memory, with an epitaph on a tablet of white marble, supported by a cherub.

In 1753 he made a poetical version of the younger Racine’s poem of “Religion,” which we are told was approved by Young. About the same time he composed an English grammar for the use of his school, which he afterwards enlarged and published in 2 vols. 12mo. This is by far the most useful of his works, and perhaps the only one likely to live. The late Mr. John Walker, a very competent judge, always spoke highly of this work. In the year 1763, Mr. Elphinston published a poem called “Education” but his taste was ill-adapted to poetry, of which unfortunately he never could be persuaded and this erroneous estimate of his talents led him to translate Martial, for which he issued proposals about 1778, and was at least fortunate in the number of his subscribers. Previous to this he had, for what reason we are not told, given up his school, and in 1778 removed altogether from Kensington, where, in the same year, his wife died. He then visited Scotland, and while in that city there was a design started of establishing a professorship of modern languages in the university of Edinburgh, with a view that Mr, Elphinston should fill the chair; but although this never took place, he gave a course of lectures on the English language, both at Edinburgh and Glasgow.

, an eminent Scotch prelate, descended from a noble family in Germany, the counts of Helphinstein, was the son of John, or as some say, William Elphinston and Margaret Douglas, daughter of Douglas of Drumlanrig, and was horn at Glasgow in 1431, or, according to another account, in 1437. He was educated in the newly-erected university of Glasgow, and in the twentieth year of his age became M. A. He then applied himself to the study of divinity, and was made rector of Kirkmichael. After continuing four years in this situation, he went to Paris, where he acquired such reputation in the study of the civil and canon law, as to attract the attention of the university; and he was advanced to the professorship of civil and canon law, first at Park, and afterwards at Orleans, where his lectures were attended by a great concourse of students. The improvement of his own mind, however, being the particular object of his solicitude, he canvassed the most abstruse and difficult parts of his profession with the most eminent and learned doctors of the age. After nine years’ intense study in France, he returned home at the earnest solicitations of his friends, particularly bishop Muirhead, who made him parson of Glasgow, and official of his diocese; and as a mark of respect he was chosen rector of that university in which he had been educated. After the death of his friend and patron, Ivluirbead, he was made official of Lolhian, by archbishop Schevez, of St. Andrew’s; and at the same time was called to parliament, and to a seat in the privycouncil. As his talents were of the most acute and discerning kind, he embraced subjects remote from his religious studies, and became conspicuous as an able politician and skilful negociator. In this capacity he was employed by James III. on an embassy to France, in conjunction with Livingstone, bishop of Dunkeld, and the earl of fiuchan. It is said that he managed so dextrously, that the old league and amity were renewed, and all cause of discord between the two kingdoms removed. The French monarch was so charmed with his conduct and conversation, that he loaded him with valuable presents. When he returned home, he was made archdeacon of Argyle, in 1479, and soon after bishop of Ross; and in 1484, he was translated to the see of Aberdeen. His address in negociation induced the king to send him as one of the commissioners from Scotland to treat of a truce with England, and a marriage between his son and the lady Anne, the niece of Richard III.

When the earl of Richmond came to the crown of England as Henry VII. bishop Elphinston was sent to his court, with other ambassadors, to arrange the terms of a truce, which was accordingly settled for three years on July 3, 1486. The discontent of the nobles threatening to involve the country in a civil war, Elphinston mediated between them and the king; but, finding it impossible to reconcile their jarring interests, he went to England about the latter end of 1487, to solicit the friendly interposition of Henry, as the ally of the Scotish king; and although he did not succeed as he wished and expected, king James was so sensible of the value of his services, that he advanced him in February 1488, to the office of lord high chancellor of Scotland, which he enjoyed until the king’s death, when he retired to his diocese. During the time he remained at Aberdeen, he was occupied in correcting the abuses that had prevailed in the diocese, and in composing a book of canon law. But he was not long permitted to enjoy the calm of retirement, and was again called to the parliament that assembled at Edinburgh, Oct. 6, 1488, to assist at the coronation of James IV. The earl of Bothwell, who then ruled as prime minister, suspecting that bishop Elphinston would not concur in an act of indemnity in favour of those who were concerned in the rebellion of the last reign, contrived to send him on an embassy to the court of Maximilian of Germany, with a proposal for a marriage between the king, and Margaret, the emperor’s daughter; but the mission was ineffectual, as that lady had been previously promised to the prince of Spain, and was married accordingly, before Elphinston arrived at Vienna. Yet although the bishop did not succeed in this embassy, he performed a lasting service to the country in his way home, by settling a treaty of peace and amity between the states of Holland and the Scotch. In 1492, when the bishop returned, he was made lord privy-seal, and the same year appointed one of the commissioners on the part of Scotland, for the prolongation of the truce with England. But the truce was not strictly observed by the Scotch, and a new commission was found to be necessary for the more effectual settlement of all differences. Bishop Elphinston was included in this commission, and the Scotch deputies meeting with the English at Edinburgh, June 2l, they agreed to prolong the truce till fhe last day of April, 1501.

