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

, of Canterbury, the son of Mr. Nicholas Hunt of that city (an intimate and worthy friend of Arch. Tillotson, and to whom, whilst labouring under a cancer, he addressed that most excellent letter of consolation, printed in his life by Birch, p. 135), was admitted a scholar of C. C. C. Cambridge, Jan. 29, 1693. After taking the degree of M. B. in 1699, he practised physic at Canterbury, and became a collector of Roman coins, vessels, and utensils, particularly of those about Reculver and Richborough, after the manner of archdeacon Batteley, in his “Antiquitates Rutupina?;” all which, together with his books and manuscripts, he bequeathed to the library of that cathedral. He was esteemed a learned antiquary. The time of his death is uncertain.

, a learned Hebraist, and Regius professor of Hebrew, Oxford, was horn in 1696, but where or of what parents we have not been able to learn, or indeed to recover any particulars of his early life. He was educated at Hart-hall, Oxford, where he proceeded M. A. in Oct. 26, 1721, and was one of the first four senior fellows or tutors, when the society was made a body corporate and politic under the name of Hertford college; and he took his degree of B. D. in 1743, and that of D. D. in 1744. His first literary publication, which indicates the bent of his studies, was “A Fragment of Hippolytus, taken out of two Arabic Mss. in the Bodleian library,” printed in the fourth volume of “Parker’s Bibliotheca Bibiica,” 1728, 4to. In 1738* he was elected Laudian professor of Arabic, which he retained the whole of his life, and was succeeded by the late Dr. Joseph White. In the following year he delivered in the schools, a Latin speech “De antiquitate, elegantia, utilitate, Linguae Arabicae,” published the same year; and another “De usu Dialectorum Orientalium, ac praecipue Arabicae, in Hebraico codice interpretando,” which was published in 1748. In 1746 he issued proposals for printing “Abdollatiphi Historias Ægypti compendium,” with a full account of that work, which, however, he never published. The subscribers were recompensed by receiving in lieu of it his posthumous “Observations on the Book of Proverbs,” edited by Dr. Kennicott after his death.

In 1747, Dr. Hunt was appointed regius professor of Hebrew, and consequently canon of the sixth stall in Christ church. He had in 1740 been elected a fellow of the royal society, and was also a fellow of that of antiquaries. In 1757, as we have noticed in the life of bishop Hooper, he published the works of that prelate, in the preface to which he represents himself as “one who had received many obligations from his lordship, was acquainted with his family, and had been formerly intrusted by him with the care of publishing one of his learned works,” viz. “De Benedictione patriarchs Jacobi, conjecturae,” Oxon. 1728, 4to, by the preface to which it appears that bishop Hooper was one of his early patrons. Of this only 100 copies were printed as presents to friends, but it is included in the bishop’s works.

Dr. Hunt’s epistolary correspondence both at home and abroad, was considerable. Some of his letters are to be found in “Doddridge’s Letters,” published by Stedman. He frequently mentions his “Ægyptian History,” and his “attendance on Abdollatiph,” as engrossing much of his time. He also highly praises Dr. Doddridge’s “Rise and Progress of Religion,” and his “Life of colonel Gardiner.” In 1759 Dr. Kennicott dedicated his second volume on the “State of the printed Hebrew text of the Old Testament” to his much respected friend Dr. Hunt, to v.hom he stood “indebted for his knowledge of the very elements of the Hebrew language.” Anquetil du Perron, the French orientalist, having made some unhandsome reflections on Dr. Hunt, the celebrated sir William Jones, then a student at Oxford, repelled these by a shrewd pamphlet, published in 1771, entiled “Lettre a monsieur A[nquetil du P(erron) dans laquelle est compris l'examen de sa traduction des livres attribues a Zoroastre.”

Among Dr. Hunt’s intimate friends was Dr. Gregory Sharpe, who sought his acquaintance and highly prized it, and their correspondence was frequent and affectionate. Dr. Hunt not only promoted Dr. Sharpe’s election into the royal society, but was a liberal and able assistant to him in his literary undertakings. When, however, Dr. Sharpe published his edition of Dr. Hyde’s Dissertations in 1767, no notice was taken of these obligations; and the reason assigned is Dr. Hunt’s having declined a very unreasonable request made by Dr. Sharpe, to translate into Latin a long English detail of introductory matter. Such treatment Dr. Hunt is said to have mentioned “to his friends, with as much resentment as his genuine good-nature would permit.” This very learned scholar, who had long been afflicted with the gravel, died Oct. 31, 1774, aged seventyeight, and was buried in the north aile joining to the body of the cathedral of Christ-church, with an inscription expressing only his name, offices, and time of his death. His library was sold the following year by honest Daniel Prince of Oxford. In that same year Dr. Kennicott pub.­lished a valuable posthumous work of his friend, entitled “Observations on several passages in the Book of Proverbs, with two Sermons. By Thomas Hunt,” &c. 4to. A considerable part of this work was printed before his death; and the only reason given why he himself did not finish it, was, that he was remarkably timorous, and distrustful of his own judgment; and that, in his declining years, he grew more and more fearful of the severity of public criticism, for which he certainly had little cause, had this been his only publication. His character, as an Orientalist, had been fully established by his former works; and he justly retained it to the close of his life, leaving the learned world only to regret that he did not engage in some gra-id and critical work, or that he did not complete an edition of Job which he bad long intended.

, an eminent physician and antiquary of Durham, was the son of Thomas Hunter, gent, of Medomsley, in the county of Durham, where he was born in 1675: he was educated at the free-school of Houghton-le-Spring, founded by the celebrated Bernard Gilpin, and was admitted of St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he continued until he had taken his bachelor’s degree in 1698. In 1701 he received a faculty or licence from Dr. John Brookbank, spiritual chancellor at Durham, to piactice physic through the whole diocese of Durham. After some years he removed to the city of Durham; and though he published little, was always ready to assist in any literary undertaking. He is acknowledged by Mr. Horsley and Mr. Gordon to be very exact and masterly in the knowledge of antiquities. Dr. Wilkins mentions him with respect in the preface to the first volume of his “Councils,” to which he furnished some materials; and Mr. Bourne was much indebted to him in compiling his “History of Newcastle” He published a new edition of “The Ancient Rites and Monuments of the church of Durham,” 1733, without his name; and a curious, and now very scarce work, entitled “An Illustration of Mr. Daniel Neale’s History of the Puritans, in the article of Peter Smart, M. A. from original papers, with remarks.” 1736, 8vo. In April 1743, he published proposals for printing by subscription, in 2 vols. 4to. “Antiquitates Parochiales Dioc. Dunelm. hucusque ineditae,” but no further progress appears to have been made. Perhaps this might be owing to an unfortunate accident he met with, in searching the archives of the cathedral, where he spilt a bottle of ink on the celebrated copy of Magna Charta, and was never afterwards permitted to come there. In 1757 be retired from Durham, with his family, to Unthank, an estate belonging to his wife, in Shotley parish, Northumberland, where he died July 13 of that year, and was buried in Shotley church.

, a popular preacher and writer, was born at Culross, in Perthshire, in 1741. He had the best education that the circumstances of his parents would permit, and at the age of thirteen was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where, by his talents and proficiency, he attracted the notice of the professors, and when he left Edinburgh he accepted the office of tutor to lord Dundonald’s sons at Culross abbey. In 1764 he was licensed to preach, having passed the several trials with great applause: and very quickly became much followed on account of his popular talents. He was ordained in 1766, and was appointed minister of South Leith. On a visit to London in 1769, he preached in most of the Scotch meeting-houses with great acceptance, and soon after his return he received an invitation to become pastor of the Scotch church in Swallow-street, which he declined; but in 1771 he removed to London, and undertook the pastoral office in the Scotch church at London-wall. He appeared first as an author in 1783, by the commencement of his “Sacred Biography,” which was at length extended to seven volumes octavo. While this work was in the course of publication, he engaged in the translation of Lavater’s “Essays on Physiognomy,” and in order to render his work as complete as possible, he took a journey into Swisserland, for the purpose of procuring information from Lavater himself. He attained, in some measure, his object, though the author did not receive him with the cordiality which he expected, suspecting that the English version must injure the sale of the French translation. The first number of this work was published in 1789, and it was finished in a style worthy the improved state of the arts. From this period Dr. Hunter spent much of his time in translating different works from the French language. In 1790 he was elected secretary to the corresponding board of the “Society for propagating Christian Knowledge in the Highlands and Islands of Scotland.” He was likewise chaplain to the “Scotch Corporation;” and both these institutions Were much benefited by his zealous exertions in their behalf. In 1795, he published two volumes of Sermons; and in 1798 he gave the world eight “Lectures on the Evidences of Christianity,” being the completion of a plan begun by Mr. Fell. The whole contains a popular and useful elucidation of the proofs in favour of the Christian religion, arising from its internal evidence, its beneficial influence, and the superior value of the information which it conveys with respect to futurity. During the latter years of his life, Dr. Hunter’s constitution suffered the severest shocks from the loss of three children, which, with other causes, contributed to render him unable to withstand the attacks of disease. He died at the Hot-Wells, Bristol, on the 27th of October, 1802, in the 62d year of his age. Dr. Hunter was a man of learning: his writings are eloquent, and shew how well he had studied human nature. In the pulpit his manner was unaffected, solemn, and impressive. He indulged his liberal and friendly heart in the exercise of hospitality, charity, and the pleasures of social intercourse, but the latter frequently beyond the limits which a regard to prudence and economy should have prescribed. He was the translator of “Letters of Euler to a German Princess, on different subjects in Physics and Philosophy” “The Studies of Nature by St. Pierre” “Saurin’s Sermons;” “Sonnini’s Travels.” Miscellaneous pieces and sermons of his own have been published since his death, to which are prefixed memoirs: from these the foregoing particulars have been taken. Dr. Hunter, about 1796 or 7, began “A History of London and its Environs,” which came out in parts, but did little credit to him, as he evidently had no talents or research for a work of this description.

, an eminent anatomist and physician, was born May 23, 1718, at Kilbride in the county of Lanark. He was the seventh of ten children of John and Agnes Hunter, who resided on a small estate in that parish, called Long Calderwood, which had long been in the possession of his family. His great grandfather, by iiis fatner’s side, was a youoger son of Hunter of Hunterston, chief of the family of that name. At the age of fourteen, his father sent him to the college of Glasgow; where he passed five years, and by nis prudent behaviour and diligence acquired the esteem of the professors, and the reputation of being a good scholar. His father had designed him for the church, but the necessity of subscribing to articles of faith was to him a strong objection. In this state of mind he happened to become acquainted with Dr Cullen, who was then just established in practice at Hamilton, under the patronage of the duke of Hamilton. By the conversation of Dr. Cullen, ha was soon determined to devote himself to th^ profession of pbysic. His father’s consent having been previously obtained, he went, in 1737. to reside with Dr. Cullen. In the family of this excellent friend and preceptor he passed nearly three years, and these, as he has been often heard to acknowledge, were the happiest years of his life. It was then agreed, that he should prosecute his medical studies at Edinburgh and London, and afterwards return to settle at Hamilton, in partnership with Dr. Cullen.

Mr. Hunter set out for Edinburgh in Nov. 1740, and continued there till the following spring, attending the lectures of the medical professors, and amongst others those of the late Dr. Alexander Monro. He arrived in London in the summer of 1741, and took up his residence at Mr. (afterwards Dr.) Smellie’s, who was at that time an apothecary in Pall-mall. He brought with him a letter of recommendation to his countryman Dr. James Douglas, from Mr. Foulis, printer at Glasgow, who had been useful to the doctor in collecting for him different editions of Horace. Dr. Douglas was then intent on a great anatomical work on the bones, which he did not live to complete, and was looking out for a young man of abilities and industry whom he might employ as a dissecter. This induced him to pay particular attention to Mr. Hunter; and finding him acute and sensible, he after a short time invited him into his family, to assist in his dissections, and to superintend the education of his son. Mr. Hunter having communicated this offer to his father and Dr. Cullen, the latter readily and heartily gave his concurrence to it; but his father, who was very old and infirm, and expected his return with impatience, consented with reluctance. His father did not long survive, dying Oct. 30 following, aged 78.

Mr. Hunter, having accepted Dr. Douglas’s invitation, was by his friendly assistance enabled to enter himself as a surgeon’s pupil at St. George’s hospital under Mr. James Wilkie, and as a dissecting pupil under Dr. Frank Nichols, who at that time taught anatomy with considerable reputation. He likewise attended a course of lectures on experimental philosophy by Dr. Desaguliers. Of these means of improvement he did not fail to make a proper use. He soon became expert in dissection, and Dr. Douglas was at the expence of having several of his preparations engraved. But before many months had elapsed, he had the misfortune to lose this excellent friend. Dr. Douglas died April 1, 1742, in his 67th year, leaving a widow and two children. The death of Dr. Douglas, however, made no change in his situation. He continued to reside with the doctor’s family, and to pursue his studies with the same diligence as before. In 1743 he communicated to the royal society “An Essay on the Structure and Diseases of articulating Cartilages.” This ingenious paper, on a subject which till then had not been sufficiently investigated, affords a striking testimony of the rapid progress he had made in his anatomical inquiries. As he had it in contemplation to teach anatomy, his attention was directed principally to this object; and it deserves to be mentioned as an additional mark of his prudence, that he did not precipitately engage in this attempt,but passed several years in acquiring such a degree of knowledge, and such a collection of preparations, as might insure him success. After waiting some time for a favourable opening, he succeeded Mr. Samuel Sharpe as lecturer to a private society of surgeons in Covent-garden, began his lectures in their rooms, and soon extended his plan from surgery to anatomy. This undertaking commenced in the winter of 1746. He is said to have experienced much solicitude when he began to speak in public, but applause soon inspired him with courage; and by degrees he became so fond of teaching, that for many years before his death he was never happier than when employed in delivering a lecture.

The profits of his two first courses were considerable, but by contributing to the wants of different friends, he found himself, at the return of the next season, obliged to defer his lectures for a fortnight, merely because he had not money to defray the necessary expeiice of advertisements. This circumstance taught him to be more reserved in this respect. In 1747 he was admitted a member of the corporation of surgeons, and in the spring of the following year, soon after the close of his lectures, he set out in company with his pupil, Mr. James Douglas, on a tour through Holland to Paris. His lectures suffered no interruption by this journey, as he returned to England soon enough to prepare for his winter course, which began about the usual time. At first he practised both surgery and midwifery, but the former he always disliked; and, being elected one of the surgeon-men-midwives first to the Middlesex, and soon afterwards to the British lying-in hospital, and recommended by several of the most eminent surgeons of that time, his line was thus determined. Over his countryman, Dr. Smellie, notwithstanding his great experience, and the reputation he had justly acquired, he had a great advantage in person and address. The most lucrative part of the practice of midwifery was at that time in the hands of sir Richard Manningham and Dr. Sandys. The former of these died, and the latter retired into the country a few years after Mr. Hunter began to be known in midwifery. Although by these incidents he was established in the practice of midwifery, it is well known that in proportion as his reputation increased, his opinion was eagerly sought in all cases where any light concerning the seat or nature of any disease, could be expected from an intimate knowledge of anatomy. In 1750 he obtained the degree of M. D. from the university of Glasgow, and began to practise as a physician. About this time he quitted the family of Mrs. Douglas, and went to reside in Jermyn-skreet. In the summer of 1751 he revisited his native country, for which he always retained a cordial affection. His mother was still living at Long Calderwood, which was now become his property by the death of his brother James. Dr. Cullen, for whom he always entertained asincere regard, was then established at Glasgow. During this visit, he shewed his attachment to his little paternal inheritance, by giving many instructions for repairing and improving it, and for purchasing any adjoining lands that might be offered for sale. As he and Dr. Cullen were riding one day in a low part of the country, the latter pointing out to him Long Calderwood at a considerable distance, remarked how conspicuous it appeared. “Well,” said he, with some degree of energy, “if I live, I shall make it still more conspicuous.” After his journey to Scotland, to which he devoted only a few weeks, he was never absent from London, unless his professional engagements, as sometimes happened, required his attendance at a distance from the capital.

In 1762 we find him warmly engaged in controversy, supporting his claim to different anatomical discoveries, in, a work entitled “Medical Commentaries,” the style of which is correct and spirited. As an excuse for the tardiness with which he brought forth this work, he observes in his introduction, that it required a good deal of time, and be had little to spare; that the subject was unpleasant, and therefore he was very seldom in the humour to take it up. In 1762, when our present excellent queen became pregnant, Dr. Hunter was consulted; and two years after he had the honour to be appointed physicianextraordinary to her majesty. About this time his avocations were so numerous, that he became desirous of lessening his fatigue, and having noticed the ingenuity and assiduous application of the late Mr. William Hewson, F. R. S. who was then one of his pupils, he engaged him, first as an assistant, and afterwards as a partner in his lectures. This connection continued till 1770, when some disputes happened, which terminated in a separation. [See Hewson]. Mr. Hewson was succeeded in the partnership by Mr. Cruikshank, whose anatomical abilities were deservedly respected.

April 30, 1767, Dr. Hunter was elected F. R. S. and the year following communicated to that learned body “Observations on the Bones commonly supposed to be Elephants’ bones, which have been found near the river Ohio in America.” This was not the only subject of natural history on which Dr. Hunter employed his pen; for in a subsequent volume of the “Philosophical Transactions,” we find him offering his “Remarks on some Bones found in the Rock of Gibraltar,” which he proves to have belonged to some quadruped. In the same work, likewise, he published an account of the Nyl-ghau, an Indian animal not described before, and which, from its strength and swiftness, promised, he thought, to be an useful acquisition to this country.

In 1768, Dr. Hunter became F. S. A. and the sam*' year, at the institution of a royal academy of arts, he was appointed by his majesty to the office of professor of anatomy. This appointment opened a new field for his abilities; and he engaged in it, as he did in every other pursuit of his life, with unabating zeal. He now adapted his anatomical knowledge to the objects of painting and sculpture; and the novelty and justness of his observations proved at once the readiness and the extent of his genius.

In January 1781, he was unanimously elected to succeed the late Dr. John Fothergill as president of the society of physicians of London. “He was one of those,” says Dr. Simmons, “to whom we are indebted for its establishment, and our grateful acknowledgments are due to him for his zealous endeavours to promote the liberal views of this institution, by rendering it a source of mutual improvement, and thus making it ultimately useful to the public.” As his name and talents were known and respected in every part of Europe, so the honours conferred on him were not limited to his own country. In 1780 the royal medical society at Paris elected him one of their foreign associates; and in 1782 he received a similar mark of distinction from the royal academy of sciences in that city. We come now to the most splendid of Dr. Hunter’s medical publications, “The Anatomy of the Human Gravid Uterus.” The appearance of this work, which had been begun so early as 1751 (at which time ten of the thirty-four plates it contains were completed), was retarded till 1775, only by the author’s desire of sending it into the world with fewer imperfections. This great work is dedicated to the king. In his preface to it we find the author very candidly acknowledging, that in most of the dissections he had been assisted by his brother, Mr. John Hunter. This anatomical description of the gravid uterus, was not the only work which Dr. Hunter had in contemplation to give to the public. He had long been employed in collecting and arranging materials for a history of the various concretions that are formed in the human body. He seems to have advanced no further in the execution of this design, than to have nearly completed that part of it which relates to urinary and biliary concretions. Among Dr. Hunter’s papers have likewise been found two introductory lectures, which are written out so fairly, and with such accuracy, that he probably intended no further correction of them, before they should be given to the world. In these lectures Dr. Hunter traces the history of anatomy from the earliest to the present times, along with the general progress of science and the arts. He considers the great utility of anatomy in the practice of physic and surgery; givt-s the ancient divisions of the different substances composing the human body, which for a long time prevailed in anatomy; points out the most advantageous mode of cultivating this branch of natural knowledge; and concludes with explaining the particular plan of his own lectures. Besides these Mss. he has also left behind him a considerable number of cases of dissection. The same year in which the tables of the gravid uterus made their appearance, Dr. Hunter communicated to the royal society “An essay on the Origin of the Venereal Disease.” After this paper had been read to the royal society, Dr. Hunter, in a conversation with the late Dr. Musgrave, was convinced that the testimony on which he placed his chief dependence was of less weight than he had at first imagined; he therefore very properly laid aside his intention of giving his essay to the public.

In 1777, Dr. Hunter joined with Mr. Watson in presenting to the royal society “A short account of the late Dr. Maty’s illness, and of the appearances on dissection;” and the year following he published his “Reflections on the Section of the Symphysis Pubis.”

We must now go back a little in the order of time, to describe the origin and progress of Dr. Hunter’s Museum, without some account of which these memoirs would be very incomplete. When he began to practise midwifery, he was desirous of acquiring a fortune sufficient to place him in easy and independent circumstances. Before many years had elapsed, he found himself in possession of a sum adequate to his wishes iii this respect; and this he set apart as a resource of which he might avail himself whenever age or infirmities should oblige him to retire from business. He has been heard to say, that he once took a considerable sum from this fund for the purposes of his museum, but that he did not feel himself perfectly at ease till he had restored it again. After he had obtained this competency, as his wealth continued to accumulate, he formed a laudable design of engaging in some scheme of public utility, and at first had it in contemplation to found an anatomical school in this metropolis. For this purpose, about 1765, during the administration of Mr. Grenville, he presented a memorial to that minister, in which he requested the grant of a piece of ground in the Mews for the site of an anatomical theatre. Dr. Hunter undertook to expend 7000l. on the building, and to endow a professorship of anatomy in perpetuity. This scheme did not meet with the reception it deserved. In a conversation on this subject soon afterwards with the earl of Shelburne, his lordship expressed a wish that the plan might be carried into execution by subscription, and very generously requested to have his name set down for 1000 guineas. Dr. Hunter’s delicacy would not allow him to adopt this proposal. He chose rather to execute it at his own expence, and accordingly purchased a spot of ground in Great Windmill-street, where he erected a spacious house, to which he removed from Jermyn-street in 1770. In this building, besides a handsome amphitheatre and other convenient apartments for his lectures and dissections, there was one magnificent room, fitted up with great elegance and propriety as a museum.

Of the magnitude and value of his anatomical collection, some idea may be formed, when we consider the great length of years he employed in making anatomical preparations, and in the dissection of morbid bodies; added to the eagerness with which he procured additions, from the collections that were at different times offered for sale in London. His specimens of rare diseases were likewise frequently increased by presents from his medical friends and pupils, who, when any thing of this sort occurred to them, very justly thought they could not dispose of it more properly than by placing it in Dr. Hunter’s museum. Before his removal to Windmill-street, he had confined his collection chiefly to specimens of human and comparative anatomy, and of diseases; but now he extended his views to fossils, and likewise to the branches of polite literature and erudition. In a short space of time he became possessed of “the most magnificent treasure of Greek and Latin books that has been accumulated by any person now living, since the days of Mead.” A cabinet of ancient medals contributed likewise greatly to the richness of his museum. A description of part of the coins in this collection, struck by the Greek free cities, has been published by the doctor’s learned friend Mr. Combe, under the title of “Nummorum veterurn populorum & urbium qui in museo Guliehni Hunter asservantur descriptio figuris illustrata. Opera & studio Caroli Combe, S. R. & S. A. Soc. Londini,” 1783, 4to. In a classical dedication of this elegant volume to the queen, Dr. Hunter acknowledges his obligations to her majesty. In the preface, some account is given of the progress of the collection, which had been brought together since 1770, with singular taste, and at the expence of upwards of 20,000l. In 1781, the museum received a valuable addition of shells, corals, and other curious subjects of natural history, which had been collected by the late Dr. Fothergill, who gave directions by his will, that his collection should be appraised after his death, and that Dr. Hunter should have the refusal of it at 500l. under the valuation. This was accordingly done, and Dr. Hunter purchased it for the sum of 1200l.