The distractions of the state being appeased, and tranquillity restored both at home and abroad, the bishop found leisure to attend to an object that he had long meditated, and which engrossed much of his thoughts. Religion and learning had been the chief pursuits of his life, and he wished to diffuse the happy influence of both over the north of Scotland. For this purpose he applied to the king to solicit the papal authority for the foundation of the university of Aberdeen, which was granted by a, bull from ope Alexander VI. dated Feb. 10, 1494. From this time the bishop bent all his attention to the completion of his design; and having requested the king to permit the college to be founded in his royal name, letters patent under the great seal were passed accordingly; and the college called King’s-college, in Old Aberdeen, was erected in 1506, in a very magnificent manner. It was endowed with great privileges, similar to those granted to the universities of Paris and Bononia. A doctor in theology was constituted principal of the college; doctors of the canon law, civil jurisprudence, and of medicine, were appointed for the cultivation of those sciences; a professor of humanity, orlitei‘t? humam’ores, to instruct the students in grammar and languages, and a sub-principal to institute them in philosophy. The plan of endowment made provision also, for the maintenance of twenty-seven students, a chanter, organist, &c. As this college k the only one that has ever been erected in this university, it possesses within itself the whole rights and privileges of an university, and the whole corporation is denominated the “University and King’s College of Aberdeen.”

, sister of Mr. William Elstob, and engaged in the same learned pursuits, was born at Newcastle, Sept. 29, 1683. It is said, that she owed the rudiments of her extraordinary education to her mother; of which advantage, however, she was soon deprived; for at the age of eight years she had the misfortune of losing this intelligent parent. Her guardians, who entertained different sentiments, discouraged as much as they were able her progress in literature, as improper for her sex; but she had contracted too great a fondness for literary studies to be diverted from the prosecution of them. During her brother’s continuance at Oxford, she appears to have resided in that city, where she was esteemed and respected by Dr. Hudson and other Oxonians. Upon her brother’s removal to London, she probably removed with him; and, it is certain, that she assisted him in his antiquarian undertakings. The first public proof which she gave of it was in 1709, when, upon Mr. Elstob’s printing the homily on St. Gregory’s day, she accompanied it with an English translation. The preface, too, was written by her, in which she answers the objections made to female learning, by producing that glory of her sex, as she calls her, Mrs. Anna Maria Schurman. Mrs. Elstob’s next publication was a translation of madame Seudery’s “t-ssay on Glory.” She assisted, also, her brother in an edition of Gregory’s pastoral, which was probably intended to have included both the original and Saxon version; and she had transcribed all the hymns, from an ancient manuscript in Salisbury cathedral. By the encouragement of Dr. Hickes, she undertook a Saxon Homilarium, with an English translation, notes, and various readings. To promote this design, Mr. Bowyer printed for her, in 1713, “Some testimonies of learned men, in favour of the intended edition of the Saxon Homilies, concerning the learning of the author of those homilies, and the advantages to be hoped for from an edition of them. In a letter from the publisher to a doctor in divinity.” About the same time she wrote three letters to the lord treasurer, from which it appears, that he solicited and obtained for her queen Anne’s bounty towards printing the homilies in question. Her majesty’s decease soon deprived Mrs. Elstob of this benefit; and she was not otherwise sufficiently patronized, so as to be able to complete the work. A lew only of the homilies were actually printed at Oxford, in folio. Mrs. Elstob’s portrait was given in the initial letter G of “The English. Saxon Homily on the Birth-day of St, George.” In 1715, she published a Saxon grammar, the types for which had been cut at the expence of the lord chief justice Parker, afterwards earl of Macclesfield. Mrs. Elstob had other literary designs in view, but was prevented from the prosecution of them, by her distressed circumstances, and the want of due encouragement. After her brother’s death, she was so far reduced, that she was obliged to retire to Evesham in Worcestershire, where she subsisted with difficulty by keeping a small school. In this situation she experienced the friendship of Mr. George Ballard, and of Mrs. Capon, wife of the rev. Mr. Capon, who kept a boarding-school at Sianton, in Gloucestershire. These worthy persons exerted themselves among their acquaintance, to obtain for Mrs. Elstub some annual provision. At length she was recoiflmended to queen Caroline, who granted her a pension of twenty guineas a year. This being discontinued on the queen’s decease, Mrs. Elstob was again brought into difficulties, and, though mistress of eight languages, besides her own, was obliged to seek for employment as a preceptress of children. She may, however, be considered as having been very fortunate in the situation which she obtained in this capacity; for, in 1739, she was taken into the family of the duchess Dowager of Portland, where she continued till her death, which happened on the 30th of May 1756. She was buried at St. Margaret’s, Westminster. Mr. Rowe Mores describes her as having been the indefessa comes of her brother’s studies, and a female student of the university; and as having originally possessed a genteel fortune, which, by pursuing too much the drug called learning, she did not know how to manage. He adds, that upon visiting her in her sleeping-room at Bulstrode, he found her surrounded with books and dirtiness. She was, however, one of the most extraordinary women of her age, the first, and as far as we know, the last of her sex, who was a Saxon scholar. A more particular account of her Mss. and other productions is given in our first authority.