Dr. Hunter, at the head of his profession, honoured with the esteem of his sovereign, and in the possession of every thing that his reputation and wealth could confer, seemed now to have attained the summit of his wishes. But these sources of gratification were embittered by a disposition to the gout, which harassed him frequently during the latter part of his life, notwithstanding his very abstemious manner of living. About ten years before his death his health was so much impaired, that, fearing he might soon become unfit for the fatigues of his profession, he began to think of retiring to Scotland. With this view he requested his friends Dr. Cullen and Dr. Baillie, to look out for a pleasant estate for him. A considerable one, and such as they thought would be agreeable to him, was offered for sale about that time in the neighbourhood of Alloa. A description of it was sent to him, and met with his approbation: the price was agreed on, and the bargain supposed to be concluded. But when the title-deeds of the estate came to be examined by Dr. Hunter’s counsel in London, they were found defective, and he was advised not to complete the purchase. After this he found the expences of his museum increase so fast, that he laid aside all thoughts of retiring from practice.

This alteration in his plan did not tend to improve his health. In the course of a few years the returns of his gout became by degrees more frequent, sometimes affecting his limbs, and sometimes his stomach, but seldom remaining many hours in one part. Notwithstanding this valetudinary state, his ardour seemed to be unabated. In the last year of his life he was as eager to acquire new credit, and to secure the advantage of what he had before gained, as he could have been at the most enterprising port of his life. At length, on Saturday, March 15, 1783, after having for several days experienced a return of wandering gout, he complained of great head-ache and nausea. In this state he went to bed, and for several days felt more pain than usual, both in his stomach and limbs. On the Thursday following he found himself so much recovered, that he determined to give the introductory lecture to the operations of surgery. It was to no purpose that his friends urged to him the impropriety of such an attempt. He was determined to make the experiment, and accordingly delivered the lecture; but towards the conclusion, his strength was so exhausted that he fainted away, and was obliged to be carried to bed by two servants. The following night and day his symptoms were such as indicated danger; and on Saturday morning Mr. Combe, who made him an early visit, was alarmed on being told by Dr. Hunter himself, that during the night he had certainly had a paralytic stroke. As neither his speech nor his pulse were affected, and he was able to raise himself in bed, Mr. Combe encouraged him to hope that he was mistaken. But the event proved the doctor’s idea of his complaint to be but too well founded; for from that time till his death, which happened on Sunday March 30, he voided no urine without the assistance of the catheter, which was occasionally introduced by his brother; and purgative medicines were administered repeatedly, without procuring a passage by stool. These circumstances, and the absence of pain, seemed to shew that the intestines and bladder had lost their sensibility and power of contraction; and it was reasonable to presume, that a partial palsy had affected the nerves distributed to those parts. The latter moments of his life exhibited a remarkable instance of calmness and fortitude. Turning to his friend Mr. Combe, “If I had strength enough to hold a pen,” said he, “I would write how easy and pleasant a thing it is to die.”

By his will, the use of his museum, under the direction of trustees, devolved to his nephew Matthew. Baillie, and in case of his death, to Mr. Cruikshank, for the term of thirty years, at the end of which period the whole collection was bequeathed to the university of Glasgow, but Dr. Baillie removed it to its destination some years before the completion of that term. The, sum of 8000l. sterling was left as a fund for the support and augmentation of the collection. The trustees were, Dr. George For.lyne, Dr. David Pitcairne, and Mr. Charles (since Dr.) Combe, to each of whom Dr. Hunter bequeathed an annuity of 20l. for thirty years, that is, during the period in which they would oe executing the purposes of the will. Dr. Hunter likewise bequeathed an annuity of 100l. to his sister Mrs. Baillie, during her life, and the sum of 2000l. to each of her two daughters. The residue of his estate and effects went to his nephew. On Saturday April 5, his remains were interred in the rector’s vault of St. James’s church, Westminster.

Of the person of Dr. Hunter it may be observed that he was regularly shaped, but of a slender make, and rather below a middle stature. There are several good portraits of him extant. One of these is an unfinished painting by Zoffany, who has represented him in the attitude of giving a lecture on the muscles at the royal academy, surrounded by a groupe of academicians. His manner of living was extremely simple and frugal, and the quantity of his food was small as well as plain. He was an early riser, and when business was over, was constantly engaged in his anatomical pursuits, or in his museum. There was something very engaging in his manner and address, and he had such an appearance of attention to his patients when he was making his inquiries, as could hardly fail to conciliate their confidence and esteem. In consultation with his medical brethren^ he delivered his opinions with diffidence and candour. In familiar conversation he was chearful and unassuming. All who knew him allowed that he possessed an excellent understanding, great readiness of perception, a good memory, and a sound judgment. To these intellectual powers he united uncommon assiduity and precision, so that he was admirably fitted for anatomical investigation. As a teacher of anatomy, he was long and deservedly celebrated. He was a good orator, and having a clear and accurate conception of what he taught, he knew how to place in distinct and intelligible points of view the most abstruse subjects of anatomy and physiology. How much he contributed to the improvement of medical science in general, may be collected from the concise view we have taken of his writings. The munificence he displayed in the cause of science has likewise a claim to our applause. Dr. Hunter sacrificed no part of his time or his fortune to voluptuousness, to idle pomp, or to any of the common objects of vanity that influence the pursuits of mankind in general. He seems to have been animated with a desire of distinguishing himself in those things which are in their nature laudable; and being a bachelor, and without views of establishing a family, he was at liberty to indulge his inclination. Let us, therefore, not withhold the praise that is due to him; and undoubtedly his temperance, his prudence, his persevering and eager pursuit of knowledge, constitute an example which we may, with advantage to ourselves and to society, endeavour to imitate.

, younger brother of Dr. Hunter, one of the most profound anatomists, sagacious and expert surgeons, and acute observers of nature, that any age has produced, was born at Long Calderwood, before-mentioned, July 14, 1728. At the age of ten years he lost his father, and being the youngest of ten children, was suffered to employ himself in amusement rather than study, though sent occasionally to a grammar-school. He had reached the age of twenty before he felt a wish for more active employment; and hearing of the reputation his brother William had acquired in London as a teacher of anatomy, made a proposal to go up to him as an assistant. His proposal was kindly accepted, and in September 1748 he arrived in London. It was not long before his disposition to excel in anatomical pursuits was fully evinced, and his determination to proceed in that line confirmed and approved. In the summer of 1749 he attended Mr. Cheselden at Chelsea-hospital, and there acquired the rudiments of surgery. In the subsequent winter he was so far advanced in the knowledge of anatomy, as to instruct his brother’s pupils in dissection; and from the constant occupation of the doctor in business, this task in future devolved almost totally upon him. In the summer of 1756 he again attended at Chelsea, and in 1751 became a pupil at St. Bartholomew’s, where he constantly attended when any extraordinary operation was to be performed. After having paid a visit to Scotland, he entered as a gentleman commoner in Oxford, at St. Mary-hall, though with what particular view does not appear. His professional studies, however, were not interrupted, for in 1754 he became a pupil at St. George’s hospital, where in 1756 he was appointed house-surgeon. In the winter of 1755, Dr. Hunter admitted him to a partnership in his lectures.

The management of anatomical preparations was at this time a new art, and very little known; every preparation, therefore, that was skilfully made, became an object of admiration; many were wanting for the use of the lectures, and Dr. Hunter having himself an enthusiasm for the art, his brother had every advantage in the prosecution of that pursuit towards which his own disposition pointed so strongly; and of which he left so noble a monument in his Museum of Comparative Anatomy. Mr. Hunter pursued the stud^bf anatomy with an ardour and perseverance of which few examples can be found. By this clo^e application for ten years, he made himself master of all that was already known, and struck out some additions to that knowledge. He traced the ramifications of the olfactory nerves upon the membranes of the nose, and discovered the course of some of the branches of the fifth pair of nerves. In the gravid uterus, he traced the arteries of the uterus to their termination in the placenta. He also discovered the existence of the lymphatic vessels in birds. In comparative anatomy, which he cultivated with indefatigable industry, his grand object was, by examining various organizations formed for similar functions, under different circumstances, to trace out the general principles of animal life. With this object in view, the commonest animals were often of considerable importance to him; but he also took every opportunity of purchasing those that were rare, or encouraged their owners to sell the bodies to him when they happened to die.

By excessive attention to these pursuits, his health was so much impaired, that he was threatened with consumptive symptoms, and being advised to go abroad, obtained the appointment of a surgeon on the staff, and went with the army to Belleisle, leaving Mr. Hewson to assist his brother. He continued in this service till the close of the war in 1763, and thus acquired his knowledge of the nature and treatment of gun-shot wounds. On his return to London, to his emoluments from private practice, and his half-pay, he added those which arose from teaching practical anatomy and operative surgery; and that he might be more enabled to carry on his inquiries in comparative anatomy, he purchased some land at Earl’s-court, near Brompton, where he built a house. Here also he kept such animals alive as he purchased, or were presented to him; studied their habits and instincts, and cultivated an intimacy with them, which with the fiercer kinds was not always supported without personal risk. It is recorded by his biographer, that, on finding two leopards loose, and likely to escape or be killed, he went out, and seizing them with his own hands, carried them back to their den. The horror he felt afterwards at the danger he had run, would not, probably, have prevented him from making a similar effort, had a like occasion arisen.

On the 5th of February, 1767, Mr. Hunter was elected a fellow of the royal society; and in order to make that situation as productive of knowledge as possible, he prevailed on Dr. George Fordyce, and Mr. Gumming (the celebrated watch-maker) to form a kind of subsequent meeting at a coffee-house, for the purpose of philosophical discussion, and inquiry into discoveries and improvements. To this meeting some of the first philosophers of the age very speedily acceded, among whom none can be more conspicuous than sir Joseph Banks, Dr. Solander, Dr. Maskelyne, sir Geo. Shuckburgh, sir Harry Englefieid, sir Charles Blagden, Dr. Noothe, Mr. Ramsden, and Mr. Watt of Birmingham. About the same time, the accident of breaking his tendo Achillis, led him to some very successful researches into the mode in which tendons are reunited so completely does a true philosopher turn every accident to the advantage of science. In 176M, Dr. Hunter having finished his house in Windmill-street, gave up to his brother that which he had occupied in Jermyn-street; and in the same year, by the interest of the doctor, Mr. Hunter was elected one of the surgeons to St. George’s hospital. In 1771 he married Miss Home, the eldest daughter of Mr. Home, surgeon to Burgoyne’s regiment of light-horse, by whom he had two sons and two daughters. In 1772 he undertook the professional education of his brother-in-law Mr. Everard Home, then leaving Westminster-school, who has assiduously pursued his steps, ably recorded his merits, and successfully emulates his reputation.

As the family of Mr. Hunter increased, his practice and character also advanced; but the expence of his collection absorbed a very considerable part of his profits. The best % rooms in his house were filled with his preparations; and his mornings, from sun-rise to eight o'clock, were constantly employed in anatomical and philosophical pursuits. The knowledge which he thus obtained, he applied most successfully to the improvement of the art of surgery; was particularly studious to examine morbid bodies, and to investigate the cause of failure when operations had not been productive of their due effect. It was thus that he perfected the mode of operation for the hydrocele, and made several other improvements of different kinds. At the same time the volumes of the Philosophical Transactions bear testimony to his success in comparative anatomy, which was his favourite, and may be called almost his principal pursuit. When he met with natural appearances which could not be preserved in actual preparations, he employed able draughtsmen to represent them on paper; and for several years he even kept one in his family expressly for this purpose. In Jan. 1776, Mr. Hunter was appointed surgeon -extraordinary to his majesty. In the autumn of the same year, he had an illness of so severe a nature, as to turn his mind to the care of a provision for his family in case of his decease; when, considering that the chief part of his property was vested in his collection, he determined immediately to put it into such a state of arrangement as might make it capable of being disposed of to advantage at his death. In this he happily lived to succeed in a great measure, and finally left his museum so classed as to be fit for a public situation.

Mr. Hunter in 1781 was elected into the royal society of sciences and belles lettres at Gottenburg; and in 1783, into the royal society of medicine, and the royal academy of surgery at Paris. In the same year he removed from Jermyn-street to a larger house in Leicester-square, and, with more spirit than consideration, expended a very great sum in buildings adapted to the objects of his pursuits. He was in 1785 at the height of his career as a surgeon, and performec 1 some operations with complete success, which were thought by the profession to be beyond the reach of any skill. His faculties were now in their fullest vigour, and his body sufficiently so to keep pace with the activity of his mind. He was engaged in a very extensive practice, he was surgeon to St. George’s hospital, he gave a very long course of lectures in the winter, had a school of practical anatomy in his house, was continually engaged in experiments concerning the animal osconomy, and was from time to time producing very important publications. At the same time he instituted a medical society called “Lyceum Medicum Londinense,” which met at his lecture-rooms, and soon rose to considerable reputation. On the death of Mr. Middleton, surgeon-general, in 1786, Mr. Hunter obtained the appointment of deputy surgeon-general to the army; but in the spring of the year he had a violent attack of illness, which left him for the rest of his life subject to peculiar and violent spasmodic affections of the heart. In July 1787, he was chosen a member of the American philosophical society. In 1790, finding that his lectures occupied too much of his time, he relinquished them to his brother-in-law Mr. Home; and in this year, on the death of Mr. Adair, he was appointed inspector-general of hospitals, and surgeon-general of the army. He was also elected a member of the royal college of surgeons in Ireland.

The death of Mr. Hunter was perfectly sudden, and the consequence of one of those spasmodic seizures in the heart to which he had now for several years been subject. It happened on the 16th of October, 1793. Irritation of mind had long been found to bring on this complaint; and on that day, meeting with some vexatious circumstances at St. George’s hospital, he put a degree of constraint upon himself to suppress his sentiments, and in that state went into another room; where, in turning round to a physician who was present, befell, and instantly expired without a groan. Of the disorder which produced this effect, Mr. Home has given a clear and circumstantial account, of a very interesting nature to professional readers. Mr. Hunter was short in stature, but uncommonly strong, active, and capable of great bodily exertion. The prints of him by Sharp, from a picture by sir Joshua Reynolds, give a forcible and accurate idea of his countenance. His temper was warm and impatient; but his disposition was candid and free from reserve, even to a fault. He was superior to every kind of artifice, detested it in others, and in order to avoid it, expressed his exact sentiments, sometimes too openly and too abruptly. His mind was uncommonly active; it was naturally formed for investigation, and so attached to truth and fact, that he despised all unfounded speculation, and proceeded always with caution upon the solid ground of experiment. At the same time his acuteness in observing the result of those experiments, his ingenuity in contriving, and his adroitness in conducting them, enabled him to deduce from them advantages which others would not have derived. It has been supposed, very falsely, that he was fond of hypothesis; on the contrary, if he was defective in any talent, it was in that of imagination; he pursued truth on all occasions with mathematical precision, but he made no fanciful excursions. Conversation in a mixed company, where no subject could be connectedly pursued, fatigued instead of amusing him; particularly towards the latter part of his life. He slept little; seldom more than four hours in the night, and about an hour after dinner. But his occupations, laborious as they would have been to others, were far from being fatiguing to him, being so perfectly congenial to his mind. He spoke freely and sometimes harshly of his contemporaries; but he considered surgery as in its infancy, and, being very anxious for its advancement, thought meanly of those professors whose exertions to promote it were unequal to his own. Money he valued no otherwise than as it enabled him to pursue his researches; and in his zeal to benefit mankind, he attended too little to the interests of his own family. Altogether he was a man such as few ages produce, and by his great contributions to the stores of knowledge, will ever deserve the gratitude and veneration of posterity.

The contributions of Mr. Hunter to the Transactions of the Royal Society cannot easily be enumerated: his other works appeared in the following order. 1. A treatise on “the Natural History of the Human Teeth,” 1771, 4to; a second part to which was added in 1778. 2. “A treatise on the Venereal Disease,” 1786, 4io. 3. “Observations on certain Parts of the Animal QEconomy,” 1786, 4to, 4. “A treatise on the Blood, Inflammation, and Gunshot Wounds,” 4to. This was a posthumous work, not appearing till the year 1794; but it had been sent to tho press in the preceding year, before his death. There are also some papers by Mr. Hunter in the “Transactions of the Society for the Improvement of Medical and Chirurgical Knowledge,” which were published in 1793. The collection of comparative anatomy which Mr. Hunter left behind him, must be considered as a proof of talents, assiduity, and labour, which cannot be contemplated without surprize and admiration. His attempt in this collection has been to exhibit the gradations of nature, from the most simple state in which life is found to exist, up to the most perfect and complex of the animal creation, to mau himself. By his art and care, he has been able so to expose and preserve in a dried state, or in spirits, the corresponding parts of animal bodies, that the various links in the chain of peifectness may be readily followed and clearly understood. They are classed in the following order: first, the parts constructed for motion; secondly, the parts essential to animals as respecting their own internal economy; thirdly, parts superadded for purposes concerned with external objects; fourthly, parts designed for the propagation of the species, and the maintenance and preservation of the young. To go further into these particulars, would lead us to a detail inconsistent with the nature of this work; but they are of the most curious kind, and may be found described in a manner at once clear and instructive, in the “Life of John Hunter,” from which we have taken this account. By his will, Mr. Hunter directed that this museum should be offered to the purchase of government; and, after some negociation, it was bought for the public use for the sum of 15,000l. and given to the College of Surgeons, on condition of exposing it to public view on certain days in the week, and giving a set of annual lectures explanatory of its contents. A large building for its reception has been completed in Portugalstreet, connected with the College of Surgeons, in Lincoln’s-inn fields; and in the spring of the year 1810 the first course of lectures was delivered by Mr. Home and sir William Blizard.

, author of the celebrated “Letter on Enthusiasm,” and, if Coxeter be right in his ms conjecture in his title-page of the only copy extant, of a farce called “Androboros.” He was appointed lieutenant-governor of Virginia in 1708, but was taken by the French in his voyage thither. Two excellent letters, addressed to colonel Hunter while a prisoner at Paris, which reflect equal honour on Hunter and Swift, are printed in the 12th volume of the Dean’s works, by one of which it appears, that the “Letter on Enthusiasm” had been ascribed to Swift, as it has still more commonly been to the earl of Shaftesbury. In 1710 he was appointed governor of New York, and sent with 2700 Palatines to settle there. From Mr. Cough’s “History of Croyland Abbey,” we learn, that Mr. Hunter was a major-general, and that, during his government of New-York, he was directed by her majesty to provide subsistence for about 3000 Palatine? (the number stated in the alienating act) sent from Great Britain to be employed in raising and manufacturing naval stores; and by an account stated in 1734, it appears that the governor had disbursed 20,000l. and upwards in that undertaking, no part of which was ever repaid. He returned to England in 1719; and on the accession of George II. was continued governor of New York and the Jerseys. On account of his health he obtained the government of Jamaica, where he arrived in February 1728; died March 31, 1734; and was buried in that island.

, an ancient English historian, was the son of one Nicholas, a married priest, and was born about the beginning of the twelfth century, or end of the eleventh, for he informs us that he was made an archdeacon by Robert Bloet, bishop of Lincoln, who died in 1123. He was educated by Albinus of Anjou, a learned canon of the chqrch of Lincoln, and in his youth discovered a great taste for poetry, by writing eight books of epigrams, as many of love verses, with three long didactic poems, one of herbs, another of spices, and a third of precious stones. In his more advanced years he applied to the study of history; and at the request of Alexander bishop of Lincoln, who was his great friend and patron, he composed a general History of England, from the earliest accounts to the death of king Stephen, 1154, in eight books, published by sir Henry Savile. In the dedication of this work to bishop Alexander, he tells us, that in the ancient part of his history he had followed the venerable Bede, adding a few things from some other writers: that he had compiled the sequel from several chronicles he had found in different libraries, and from what he had heard and seen. Towards the conclusion be very honestly acknowledges that it was only an abridgment, and that to compose a complete history of England, many more books were necessary than he could procure. Mr. Wharton has published a long letter of this author to his friend Walter, abbot of Ramsay, on-the contempt of the world, which contains many curious anecdotes of the kings, nobles, prelates, and other great men who were his contemporaries. In the Bodleian library is a ms Latin poem by Henry, on the death of king Stephen, and the arrival of Henry II. in England, which is by no means contemptible, and in Trinity college library, Oxford, is a fine ms. of his book “De imagine mundi.” When he died is uncertain.

, a learned English divine, was born at Deorhyrst in Gloucestershire, where his father was minister, in 1636. Having been educated in school learning at Bristol, he was sent to Merton-college, Oxford, of which in due time he was chosen fellow. He went through the usual course of arts and sciences with great applause, and then applied himself most diligently to divinity and the Oriental languages. The latter became afterwards of infinite service to him, for he was chosen, chaplain to the English factory at Aleppo, and sailed from England in Sept. 1670. During his eleven years’ residence in this place, he applied himself particularly to search out and procure manuscripts; and for this purpose maintained a correspondence with the learned and eminent of every profession and degree, which his knowledge in the Eastern, languages, and especially the Arabic, enabled him to do. He travelled also for his diversion and improvement, not only into the adjacent, but even into distant places; and after having carefully visited almost all Galilee and Samaria, he went to Jerusalem. In 1677 he went into Cyprus; and the year after undertook a journey of 150 miles, for the sake of beholding the venerable ruins of the once noble and glorious city of Palmyra; but, instead of having an opportunity of viewing the place, he and they that were with him were very near being destroyed by two Arabian princes, who had taken possession of those parts. He had better success in a journey to Egypt in 1680, where he met with several curiosities and manuscripts, and had the pleasure of conversing with John Lascaris, archbishop of mount Sinai.

In 1682 he embarked, and landed in Italy; and having visited Rome, Naples, and other places, taking Paris in his way, where he stayed a few weeks, he arrived, after many dangers and difficulties, safe in his own country. He retired immediately to his fellowship at Merton college; and in 1683 took the degrees in divinity. About the same time, through the recommendation of bishop Fell, he was appointed master of Trinity college in Dublin, and went over thither, though against his will; but the troubles that happened in Ireland at the Revolution forced him back for a time into England; and though he returned after the reduction of that kingdom, yet he resigned his mastership in 1691, and came home, with an intention to quit it no more. In the mean time he sold for 700l. his fine collection of Mss. to the curators of the Bodleian library having before made a present of thirty- five. In 1692 he was presented by sir Edward Tumor to the rectory of Great Hallingbury in Essex, and the same year he married. He was offered about that time the bishopric of Kilmore in Ireland, but refused it; in 1701, however, he accepted that of Raphoe, and was consecrated in Christ-church, Dublin, Aug. 20. He survived his consecration but twelve days, for he died Sept. 2, in his 66th year, and was buried in Trinity college chapel.