Had sir Thomas Elyot written only his book called “The Governor,” it would have entitled him to the respect of posterity as one of the best writers of his time, a man of acute observation, and of manly and liberal sentiments. The days of Henry VIII. were not very favourable to such, as the capricious will of Henry VI It. interfered so frequently with the progress of right thinking; but sir Thomas on some occasions was not afrai<$ to avour feis sentiments. In 1535, a proclamation was issued for calling in seditious hooks; under which description were reckoned, and chiefly intended, such writings as favoured the hishop of Rome. Upon this occasion sir Thomag Cromwell directed letters to several persons, ordering them to send in all publications of the nature designed to be condemned. Among others, he wrote to sir Thomas Elyot, whom, though an old friend of his own, he suspected, from his having been intimate with sir Thomas More, to be attached to the Romish religion. In answer, Elyot declared his judgment of the need of a reformation of the clergy, and disclaimed all undue connection with papists. As to any of the prohibited books he might chance to have by him, and which were very few, he was ready to deliver them up. Part of the language which he uses is as foilows: “Sir, As ye know, I have been ever desirous to read many books, especially concerning humanity and moral philosophy. And, therefore, of such studies I have a competent number. But, concerning the Scripture I have very few. For in Questionists I never delighted. Unsavory glosses and comments I ever abhorred. The boasters and advancers of the pompous authority of the bishop of Rome I never esteemed. But, after that, by a judgment, or estimation of things, I did anon smell out their corrupt affection, and beheld with scornful eyes the sundry abusions of their authorities, adorned with a licentious and dissolute form of living. Of the which, as well in them as in the universal state of the clergy, I have oftentimes wished a necessary reformation.”

Sir Thomas Elyot’s “Governor,” says Strype, waa designed to instruct men, especially great men, in good morals, and to reprove theirvices. It consisted of several chapters, treating concerning affability, benevolence, beneficence, the diversity of flatterers, and other similar subjects. In these chapters were some sharp and quick sentences, which offended many of the young men of fashion at that time. They complained of sir Thomas’s strange terms, as they called them; and said that it was no little presumption in him to meddle with persons of the higher and nobler ranks. The complaints of these gentlemen, who were always kicking at such examples as did bite them, our author compared to a galled horse, abiding no plasters. King Henry read and much liked sir Thomas Elyot’s treatise; and was particularly pleased with his endeavours to improve and enrich the English language. It was observed by his majesty, that throughout the book there was no new term made by him of a Latin or French word, and that no sentence was hereby rendered dark or hard to be understood.

In less than nine months after Mrs. Emlyn’s decease, he began to be involved in prosecutions on account of his opinions in relation to the Trinity. The first occasion was given by Dr. Duncan Cummins, a noted physician in Ihibiin, and a leading member of the congregation in Wood-street. This gentleman had been brought up to the study of divinity, but afterwards chose the medical profession; he had done many kind offices to Mr. Emlyn, but, having observed that Mr. Emlyn avoided expressing the common opinion, and those arguments which are supposed to support it, he strongly suspected that his judgment was against the Supreme Deity of the Lord Jesus Christ. This suspicion he communicated to Mr. Boyse, the consequence of which was, that, in June 1702, they jointly waited upon Mr. Emlyn, acquainting him with their jealousies, and earnestly desiring to know his real sentiments in the matter. Being tlius applied to, he thought himself bound to declare openly his faith in so great a point. Accordiugly he freely owned himself to be convinced, that the God and father of Jesus Christ is alone the Supreme Being, and superior in excellence and authority to his son, who derives all from him. At the same time, Mr. Emlyn told the gentlemen that he did not aim to make any strife among the people of the congregation, but was willing to leave them peaceably, that, if they pleased, they might choose another minister. This, however, was not to be permitted him. Mr. Boyse, not willing to take such a weighty matter upon himself, brought it before the Dublin ministers, namely, Mr. Weld, Mr. Travers, Mr. Sinclair, Mr. Iredel, and Mr. Tate. At an interview with them, he candidly explained his sentiments, the only resuli of which was, that, on that very day, they agreed to cast him off, and that he should not be permitted to preach any more: and this they did without consulting his congregation, who, as yet, were entire strangers to the affair. Mr. Emlyn, however, directed the deacons and chief managers of the church to be called together, when he informed them, that a difference of opinion relative to the Trinity had rendered him offensive to some who were present, and to the ministers of Dublin; upon which account, thankfully acknowledging the kindness and respect they had shewn him for so many years, he desired his dismission. At this declaration the gentlemen assembled were greatly surprised and grieved; and Dr. Cummins himself then wished he had not begun the business. It was proposed that Mr. Emlyn should lie by for some time without preaching; but to this he would not consent without a declaration of the cause, lest he should be suspected of having been guilty of some immorality. The next proposition, was, that he should retire for a while to England, provided it was approved of by the ministers. To this they agreed, accompanying their agreement with a curious message, sent by two of their number, charging him not to preach any where, to whatever place he went. Mr. Emlyn embarked for England the next day, with great inconvenience to himself and family; and, no sooner was he gone, than a loud clamour was raised against him and his opinions. When he came to London, he found some persons who were disposed to treat him with candour and charity. This, however, when they heard of it, was so offensive to the Dublin ministers, that they endeavoured, by their letters, to render him as odious as possible. While he was in London, he published a short account of his case.

Mr. Emlyn was one of the most eminent divines of the Arian persuasion which this country has produced, but liis writings are not now so much read as they formerly were. He was what is called a high Ariao; believing our blessed Saviour to be the first of derived beings, the Creator of the world, and an object of worship; but several persons who are advocates for the pre-existence of Christ, do not entirely coincide with the sentiments which Mr. Emlyn has advanced upon these subjects.

, an opponent of Luther in the sixteenth century, was a native of the circle of Suabia, a licentiate of the canon law, professor at Leipsic, and secretary and counsellor to George duke of Saxony. When Luther’s translation of the Bible appeared, it was very generally read in Germany, and contributed much to advance the reformation. An antidote was therefore necessary, and Emser was fixed upon as the best qualified to furnish it. This he first attempted by publishing some notes on Luther’s New Testament, and afterwards, encouraged by the duke and two popish bishops, produced what Le called “A correct translation” of the New Testament into German, which was in fact little more than a transcript of Luther’s labours, with some alterations in favour of the peculiar tenets of the Romish church; yet the duke George had such an opinion of this formidable translation, and of the mischief it would do to the reformed, that as soon as it was ready to appear (1527), he issued a proclamation in which he treated Luther and his disciples with the most virulent language. Emser also entered into controversy with Luther, on the mass and other subjects which then formed the basis of the disputes between the popish adherents and the reformed. He died suddenly Nov. 8, 1527, and his works soon after him, which, indeed, had never been held in high repute, nor did Luther ever condescend to answer him.