All that he published himself was, “An Account of the Porphyry Pillars in Egypt,” in the “Philosophical Transactions, No. 161.” Some of his “Observations” are printed in "A Collection of curious Travels and Voyages,' in two vols. 8vo, by Mr. J. Ray; and thirty-nine of his letters, chiefly written while he was abroad, were published by Dr. T. Smith, at the end of his life.

, an eminent and accomplished prelate, was born at Congreve, in the parish of Penkrich, in Staffordshire, Jan. 13, 1720. He was the second of three children, all sons, of John and Hannah Hurd, whom he describes as “plain, honest, and good people, farmers, but of a turn of mind that might have honoured any rank and any education;” and they appear to have been solicitous to give this son the best and most liberal education. They rented a considerable farm at Congreve, but soon after removed to a larger at Penford, about half-way between Brewood and Wolverhampton in the same county. There being a good grammar-school at Brewood, Mr. Hurd was educated there under the rev. Mr. Hitman, and upon his death under his successor the rev. Mr. Budvvorth, whose memory our author affectionately honoured in a dedication, in 1757, to sir Edward Littleton, who had also been educated at Brewood school. He continued under this master’s care until 1733, when he was admitted of Emanuel college, Cambridge, but did not go to reside there till a year or twa afterwards.

In this college he had the happiness of being encouraged by, and hearing the lectures of, that excellent tutor, Mr. Henry Hubbard, although he had been admitted under another person. He took the degree of B. A. in 1739, proceeded M. A. and was elected fellow in 1742. In June of that year he was ordained deacon in St. Paul’s cathedral, London, by Dr. Joseph Butler, bishop of Bristol and dean of St. Paul’s, on letters diruissory from Dr. Gooch, bishop of Norwich; and was ordained priest May 20, 1744, in the chapel of Gonvile ar.d Caius college, Cambridge, by the same Dr. Gooch.

Mr. Kurd’s first literary performance, as far as can be ascertained, was “Remarks on a late book entitled ‘An Enquiry into the rejection of the Christian miracles by the Heathens, by William Weston, B. D.’” 1746. On the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, in 1748, he contributed some verses to the university collection of 1749. In the same year he took the degree of B. D. and published his “Commentary on Horace’s Ars Poetica,” in the preface to which he took occasion to compliment Mr. Warburton in a manner which procured him the acquaintance of that author, who soon after returned the eulogium, in his edition of Pope’s works, in which he speaks of Mr. Kurd’s Commentary in terms of the highest approbation. Hence arose an intimacy which remained unbroken during the whole of their lives, and is supposed to have had a considerable effect on the opinions of Mr. Hurd, who was long considered as the first scholar in what has been called the Warburtonian school. His Commentary was reprinted in 1757, with the addition of two Dissertations, one on the Province of the Drama, the other on Poetical Imitation, and a letter to Mr. Mason, on the “Marks of Imitation.” A fourth edition, corrected and enlarged, was published in 3 vols. 8vo. in 1765, with the addition of another Dissertation on the idea of universal Poetry; and the whole were again reprinted in 1776. It is needless to add that they fully established Mr. Kurd’s character as an elegant, acute, and judicious critic.

In May 1750, by Warburton’s recommendation to Dr. Sherlock, bishop of London, Mr. Kurd was appointed one of the Whitehall preachers. At this period the university of Cambridge was disturbed by internal divisions, occasioned by an exercise of discipline against some of its members, who had been wanting in respect to those who were entrusted with its authority. A punishment having been inflicted on some delinquents, they refused to submit to it, and appealed from the vice-chancellor’s jurisdiction. The right of the university, and those to whom their power was delegated, becoming by this means the subject of debate, several pamphlets appeared, and among others who signalised themselves upon this occasion, Mr. Kurd was generally supposed to have written “The Academic, or, a disputation on the state of the university of Cambridge, and the propriety of the regulations made in it on the 1 Ith day of May and the 26th day of June 1750, 8vo” but this was, as we have already remarked, the production of Dr. Green: Mr. Hurd, however, wrote “The opinion of an eminent lawyer (the earl of Hardwicke) concerning the right of appeal from the vice-chancellor of Cambridge to the senate; supported by a short historical account of the jurisdiction of the university; in answer to a late pamphlet, intituled * An Inquiry into the right of appeal from the vice-chancellor, &c.' By a fellow of a college,” 1751, 8vo. This passed through three editions; and being answered, was defended in “A Letter to the Author of a Further Inquiry,” 1752, 8vo. It is also preserved in the bishop’s works.

In 1751, he published the “Commentary on the Epistle to Augustus;” and a new edition of both Comments, with a dedication to Mr. Warburton, in 1753. In 1752 and 1753, he published two occasional sermons, the one at the assizes at Norwich, on “The Mischiefs of Enthusiasm and Bigotry,” and the other, for the charity schools at Cambridge, neither of which has been retained in his works. The friendship which had already taken place between Warburton and Mr. Kurd had from its commencement continued to increase by the aid of mutual good offices; and in 1755 an opportunity offered for the latter to shew the warmth of his attachment, which he did perhaps with too close an imitation of his friend’s manner. Dr. Jortin having, in his “Dissertations,” spoken of Warburton with less deference and submission than the claims of an overbearing and confident superiority seemed to demand, Mr. Hurd wrote a keen satire, entitled “The Delicacy of Friendship, a seventh dissertation; addressed to the author of the sixth,” 1755, 8vo. It has been said, that upon reflection, he was so little satisfied with the warmth of zeal he had displayed on this occasion, that he took great pains to suppress this pamphlet. If so, it is difficult to account for the eagerness with which it was brought forward again in a new edition in 1788, by an eminent living scholar, in a volume entitled “Tracts by Warburton and a Warburtonian.” It was this obtrusion, however, for which it would not be easy to assign the most liberal motives, that probably induced the author in his latter days, not only to acknowledge the tract, but to include it among those which he wished to form his collected works.

Although Mr. Kurd’s reputation as a polite scholar and critic had been now fully established, his merit had not attracted the notice of the great. He still continued to reside at Cambridge, in learned and unostentatious retirement, till, in Dec. 1756, he became, on the death of Dr. Arnald, entitled to the rectory of Thurcaston, as senior fellow of Emanuel college, and was instituted Feb. 16, 1757. At this place he accordingly entered into residence, and, perfectly satisfied with his situation, continued his studies, which were still principally employed on subjects of polite literature. It was in this year that he published “A Letter to Mr. Mason on the Marks of Imitation,” one of his most agreeable pieces of this class, which was afterwards added to the third edition of the “Epistles of Horace.” This obtained for him the return of an elegy inscribed to him by the poet, in 1759, in which Mason terms him “the friend of his youth,” and speaks of him as seated in “low Thurcaston’s sequester' d bower, distant from promotion’s view.” The same year appeared Mr. Kurd’s “Remarks on Hume’s Essay on the Natural History of Religion.” Warburton appears to have been so much concerned in this tract, that we find it republished by Hurd in the quarto edition of that prelate’s works, and enumerated by him in his list of his own works. It appears to have given Hume some uneasiness, and he notices it in his account of his life with much acrimony. In 1759, he published a volume of “Dialogues on sincerity, retirement, the golden age of Elizabeth, and the constitution of the English government,” in 8vo, without his name. In this work he was thought to rank among those writers who, in party language, are called constitutional; but it is said that he made considerable alterations in the subsequent editions. This was followed by his very entertaining “Letters on Chivalry and Romance,” which with his yet more useful “Dialogues on foreign Travel” were republished in 1765, with the author’s name, and an excellent preface on the manner of writing dialogue, under the general title of“Dialogues moral and political.” In the year preceding, he wrote another of those zealous tracts in vindication of Warburton, which, with the highest respect for Mr. Kurd’s talents, we may be permitted to say, have added least to his fame, as a liberal and courteous polemic. This was entitled “A Letter to the Rev. Dr. Thomas Leland, in which his late ‘ Dissertation on the principles of Human Eloquence’ is criticized, and the bishop of Gloucester’s idea of the nature and character of an inspired language, as delivered in his lordship’s Doctrine of Grace, is vindicated from all the objections of the learned author of the dissertation.” This, with Mr. Kurd’s other controversial tracts, is republished in vol. VIII. of the late authorized edition of his works, with the following lines, by way of advertisement, written not long before his death "The controversial tracts, which make up this volume, were written and published by the author at different times, as opportunity invited, or occasion required. Some sharpness of style may be objected to them; in regard to which he apologizes for himself in the words of the poet:

With this apology, we return to his well-earned promotions. In 1762, he had the sine-cure rectory of Folkton, near Bridlington, Yorkshire, given him by the lord chancellor (earl of Northington), on the recommendation of Mr. Allen of Prior-Park and in 1765, on the recommendation of bishop Warburton and Mr. Charles Yorke, he was chosen preacher of Lincoln’s-inn; and was collated to the archdeaconry of Gloucester, on the death of Dr. Geekie, by bishop Warburton, in August 1767. On Commencement Sunday, July 5, 1768, he was admitted D. D. at Cambridge; and on the same day was appointed to open the lecture founded by his friend bishop Warburton, for the illustration of the prophecies, in which he exhibited a model worthy of the imitation of his successors. His “Twelve Discourses” on that occasion, which had been delivered before the most polite and crowded audiences that ever frequented the chapel, were published in 1772, under the title of “An Introduction to the Study of the Prophecies concerning the Christian Church, and in particular concerning the Church of Papal Rome;” and raised his character as a divine, learned and ingenious, to an eminence almost equal to that which he possessed as a man of letters; but his notion of a double sense in prophecy, which he in general supposes, has not passed without animadversion. This volume produced a private letter to the author from Gibbon the historian, under a fictitious name, respecting the book of Daniel, which Dr. Hurd answered; and the editor of Gibbon’s Miscellaneous Works having printed the answer, Dr. Hurd thought proper to include both in the edition of his works published since his death (in 1811). It was not, however, until the appearance of Gibbon’s “Miscellaneous Works,” that he discovered the real name of his correspondent.

In 1769, Dr. Hurd published “The Select Works of Mr. Abraham Cowley,” with a preface and notes, in 2 vols. 8vo. This has not been thought the most judicious of Dr. Kurd’s attempts, yet it was too fastidiously objected to, as interfering with the totality of Cowley’s works. Dr. Hurd had no intention to sink the old editions; he only selected what he thought most valuable.

In 1775, by the recommendation of lord Mansfield, who had for some time cultivated his acquaintance, and had a high esteem for his talents, he was promoted to the bishopric of Lichneld and Coventry, and consecrated Feb. 12, of that year. On this occasion he received an elegant and affectionate letter of congratulation from the members of Emanuel college, to which he returned an equally elegant and respectful letter of thanks. In this year he edited ft republication of bishop Jeremy Taylor’s “Moral Demonstration of the Truth of the Christian Religion,” 8vo; and early in 1776, published a volume of “Sermons preached at Lincoln’s-inn,” which was followed afterwards by a second and third. These added very greatly to the reputation he had derived from his sermons on prophecy, and are equally distinguished by elegant simplicity of style, perspicuity of method, and acuteness of elucidation. On June 5th of this year, he was appointed preceptor to their royal highnesses the prince of Wales, and prince Frederick, now duke of York. Very soon after entering into the episcopal office, appeared an excellent “Charge delivered to the clergy of the diocese of Lichneld and Coventry, at the bishop’s primary visitation in 1775 and 1776,” and soon after, his “Fast Sermon” for the “American rebellion,” preached before the House of Lords. In 1781 he* was elected a member of the royal society of Gottingen. It is somewhat remarkable that he did not belong to that of London.

On the death of the bishop of Winchester, Dr. Thomas, in May 1781, bishop Hurd received a gracious message from his majesty, with the offer of the see of Worcester (vacant by the promotion of bishop North to Winchester), and of the clerkship of the closet, in the room of Dr. Thomas, both which he accepted. On his arrival at Hartlebury castle, one of the episcopal seats of Worcester, he resolved to put the castle into complete order, and to build a library, which was much wanted. The library was accordingly finished in 1782, and furnished with a collection of books, the property of his lately deceased friend bishop Warburton, which he purchased. To these he afterwards made several considerable additions, and bequeathed the whole of his own collection. On the death of Dr. Cornwallis, archbishop of Canterbury, in 1783, bishop Hurd had the offer of the archbishopric from his majesty, with many gracious expressions, and vvas pressed to accept it: but he humbly begged leave to decline it, “as a charge not suited to his temper and talents, and much too heavy for him to sustain, especially in these times,” alluding to the political distractions arising from a violent conflict between Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox, and their respective supporters. The king was pleased not to take offence at this freedom, and then to enter with Dr. Hurd into some confidential conversation on the subject. “I took the liberty,” said the good bishop to Mr. Nichols, when relating this affair, “of telling his majesty, that several much greater men than myself had been contented to die bishops of Worcester; and that I wished for no higher preferment.”

In the end of February 1788, was published in 7 vols. 4to, a complete edition of the Works of bishop Warburton, prepared by our prelate, but who did not publish the “Life” until 1795. In March 1788, a fine gold medal was given to him by his majesty at the queen’s house; the king’s head on one side; the reverse was taken from the bishop’s seal (a cross with the initials on a label, 1. N. R. I. a glory above, and the motto below sx irurleus), which his majesty chanced to see and approved. The die was cut by Mr. Burch, and the medal designed for the annual prize-dissertation on theological subjects, in the university of Gottingen. In the summer of the same year he was honoured with a visit from their majesties at Hartlebury castle.

In 1795 the life of bishop Warburton appeared under the title of “A Discourse, by way of general preface to the quarto edition of bishop Warburton’s works; containing some account of the life, writings, and character of the author.” Of this work, which excited no common portion of curiosity/ the style is peculiarly elegant and pure, but the whole is too uniform in panegyric not to render the author liable to the suspicion of long-confirmed prejudices. Even the admirers both of Warburton and Hurd would have been content with less effort to magnify the former at the expence of all his contemporaries; and conscious that imperfection is the lot of all, expected that age and reflection would have abated, if not wholly extinguished, the unscholarlike animosities of former times. But in this all were disappointed; and it was with regret they saw the worst characteristics of Warburton, his inveterate dislikes, his strong contempt, and sneering rancour, still employed to perpetuate his personal antipathies; and employed, too, against such men as Lowth and Seeker. If these were the feelings of the friends who venerated Warburton, and who loved Hurd, others who never had much attachment to Warburton, or his school, found little difficulty in accumulating charges of gross partiality, and illiberal language, against his biographer. This much may be sufficient in noticing this life as the production of Dr. Hurd. It will come hereafter to be more particularly noticed as regarding Warburton. The remainder of bishop Kurd’s life appears to have been spent in the discharge of his episcopal duties, as far as his increasing infirmities would permit; in studious retirement; and often in lamenting the loss of old and tried friends. So late as the first Sunday in February before his death, though then declining in health and strength, he was able to attend his parish church, and to receive the sacrament. Free from any painful or acute disorder, he gradually became weaker, but his faculties continued perfect. After a few days’ confinement to his bed, he expired in his sleep, on Saturday morning, May 28, 1808, having completed four months beyond his eighty-eighth year. He was buried in Hartlebury church-yard, according to his own directions. As a writer, Dr. Hurd’s taste, learning, and genius, have been universally acknowledged, and although a full acquiescence has not been given in all his opinions, he must be allowed to be every where shrewd, ingenious, and original. Even in his sermons and charges, while he is sound in the doctrines of the church, his arguments and elucidations have many features of novelty, and are conveyed in that simple, yet elegant style, which renders them easily intelligible to common capacities. Dr. Hurd’s private character was in all respects amiable. With his friends and connexions he obtained the best eulogium, their constant and warm attachment; and with the world in general, a kind of veneration, which could neither be acquired nor preserved, but by the exercise of great virtues. One of his last employments was to draw up a series of the dates of his progress through life. It is to be lamented he did not fill up this sketch. Few men were more deeply acquainted with the literary history of his time, or could have furnished a more interesting narrative. Much of him, however, may be seen in his Life of Warburton, and perhaps more in the collection of Warburton’s “Letters” to himself, which he ordered to be published after his death, for the benefit of the Worcester Infirmary. Of this only 250 copies were printed, to correspond with the 4to edition of Warburton’s works, but it has since been reprinted in 8vo.

Dr. Hurd was early an admirer of Addison, and although afterwards seduced into the love of a style more flighty and energetic, maturer judgment led him back to the favourite of his youth. “His taste is so pure,” Dr. Hurd says in a letter to Mason, “and his Virgiliau prose (as Dr. Young styles it) so exquisite, that I have but now found out, at the close of a critical life, the full value of his writings.” This letter is dated 1770; and the author, whose life was then far from its close, employed his leisure hours in preparing an edition of Addison’s works, which he left quite ready for the press! It was published accordingly in six handsome volumes, 8vo, with philological notes. These are accounted for in a very short address prefixed in these words: “Mr. Addison is generally allowed to be the most correct and elegant of all our writers; yet some inaccuracies of style have escaped him, which it is the chief design, of the following notes to point out. A work of this sort, well executed, wouldbe of use to foreigners who study our language and even to such of our countrymen as wish to write it in perfect purity.” This is followed by an elegant Latin inscription to Addison, written in 1805, by which we learn that he intended this edition as a monument to Addison “Hoc monumentum sacrum esto.” In the same year, 1810, a new edition of the works of bishop Warburton appeared, according to Dr. Kurd’s directions; and, for the first time, an edition of his own works, in 8 vols. 8vo, consisting of his critical works, moral and political dialogues, his sermons, and controversial tracts.

, an ingenious poet, and very amiable man, the son of James Hurdis, gent, was born at Bishopstone in Sussex in 1763. His father dying, and leaving his mother in no affluent circumstances, with seven children, seems to have laid the foundation of that extreme tenderness and liberality of brotherly affection which formed the most striking feature in the character of Mr. Hurdis. He was educated at Chichester school, where being of a delicate constitution, he seldom partook in the juvenile sports of his school companions, but generally employed his hours of leisure in reading. His inclination to poetry soon appeared in various juvenile compositions, and he contracted at the same time a fondness for the sister art, music, which ended in his being a very considerable performer on several instruments^ Before he left school, he nearly completed the building of an organ, an instrument he preferred to all others.

In 1780 he was entered a commoner of St. Mary-hall, Oxford; and at the election in 1782, was chosen a demy of St. Mary Magdalen college. Here his studies, which were close and uninterrupted, were encouraged, and his amiable character highly respected, by Dr. Home, president of Magdalen, and his successor Dr. Routh, by Dr. Sheppard, Dr. Rathbone, and others. About 1784 he went to Stanmer in Sussex, where he resided for some considerable time as tutor to the late earl of Chichester’s youngest son, the hon. George Pelham, now bishop of Exeter. In May 1785, having taken his bachelor’s degree, he retired to the curacy of Burwash in Sussex, which he held for six years, but in the interim, in 1786, was elected probationer fellow of Magdalen, and the following year took his master’s degree. Finding himself now sufficiently enabled to assist his mother in the support of her family, he hired a small house, and took three of his sisters to reside with him. In 1788, he first appeared before the public as a poet, in “The Village Curate,” the reception of which far exceeded his expectations, a second edition being called for the following year. This poem, although perhaps not highly finished, contained so many passages of genuine poetry, and evinced so much elegance, taste, and sense, as to pass through the ordeal of criticism with great applause, and to be considered as the earnest of future and superior excellence. Such encouragement induced the author to publish in 1790, his “Adriano, or the first of June,” which was followed in a short time by his “Panthea,” “Elmer and Ophelia,” and the “Orphan Twins,” all which were allowed to confirm the expectations of the public, and place the author in an enviable rank among living poets. These were followed by two publications, connected with his profession; “A short critical Disquisition ou the true Meaning of the word tO*OiJin, found in Gen. i. 21, 1790,” and “Select critical Remarks upon the English version of the first ten chapters of Genesis.” In 1791, through the interest of the earl of Chichester, he was appointed to the living of Bishopstone; and about the same time wrote his tragedy of “Sir Thomas More,” a poem of considerable merit, but not intended for the stage. In 1792, he was deprived by death of his favourite sister Catherine, whose elegant mind he frequently pourtrayed in his works, under the different appellations of Margaret and Isabel. On this affliction he quitted his curacy, and returned with his two sisters to Bishopstone. Here the trouble of his mind was considerably alleviated by an affectionate invitation from his much- esteemed friend Mr. Hayley to visit Eartham, where he had the pleasing satisfaction of becoming personally known to Cowper, the celebrated poet, with whom he had maintained a confidential correspondence for some years.

In 1792, he published his “Cursory Remarks upon the arrangement of the plays of Shakspeare, occasioned by reading Mr. Malone’s Essay on the chronological order of those celebrated pieces;” which showed that he had bestowed much attention on this curious subject In April 1793, he went to Oxford, and with two of his sisters, resided in a small house at Temple Cowley. In November of the same year, he was elected professor of poetry in that university, and in the year following took the degree of B. D. On being elected professor, he published a specimen of some intended lectures on English poetry, and meant to have published the lectures themselves, a few of which he printed at a private press, but the scheme was dropped for want of encouragement. In 1797 he took his degree of D. D. and in 1799, married Harriet, daughter of Hughes Minet, esq. of Fulham, Middlesex. In 1800 he published his “Favourite Village,” and the same year his “Twelve Dissertations on the Nature and Occasion of Psalm and Prophecy,” 8vo, in which he displays much ingenuity and acumen, as in all his publications, but has in some instances yielded too much to the hypotheses which arise from a fertile imagination, and are repugnant to the genius of the Hebrew criticism, and the rules of Hebrew grammar. Dr. Hurdis’s fame seems indeed more solidly established on his poetical than his critical works.

Dr. Hurdis died Dec. 23, 1801, after a very short illness, in his thirty-eighth year, leaving a widow and two sons, and a posthumous daughter. He was buried, by his own desire, at Bishopstone. As few men bore so excellent a character in every station and duty of life, few have been more generally lamented. In 1808, a correct and elegant edition of his “Poems,” in 3 vols. was printed at the university-press, Oxford, encouraged by a very large list of subscribers. They have since been partly reprinted, and are likely to retain their popularity-

, a French divine of some eminence, was born at Champigny-sur-Youne, in 1639, the son of a labourer. He made it his object to know every thing that could throw any light upon theology; and with this view he studied the oriental languages. He was a member of the learned society of Port- Royal, where he imbibed at once his zeal for religion and for letters. He was afterwards professor of the learned languages in the university of Paris, and principal of the college of Boncourt. He died in 1717. There are extant by him, 1. A Dictionary of.the Bible, 2.vols. folio, less full, and less complete, than that of Calmet, published in 1715. 2. An edition of the Latin Testament, with notes, which are much esteemed, 2 vols. 12mo. 3. “A French translation of the former, with the notes from the Latin augmented, 1702, 4 vols. 12mo. 4.” A Sacred Grammar," with rules for understanding the literal sense of the Scripture. He was considered as a Jansenist; and by some said to be only Quesnel a little moderated.