, an ancient Latin poet, was born at Radian, a town in Calabria, anno U. C. 514, or B.C. 237. That this was the place of his nativity, we learn from himself, as well as from others; and the Florentines at this day claim him for their fellow-citizen. He came at first to Rome, when M. P. Cato was quaestor, whom he had instructed in the Greek language in Sardinia. C. Nepos informs us, that “Cato, when he was praetor, obtained the province of Sardinia, from whence, when he was quaestor there before, he had brought Ennius to Rome:” which we esteem,“says the historian,” no less than the noblest triumph over Sardinia.“He had a house on the Aventine mount; and, by his genius, conversation, and integrity, gained the friendship of the most eminent perspns in the city. Among these were Galba and M. Fulvius Nobilior, by whose son (who, after his father’s example, was greatly addicted to learning) he was made free of the city. He attended Fulvius in the war against the Ætolians and Ambraciotae, and celebrated his victories over those nations. He fought likewise under Torquatus in Sardinia, and under the elder Scipio; and in all these services distinguished himself by his uncommon valour. He was very intimate with Scipio Nasica, as appears from Cicero: Nasica, going one day to visit Ennius, and the maid-servant saying that he was not at home, Scipio found that she had told him so by her master’s orders, and that Ennius was at home. A few days after, Ennius coming to Nasica, and inquiring for him at the door, the latter called out to him,” that he was not at home.“Upon which Ennius answering,” What do I not know your voice“Scipio replied,” You have a great deal of assurance for I believed your maid, when she told me, that you were not at home and will not you believe me myself?" Ennius was a man of uncommon virtue, and lived in great simplicity and frugality. He died at the age of seventy years; and his death is said to have been occasioned by the gout, contracted by an immoderate use of wine, of which he always drank very freely before he applied himself to writing. This Horace affirms:

, a miscellaneous compiler of various historical works, was born in 1713, but where, or where educated, we have not been able to discover: he styled himself in his numerous title-pages the Rev. John Entick, M. A. but it does not appear whence, he derived his orders, or his degree. It is certain that at one time he studied with a view to the ministry, eilher in the church or among the dissenters. In the list of writers who engaged in the controversy with Woolston, we find his name, as a “student in divinity,” and the author of a tract, entitled “The Evidence of Christianity asserted and proved from facts, as authorised from sacred and profane history.” Mr. Entick was at this time about eighteen years old. In London, or its vicinity at Stepney, he was a schoolmaster, and spent a considerable part of his life in writing for the booksellers, who appear to have always employed him when they engaged in such voluminous compilations as were to be published in numbers. In this way we find his name to a “Naval History,” folio “A History, of the (Seven years’) War,” 5 vols. 8vo “A History of London,” 4 vols. 8vo a new edition, enlarged, of Maitland’s History of London, 2 vols. folio, &c. &c. He compiled also a small Latin and English Dictionary, and a Spelling Dictionary, of both which immense numbers have been sold. About the year 1738, he proposed publishing an edition of Chaucer, which never took effect. Soon after the beginning of the present reign, he commenced patriot, of the school of Wilkes, wrote for some time in an anti-ministerial paper called the Monitor, and had at length the good fortune to be taken up under a general warrant, for which he prosecuted the messenger, and recovered 300l. damage?. It was after this that he professed to improve and enlarge Maitland’s History of London, without adding a syllable to the topographical part; but in the historical, he gave a very full account of Wilkes’s proceedings with the city of London, and of the sufferings of his adherents. In 1760, he married a widow lady of Stepney, who died the same year; and in May 1773, himself died, and was buried at the same place. We may add to his other publications, that he had a considerable share in the New “Week’s Preparation,” and a New “Whole Duty of Man.”