, a celebrated divine and martyr, was born at a town in Bohemia, called Hussenitz, about 1376, and liberally educated in the university of Prague. Here he took the degree of B. A. in 1393, and that of master in 1395; and we find him, in 1400, in orders, and a minister of a church in that city. About this time the writings of our countryman Wickliffe had spread themselves among the Bohemians, which was owing to the following circumstance: Queen Anne, the wife of Richard II. of England, was daughter to the emperor Charles IV. and sister to Wenceslaus king of Bohemia, and Sigismund emperor of Germany. She was a princess of great piety, virtue, and knowledge, nor could she endure the implicit service and devotion of the Romish church. Her death happened in 1394, and her funeral was attended by all the nobility of England. She had patronized Wickliffe, and after her death, several of Wickliffe’s books were carried by her attendants into Bohemia, and were the means of promoting the reformation there. They had also been carried into the same country by Peter Payne, an Englishman, one of his disciples, and principal of Edmund-hall. Fox mentions another person, a young nobleman of Bohemia, who had studied some time at Oxford, and carried home with him several of Wickliffe’s tracts. They were particularly read by the students at Prague, among the chief of whom was Huss; who, being much taken with Wickliffe’s notions, began to preach and write with great zeal against the superstitions and errors of the church of Rome. He succeeded so far, that the sale of indulgences gradually decreased among the Bohemians; and the pope’s party declared, that there would soon be an end of religion, if measures were not taken to oppose the restless endeavours of the Hussites. With a view, therefore, of preventing this danger, Subinco, the archbishop of Prague, issued forth two mandates in 1408; one, addressed to the members of the university, by which they were ordered to bring together all Wickliffe’s writings, that such as were found no contain any thing erroneous or heretical might be burnt; the other, to all curates and ministers, commanding them to teach the people, that, after the consecration of the elements in the holy Sacrament, there remained nothing but the real body and blood of Christ, under the appearance of bread and wine. Hjiss, whose credit and authority in the university were very great, as well for his piety and learning, as on account of considerable services he had done, found no difficulty in persuading many of its members of the unreasonableness and absurdity of these mandates: the first being, as he said, a plain encroachment upon the liberties and privileges of the university, whose members had an indisputable right to possess, and to read all sorts of books; the second, inculcating a most abominable error. Upon this foundation they appealed to Gregory XII. and the archbishop Subinco was summoned to Rome. But, on acquainting the pope that the heretical notions of WicklifTe were gaining ground apace in Bohemia, through the zeal of some preachers who had read his books, a bull was granted him for the suppression of all such notions in his province. By virtue of this bull, Subinco condemned the writings of Wickliffe, and proceeded against four doctors, who bad not complied with his mandate in bringing in their copies. Huss and others, who were involved in this sentence, protested against this projcedure of the archbishop, and appealed from him a second time, in June 1410. The matter was then brought before John XXIII. who ordered Huss, accused of many errors and heresies, to appear in person at the court of Rome, and gave a special commission to cardinal Colonna to cite him. Huss, however, under the protection and countenance of Wenceslaus king of Bohemia, did riot appear, but sent three deputies to excuse his absence, and to answe'r all which should be alledged against him. Colonna paid no regard to the deputies, nor to any defence they could make; but. declared Huss guilty of contumacy to the court of Rome, and excommunicated him for it. Upon this the deputies appealed from the cardinal to the pope, who commissioned four other cardinals to examine into the affair. These commissaries not only confirmed all that Colonna had done, but extended the excommunication, which was limited to Huss, to his friends and followers: they also declared him an Heresiarch, and pronounced an interdict against him.

All this time, utterly regardless of what was doing at Rome, Huss continued to preach and write with great zeal against the errors and superstitions of that church, and in defence of Wickliffe and his doctrines. His discourses were pointed directly against the pope, the cardinals, and the clergy of that party; and at the same time he published writings, to shew the lawfulness of exposing the vices of ecclesiastics. In 1413, the religious tumults and seditions were become so violent, that Subinco applied to Wenceslaus to appease them. Wenceslaus banished Huss from Prague; but still the disorders continued. Then the archbishop had recourse to the emperor Sigismond, who promised him to come into Bohemia, and assist in settling the affairs of the church; but, before Sigismond could be prepared for the journey, Subinco died in Hungary. About this time bulls were published by John XXIil. at Prague against Ladislaus king of Naples; in which a crusade was proclaimed against that prince, and indulgences promised to all who would go to the war. This furnished Huss, who had returned to Prague upon the death of Subinco, with a favourable occasion of preaching against indulgences and crusades, and of refuting these bulls: and the people were so affected and inflamed with his preaching, that they declared pope John to be Antichrist. Upon this, some of the ringleaders among the Hussites were seized and imprisoned; which, however, was not consented to" by the people, who were prepared to resist, till the magistrate had promised that no harm should happen to the prisoners; but the Hussites discovering that these persons had been executed in prison, took up arms, rescued their bodies, and interred them honourably, as martyrs, in the church of Bethlehem, which was Huss’s church. Huss, says Mr. Gilpin, discovered on this occasion a true Christian spirit The late riot had given him great concern; and he had now so much weight with the people as to restrain them from attempting any farther violence, whereas, at the sound of a bell, he could have been surrounded with thousands, who might have laughed at the police of the city.

Matters were in this state at Prague and in Bohemia, till the council of Constance was called where it was agreed between the pope and the emperor, that Huss should appear and give an account of himself and his doctrine. The emperor promised him security against any danger, and that nothing should be attempted against his person; upon which he set out, after declaring publicly, that he was going to the council of Constance, to answer the accusations that were formed against him and challenging all people who had any thing to except to his life and convey sation, to do it without delay. He made the same declaration in all the towns through which he passed, and arrived at Constance, Nov. 3, 1414. Here he was accused in form, and a list of his heretical tenets laid before the pope and the prelates of the council. He was summoned to appear the twenty-sixth day after his arrival; and declared himself ready to be examined, and to be corrected by them, if he should be found to have taught any doctrine worthy of censure. The cardinals soon after withdrew to deliberate upon the most proper method of proceeding against Huss; and the result of their deliberations was, that he should be imprisoned. This accordingly was done, notwithstanding the emperor’s parole for his security; nor were all his prince’s endeavours afterwards sufficient to release him, though he exerted himself to the utmost. Huss was removed from prison to prison for six; months, suffering great hardships from those who had the care of him; and at last was condemned of heresy by the council in his absence, and without a hearing, for maintaining that the Eucharist ought to be administered to the people in both kinds. The emperor, in the mean time, complained heavily of the contempt that was shewn to himself, and of the usage that w is employed towards Huss; insisting, that Huss ought to be allowed a fair and public hearing. In pretended compliance with this, he was on the 5th and 7th of June 1415, brought before the council, and permitted to say what he could in behalf of himself and his doctrines; but every thing was carried on with noise and tumult, and Huss soon given to understand that they were not disposed to hear any thing from him but a recantation of his errors; which, however, he absolutely refused, and was ordered back to prison. On July 6, he was brought again before the council, where he was condemned of heresy, and ordered to be burnt. The ceremony of his execution was this he was first stripped of hi& iacerdotal vestments by bishops nominated for that purpose; next he was formally deprived of his university-degrees; then he had a paper-crown put upon his head, painted round with devils, and the word heresiarch inscribed in great letters; then he was delivered over to the magistrate, who burnt him alive, after having first burnt his books at the door of the church. He died with great firmness and resolution; and his ashes were afterwards gathered up and thrown into the Rhine. His writings, which are very numerous and learned, were collected into a body and published, 1558, in two volumes folio, under this title, “Joannis Hussi Opera, quse extant.” To preserve his memory, it is said that the 7th of July was, for many years, held sacred among the Bohemians. In some places large fires were lighted in the evening of that day upon the mountains, to preserve the memory of his sufferings; round which the country people would assemble and sing hymns. Huss, although a martyr for the opinions of Wickliffe, did not imbibe the whole of them. He was in most points a strenuous Calvinist, if we may anticipate the epithet, but neither he nor Jerora of Prague denied the real presence in the eucharist, and transubstantiation. It is said that at his execution he asked the excutioner, “Are you going to burn a goose?” (the meaning of Huss in the Bohemian language) “In one century you will have a swan you can neither roast nor boil.” This was afterwards interpreted to mean Luther, who had a swan for his arms. Much of Huss’s writings are in Fox, Gilpin, and other ecclesiastical writers.

, a distinguished artist, was the sixth, but only surviving son and heir of John Hussey of Marnhull, esq. descended from a very ancient family, and was born at Marnhull (in Dorsetshire), Feb. 10, 1710. At seven years of age he was sent by his father, who was a Roman catholic, to Doway for his education, where he continued two years. He then was removed to St. Osier’s, where he pursued his studies for three years more. His father, though willing to afford him some education, yet designed him for trade; to which, perhaps, he was the more inclined, as a near relation, in the commercial world, offered to take him under his protection and care. Thought from a sense of parental authority, and filial obedience, Mr. Hussey did not at first openly oppose this design, yet it was so repugnant to his natural turn and bent, that he found his mind greatly embarrassed and perplexed; but after some opposition, his father very wisely yielded to his son’s request, to be permitted to follow the direction of his genius; and for that end he placed him under the care and tuition of Mr. Richardson, the painter; with whom he continued scarcely a month; revolting at the idea and proposal of being kept in the bondage of apprenticeship for seven years. He then commenced pupil at large under one Damini, a Venetian artist, esteemed one of the best painters at that time in England, with whom he continued nearly four years. During this time he was principally employed in copying pictures, and finishing those of his master, whom he assisted in painting the ornaments of the cathedral of Lincoln. During their work, on a scaffold nearly twenty feet high, as Mr. Hussey was drawing back to see the effects of his pencil, he would have fallen, had not his master saved him as ingeniously as affectionately, and at some risque to himself. Mr. Hussey entertained such a sense of his master’s humanity and kindness, that he could not bear the thought of being separated from him, and therefore requested permission of his father for Damini to attend him whilst pursuing his studies in Italy. This he obtained; and under the care and direction of the Venetian, our young and inexperienced pupil set out for the seat of science and genius; bending first his course for Bologna. But, soon after their arrival, the poor unsuspecting pupil found that one act of friendship is by no means a sure pledge of another; Damini having in a few days decamped, taking with him all his pupil’s money and the best of his apparel. Mr. Hussey was, however, kindly relieved from this state of distress by signor Gislonzoni, who had been ambassador from the States of Venice to the court of London, and now became his friend and protector.

Mr. Hussey prosecuted his studies at Bologna for three years and a half, and then removed to Rome, where he was received with the most obliging courtesy by a celebrated artist, Hercule Lelli, who, refusing any compensation, imparted to him in the most friendly manner all that he knew of the art. This did not entirely satisfy Mr. Hussey, who seems to have aimed at establishing some fixed and unerring principles: hence he was led into a search after theory, which ended, although he knew nothing of music, in his adopting the ancient hypothesis of musical or harmonic proportions, as being the governing principle of beauty, in all forms produced by art, and evea by nature. Delighted with this discovery, as he thought it, he continued his studies at Rome with increasing pleasure and reputation. At length, in 1737, he returned to his friends in England, with whom he resided till 1742, when he went to London, where he submitted to the drudgery (as he used to call it) of painting portraits for his subsistence.

Whilst thus employed, our artist met with great opposition and very illiberal treatment from those to whom, in the simplicity of his heart, he communicated his principles, as well as from those whose professional pride was piqued, and envy excited, by those masterly, elegant, and graceful performances which were the result of these principles. The meek spirit of Hussey, as well as his pride of conscious superiority, could ill bear the treatment both himself and his performances met with from the envy of those who depreciated their merit. This, as he often complained, affected him deeply; and so depressed his spirits, and repressed his ardour, as to give him a disgust to the world, and almost a dislike to his profession, and his temper, though not rendered sour and morose, was certainly exasperated. After conflicting with this and other difficulties and misfortunes, Mr. Hussey left London in the month of October 1768, and retired for three years into the country, to recover his health and spirits; and having at length, by the death of his elder brother, Mr. Hussey, in 1773, succeeded to possession of his paternal estate at Marnhull, he resided there in affluence, ease, and content, and pursued his favourite studies, and amusements of gardening, till the autumn of 1787; when, from motives purely of a religious nature (after having transferred and resigned all his worldly possessions to a near relation) he retired to Beaston, near Ashburton, in Devonshire; at which place, in the month of June 1788, as he was working in the garden in a very sultry day, he suddenly fell, and expired.

The great merit of Mr. Hussey’s pencil drawings from life was, that he has preserved the best characteristic likenesses of any artist whatever. And, with respect to those of mere fancy, no man ever equalled him in accuracy, elegance, simplicity, and beauty. The academical drawings he left at Bologna, notwithstanding the school has been often purged, as it is called, by removing old drawings to make room for those of superior merit, are still shewn on account of their superior merit.

Mr. Barry, that ingenious and liberal artist, whose great work in the paintings which adorn the large room at the Society of Arts in the Adelphi, together with his description of these paintings, do no less honour to himself than to his country, has, among other illustrious characters, thought Mr. Hussey entitled to an eminent place in his Elysium, and thus notices him: " Behind Phidias, I have introdced<Giles Hussey, a name that never occurs to me without fresh grief, shame, and horror, at the mean, wretched cabal of mechanics, for they deserve not the name of artists; and their still meaner runners, and assistants, that could have co-operated to cheat such an artist out of the exercise of abilities, that were so admirably calculated to have raised this country to an immortal reputation, and for the highest, species of excellence. Why will the great, who can have no interest but in the glory of their country, why will they suffer any dirty, whispering medium to interfere between them and siicji characters as Mr. Russey, who appears to have been no less amiable as a man, than he was admirable as an artist?

"The public are likely never to know the whole of what they have lost in Mr. Hussey. The perfections that were possible to him, but a very few artists can conceive; and it would be time lost to attempt giving an adequate idea of them in words.

“My attention was first turned to this great character by a conversation I had, very early in life, with Mr. Stuart, better known by the name of Athenian Stuart, an epithet richly merited by the essential advantages Mr. Stuart had rendered the public, by his establishing just ideas, and a true taste for the Grecian arts. The discourses of this truly intelligent and very candid artist, and what I saw of the works of Hussey, had altogether made such an impression on my mind, as may be conceived, hut cannot be expressed. With fervour I went abroad, eager to retrace all Hussey’s steps, through the Greeks, through Rafaelle, through dissected nature, and to add to what he had been cruelly torn away from, by a laborious, intense study and investigation of the Venetian school. In the hours of relaxation, I naturally endeavoured to recommend myself to the acquaintance of such of Mr. Hussey’s intimates as were still living: they always spoke of him with delight. And from the whole of what I could learn abroad, added to the information I received from my very amiable and venerable friend Mr. Moser since my return, Mr. Hussey must have been one of the most amiable, friendly, and companionable men, and the farthest removed from all spirit of strife and contention.”

Mr. Edwards and Mr. Fuseli have spoken less respectfully of Hussey. The latter says, that “disdaining portraiture, discountenanced in history, Hussey was reduced to the solitary patronage of the then duke of Northumberland, who, says Edwards, * offered to receive him into his family, and to give him a handsome pension, with the attendance of a servant, upon condition that he should employ his talents chiefly,‘ though not exclusively, ’ for the duke. This offer he rejected, because the duke did not comply with the further request of keeping a priest for him in the house.' Hussey, a bigot in religion, was attached to the creed of Rome; but had he not been so, commis. sions and patronage, almost confined to drawing copies, ven from the antique, was certainly sufficiently provoking for a man of an original turn, to be rejected.” It is not strictly true, however, that the duke of Northumberland was his only patron. Mr. Duane was another, who possessed many of his works. Mr. West bought some penciled heads at Mr. Duane’s sale, and said of one of them, that “he would venture to show it against any head, ancient or modern; that it was never exceeded, if ever equalled; and that no man had ever imbibed the true Grecian character Vid art deeper than Giles Hussey.”

, a philosopher of the Shaftesbury school, was the son of a dissenting; minister in Ireland, and was born Aug. 8, 1694. He, discovered early a superior capacity, and ardent thirst after knowledge; and when he had gone through his school-education, was sent to an academy to begin his course of philosophy. In 1710 he removed from the academy, and entered a student in the university of Glasgow in Scotland. Here he renewed his study of the Latin and Greek languages, and applied himself to all parts of literature, in which he made a progress suitable to his uncommon abilities. Afterwards h.e turned his thoughts to divinity, which he proposed to make the peculiar study and profession of his life, and for the prosecution of this he continued several years longer at Glasgow.

He then returned to Ireland; and, entering into the ministry, was just about to be settled in a small congregation of dissenters in the north of Ireland, when some gentlemen about Dublin, who knew his great abilities and virtues, invited him to set up a private academy in that city, with which he complied, and met with much success. He had been fixed but a short time in Dublin, when his singular merits and accomplishments made him generally known; and his acquaintance was sought by men of all ranks, who had any taste for literature, or any regard for learned men. Lord Molesworth is said to have taken great pleasure in his conversation, and to have assisted him with his criticisms and observations upon his “Enquiry intp the Ideas of Beauty and Virtue,” before it came abroad. He received the same favour from Dr. Synge, bishop of Elphin, with whom he also lived in great friendship. The first edition of this performance came abroad without the author’s name, but the merit of it would npt suffer him to be Long concealed. Such was the reputation of the work, and the ideas it had raised of the author, that lord Granville, who was then lord-lieutenant of Ireland, sent his private secretary to inquire at the bookseller’s for the author; and when he could not learn his name, he left a letter to be cpnveyed to him: in consequence of which Mr. Hutcheson soon became acquainted with his excellency, and was treated by him, all the time he continued in his government, with distinguished marks of familiarity and esteem.

From this time he began to be still more courted by men of distinction, either for rank or literature, in, Ireland. Abp. King held him in great esteem; and the friendship of that prelate was of great use to him in screening him from two attempts made to prosecute him, for taking upon him the education of youth, without having qualified himself by subscribing the ecclesiastical canons, and obtaining a license from the bishop. He had also a large share in the esteem of the primate Boulter, who, through his influence, made a donation to the university of Glasgow of a yearly fund for an exhibitioner, to be bred to any of the learned professions. A few years after his Inquiry into the Ideas of Beauty and Virtue, his “Treatise on the Passions” was published: these works have been often reprinted, and always admired both for the sentiment and language, even by those who have not assented to the philosophy of them, nor allowed it to have any foundation in nature. About this time he wrote some philosophical papers, accounting for laughter in a different way from Hobbes, and more honourable to human nature, which were published in the collection called “Hibernicus’s Letters.” Some letters in the “London Journal,” 1728, subscribed Philaretus, containing objections to some parts of the doctrine in “The Enquiry,” &c. occasioned his giving answers to them in those public papers. Both the letters and answers were afterwards published in a separate pamphlet.

After he had taught in a private academy at Dublin for seven or eight years with great reputation and success, he was called in 1729 to Scotland, to be professor of philosophy at Glasgow. Several young gentlemen came along with him from the academy, and his high reputation drew many more thither both from England and Ireland. After his settlement in the college, the profession of moral philosophy was the province assigned to him; so that now -he had full leisure to turn all his attention to his favourite study, human nature. Here he spent the remainder of his life in a manner highly honourable to himself, and ornamental to the university of which he was a member. His whole time was divided between his studies and the duties of his office; except what he allotted to friendship and society. A firm constitution, and a pretty uniform state of good health, except some few slight attacks of the gout, seemed to promise a longer life; yet he did not exceed his 53d year, dying in 1747. He was married soon after his settlement in Dublin, to Mrs. Mary Wilson, a gentleman’s daughter in the county of Longford; by whom he left behind him one son, Francis Hutcheson, M. D. By this gentleman was published, from the original ms. of his father, “A System of Moral Philosophy,” in three books, Glasgow, 1755, 2 vols. 4to. To which is prefixed, “Some account of the Life, Writings, and Character of the Author,” by Dr. Leechman, professor of divinity in the same university. Dr. Hutcheson’s system of morals is, in its foundation, very nearly the same with that of lord Shaftesbury. He agrees with the noble author in asserting a distinct class of the human affections, which, while they have no relation to our own interest, propose for their end the welfare of others; but he makes out his position rather more clearly than Shaftesbury, who cannot exclude somewhat of the selfish as the spring of our benevolent emotions. Hutcheson maintains, that the pleasure arising from the performance of a benevolent action, is not the ruling principle in prompting to such actions; but that, independently of the selfish enjoyment, which is allowed in part to exist, there is in the human mind a calm desire of the happiness of all rational beings, which is not only consistent with, but of superior influence in regulating our conduct, to the desire of our own happiness; insomuch that, whenever these principles come into opposition, the moral sense decides in favour of the former against the latter. Dr. Hutcheson deduced all moral ideas from what he calls a moral sense t implanted in our natures, or an instinct like that of self-preservation, which, independently of any arguments taken from the reasonableness and advantages of any action, leads us to perform it ourselves, or to approve it when performed by others; and this moral sense he maintained to be the very foundation of virtue. His hypothesis was new, but whether much better than other theories of the same kind, may be questioned. His fame, in the opinion of an eminfent author, rests now chiefly on the traditionary history of his academical lectures, which appear to have contributed very powerfully to diffuse, in Scotland, that taste for analytical discussion, and that spirit of liberal inquiry, to which the world is indebted for some of the most valuable productions of the eighteenth century."

, a topographical historian, the son of the rev. Richard Hutchins, was born in the parish of Bradford Peverel, Sept. 21, 1698. His father was rector of All Saints in Dorchester, and curate of Bradford Peverel. His income was small, and his son’s education was suited to the frugality of the station in which he was born. He appears to have been sent early to the grammar-school at Dorchester, where his master was the rev. Mr. Thornton, rector of West Stafford, whom he afterwards mentioned with gratitude, as behaving to him with the kindest attention, and as a second parent. He was afterwards sent to Oxford, where his residence was not long; for he took his master of arts degree at Cambridge, a proof that he had not kept a statutable residence for that degree in his own university, by applying to another in which none is required; and it is also a proof that he determined in Oxford; for, unless that exercise be performed, a certificate of a bachelor of arts degree is never granted. He was matriculated in Easter term, 1718, from Hart-hair, now Hertford college; but was afterwards removed by a bene discessit to Baliol college; and, as it appears by their books, he was admitted a member of that society in Easter term, April 10, 1719, and was regularly admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts in Lent term, Jan. 18, 1721-2. He was a determining bachelor in the same term; so that his whole residence in the university did not exceed four years; yet the friendships he contracted in both societies of which he was a member, continued with life; of which Mr. Charles Godwyn, fellow of Baliol college, was an instance in one; and his tutor, Mr. Davis, vice-principal of Harthall, in the other; and in what esteem he held both the one and the other, different passages in his “History” evince.

He was soon after admitted into holy orders, and became curate and usher to the rev. George Marsh, rector of Burleston, vicar of Milton Abbas, and master of the free grammar school of Milton Abbas. This engagement at Milton procured him the acquaintance of Jacob Bancks, sq. then the possessor of that estate, by whose interest he obtained in 1729 the rectory of Swyre, and in 1733 the rectory of Melcombe Horsey. About this time he began first to engage in the study of antiquities, and having a competent income, was enabled to pursue it with the less interruption, as an incurable deafness prevented his enjoying the pleasures of society. In 1744 he was presented to the living of Wareham, which was attended with a considerable increase in his clerical duties; yet without ever relaxing in his attention to these, he continued to accumulate materials for the history of his native county, and eutered into an extensive correspondence with gentlemen most likely to assist his researches. He had many difficulties, however, to encounter. He was himself rather a man of diligence than of extraordinary genius; his collections were many years making, and a great part of them fell into his hands on the death of a prior collector. The book, however, which he did not live to see published, was most liberally conducted through the press, by a very handsome subscription of the gentlemen of the county, and the kind patronage of Dr. Cuming and Mr. Gough, for the benefit of the author’s widow and daughter. Several articles were added, relative to the antiquities and natural history; and such a number of beautiful plates were contributed by the gentlemen of the county, that (only 600 copies having been printed, a number not quite sufficient for the subscribers) the value of the book increased, immediately after publication, to twice the original price, which was only a guinea a volume. The title of it is, “The History and Antiquities of the County of Dorset, compiled from the best and most ancient historians, Inquisitiones post mortem, and other valuable Records and Mss. in the public offices, libraries, and private hands; with a Copy of Domesday-book and the Inquisitio Gheldi for the county: interspersed with some remarkable particulars of Natural History, and adorned with a correct map of the county, and views of antiquities, seats of the nobility and gentry,” Lond. 1774, 2 vols, folio.

In the decline of life, when he had a reasonable prospect of seeing his “History” through the press, he was seized with a paralytic stroke, which greatly debilitated him, and hastened his dissolution, which took place June 21, 1773, He was buried in St. Mary’s church at Wareham, in the ancient chapel under the south aile of the church. He married Anne, daughter of the rev. Thomas Stephens, for-: merly rector of Pimperne, by whom he had issue one daughter, who was married to the late John Bellasis, esq. major-general of artillery in the service of the East-India company, who died at Bombay in 1808. The profit arising from his “History,” was the chief provision Mr. Hutchins made for his family. A second edition was brought forwards, of which vol. I. was published in 1796, and vol. II. in 1803, under the auspices of gen. Bellasis, who expended a large sum to promote the undertaking, and with the assistance of Mr. Gough and Mr. Nichols. The improvements in this edition were so many as to extend the work to four volumes, the third of which was nearly ready for publication at the time when the unfortunate fire in Mr. Nichols’s printing-office and warehouses destroyed that and a vast mass of other valuable literary property. Mr. Nichols has since printed the third and fourth volumes, so essential to the completion of the work, and we may add so indispensable to every public library and private topographical collection.

, an English autnor, whose writings have been much discussed, and who is considered as the founder of a party, if not of a sect, was born at Spenny thorn in Yorkshire in 1674. His father was possessed of about 40l. per ann. and determined to qualify his son for a stewardship to some gentleman or nobleman. He had given him such school- learning as the place afforded-, and the remaining part of his education was finished by a gentleman that boarded with his father. This friend is said to have instructed him, not only in such parts of the mathematics as were more immediately connected with his destined employment, but in every branch of that science, and at the same time to have furnished him with a competent knowledge of the writings of antiquity. At the age of nineteen, he went to be steward to Mr. Rathurst of Skutterskelf in Yorkshire, and from thence to the earl of Scarborough, who would gladly have engaged him in his service; but his ambition to serve the duke of Somerset would not suffer him to continue there, and accordingly he removed soon after into this nobleman’s service. About 1700 he was called to London, to manage a law-suit of consequence between the duke and another nobleman; and during his attendance in town, contracted an acquaintance with Dr. Woodward, who was physician to the duke his master. Between 1702 and 1706, his business carried him into several parts of England and Wales, where he made many observations, which he published in a little pamphlet, entitled, “Observations made by J. H. mostly in the year 1706.”

While he travelled from place to place, he employed himself in collecting fossils; and we are told, that the large and noble collection, which Woodward bequeathed to the university of Cambridge, was actually formed by him. Whether Woodward had no notion of Hntchinson’s abilities in any other way than that of steward and minera­)ogist, or whether he did not suspect him at that time as likely to commence author, is not certain: Hutchinson, however, complains in one of his books, that “he was bereft, in a manner not to be mentioned, of those observations and those collections; nay, even of the credit of being the collector.” He is said to have put his collections into Woodward’s hands, with observations on them, which Woodward was to digest and publish, with further observations of his own: but his putting him off with excuses, when from time to time he solicited him about this work, first suggested to Hutchinson unfavourable notions of his intention. On this Hutehinson resolved to wait no longer, but to trust to his own pen; and that be might be more at leisure to prosecme his studies, he begged leave of the duke of Somerset to quit his service. The request at first piqued 'the pride of that nobleman; but when he was made to understand by Hutchinson, that he did not intend to serve any other master, and was told what were the real motives of his request, the duke not only granted" his suit, but made him his riding purveyor, being at that time master of the horse to George I. As there is a good house in the Mews belonging to the office of purveyor, a fixed salary of 200l. per ann. and the phice a kind of sinecure,. Hutchinson’s situation and circumstances were quite agreeable to his mind; and he gave himself up to a studious and sedentary life. The duke also gave him the next presentation of the living of Sutton in Sussex, which Hutchinson bestowed on the rev. Julius Bate, a great favourite with htm, and a zealous promoter of his doctrines.

In 1724 he published the first part of his “Moses’s Principia;” in which he ridiculed Woodward’s “Natural History of the Earth,” and his account of the settlement of the several strata, shells, and noduies, by the laws of gravity; which, he tells him, every dirty impertinent collier could contradict and disprove by ocular demonstration. This work, in which gravitation is exploded, is evidently opposed to Newton’s“Principia,” where that doctrine is established. H utchinson also threw out some hints concerning what had passed between Woodward and himself, and the doctor’s design of robbing him of his collection of fossils. From this time to his death, he continued to publish a volume every year, or every other year; which, with the Mss. he left behind him, were collected in 1743, amounting to 12 vols. 8vo. An abstract of them was also published in 1723, in 12mo. Hutchinson' s followers look upon the breach between Woodward and him, as a very happy event; because, say they, had the doctor fulfilled his engagements, Hutchinson might have stopped there, and not have extended his researches so far as he has done; in which case the world would have been deprived of writings deemed by them invaluable. Others are as violent opposers and censurers of his writings and opinions; and the dispute has been carried on at various times with no small degree of warmth.

In 1727, Hutchinson published the second part of “Moses’s Principia” which contains the sum and substance, or the principles of the Scripture- philosophy. As sir Isaac Newton made a vacuum and gravity the principles of his philosophy, this author on the contrary asserts, that a plenum and the air are the principles of the Scripture-philosophy. In the introduction to this second part, he hinted, that the idea of the Trinity was to be taken from the three grand agents in the system of nature, fire, light, and spirit; these three conditions of one and the same substance, namely, air, answering wonderfully in a typical or symbolical manner to the three Persons of one and the same essence. This, we are told, so forcibly struck the celebrated Dr. Samuel Clarke,- that he sent a gentleman to Mr. Hutchinson with compliments upon the performance, and desired a conference with him on that proposition in particular: which, however, it is added, after repeated solicitations, Hutchinson thought fit to refuse. This doctrine a certain admirer of Hutchinson, particularly in his opinions on natural philosophy, has lately attempted to revive and illustrate, in a pamphlet entitled, “A short Way to Truth, or the Christian doctrine of a Trinity in Unity, illustrated and confirmed from an Analogy in the Natural Creation.” It was published in 1793.

Some time in 1712, Hutchinson is said to have completed a machine of the watch -kind, for the discovery of the longitude at sea, which was approved by sir Isaac Newton; and Whiston, in his “Longitude and Latitude,” &c. has given a testimony in favour of his mechanical abilities. “I have also,” says he, “very lately been shewn by Mr. Hutchinson, a very curious and inquisitive person, a copy of a ms map of the world, made about eighty years ago, taken by himself from the original: wherein the variation is reduced to a theory, much like that which Dr. Halley has since proposed, and in general exactly agreeing to his observations. But with this advantage, that therein the northern pole of the internal loadstone is much better stated than it is by Dr. Halley its place then being, according to this unknown very curious and sagacious author, about the meridian, &c. which ancient and authentic determination of its place, I desire my reader particularly to observe.”

Hutchinson had been accustomed to make an excursion for a month or so into the country for his health: but to neglecting this in pursuit of his studies, he is supposed have brought himself into a bad habit of body, which prepared the way for his death. The immediate cause is said to have been an overflowing of the gall, occssioned by the irregular sallies of an high-kept unruly horse, and the sudden jerks given to his body by them. On the Monday before his death, Dr. Mead was with him, and urged him to be bled; saying at the same time in a pleasant way, “I will soon send you to Moses.” Dr. Mead meant to his studies, two of his books being entitled “Moses’s Principia:” but Hutchinson, taking it in the other sense, answered in a muttering tone, “I believe, doctor, you will;” and was so displeased with Mead, that he afterwards dismissed him for another physician. He died August 28, 1737, aged 63. He seems to have been in many respects a singular man. He certainly jjad eminent abilities, with much knowledge and learning; but many people have thought it very questionable, whether he did not want judgment to apply them properly, and many more have inveighed against his principles without previously making themselves acquainted with them. They were, however, in some measure, adopted by many pious and learned divines of the last century, by Home, Parkhurst, Homaine, and the late Rev. William Jones, who, of all others, has exhibited the ablest analysis and defence of Mr. Hutchinson’s sentiments, or what is called Hutchinsonianism, in the “Preface to the second edition” of his life of bishop Home.

, a gentleman of Franconia, of uncommon parts and learning, was born in 1488 at Steckenburg, the seat of his family; was sent to the abbey of Fulde at eleven years of age; and took the degree of M. A. in 1506 at Francfort on the Oder, being the first promotion made in that newly-opened university. In 1509, he was at the siege of Padua, in the emperor Maximilian’s army; and he owned that it was want of money, which forced him to make that campaign. His father, not having the least taste or esteem for polite literature, thought it unworthy to be pursued by persons of exalted birth; and therefore would not afford his son the necessary supplies for a life of study. He wished him to apply himself to the civil law, which might raise him in the world; but Hutten had no inclination for that kind of study. Finding, however, that there was no other way of being upon good terms with his father, he went to Pavia in 1511, where he stayed but a little time; that city being besieged and plundered by the Swiss, and himself taken prisoner. He returned afterwards to Germany, and there, contrary to his father’s inclinations, began to apply himself again to literature. Having a genius for poetry, he began his career as an author in that line, and published several compositions, which were much admired, and gained him credit. He travelled to various places, among the rest to Bohemia and Moravia; and waiting on the bishop of Olmutz in a very poor condition, that prelate, who was a great Maecenas, received him graciously, presented him with a horse, and gave him money to pursue his journey. The correspondence also he held with Erasmus was of great advantage to him, and procured him respect from all the literati in Italy, and especially at Venice.

At his return to Germany in 1516, he was recommended in such strong terms to the emperor, that be received from him the poetical crown; and from that time Hutten had himself drawn in armour, with a crown of laurel on his head, and took great delight in being so represented. He was of a very military, disposition, and had given many proofs of courage, as well in the wars as in private rencounters. Being once at Viterbo, where an ambassador of France stopped, a general quarrel arose, in which Hutten, forsaken by his comrades, was attacked by five Frenchmen at once, and put them all to flight, after receiving some small wounds. He wrote au epigram on that occasion, “in quinque Gallbs a se profligates,” which mky be seen in Melchior Adam. He had a cousin John de Hutten, who was court-marshal to Ulric duke of Wirtemberg, and was murdered by that duke in 15 15, for the sake of his wife, whom the duke kept afterwards as a mistress. The military poet, as soon as he heard of it, breathed nothing but resentment; and because he had no opportunity of shewing it with his sword, took up his pen, and wrote several pieces in the form of dialogues, orations, poems, and letters. A collection of these was printed io the castle of Steckelberg, 1519, 4to.

He was in France in 1518-, whence he went to Mentz, and engaged in the service of the elector Albert; and attended him a little after to the diet of Augsburg, where the elector was honoured with a cardinal’s hat. At this diet, articles were exhibited against the duke of Wirtemberg, on which occasion the murder of John de Hutten, marshal of his court, was not forgotten: and a league was after formed against him. Ulric Hutten served in this war with great pleasure; yet was soon disgusted with a military life, and longed earnestly for his studies and retirement. This we find by a letter of his to Frederic Piscator, dated May 21, 1519: in which he discovers an inclination for matrimony, and expresses himself somewhat loosely on that subject.

Believing Luther’s cause a very good one, he joined in it with great warmth; and published Leo the Xth’s bull against Luther in 1520, with interlineary and marginal glosses, in which that pope was made an object of the strongest ridicule. The freedom with which he wrote against the irregularities and disorders of the court of Rome, exasperated Leo in the highest degree; and induced him to command the elector of Mentz to send him to Rome bound hand and foot, but the elector suffered him, to depart in peace. Hutten then withdrew to Brabant, and was at the court of the emperor Charles V. but did not stay long there, being told that his life would be in danger. He then retired to Ebernberg, where he was protected by Francis de Sickingen, Luther’s great friend and guardian, to whom the castle of Ebernberg belonged. There he wrote in 1520 his complaint to the emperor, to the electors of Mentz and Saxony, and to all the states of Germany, against the attempts which the pope’s emissaries made against him. From the same place also he wrote to Luther in May 1521, and published several pieces’ in favour of the Reformation. He did not declare openly for Luther, till after he had left the elector of Mentz’s court; but he had written to him before from Mentz, and his first letter is dated June 1520. While he was upon his journey to Ebernberg, he met with Hochstratus-, and, drawing his sword, run up to him, and swore he would kill him, for what he had done against Reuchlin and Luther: but Hochstratus, throwing himself at his feet, conjured him so earnestly to spare his life, that Hutten let him go, after striking him several times with the flat sword. Such was his turbulent zeal, so disgraceful to the cause he espoused, that Luther himself, warm as he was, blamed it. During his stay at Ebernberg, however, he performed a very generous action in regard to his family. Being the eldest son, and succeeding to the whole estate, he gave it all up to his brothers; and even, to prevent their being involved in the misfortunes and disgraces which he expected, by the suspicions that might be entertained against him, he enjoined them not to remit him any money, nor to hold the least correspondence with him.

It was now that he devoted himself wholly to the Lutheran party, to advance which he laboured incessantly both by his writings and actions. We do not know the exact time when he quitted the castle of Ebernberg; but it appears, that in January 1523, he left Basil, where he had flattered himself with the hopes of finding an asylum, and had only been exposed to great daggers. Erasmus, though his old acquaintance and friend, had here refused a visit from him, for fear, as he pretended, of heightening the suspicions which were entertained against him but his true reason, as he aftersvards declared, in a letter to Melancthon, was, “that he should then have been under a necessity of taking into his house that proud boaster, oppressed with poverty and disease, who only sought for a nest to lay himself in, and to borrow money of every one he met.” This refusal of P>asmus provoked Hutten to attack him severely, and accordingly he published an “Expostulatio” in 1523, which Erasmus answered the same year, in _a very lively piece, entitled, “Spongia Erasmi adversus adspergines Ilutteni.” Hutten probably intended to reply, had he not been snatched away by death; but he died in an island of the lake Zurich, where he had liimself for security, August 1523. tie was a man of little stature; of a weak and sickly Constitution; extremely brave, but passionate: for he was mot satisfied with attacking the Roman Catholics with his pen, he attacked them also with his sword. He acquainted Luther with the double war which he carried on against the clergy. “I received a letter from Hutten,” says Luther, “filled with rage against the Roman pontiff, declaring he would attack the tyranny of the clergy both with his pen and sword: he being exasperated against the pope for threatening him with daggers and poison, and commanding the bishop of Mentz to send him bound to Rome.” Camerarius says, that Hutten was impatient, that his aif and discourse shewed him to be of a cruel disposition and applied to him what was said o Demosthenes, namely, that “he would have turned the world upside down, had his power been equal to his will.” His works are numerous, though he died young. A collection of his “Latin Poems” was published at Francfort in 1538, 12mo; all which, except two poemsj were reprinted in the third part of the “Deliciae Poetarum Germanorum.” He was the author of a great many works, chiefly satirical, in the way of dialogue; and Thuanus has not scrupled to compare him to Lucian. Of this cast were his Latin Dialogues on Lutheranism, published in 4to, in 1520, and now very scarce. He had also a considerable share in the celebrated work called “Epistolae virorum obscurorum,” which Meiners, in his “Liv$s of Illustrious Men,” says, was the joint work of Ulrick and Crotus Rubianus, alias John Jaeger, of Dornheim,in Thuringia. The produc“­tions of each, according to Meiners, may easily be distinguished. Wherever we are struck with the” peculiar levity, rapidity, and force of the style with a certain sol- ­dier-like boldness and unclerical humour, in obscene jests and pictures, and comical representations of saints, reliques, &c. with no small degree of keenness in the relation of laughable anecdotes, with a knowledge of Italy, to be obtained only by experience, with a pleasant explanation and derivation of words in the style of the monkish schools; 'in all these places, the hand of Ulrick Hutten may be traced.“That these letters were the work of different hands, says an acute critic, is not improbable; but we are not certain that Crotus Rubianus had any share in them; nor can we tell from what authority it is sq affirmed. Goethe, who wrote his” Tribute to the memory of Ulrick of Hutten," translated into English by Antony Aufrtre, esq. 1789, and who wrote that some years before the appearance of Meiners’ Biography, seems to have led the latter into this opinion. With much more probability might Reuchlin have been mentioned, who, indeed, by some has been supposed the sole author. Upon the whole, however, there is most reason to think them Hutten' s.

, a Silesian of the sixteenth century, was the founder of the sect called the Bohemian or Moravian brethren, a sect of Anabaptists. Hutten purchased a territory of some extent in Moravia, and there established his society. They are considered as descended from the better sort of Hussites, and were distinguished by several religious institutions of a singular nature, but well adapted to guard their community against the reigning vices of the times. When they heard of Luther’s attempts to reform the church, they sent a deputation to him, and he, examining their tenets, though he could not in every particular approve, looked upon them as worthy of toleration and indulgence. Hutten brought persecution upon himself and his brethren by violent declamations against the magistrates, and the attempt to introduce a perfect equality among men. It has been said that he was burnt as a heretic at Inspruck, but this is by no means certain. By degrees these sectaries, banished from their own country, entered into communion with the Swiss church; though, for some time, with separate institutions. But in the synods held at Astrog in 162O and 1627, all dissensions were removed, and the two congregations were formed into one, under the title of the Church of the United Brethren. The sect of Herrenhutters or Moravians, formed by count JZinzendorff in the beginning of the present century, pretend to be descended from these brethren, ad take the same title of unitas Jratrum but Mosheina observes that “they may with more propriety be said to imitate the example of that famous community, than to descend from, those who composed it, since it is well known that there are very few Bohemians and Moravians in the fraternity of the Herrenhutters; and it is extremely doubtful whether vcn this smaJl number are to be considered as the posterity of the ancient Bohemian brethren, who distinguished themselves so early by their zeal for the reformation,”

, a Protestant divine, was born at Ulm, in 1553, and died at Nuremberg after 1602. He was deeply versed in languages, oriental and occidental; particularly Hebrew, which he seems to have taught at Leipsic. He published, 1. “A Hebrew Bible,” remarkable for being printed with the radical letters in black, the servile in hollow types, and the quiescent or deficient letters in smaller characters above the line. At the end is the 117th Psalm in thirty different languages. 2. “Two Polyglotts,” one in four languages, printed at Hamburg in 1596; the other in six languages, at Nuremberg, in 1599; both in folio.

, was also a native of Ulm, and born in 1563. He studied at Strasbourg, and early applied himself with great diligence to theology; he was afterwards at Leipsic, Heidelberg, Jena, and Wirtemburg, and in the latter place was appointed one of the public professors of theology. He married a lady of illustrious birth in 1599; and died of a fever in 1616, being then, for the fourth time rector of the university. The opinion held of his principles may be judged by five anagrams of his names Leonardus Hutterus, four of them implying that he was another Luther. They are formed, says the author who gives them, “per literarum haud vanam transposijtionem;” thus, “Redonatus Lutherus;” “Leonhartus Hutterus;” “Ah tu noster Lutherus-,” “Notus arte Lutherus;” “Tantus ero Lutherus.” His works are very numerous; a great part of them controversial, directed against the church of Rome. Besides these, 1. “Compendium Theologiae, cum Notis D. Gotofredi Cundisii.” 2. “Explicatio Libri Concordiae Christiante,” 8vo. 3. “Loci Communes Theologici,” folio. 4. “formulae concionandi,” 8vo. 5. “Disputationes de verbo Dei scripto, ac traditionihus non scriptis,” in 4to, 6. “Collegium Theologicum, sive XI disputationes de articulis confessionis Augustanse,” 8vo. 7. “Libri Christianae Concordisc,” 8vo; and several pieces in defence of the Formula: Concordiae, which in his time were highly esteemed; besides many other tracts in Latin, and in German, all of which are enumerated by Freher, but seem too uninteresting at the present day to be transcribed.

, an ingenious philosopher of the sceptical class, was the son of Mr. William Hutton, merchant in Edinburgh, and born in that city on the 3d of June, 1726. He entered the university as a student of humanity, in Nov. 1740. He studied afterwards under the celebrated Maclaurin, but did not prosecute the mathematical sciences to any great extent. The origin of his attachment to the study of chemistry is traced to the accidental mention of a chemical fact by professor Stevenson, in his prelections on logic. The fact was, that aqua regia is the only solvent of gold which requires the united action of two acids, each of which singly is capable of dissolving any of the baser metals. This important phenomenon drew him, as if by a kind of electric attraction, to the study of chemistry, with a force that could never afterwards be overcome. His philosophical career was however interrupted by his engaging, at the request of his friends, as an apprentice to a writer to the signet. But instead of copying writs and deeds, or studying th,e forms of legal proceedings, it was found that his favourite object of pursuit was the experiments of the crucible and retort. He was accordingly released from his engagement as an apprentice, and permitted to direct his attention to studies more congenial to his inclinations. He applied himself to the study of medicine as being the most closely connected with chemistry, and after attending the lectures in the university for some years, repaired, as was then customary, to the continent, to finish his course of study. He took the degree of M. D. at Leyden, in 1749.

After his return from the continent, he began to think seriously of settling in the world. His views were first directed to the medical profession, but were soon abandoned for others that afforded better hopes of success. He resolved to apply himself to the study and practice of agriculture. With this view he fixed his residence for some time with a farmer in Norfolk, from whom he received practical lessons in husbandry. During his stay in England he made many journeys on foot into different parts of the pountry, for the purpose of studying mineralogy or geology. He afterwards visited Flanders with the view of (promoting both his mineralogical and agricultural studies. Jn 1754 he returned- to Scotland, and fixed his residence on his own farm in Berwickshire, where he introduced the new husbandry which has since made such rapid advances in that quarter. About 1768 he left Berwickshire, and went to reside in Edinburgh, giving his undivided attention to scientific pursuits. This gave him the advantage of enjoying with less interruption, the society of his literary friends, among whom were Dr. Black, Mr. Russel, and professor Adam Ferguson.

Dr. Hutton’s first publication was given to the world in 1777, entitled “Considerations on the nature, quality, and distinctions of Coal and Culm.” It proves that culm is the small or refuse of the infusible or stone-coal, but very different in its properties from the small of the fusible coal. A sketch of his great work, his “Theory of the Earth,” the formation of which had been the object of many years of previous study, was communicated to the royal society of Edinburgh soon after its original institution. Another paper, a “Theory of Kain,” appeared also in the first volume of the Edinburgh Transactions. This theory, as is well known, met with a most vigorous and determined opposition from M. de Luc, and became a subject of controversy, which was conducted with perhaps too much warmth. After the period of these two publications, Dr. Hutton made severalexcursions into different parts of Scotland, wkh a view of comparing certain results of his theory with actual observation; and in these he seems to have been very successful. In 1792 he published “Dissertations on different subjects in Natural Philosophy,” in which his theory for explaining the phenomena of the material world, seems to coincide very closely with that of Boscovich, though there is no reason to suppose that the former was suggested by the latter. But Dr. Hutton did not confine himself merely to physical speculations; he directed his attention also to the study of metaphysics, the result of which was the publication of a work entitled “An Investigation of the Principles of Knowledge, and of the Progress of Reason from Sense to Science and Philosophy,” 3 vols. 4to. The metaphysical opinions advanced in this work coincide for the most part with those of Dr. Berkeley, and abound in sceptical boldness and philosophical infidelity. In 1794 appeared his “Dissertation upon the Philosophy of Light, Heat, and Fire,” 8vo, which may be considered as a kind of supplement to the two preceding works. In 1796 his “Theory of the Earth” was republished in 2 vols. 8vo, from the Edinburgh Philosophical Transactions, with large additions, and a new mineralogical system. Many of his opinions here have been ably combated by Kirwan and others.

In 1792 Dr. Hutton’s health began to decline, and in the summer of 1793 he was seized with a severe illness, which after some intervals of convalescence, terminated at last in his death, March 26, 1797.

, was a physician of considerable reputation, who practised his profession at Plymouth, where he died in 1768. It is remarkable that no biographical memoirs of this able and learned practitioner are extant. Mr. Polwhele informs us only that he was the sou of a butcher at Halberton. Yet he possessed an innate genius and a strong propensity for medical acquisitions. By these he was led to the university of Leyden, where he pursued his studies with indefatigable application, and took his doctor’s degree in medicine. At length, settling at Plymouth, by a successful course of practice he acquired a considerable fortune, and by several admirable publications gained universal fame. His “Treatise on Fevers” Mr. Polwhele notices, as the most eminent, and as it leads to the subsequent anecdote. “The queen of Portugal being ill of a fever, and being reduced to the last extremity, notwithstanding the efforts of the physicians of the country; his majesty, hearing of the eminence of a physician of the English factory at Lisbon, sent for him, and giving him the particulars of the queen’s disorder, inquired whether it was in his power to administer any assistance. The physician replied that he was not without hope, but that hecould do nothing unless her majesty was left to his sole care and direction. This being granted, the disorder soon took a turn, and in a short time the queen was restored to perfect health. The doctor being complimented by the king on his abilities and success, said he had ne claim but to the application; for that the merit was due to Dr. Huxham, an eminent physician at Plymouth, whose tract on the management of fevers he had implicitly followed. Upon which, the king immediately procured the treatise, had it translated into the Portuguese language, printed it in handsome 4to, and sent it richly bound to Dr. Huxham, as an acknowledgment of the sense he entertained of his abilities, and of his debt of gratitude on the recovery of the queen.”

Dr. Huxham' s writings display a most intimate acquaintance with the writings of the ancients, and a great veneration for those of Hippocrates in particular; and he quotes the ancient languages, and writes the Latin, with great fluency and familiarity. He appears to have spent his life ;at Plymouth in the active exercise of his profession for he kept a register of the state of health and reigning diseases at that place, together with an account of the variety of the seasons, for nearly thirty years, (namely, from 1724 to 1752 inclusive); which were published in Latin, under the title of“Gbservationes de Acre et Morbis Epidemicis,” tc. in 3 vols. 8vo. The first of these volumes commences with an account of the year 1728 but in the dedication to sir Hans Sloane, he refers to an account of the constitution and diseases of the seasons from 1724 to 1727, already published. The third volume was edited in 1770, after the death of the author, by his son J. Cor. Huxham, A. M. F. R. S.; who, it is to be regretted, did not insert any memoirs of his father’s life.

Dr. Huxham was at an early period elected a member of the royal society, and communicated several papers on the subjects of pathology and morbid anatomy, which were published in the Philosophical Transactions. But the work upon which his reputation principally rests, is his “Essay on Fevers,” published about 1739, of which a fifth edition appeared the year before his death, containing also “A Dissertation on the Malignant, Ulcerous Sore Throat.” His accuracy and acuteness, as an observer of the phenomena of disease, were particularly exemplified in his discriminative history of the “Slow Nervous Fever,' to which his name is often aunexed when this fever is mentioned by succeeding authors. His theory was the ancient humoral pathology, which much influenced his practice; but that was the general fault of the age. He was the author of some” Observations on Antimony," 1756, 4to; and was elected a fellow of the royal college of physicians at Edinburgh. He has given few prescriptions in his works; for he observes, with Hippocrates, that the physician who knows a disease, cannot be at a loss in respect to the form of his remedy; but, having mentioned a favourite formula for the preparation of a tincture of the Peruvian bark, in his Essay on Fevers, in which the bitter is corrected by aromatics, his name has become attached to the tincture of bark which is commonly prepared in the shops according to his prescription, and is also adopted in the Pharmacopoeia of the college of physicians.

, a very celebrated mathematician and astronomer, was born at the Hague April 14, 1629, and was son of Constantino Huygens, lord of Zuylichem, who had served three successive princes of Orange in the quality of secretary, and had spent his whole life in cultivating the mathematics not in the speculative way only, but in making them subservient to the uses of life., From his infancy our author applied himself to this study, and made a considerable progress in it, even at nine years of age, as well as in music, arithmetic, and geography; in all which he was instructed by his father, who in the mean time did not suffer him to neglect the belles lettres. At thirteen he was initiated in the study of mechanics; having discovered a wonderful curiosity in examining machines and other pieces of mechanism; and two years after had the assistance of a master in mathematics, under whom he made surprising progress. In 1645 he went to study law at Leyden, under Vinnius; yet did not attach himself so closely to that science, but that he found time to continue his mathematics under the professor Schooten. He left this university at the end of one year, and went to Breda, where an university had just been founded, and placed under the direction of his father; and here, for two or three years, he made the law his chief study. In 1649 he went to Holstein and Denmark, in the retinue of Henry count of Nassau; and was extremely desirous of going to Sweden to visit Des Cartes, who was then in that country with the queen Christina, but the count’s short stay in Denmark would not permit him. In 1651, he gave the world a specimen of his genius for mathematics, in a treatise entitled “Theoremata de quadratura Hyperboles, Ellipsis, & Circuli, ex dato portionum gravitatis centro” in which he shewed very evidently what might be expected from him afterwards.

In 1655 he travelled into France, and took the degree of doctor of laws at Angiers. In 1658 he published his “Horologium oscillatorium, sive de motu pendulorum,” &c. at the Hague. He had exhibited in a preceding work entitled “Brevis institutio de usu HorologioKum ad inveniendas longitudines,” a model of a new invented pendulum; but as some persons envious of his reputation were labouring to deprive him of the honour of the invention, he wrote this book to explain the construction of it, and to shew that it was very different from the pendulum of astronomers invented by Galileo. In 1659 he published his “Systema Saturninum, sive de causis mirandorum Saturni phenomenon, & comiteejus planeta novo.” Galileo had endeavoured to explain some of the surprising appearances of the planet Saturn. He had at first perceived two stars which attended it; and some time after was amazed to find them disappear. Huygens, desirous to account for these changes, laboured with his brother Constautine to bring the telescopes to greater perfection; and made himself glasses by which he could view objects at a greater distance than any that had yet been contrived. With these he applied himself to observe all the phases and appearances of Saturn, and drew a journal of all the different aspects of thai planet. He discovered also one of the satellites belonging to that planet, which had hitherto escaped the eyes of astronomers; and, after a long course of observations, perceived that the planet is surrounded with a solid and permanent ring, which never changes its situation. These discoveries gained him an high rank among the astronomers of his time.

In 1660 he took a second journey into France, and the year after passed over into England, where he communicated his art of polishing glasses for telescopes, and was made a fellow of the royal society. About this time the air-pump was invented, which received considerable im-rprovements from him. This year also he discovered the laws of the collision of elastic bodies: as did afterwards our own countrymen, the celebrated Wallis and Wren, with whom he had a dispute about the honour of this discovery. After he had stayed some months in England, he returned to France in 1663, where his merit became Sq conspicuous, that Colbert resolved to fix him at Paris, by settling on him a considerable pension. Accordingly, in. 1665, letters written in the king’s name were sent to him to the Hague, where he then was, to invite him to Paris, with, the promise of a large stipend, and other considerable advantages. H.uygens consented to the proposal, and resided at Paris from 1666 to 1681; where he was made a member of the royal academy of sciences. During this time he was engaged in mathematical pursuits, wrote several works, which were published from time to time, and invented and perfected several useful instruments and machines. But continual application hegan then to impair his health; and, though he had twice visited his native air, in 1670 and 1675, for the sake of recovering from illness, he now found it permanently necessary to his constitution; but perhaps the revocation of the edict of Nantz was a principal reason for his wishing to return to his own country. Though he was assured that he should enjoy the same liberty as before, and not be molested for his religions opinions, he would not consent to live in a country where his religion was proscribed, and therefore left Paris in. 3681, and passed the remainder of his life in his own country, occupied in his usual pursuits and employments. He died at the Hague June 8, )695, in his sixty-seventh year, while his “Cosmotheoros,” a Latin treatise concerning the plurality of worlds, was printing; he provided, however, in his will for its publication, desiring his brother Constantine, to whom it was addressed, to take that trouble upon him. But Constantine was so occupied with business, as being secretary in Holland to the king of Great Britain, that he died also before it could be printed; so that the book did not appear in public till 1698.

In 1703 were printed at Leyden, in 1 vol. 4to, Hnygens’s “Opuscula Posthuma, quse continent Dioptricam, Commentaries de vitris figurandis, Dissertationem de Corona & Parheliis, Tractatum de motu & de vi centrifuga, descriptionem Automati Planetarii.” Huygens had left by will to the university of Leyden his mathematical writings, and requested de Voider and Fullenius, the former professor of natural philosophy and mathematics at Leyden, and the other at Franeker, to examine these works, and publish what they should think proper. This was performed in the volume here mentioned. Huygens had written in Low Dutch the second of the tracts it contains, relating to the art of forming and polishing telescope -glasses, to which he had greatly applied himself; and Boerhaave translated it into Latin for this work. In 1700, were published in 4to, his “Opera Varia.” This collection is generally bound in 4 volumes. It contains the greatest part of the pieces which he had published separately, and is divided into four parts. The first part contains the pieces relating to mechanics; the second, those relating to geometry; the third, those relating to astronomy; and the fourth, those which could not be arranged under any of the former titles. Gravesancle had the care of this edition, in which he has inserted several additions to the pieces contained in it, extracted from Huygens’s manuscripts. In 1728 were printed at Amsterdam, in 2 vols. 4to, his “Opera lleliqua;” which new collection was published also by Gravesande. The first volume contains his “Treatises on Light and Gravity;” the second his “Opuscula Posthuma,” which had been printed in 1703. His whole time had been employed in curious and useful researches. He loved a quiet and studious life; and perhaps through fear of interruption, never married. He was an amiable, chearful, worthy man; and in all respects as good as he was great. As an inventor, the first and not the least considerable of his discoveries was that he made of the real nature, or rather figure of the luminous appearance which accompanies the planet Saturn; but the most important was his pendulum clock and his micrometer. His history, however, includes many controversies respecting priority in these inventions, which may be seen at large in our authorities.

, a celebrated doctor of Louvain, was born in 1631, at Lier, or Lyre, a town in Brabant, He professed philosophy at Louvain with reputation, and was made president of the college of pope Adrian VI. where he died, October 27, 1702, leaving several works in Latin: the principal are, “The Method of remitting and retaining Sins,” 1686, 12mo; it has been translated into French “Theses on Grace,” 4to; “Theological Conferences,” 3 vols. 12mo, &c.; a “Course of Divinity,” 15 vols. 12mo, &c. He refused to write against the four articles of the French clergy, which displeased the court of Rome. Huyghens was P. Quesnel’s intimate friend, and zealously defended his cause and his opinions. M. Arnauld speaks highly in his praise.

, an illustrious painter who surpassed all who have ever painted in his style, and whose works excite as much surprise by their finishing, as admiration by their truth, was born at Amsterdam in 1682, and was a disciple of Justus Van Huysum, his father. He set out in his profession with a most commendable principle, not so much to paint for the acquisition of money, as of fame; and therefore he did not aim at expedition, but at delicacy, and if possible, to arrive at perfection in his art. Having attentively studied the pictures of Mignon, and all other artists of distinction who had painted in his own style, he tried which manner would soonest lead htm to imitate the lightness and singular beauties of each flower, fruit, or plant; and then fixed on a manner peculiar to himself, which seems almost inimitable. He soon received the most deserved applause from the ablest judges of painting; even those who furnished him with the loveliest flowers, confessing that there was somewhat in his colouring and pencilling that rendered every object more beautiful, if possible, than even nature itself. His pictures are finished with inconceivable truth; for he painted every tiling after nature, and was so singularly exact, as to watch even the hour of the day in which his model appeared in its greatest perfection.

By the judicious he was accounted to paint with greater freedom than Mignon or Brueghel; with more tendernessand nature than Mario da Fiori, Michael Angelo dr Campidoglio, or Segers; with more mellowness than De Heem, and greater force of colouring than Baptist. His reputation rose to such a height at last, that he fixed immoderate prices on his works; so that none but the very opulent could pretend to become purchasers. Six of his paintings were sold, at a public sale in Holland, for prices that were almost incredible. One of them, a flower-piece, for fourteen hundred and fifty guilders; a fruit-piece, for a thousand and five guilders; and the smaller pictures for nine hupdred. These vast sums caused him to redouble his endeavours to excel; no person was admitted into his room while he was painting, not even his brothers; and his method of mixing the tints, and preserving the lustre of his colours, was an impenetrable secret which he never would disclose. From the same principle he would never take any disciples, except one lady, named Haverman, and he grew envious and jealous even of her merit. By several domestic disquiets, his temper became changed; he grew morose, fretful, and apt to withdraw himself from society. He had many enviers of his fame, which has ever been the severe lot of the most deserving in all professions; but he continued to work, and his reputation never diminished. It is universally agreed, that hd lias excelled all who have painted fruit and flowers before him, by the confessed superiority of his touch, by the delicacy of his pencil, an-d by an amazing manner of finishing; nor does it ap'pear probable that any future artist will ever become his competitor. The care which he took to. purify his oils, and prepare his colours, and the various experiments he made to discover the most lustrous and durable, is another instance of his extraordinary care and capacity.

From having observed some of his works that were perfectly, finished, some only half finished, and others only begun, the principles by which he conducted himself may perhaps be discoverable. His cloths were prepared with the greatest eare, and primed with white, with all possible purity, to prevent his colours from being obscured, as he laid them on very lightly. He glazed all other colours, except the clear and transparent, not omitting even the white ones, till he found the exact tone of the colour; and over that he finished the forms, the lights, the shadows, and the reflections which are all executed with precision and warmth, withoutdryness or negligence. The greatest truth, united with the greatest brilliancy, and a velvet softness on the surface of his objects, are visible in every part of his compositions; and as to his touch, it looks like the pencil of nature. Whenever be represented flowers placed in vases, he always painted those vases after some elegant model, and the bas-relief is as exquisitely finished as any of the other parts. Through the whole he shews a delicate composition, a fine harmony, and a most happy effect of light and shadow. Those pictures which he painted on a clear ground, are preferred to others of his- hand, as having greater lustre and as they demanded more care and exactness in the finishing yet there are some on a darkish ground, in which appears rather more force and harmony.

It is observed of him, that in the grouping of his flowers, he generally designed those which were brightest in the centre, and gradually decreased the force of his colour from the centre to the extremities. The birds.' nests and their eggs, the feathers, insects, and drops of dew, are' expressed with the utmost truth, so as even to deceive the spectator. And yet, after all this merited and just praise, it cannot but be confessed, that sometimes his fruits appear like wax or ivory, without that peculiar softness and warmth w 1 ich is constantly observable in nature. Beside his merit as a flower-painter, he also painted landscapes with great applause. They are well composed and although he had never seen Rome, he adorned his scenes with the noble remains of ancient magnificence which are in that city. His pictures in that style are well coloured, and every tree is distinguished by a touch that is proper for the leafing. The grounds are well broken, and disposed with taste and judgment; the figures are designed in the manner of JLairesse, highly finished, and touched with a great deal of spirit; and through the whole composition, the scene represents Italy, in the trees, the clouds, and the skies. He died in 1749, aged sixty-seven.

Of his brothers, Justus Van Huysum was born at Amsterdam, and died when he had arrived only at his twentysecond year. He painted battles in a large and a small size, with exceeding readiness and freedom, without having recourse to any models; and he composed his subjects merely by the power of his own lively imagination, disposing them also with judgment and taste and Jacob Van Huysum, also born at Amsterdam, in 1680, died at London, where he had resided for several years. His merit chiefly consisted in imitating the works of his brother John; which he did with so much critical exactness, beauty, and delicacy, as frequently to deceive the most sagacious connoisseurs and he usually had twenty guineas for each copy. He also composed subjects of his own invention in the same style, which were very much prized; and his paintings increased in their value like those of his brother Jfohn. He died in 1740.

, earl of Clarendon, and chancellor of England, was descended from an ancient family in Cheshire, and born at Dinton in Wiltshire, Feb. 16, 1608. In 1622, he was entered of Magdalen-hall in Oxford, and ir 1625, took the degree of bachelor in arts but failing of a fellowship in Exeter college, for which he stood, he removed to the Middle Temple, where he studied the law for several years with diligence and success. When tha lawyers resolved to give a public testimony of their dissent from the new doctrine advanced in Prynne’s “Histriomastix,” in which was shewn an utter disregard of all manner of decency and respect to the crown, Hyde and Whitelocke were appointed the managers of the masque presented on that occasion to their majesties at Whitehall on Candlemas-day, 1633-4. At the same time he testified, upon all occasions, his utter dislike to that excess of power, which was then exercised by the court, and supported by the judges in Westminster-hall. He condemned the oppressive proceedings of the high-commission court, the star-chamber, the council-board, the earl-marshal’s court, or court of honour, and the court of York. This just way of thinking is said to have been formed in him by a domestic accident, which Burnet relates in the following manner: “When he first began,” says that historian, “to grow eminent in his profession of the law, he went down to visit his father in Wiltshire; who one day, as they were walking in the fields together, observed to him, that ‘ men of his profession were apt to stretch the prerogative too far, and injure liberty: but charged him, if ever he came to any eminence in his profession, never to sacrifice the laws and liberty of his country to his own interest, or the will of his prince.’ He repeated this twice, and immediately fell into a fit of apoplexy, of which he died in afew hours; and this advice had so lasting an influence upou the son, that he ever after observed and pursued it”

In the parliament which began at Westminster April 10, 1640, he served as burgess for Wotton-Basset in Wiltshire; and distinguished himself upon the following occasion. His majesty having acquainted the house of commons, that he would release the ship-money, if they would grant him twelve subsidies, to be paid in three years, great debates arose in the house that day and the next; when Hampden, seeing the matter ripe for the question, desired it might be put, “whether the house should comply with the proposition made by the king, as it was contained in the message?” Serjeant Glanvile, the speaker, for the house was then in a committee, endeavoured in a pathetic speech to persuade them to comply with the king, and so reconcile him to parliaments for ever. No speech ever united the inclination of a popular council more to th speaker than this did and if the question had been immediately put, it was believed that few would have opposed it. But, after a short silence, the other side recovering new courage, called again with some earnestness, thai Hampden’s question should be put; which being like to meet with a concurrence, Hyde, who was desirous to preserve a due medium, after expressing his dislike of Hampden’s question, proposed, that “to the end every man might freely give his yea or no, the question might be put only upon giving the king a supply; and if this was carried, another might be put upon the manner and proportion: if not, it would have the same effect with the other proposed by Mr. Hampden.” This, after it had been some time opposed and diverted by other propositions, which were answered by Hyde, would, as it is generally believed, have been carried in the affirmative, though positively opposed by Herbert the solicitor-general, if sir Henry Vane the secretary had not assured them as from his majesty, that if they should pass a vote for a supply, and not in the proportion proposed in his -majesty’s message, it would not be accepted by him, and therefore desired that the question might be laid aside. This being again urged by the solicitor-general, and it being near five in the afternoon, a very late hour in those days, it was readily consented to, that the house should adjourn till the reXt morning, at which time they were suddenly dissolvea. And within an hour after Hyde met St. John, who was seldom known to smile, but then had a most cheerful aspect; and observing Hyde melancholy, asked him, “what troubled him r” who answered, “The same he believed that troubled most good men, that, in a time of so much confusion, so wise a parliament should be so imprudently dissolved.” St. John replied somewhat warmly, “that all was well: that things must grow worse, before they would grow better; and that that parliament would never have done what was requisite.”

This parliament being dissolved, Hyde was chosen for Saltash in Cornwall in the Long-parliament, which commenced Nov. 3 the same year, where his abilities began to be noticed; and when the commons prepared a charge against lord chief baron Davenport, baron Weston, and baron Trevor, he was sent up with the impeachment to the lords, to whom he made a most excellent speech. It begins thus: “My lords, there cannot be a greater instance of a sick and languishing commonwealth, than the business of this day. Good God! how have the guilty these late years been punished, when the judges themselves have been such delinquents? It is no marvel, that an irregular, extravagant, arbitrary power, like a torrent, hath broken in upon us, when our banks and ofir bulwarks, the laws, were in the custody of such persons. Men, who had left their innocence, could not preserve their courage; nor could we look that they, who had so visibly undone us, themselves should have the virtue or credit to rescue us from the oppression of other men. It was said by one, who always spoke excellently, that `the twelve judges were like the twelve lions under the throne of Solomon;' under the throne of obedience, but yet lions. Your lordships shall this day hear of six, who, be they what they will else, were no lions: who upon vulgar fear delivered up their precious forts they were trusted with, almost without assault; and in a tame easy trance of flattery and servitude, lost and forfeited, shamefully forfeited, that reputation, awe, and reverence, which the wisdom, courage, and gravity of their venerable predecessors had contracted and fastened to the places they now hold. They even rendered that study and profession, which in all ages hath been, and I hope, now shall be, of honourable estimation, so contemptible and vile, that had not this blessed day come, all men would have had that quarrel to the law itself which JMarius had to the Greek tongue, who thought it a. mockery to learn that language, the masters whereof lived in bondage under others. And I appeal to these unhappy gentlemen themselves, with what a strange negligence, scorn, and indignation, the faces of all men, even of the meanest, have been directed towards them, since, to call it no worse, that fatal declension of their understanding in those judgments, of which they stand here charged before your lordships.” The conclusion runs thus: " If the excellent, envied constitution of this kingdom hath been of late distempered, your lordships see the causes. If the sweet harmony between the king’s protection and the subject’s obedience hath unluckily suffered interruption; if the royal justice and honour of the best of kings have been mistaken by his people; if the duty and affection of the most faithful and loyal nation hath been suspected by their gracious sovereign; if, by these misrepresentations, and these misunderstandings, the king and people have been robbed of the delight and comfort of each other, and the blessed peace of this island been shaken and frightened into tumults and commotions, into the poverty, though not into the rage, of war, as a people prepared for destruction and desolation; these are the men, actively or passively, by doing or not doing, who have brought this upon us: ' Misera servitus falso pax vocatur; ubi judicia deficiunt, incipit bellumV

But though Hyde was very zealous for redressing the grievances of the nation, he was no less so for the security of the established church, and the honour of the crown. When a bill was brought in to take away the bishops’ vote in parliament, and to leave them out of all commissions of the peace, or any thing that had relation to temporal affairs, he was very earnest for throwing it out, and said, that, “from the time tbat parliaments begun, bishops had always been a part of it that if they were taken out, there was nobody left to represent the clergy which would introduce another piece of injustice, that no other part of the kingdom could complain of, who, being all represented in parliament, were bound to submit to whatever was enacted there, because it was, upon the matter, with their own consent: whereas, if the bill was carried, there was nobody left to represent the clergy, and yet they must be bound by their determination.” He was one of the committee employed to prepare the charge against the earl of Strafford: but, as soon as he saw the unjustifiable violence with which the prosecution was precipitated, he left them, and opposed the bill of attainder warmly. He was afterwards appointed a -manager at the conference with the house of lords, for abolishing the court of York, of which that earl had been for several years president; and was chairman also of several other committees, appointed upon the most important occasions, as long as he continued to sit among them. But, when they began to put in execution their ordinance for raising the militia against his majesty, Hyde, being persuaded that this was an act of open rebellion, left them; and they felt the blow given to their authority by his absence so sensibly, that in their instructions shortly after to the earl of Essex their general, he was excepted with a few others from any grace or favour.

Hyde withdrew to the king at York, having first obtained the great seal to be sent thither on May 20, 1642: and, upon his arrival, was admitted into the greatest confidence, though he was not under any official character in the court for some months. But, towards the latter end of the year, upon the promotion of sir John Colepepper to be master of th,e rolls, he succeeded him in the chancellorship of the exchequer, and the same year was knighted, and made a privy-counsellor. With these characters he sat in the parliament assembled at Oxford, Jan. 1643; and, in 1644, was one of the king’s commissioners at the treaty of Uxbridge. Not long after, the king sending the prince of Wales into the West, to have the superintendency of the affairs there, sir Edward Hyde was appointed to attend his highness, and to be of his council; where he entered, by his majesty’s command, into a correspondence with the marquis of Ormond, then lord-lieutenant of Ireland. Upon the declension of the king’s cause, he with the lords Capel and Colepepper sailed from Pendennis castle in Cornwall to Scilly, and thence to Jersey, where he arrived in March 1645; but being greatly disgusted at the prince’s removal thence the following year to France, he obtained leave to stay in that island. His opinion respecting the prince’s removal into France, is warmly expressed in the following letter to the duke of Ormond:

"Your lordship hath been long since informed, whither my lord Digby attended the prince and from thence have pardoned my not acknowledging your grace’s favour to me, from the impossibility of presenting it to you. I confess, in that conjuncture of time, I thought the remove from Jersey to Ireland to be very fit to be deliberately weighed, before attempted but I would have chosen it much more cheerfulfy than this that is embraced, which I hope will be a memorial to my weakness for it is my misfortune to differ from those with whom I have hitherto agreed, and especially with my best friend, which I hope will not render me the less fit for your charity, though 1 may be for your consideration. Indeed, there is not light enough for me to see my way, and I cannot well walk in the dark; and therefore I have desired leave of the prince to breathe in this island a little for my refreshment, till I may discern some way in which I may serve his majesty. I hope your lordship will never meet with any interruption in the exercise of that devotion, which hath rendered you the envied example of three kingdoms, and that I shall yet find an opportunity to attend upon your lordship, and have the honour to be received by you in the capacity of

During his retirement in Jersey, he began to write his “History of the Rebellion,” which had been particularly recommended to him, and in which he was assisted also by the king, who supplied him with several of the materials for it. We learn from the history itself, that upon lord CapePs waiting on the king at Hampton-court in 1647, his majesty wrote to the chancellor a letter, in which he “thanked him for undertaking the work he was upon; and told him, he should expect speedily to receive some contribution from him towards it;” and within a very short time afterwards, he sent to him memorials of all that had passed from the time he had left his majesty at Oxford, when he waited upon the prince into the west, to the very day that the king left Oxford to go to the Scots; out of which memorials the most important passages, in the years 1644 and 1645, are faithfully collected. Agreeably to this, the ninth book opens with declaring, that “the work was first undertaken with the king’s approbation, and by his encouragement; and particularly, that many important points were transmitted to the author by the king’s immediate direction and order, even after he was in the hands and power of the enemy, out of his own memorials and journals.” Thus we may trace the exact time when this history was begun; and the time when it was finished may be ascertained with the same degree of exactness, from the dedication of the author’s “Survey of the Leviathan,” in which he addresses himself to Charles II. in these terms “As soon as I had finished a work, at least recommended, if not enjoined to me by your blessed father, and approved, and in some degree perused by your majesty, I could not,” &c. This dedication is dated Moulins, May 10, 1673; whence it appears, that the history was not completed till the beginning of that, or the latter end of the preceding year; and this may account for certain facts being related which happened long after the Restoration as for instance, that “sir John Digby lived many years after the king’s return” and that the “earl of Sandwich’s expedition was never forgiven him by some men:” which might very consistently be introduced in this history, though that nobleman did not lose his life till 1672.

In May 1648, sir Edward received a letter from the queen to call him to Paris; where, after the king’s death, he was continued both in his seat at the privy council, and in his office of the exchequer, by Charles II. In Nov. 1649, he was sent by the king with lord Cottington ambassador extraordinary into Spain, to apply for assistance in the recovery of his crown; but returned without success in July 1651. Soon after his arrival, the king gave him an account of his escape after the battle of Worcester, in that unfortunate expedition to Scotland, which had been undertaken during sir Edward’s absence,- and much against his judgment. He now resided for some time at Antwerp, but left no means unattempted, by letters and messages to England, for compassing the Restoration; in which, however, he solely relied upon the episcopal party. In 1653, he was accused of holding a correspondence with Cromwell; but being declared innocent by the king, was afterwards made secretary of state. More attempts were made to ruin him with the king, but in vain; for in 1657 he was made chancellor of England. Upon the Restoration, as he had been one of the greatest sharers in his master’s sufferings, so he had a proportionable share in his glory.

Besides the post of lord chancellor, in which he was continued, he was chosen chancellor of the university of Oxford in Oct. 1660 and, in November following, created a peer by the title of baron Hyde of Hindon in Wiltshire; to which were added, in April 1661, the titles of viscount Cornbury in Oxfordshire, and earl of Clarendon in Wiltshire. These honours, great as they were, were, however, by no means beyond his merit. He had, upon the Restoration, shewn great prudence, justice, and moderation, in settling the just boundaries between the prerogative of the crown and the liberties of the people. He had reduced much confusion into order, and adjusted many clashing interests, where property was concerned. He had endeavoured to make things easy to the Presbyterians and malcontents by the act of indemnity, and to satisfy the Royalists by the act of uniformity. But it is not possible to stand many years in a situation so much distinguished, without becoming the object of envy; which created him such enemies as both wished and attempted his ruin, and at last effected it. Doubtless nothing more contributed to inflame this passion against him, than the circumstance of his eldest daughter being married to the duke of York, which became known in a few months after the king’s return. She had been one of the maids of honour to the princess royal Henrietta, some time during the exile, when the duke fell in love with her; and being disappointed by the defeat of sir George Booth, in a design he had formed of coming with some forces to England in 1659, he went to Breda, where his sister then resided. Passing some weeks there, he took this opportunity, as Burnet tells us, of soliciting miss Hyde to indulge his desires without marriage; but she managed the matter with such address, that in the conclusion he married her, Nov. 4 that year, with all possible secrecy, and unknown to her father. After their arrival in England, being pregnant, she called upon the duke to own his marriage; and though he endeavoured to divert her from this object, both by great promises and great threatenings, yet she had the spirit and wisdom to tell him, “She would have it known that she was his wife, let him use her afterwards as he pleased.” The king ordered some bishops and judges to peruse the proofs of her marriage; and they reporting that it had been solemnized according to the doctrine of gospel and the law of England, he told his brother, that he must live with her whom he had made his wife, and at the same time generously preserved the honour of an excellent servant, who had not been privy to it; assuring him, that “this accident should not lessen the esteem and favour he had for him.”

The first open attack upon lord Clarendon was made by the earl of Bristol; who, in 1663, exhibited against him a charge of high treason to the house of lords. There had been a long course of friendship, both in prosperity and adversity, between the chancellor and this earl: but they had gradually fallen into different measures in religion and politics. In this state of things, the chancellor refusing what lord Bristol considered as a small favour (which was said to be the passing a patent in favour of a court lady), the latter took so much offence, that he resolved upon revenge. The substance of the whole accusation was as follows: “That the chancellor, being in place of highest trust and confidence with his majesty, and having arrogated a supreme direction in all thingjs, had, with a traiteroas intent to draw contempt upon his majesty’s person, and to alienate the affections of his subjects, abused the said trust in manner following. 1. He had endeavoured to alienate the hearts of his majesty’s subjects, by artfully insinuating to his creatures and dependent);, that his majesty was inclined to popery, and designed to alter the established religion. 2. He had said to several persons of his majesty’s privy council, that his majesty was dangerously corrupted in his religion, and inclined to popery: that persons of that religion had such access and such credit with him, that, unless there were a careful eye had upon it, the protestant religion would be overthrown in this kingdom. 3. Upon his majesty’s admitting sir Henry Bennet to be secretary of state in the place of sir Edward Nicholas, he said, that his majesty had given 10,000^. to remove a most zealous Protestant, that he might bring into that place a concealed Papist. 4. In pursuance of the same traiterous design, several friends and dependents of his have said aloud, that ‘ were it not for my lord chancellor’s standing in the gap, Popery would be introduced into this kingdom.’ 5. That he kad persuaded the king, contrary to his opinion, to allow his name to be used to the pope and several cardinals, in the solicitation of a cardinal” cap for the lord Aubigny, great almoner to the queen: in order to effect which, he had employed Mr. Richard Bealing, a known Papist, and had likewise applied himself to several popish priests and Jesuits to the same purpose, promising great favour to the Papists here, in case it should be effected. 6. That he had likewise promised to several Papists, that he would do his endeavour, and said, * he hoped to compass taking away all penal laws against them; to the end they might presume and grow vain upon his patronage; and, by their publishing their hopes of toleration, increase the scandal designed by him to be raised against his majesty throughout the kingdom. 7. That, being intrusted with the treaty between his majesty and his royal consort the queen, he concluded it upon articles scandalous and dangerous to the Protestant religion. Moreover, he brought the king and queen together without any settled agreement about the performance of the marriage rites; whereby, the queen refusing to be married by a Protestant priest, in case of her being with child, either the succession should be made uncertain for want of the due rites of matrimony, or else his majesty be exposed to a suspicion of having been married in his own dominions by a Romish priest. 8. That, having endeavoured to alienate the hearts of the king’s subjects upon the score of religion, he endeavoured to make use of all his scandals and jealousies, to raise to himself a popular applause of being the zealous upholder of the Protestant religion, &c. 9. That he further endeavoured to alienate the hearts of the king’s subjects, by venting in his own discourse, and those of his emissaries, opprobrious scandals against his majesty’s person and course of life; such as are not fit to be mentioned, unless necessity shall require it. 10. That he endeavoured to alienate the affections of the duke of York from his majesty, by suggesting to him, that ‘ his majesty intended to legitimate the duke of Monmouth.’ 11. That he had persuaded the king, against thie advice of the lord general, to withdraw the English garrisons out of Scotland, and demolish all the forts built there, at so vast a charge to this kingdom; and all without expecting the advice of the parliament of England. 12. That he endeavoured to alienate his majesty’s affections and esteem from the present parliament, by telling him, ‘ that there never was so weak and inconsiderable a house of lords, nor never so weak and heady a house of commons’ and particularly that ’ it was better to sell Dunkirk than be at their mercy for want of money.' 13. That, contrary to a known law made last session, by which money was given and applied for maintaining Dunkirk, he advised and effected the sale of the same to the French king. 14. That he had, contrary to law, enriched himself and his treasures by the sale of offices. 15. That he had converted to his own use vast sums of public money, raised in Ireland by way of subsidy, private and public benevolences, and otherwise given and intended to defray the charge of the government in that kingdom. 16. That, having arrogated to himself a supreme direction of all his majesty’s affairs, he had prevailed to have his majesty’s customs farmed at a lower rate than others offered; and that by persons with some of whom he went a share, and other parts of money resulting from his majesty’s revenue."

A charge urged with so much anger and inconsistency as this was, it is easy to imagine, could not much affect him on the contrary we find, that the prosecution ended greatly to the honour of the chancellor; notwithstanding which, his enemies advanced very considerably by it in their design, to make him less in favour with his master, less respected in parliament, and less beloved by the people. The building of a magnificent house, which was begun in the following year, 1664, furnished fresh matter for obloquy. “The king,” says Burnet, “had granted him a large piece of ground, near St. James’s palace, to build upon. He intended a good ordinary house; but not understanding these matters himself, he put the management of it into the hands of others, who run him to a vast expence of above 50,000l. three times as much as he had designed to lay out upon it. During the war, and in the year of the plague, he had about 300 men at work, which he thought would have been an acceptable thing, when so many men were kept at work, and so much money as was daily paid circulated about; but it had a contrary effect; it raised a great outcry against him. Some called it Dunkirk-house, intimating that it was built by his share of the price of Dunkirk: others called it Holland-house, because he was believed to be no friend to the war; so it was given out he had the money from the Dutch. It was visible that, in a time of public calamity, he was building a very noble palace. Another accident was, that before the war there were some designs on foot for the repairing of St. Paul’s, and many stones were brought thither for the purpose. That project was laid aside; upon which he bought the stones, and made use of them in building his own house. This, how slight soever it may seem to be, had a great effect by the management of his enemies.” To this remark it may be added, that this stately pile was not finished till 1667; so that it stood a growing monument for the popular odium to feed upon, almost the whole interval between his first and his last impeachment; and to aggravate and spread that odium, there was published a most virulent satirical song, entitled “Clarendon’s House-warming,” to irritate the minds of the populace.

In August 1667, he was removed from his post of chancellor, and in November following was impeached by the house of commons of high treason, and other crimes and misdemeanors; upon which, in the beginning of December, he retired to France, and on the 19th, an act of banishment was passed against him. Echard observes, how often “it has been admired, that the king should not only consent to discard, but soon after banish a friend, who had been as honest and faithful to him a* the best, and perhaps more useful and serviceable than any he had ever employed; which surely could never have been brought to bear without innumerable enviers and enemies.” But to conceive how these were raised, we need only remember, that during the height of his grandeur, which continued two years after the Restoration without any rivalship, as well as the rest of his ministry, he manifested an inflexible steadiness to the constitution of the church of England, in equal opposition to the Papists on one side, and the Dissenters on the other; so that none of these could ever be reconciled to him or his proceedings. Yet at first he seemed so forward to effect a coalition of all parties, that the cavaliers and strict churchmen thought themselves much neglected; and many of them upon that account, though unjustly, entertained insuperable prejudices against him, and joined with the greatest of his enemies. But the circumstances which were supposed to weaken his interest with, and at length make him disagreeable to the king, were rather of a personal nature, and such as concerned the king and him only. It is allowed on all hands, that the chancellor was not without the pride of conscious virtue; so that his personal behaviour was accompanied with a sort of gravity and haughtiness, which struck a very unpleasing awe into a court filled with licentious persons of both sexes. He often took the liberty to give reproofs to these persons of mirth and gallantry; and sometimes thought it his duty to advise the king himself in such a manner that they took advantage of him, and as he passed in court, would often say to his majesty, “There goes your schoolmaster.” The chief of these was the duke of Buckingham, who had a surprising talent of ridicule and buffoonery; and that he might make way for lord Clarendon’s ruin, by bringing him first into contempt, he often acted and mimicked him in the presence of the king, walking in a stately manner with a pair of bellows before him for the purse, and colonel Titus carrying a fire-shovel on his shoulder for the mace; with which sort of farce and banter, the king, says Echard, was too much delighted and captivated. These, with some more serious of the Popish party, assisted by the solicitations of the ladies of pleasure, made such impressions upon the king, that he at last gave way, and became willing, and even pleased, to part both from his person and services. It was also believed, that the king had some private resentments against him, for checking of those who were too forward in loading the crown with prerogative and revenue; and particularly we are told, that he had counteracted the king in a grand design which he had, to be divorced from the queen, under pretence “that she had been pre-engaged to another person, or that she was incapable of bearing children.” The person designed to supply her place was Mrs. Stuart, a beautiful young lady, who was related to the king, and had some office under the queen. The chancellor, to prevent this, sent for the duke of Richmond, who was of the same name; and seeming to be sorry that a person of his worth and relation to his majesty should receive no marks of his favour, advised him to marry this lady, as the most likely means to advance himself. The young nobleman, liking the person, followed his advice, made immediate application to the lady, who was ignorant of the king’s intentions, and in a few days married her. The king, thus disappointed, and soon after informed how the match was brought about, banished the duke and his new duchess from court, reserving his resentment against the chancellor to a more convenient opportunity. Be this as it will, the private reasons that induced the king to abandon the chancellor were expressed in a letter to the duke of Ormond, then in Ireland; which the king wrote to that nobleman for his satisfaction, knowing him to be the chancellor’s friend. Echard observes, that this letter was never published, nor would a copy of it be granted; but that he had been told the substance of it more than once by those who had read it; and the principal reason there given by the king was, “The chancellor’s intolerable temper.”

Being now about to quit the kingdom in exile, before he departed he drew up an apology, in a petition to the house of lords, in which he vindicated himself from any way contributing to the late miscarriages, in such a manner as laid the blame at the same time upon others. The lords received it Dec. 3, and sent two of the judges to acquaint the commons with it, desiring a conference. The duke of Buckingham, who was plainly aimed at in the petition, delivered it to the commons; and said, “The lords have commanded me to deliver to you this scandalous and seditious paper sent from the earl of Clarendon. They bid me present it to you, and desire you in a convenient time to send it to them again; for it has a style which they are in love with, and therefore desire to keep it.” Upon the reading of it in that house, it was voted to be “scandalous, malicious, and a reproach to the justice of the nation;” and they moved the lords, that it might be burnt by the hands of the common hangman, which was ordered and executed accordingly. The chancellor retired to Rouen in Normandy; and, the year following, his life was attempted at Evreux near that city by a body of seamen, in such an outrageous manner, that he with great difficulty escaped. In the Bodleian library at Oxford, there is an original letter from Mr. Oliver Long, dated from Evreux, April 26, 1668, to sir William Cromwell, secretary of state, in which the following account is given of this assault. “As I was travelling from Rouen towards Orleans, it was my fortune, April 23, to overtake the earl of Clarendon, then in his unhappy and unmerited exile, who was going towards Bourbon, but took up his lodgings at a private hotel in a small walled town called Evreux, some leagues from Rouen. I, as most English gentlemen did to so valuable a patriot, went to pay him a visit near supper-time; when he was, as usual, very civil to me. Before supper was done, twenty or thirty English seamen and more came and demanded entrance at the great gate; which, being strongly barred, kept them out for some time. But in a short space they broke it, and presently drove all they found, by their advantage of numbers, into the earl’s chamber; whence, by the assistance of only three swords and pistols, we kept them out for half an hour, in which dispute many of us were wounded by their swords and pistols, whereof they had many. To conclude, they broke the windows and the doors, and under the conduct of one Howard, an Irishman, who has three brothers, as I am told, in the king of England’s service, and an ensign in the company of cannoneers, they quickly found the earl in his bed, not able to stand by the violence of the gout; whence, after they had given him many blows with the;r swords and staves, mixed with horrible curses and oaths, they dragged him on the ground in the middle of the yard, where they encompassed him around with their swords, and after they had told him in their own language, how he had sold the kingdom, and robbed them of their pay, Howard commanded them all, as one man, to run their swords through his body. But what difference arose among themselves before they could agree, God above, who alone sent this spirit of dissention, only knows. In this interval their lieutenant, one Svvaine, came and disarmed them. Sixteen of the ringleaders were put into prison; and many of those things they had rifled from him, found again, which were restored, and of great value. Mons. la Fonde, a great man belonging to the king of France’s bed-chamber, sent to conduct the earl on his way thither, was so desperately wounded in the head, that there were little hopes of his life. Many of these assassins were grievously wounded; and this action is so much resented by all here, that many of these criminals will meet with an usage equal to their merit. Had we been sufficiently provided with fire-arms, we had infallibly done ourselves justice on them; however, we fear not but the law will supply our defect.”

Being greatly afflicted with the gout, and not finding himself secure in that part of France, he went in the summer to Montpelier, where, recovering his health in a considerable measure, he continued three or four years. In 1672 he resided at Moulins, and removing thence to Rouen, died Dec. 9, 1673, in that city; from whence his body was brought to England, and interred on the north side of Henry Vllth’s chapel in Westminster-abbey. He was twice married: first to Anne, daughter of sir Gregory Ayloffe, of Robson, in Wiltshire, knt. and this lady dying without issue, to Frances, daughter, and at length heiress, to sir Thomas Aylesbury, bart. in 1634; by whom he had four sons and two daughters. Anne his eldest daughter was married, as we have already observed, to the duke of York, by which match she became mother to two daughters, Mary and Anne, who were successively queens of England. Besides these, she brought the duke four sons and three daughters, who all died in their infancy. The last was born Feb. 9, 1670-1, and her mother died on March 31 following; having a little before her death changed her religion, to the great grief of her father, who on that occasion wrote a most pathetic letter to her, and another to the duke her consort.

Besides the “History of the Rebellion” already mentioned, the chancellor wrote other pieces, theological as well as political. In 1672, while he resided at Moulins, he wrote his “Animadversions upon Mr. Cressy’s book entitled ‘ Fanaticism fanatically imputed to the Catholic Church by Dr. Stillingfleet, and the imputation refuted and retorted by J. C.’” He is supposed to have been led to this work from the knowledge he had of Cressy, by means of an acquaintance commenced at Oxford, where that gentleman was his contemporary; and a motive of a similar nature might probably induce him to draw up his “Survey of Mr. Hobbes’s Leviathan,” which he dedicated the year following to Charles II. from the same place. He wrote also some things of a smaller kind, which have been collected and published with his “Miscellaneous Tracts.” And lastly, in 1759, was published “An Account of his own Life from his birth to the restoration in 1660; and a Continuation of the same, and of his History of the Grand Rebellion, from the restoration to his banishment in 1667;” written by himself; and printed in one volume, folio, and three in 8vo, from his original ms. given to the university of Oxford by his heirs: and his “State Papers” were published in 3 vols. fol. the first in 1767, the second in 1773, and the third in 1786.

It is as a historian that lord Clarendon will be longest remembered, and if compared with those who preceded, or were contemporaries with him, his superiority must in every respect be acknowledged. He knew more and has told more of the histories of his times than any other man, and that with an impartiality which gives us an equally favourable opinion of his head as of his heart. It may be every where seen that he cannot disguise the truth even when it makes against the cause he supports; and where there is any appearance of partiality, it may easily be traced to a warmth of loyalty and friendship, for which every honourable man will find an apology in his own breast. The republicans of his time had much to allege against him, and those of more modern times will never forgive a loyalty which they cannot comprehend, a steadiness of principle which ill accords with their versatile schemes of innovation, and a species of patriotism which would preserve the balance between liberty and licentiousness. “Like justice itself,” says lord Orford, in a character of our author, by no means very favourable, “he held the balance between the necessary power of the supreme magistrate and the interests of the people. This never-dying obligation his contemporaries were taught to overlook and to clamour against, till they removed the only man, who, if he could, would have corrected his master’s evil government.” Such was Clarendon’s n^-erit in the corrupt court of Charles II. when, “if he had sought nothing but power, his power |iad never ceased.” The fact was, that Clarendon, in his History, not then published, but certainly written, had traced the misfortunes of the preceding reign to their true source, and was the only man at court who wished to profit by his experience. As to his style, as a historian, it has chiefly been objected that his periods are long; but it seems scarcely worth while to enlarge on the style of a writer who lived at a time when style was so little cultivated, so imperfectly known. His excellencies are his comprehensive knowledge of mankind, which enabled htm to draw those exact portraits of the leading characters of:his time, which have scarcely been equalled, and probably can never be excelled. No man brings us nearer to the personages with whom we wish to be familiar. He is, says Granger, in this particular as unrivalled among the moderns as Tacitus among the ancients. He paints himself in drawing the portraits of others; and we every where see the clear and exact comprehension, the uncommon learning, the dignity and equity of the lord chancellor, in his character as a writer.

, earl of Clarendon, eldest son of the chancellor, was born in 1638. Having received the rudiments of education, he early entered into business; for his father, apprehending of what fatal consequence it would be to the king’s affairs, if his correspondence should be discovered by unfaithful secretaries, engaged him, when very young, to write all his letters in cypher; so that he generally passed half the day in writing in cypher, or decyphering, and was so discreet, as well as faithful, that nothing was ever discovered by him. After the restoration, he was created master of arts, at Oxford, in 1660; and, upon settling the queen’s household, appointed chamberlain to her majesty. He was much in the queen’s favour; and, his father being so violently prosecuted on account of her marriage, she thought herself bound t. protect him in a particular manner. He so highly resented the usage his father met with, that he united himself eagerly to the party which opposed the court, and made no inconsiderable iigure in the list of speakers. Mr. "Grey has preserved a great number of his speeches. On his father’s death in 1674, he took his seat in the House of Lords; still continued his opposition, and even signed a protest against an address voted to the king on his speech. He still, however, held his post of chamberlain to the queen; and afterwards, shewing himself no less zealous against the bill of exclusion, was taken into favour, and made a privycounsellor, 1680. But he soon fell under the displeasure of the prevailing party in the House of Commons; who, unable to carry the exclusion bill, shewed their resentment against the principal opposers of it, by voting an address to the king, to remove from his presence and councils, the marquis of Worcester, and the earls of Halifax, Feversham, and Clarendon.

On the accession of James II. he was first made lord privy-seal, and then lord-lieutenant of Ireland: but being too firmly attached to the protestant religion for those times, he was recalled from his government to make room for lord Tyrconnel; and soon after removed from the privy-seal, that lord Arundel, of Wardour, another papist, fhight succeed him. About this time he was made highsteward of the university of Oxford. After the landing of the prince of Orange, he was one of the protestant lords, summoned by the king, when it was too late, to repair the ill consequences of his popish councils, and had spirit enough to take the lead, and to speak his mind frankly and openly in that memorable assembly. Yet though he had so great a regard to the constitution as to oppose king James’s encroachments, he would not transfer his allegiance to the new establishment, nor take the oaths to king William: on which account he was, with some others, suspected of designs against the government; and, when the king was in England, and the French fleet appeared on the English coast, the regency thought proper to secure him in the Tower. After some months he was released, and spent the remainder of his days privately at his own house in the country; where he died Oct. 22, 1709, aged seventy -one.

His State Letters, during his government of Ireland, and his Diary for the years 1687, 1688, 1689, and 169O, were published in 2 vols. 4to, 1763, from the Clarendon press in Oxford. “This diary,” says the editor, “presents us with a picture of the manners of the age in which the writer lived. We may learn from it, that at the close of the seventeenth century, a man of the first quality made it his constant practice to go to church, and could spend the day in society with his family and friends, without shaking his arm at a gaming-table, associating with jockies at Newmarket, or murdering time by a constant round of giddy dissipation, if not of criminal indulgence.” Besides the above, lord Clarendon drew up “Some account of the tombs and monuments in the cathedral church of Winchester, Feb. 1683,” which was continued and printed with Gale’s history of that church; and there are three tracts attributed to him, printed in Gutch’s “Collectanea.”

, Lord Hyde and Cornbury, eldest son to Henry earl of Clarendon and Rochester, was the author of a few pamphlets published without his name: of some tragedies still in manuscript, and of a comedy called “The Mistakes or, The Happy Resentment,” printed in 1758 at Strawberry Hill, with a preface by lord Orford. This was a juvenile performance, of no great merit, never acted, and printed for the benefit of an actress. His lordship was killed by a fall from his horse, in France, May 2, 1753. Pope has neatly complimented the virtuous taste of lord Cornbury, by making it a criterion of merit to “disdain whatever Cornbury disdained.” “He was,” says lord Orford, “upright, calm, steady his virtues were of the gentlest complexion, yet of the firmest texture vice could not bend him, nor party warp him even his own talents could not mislead him. Though a master of eloquence, he preferred justice and the love of his country to all the applause which the violence of the times in which, he lived was so prodigal of bestowing on orators who distinguish themselves in any faction; but the tinsel of popularity and the intrinsic of corruption were equally his contempt. He spoke, nor wrote, nor acted, for fame.” He wrote the paper dated Feb. 12, 1737, in the periodical paper entitled “Common Sense,” and “A Letter to the vice-chancellor of Oxford.” 1751. His lordship had represented the university in parliament, and in this letter announces his resignation, in consequence of being called up to his father’s barony in the house of peers. This was followed by a “Letter to his Lordship,” from several members of the university, acknowledging his merits. He was succeeded by sir Roger Newdigate. But of all his compositions, that which did his lordship most credit, was his “Letter to David Mallet, on the intended publication of lord Bolingbroke’s Manuscripts,” which was printed in Dr. Havvkes worth’s edition of Swift’s works; and it is a monument, says that editor, that will do more honour to the writer’s memory than all that mere wit or valour has achieved since the word began. Mallet, it is well known, did not profit as he ought to have done by this advice. Pope’s allusion of “disdain,” &c. is said, by Ruffhead, to have arisen from the following circumstance: when lord Cornbury returned from his travels, the earl of Essex, his brother-in-law, told him he had got a handsome pension for him; to which lord Cornbury answered with a composed dignity, “How could you tell, my lord, that I was to be sold; or, at least, how came you to know my price so exactly?”

, a very learned writer, was son of Mr. Ralph Hyde, minister of Billingsley near Bridgenorth in Shropshire, and born there June 2i), 1636. Having a strong inclination for the Oriental languages from his youth, he studied them first under his father; and afterwards, in 1652, being admitted of King’s college, Cambridge, he became acquainted with Mr. Abraham Wheelock, an admirable linguist, who encouraged him to prosecute his study of them in that place. By him, Hyde, when he had been at Cambridge little more than a year, was sent to London, and recommended to Walton, afterwards bishop of Chester, as a person very capable of assisting him in the Polyglott Bible, in which work he was then engaged. Hyde rendered him great services; for, besides his attendance in the correction of it, he transcribed the Pentateuch out of the Hebrew characters, in which it was first printed at Constantinople, into the proper Persian characters; which by archbishop Usher was then judged impossible to have been done by a native Persian, because one Hebrew letter frequently answered to several Persian letters, which were difficult to be known. He translated it likewise into Latin. What he did farther in the Polyglott, is specified by the editor in these words: “Nee praetereundus est D. Thomas Hyde, summae spei juvenis, cjui in linguis Orientalibus supra aetatem magnos progressuB fecit, quorum specimina dedit turn in Arabibus, Syriacis, Persicis, &c. corrigendis, turn in Pentateucho Persico characteribus Persicis describendo, quia antea soils Hebraicis extitit, ejusque versionem Latinam concinnando.”

In 1658 he went to Oxford, and was admitted of Queen’s college, where he was soon after made Hebrew rea ler. The year after, Richard Cromwell, then chancellor of that university, directed his letters to the delegates, signifying, that “Mr. Hyde was of full standing, since his admission, into the university of Cambridge, for the degree of master of arts, and that he had given public testimony of his more than ordinary abilities and learning in the Oriental languages;” on which they made an order that he should accumulate that degree by reading only a lecture in one of the Oriental languages in the schools; and having ac-. cordingly read upon the Persian tongue, he was created M. A. in April 1659. Soon after he was made underkeeper of the Bodleian library, upon the ejection of Mr,. Henry Stubbe; and behaved himself so well in this employment, that, when the office of head -keeper became vacant, he was elected into it with the unanimous approbation of the university. In 1665 he published a Latin translation from the Persian of Uiugh Beig’s “Observations concerning the Longitude and Latitude of the fixed Stars,” with notes. This Ulugh Beig was a great Tartajr monarch, the son of Shahrokn, and the grandson of Timur Beig, or, as he is usually called, Tamerlane. In the pre/ace he informs us, “that the great occupations of government hindered him from performing in person, so much as he would have done towards the completing this useful work: but that he relied chiefly on his minister Salaheddin, and t.iat he dying before the work was finished, his colleague Gaiatheddin Giamshed and his son Ali al Cousin were afterwards employed, who put the last hand to it.” It was written originally in the Arabic tongue, but afterwards translated twice into the Persian.

About this time Hyde became known to Mr. Boyle, to whom he was very useful in communicating from Oriental writers several particulars relating to chemistry, physic, and natural history. In Oct. 1666, he was collated to a prebend in the church of Salisbury. In 1674, he published “A Catalogue of the books in the Bodleian library.” In 1678, he was made archdeacon of Gloucester; and, in 1682, took the degree of doctor in divinity. Dec. 1691, he was elected Arabic professor, on the death of Dr. Edward Pocock; and the same year published the “Itinera Mundi” of Abraham Peritsol, the son of Mordecai Peritsol, a very learned Jew. This was done to supply in some measure the Arabic geography of Abulfeda, which, at the request of Dr. Fell, he had undertaken to publish with a Latin translation: but the death of his patron putting an end to that work, he sent this smaller performance abroad, and dedicated it to the earl of Nottingham, then secretary of state, in hopes that it might excite a stronger curiosity amongst the learned to search into this branch of literature. Dr. Altham, regius-professor of Hebrew, and canon of Christ-church, being, on some dispute about the oaths, removed from both preferments, Hyde became possessed of both, as they are always annexed, in July 1697.

Three years after he had ready for the press, as Wood tells us, an excellent work, on a subject very little known even to the learned themselves, “The Religion of the Ancient Persians,” a work of profound and various erudition, abounding with many new lights on the most curious and interesting subjects, filled with authentic testimonies, which none but himself could bring to public view, and with many ingenious conjectures concerning the theology, history, -and learning of the Eastern nations. This work, which was printed at Oxford in 1700, in 4to, containing 550 pages, and is now become exceedingly scarce, and sells at a very high price, was entitled “Historia Religionis Vetejum Persarum, eorumque Magorum.” It was dedicated to lord Somers. Foreign writers, as well as those of our own country, have spoken of it with high admiration and applause; and, if Hyde had left us no other monument of his studies, this alone had been sufficient to establish and preserve his reputation, as long as any taste for Oriental learning shall remain.

In April 1701 he resigned the office of principal keeper of the Bodleian library, on account of his age and infirmities; and died Feb. 18, 1703, at his lodgings in Christchurch, in his 67th year. He had occupied the post of interpreter and secretary in the Oriental languages, during the reigns of Charles II. James II. and William III. and, it is said, had, in the course of this employment, made himself accurately acquainted with whatever regarded the policy, ceremonies, and customs of the Oriental nations. He was succeeded in his archdeaconry of Gloucester by Mr. Robert Parsons; and, what was singular enough, in the chair of Hebrew professor and in his eanonry of Christchurch by his predecessor Dr. Altham. Besides the works already mentioned, he published “Qiiatuor Evangelia & Acta Apostolorum Lingua Malaica, characteribus Europaeis,” Oxford, 1677, 4to. His “Epistola de mensuris & ponderibus Serum sive Sinensium,” &c, was printed at the end of Dr. Edward Bernard’s book, entitled “De mensuris & ponderibus antiquis Libri tres,” Oxford, 1688, 8vo. In 1690 he published at Oxford in. 4to, “Annotatiunculae in Tractatum Alberti Bobovii Turcarum Imp. Mohammedis IV. olim interpretis primarii, da Turcarum Liturgia, peregrinatione Meccana, Circnmcisione, aegrotorum visitatione, &c. Subjuugitur Castigatio in Angelum a Sancto Josepho, Carmelitarum discalceatorum in Perside praefectum olim generalem.” In 1694 he published at Oxford in 8vo, “De Ludis Orientalibus Libri duo,” &c. The first book is divided into two parts the first of which parts contains “Mandragorias, seu Historia Shahiludii,” c. in Latin; and the second part “Hist. Shahiludii,” &c. in Hebrew and Latin. This “Historia Shahiludii” had been published by itself at Oxford, 1689, in 8vo. The second book contains “Historia Nerdiludii, hoc est dicere, Trunculorum,” &c. He wrote likewise “In Historiam Plantarum Oxoniensium Annotationes Noininum singularum Plantarum Lingua Arabica & Persic^ & TurcicV published by Jacob Bobart in his” Historia Plantarum," at Oxford, 1699, in 4to.

The vast extent of his learning and industry will yet appear more extraordinary by a list of the works which, according to Wood, he had planned, and partly prepared for the press. These are, 1. “Grammatica pro Lingua Persica,” 4to. 2. “Lexicon Persico-Latinum,” in a thick 4to. 3. “Lexicon Turcico-Latinum,” in a thick 4to. 4. “Nomenclator Mogolo-Tartaricum, cum Grammatic& ejusdem Linguae.” 5. “Dissertatio de Tartaria. Item Historia Chartiludii & Dissertatio de Numerorum Notis, earundemque origine & combinandi ratione, doctrina nova,” 8vo. 6. “Curiosa Cbinensia & Selanensia,” 8vo. 7. “Historia Gemmarum Arabice & Latin^, cum Notis,” 8vo. 8. “Historia Tamerlanis Arabice & Latine cum Notis,” 4to. 9. “Liber Bustan Persice & Latine cum Notis Liber elegantissimus, autore Scheia Shadi,” 4to. 10. “Divini Poetae Haphix Opus Persice & Latine, cum Notis,” 4to. 11. “Abulfeda3 Geographia Arabice & Latine, cuoj Notis,” 4to. 12. “Liber Bttharistan eloquentissimo stylo corrscriptus, meri ingenii specimina continens, Libruna Gulistan cequans, si non superans, Persice & Latine, cum Notis,” 4to. 13.“Maimonidis Liber More Nevochim transcriptus ex characteribus Hebraicis quibus a Maimonide scriptum est, in proprios Arabicos, cum nova Versione &. Notis, Arabice & Latine,” in a thick 4to. 14. “Historia Regum Persica? ex ipsorutn monumentis & autoribus extracta,” 4to. 15. “Annotntiones in difficiliora loca Biblica ex Literatura Oriental!,” in a thick 4to. 16. “Periplus Marium Mediterranei & Archipelagi,Turcice & Latine, cum circulo ventorum in variis Linguis, Arabica, Persica, Chinensi,” &c. 8vo. 17. “Zoroastris Perso-Medi Opera omnia Mathematico-medico-physico-Theologica, Persice & Latine,” folio. 18. “Liber Erdaviraph-name, Persice & Latine,” 4to. 19. “Lexicon Hebraicum emendatum ex Mss. Lexicis Rabbi Pinchon, R. Jonae, & R. Jesaiae, atque ex collatione cum Linguis Arabica & Persica & aliis Linguis Orientalibus,” 4to. 20. “Coelum Orientale ArabicoPersicum, atq; Occidentale Graeco-Latinum, una cum Saphh Figurationibus Stellarum duplici situ, prout in Coelo, & prout in Globo apparent, cum earum nominibus secundu-rn harum gentium doctrinam,” 4to. 21. “Commentarius in Pentateuchum Arabice, auctor Manstir Syro-Arabe ex Scriptura Gershumi in Arabicam transcriptus & Latinitate donatus,” 4to. 22. “Urbium Armeniae Nomenclaturae ex eorum Geographia excerpta,” &c. 23. “Varia Chinensia, scil. eorum Idololatria, Opiniones de Deo & de Paradiso atque de Gehenna, & de Gradibus & modis supplicii de eorum ^Literatura & Libris & Charta, & de imprimendi modo atque antiquitate, c. omnia excerpta ex ore & scriptis nativi Chinensis Shin Fo-burg,” 8vo. 24> “Varia Seianensia, ubi insula? Selan (vulgo Batavis Ceylon) Historica quasdam & vocabularium genuinis eorum characteribus exaratum cum eorum Alphabeto & aliis rebus,” 8vo, 25. “Batamense Alphabetum a Legato scriptum cum Literarum potestate & numerorum notis,” 8vo. 26. “Notas Arithmetics variarum Gentium, ubi talium Notarum origo & combinandi ratio docetur,” 8vo. 27. “Dialog! Arabico-Persico-Turcici, Latine versi,” 8vo. 28. “Liber de '1 urcarum opinionibus in rebus religiosis, Turcice & Latine,” 8vo. 29. “Utilia, mensalia, scil. quid in Conversatione Convivali decorum est, Arabice & Latine,” 8vo. 30. “Rivolae Lexicon Arrneniacum cum Linguis Orientalibus (scil. Arabica, Persica, & Turcica) collatum & in margine notatum,” 4to. 31. “Evangeliuoa Lucas & AcU Apostolorum Lingua & Charactere Malaico,” 4to. He also translated into English the letters of several Eastern kings and princes sent to king Charles II, king James II, and king William III.

Dr. Gregory Sharpe, master of the Temple, collected and re published some of Dr. Hyde’s pieces that were formerly published, under the title of “Syntagma Dissertationum et Opuscula,” 1767, 2 vols. 4to. This is accompanied by a life and very just praises of the author, as one of the greatest Orientalists that any country has produced.

, was an ancient Latin writer, who flourished in the time of Augustus. Suetonius, in. his book “De illustribus Grammaticis,” says that he was a freedman of Augustus, and by nation a Spaniard; though some think that he was an Alexandrian, and brought by Caesar to Rome when Alexandria was taken. He was a diligent follower and imitator of Cornelius Alexander, a celebrated Greek grammarian; and was also himself a teacher at Rome. He was made keeper of the Palatine library; was very intimate with the poet Ovid, and with Caius Licmius, a man of consular dignity and an historian, who has taken occasion to inform us, that he died very poor, and, while he lived, was supported chiefly by his generosity; but Vossius thinks that the person here named the consular historian Caius Licinius, should be Caius Asinius, who wrote a history of the civil war, and was consul with Cneius Domitius Calvinus, U. C. 723.

Hyginus wrote many books, which are mentioned by ancient writers. Gellius quotes a work “of the Lives and Actions of illustrious Men.” Servius, in his “Commentary upon the Æneid,” tells us, that he wrote upon “the Origin and Situation of the Italian Cities” which same work is also mentioned by Macrobius. Gellius again mentions his “Commentaries upon Virgil;” as does Macrobius a book “Concerning the Gods.” He wrote also “about Bees and Agriculture;” and lastly, a book of “Genealogies,” of which he himself has made mention in the only undoubted work of his remaining, that is, in his “Poeticon Astronomicon, de mundi & sphaerae ac utriusque partium declaratione, libris quatuor, ad M. Fabium couscrip-f, turn.” The first book treats of the world and of the doctrine of the sphere; the second of the signs in the zodiac; the third gives a description and history of the constellations; and the fourth treats of several things relating to the planets. Here, while Hyginus describes the constellations in the heavens, and notes the stars which belong to each, he takes occasion to explain the fables of the poets from which the constellations were supposed originally to have taken their rise and name; and hence his work seems to have been called “Poeticun Astronomicon.” It has come down to us, however, very imperfect; and all that part of it, -which, as he tells us, treated of the month, the year, and the reasons of intercalating the months, is entirely lost. To this is joined a book of fables, in which the heathen mythology is reduced into a compendium: but this is imperfect, and suspected to be spurious. There are many editions of these books, but the best is that which Munker published, together with some other pieces of antiquity upon the same or a similar subject, under the title of “Mythographi Latini,” Amst. 16*1, 2 vols. 8vo. The third book of the Astronomies, is illustrated with several copper-plates of the constellations elegantly engraved, which Grotius had published from the Susian ms. but which, Schetter tells us, he had omitted in his edition of 1674, because he knew those ancient delineations to be very erroneous, and very ill done.

, a most beautiful, virtuous, and learned lady of antiquity, was the daughter of Theon, who governed the Platonic school at Alexandria, the place of her birth and education, in the latter part of the fourth century. Theon was famous among his contemporaries for his extensive knowledge and learning; but what has chiefly rendered him so with posterity, is, that he was the father of Hypatia, whom, encouraged by her prodigious genius, he educated not only in all the qualifications belonging to her sex, but likewise in the most abstruse sciences. She made an amazing progress in every branch of learning, and the things that are said of her almost surpass belief. Socrates, the ecclesiastical historian, a witness whose veracity cannot be doubted, at least when he speaks in favour of an heathen philosopher, tells us, that Hypatia “arrived at such a pitch of learning, as very far to exceed all the philosophers of her time:” to which Nicephorus adds, “those of Other times.” Philostorgius, a third historian of the same stamp, affirms, that “she was much superior to her father and master Theon, in what regards astronomy;” and Suidas, who mentions two books of her writing, one “on the Astronomical Canon of Diophantus, and another on the Conies of Apollonius,” avers, that “she not only exceeded her father in astronomy, but also that she understood all the other parts of philosophy.” It is some confirmation of these assertions that she succeeded her father in the government of the Alexandrian school: filling that chair, where Ammonius, Hierocles, and many great and celebrated philosophers had taught; and this, at a time, when men of immense learning abounded both at Alexandria, and in many other parts of the Roman empire. Her fame was so extensive, and her worth so universally acknowledged, that we cannot wonder, if she had a crowded au> ditory. “She explained to her hearers,” says Socrates, “the several sciences, that go under the general name of philosophy for which reason there was a confluence to her, from all parts, of those who made philosophy their delight and study.”

Her scholars were as eminent as they were numerous: one of whom was the celebrated Synesius, who was afterwards bishop of Ptolemais. This ancient Christian Platonist every where bears the strongest, as well as the most grateful testimony to the learning and virtue of his instructress; and never mentions her without the profoundest respect, and sometimes in terms of affection coming little short of adoration. In a letter to his brother Euoptius, “Salute,” says he, “the most honoured and the most beloved of God, the Philosopher”; and that happy society, which enjoys the blessing “of her divine voice.” In another, he mentions one Egyptus, who “sucked in the seeds of wisdom from Hypatia.” In another, he expresses himself thus “I suppose these letters will be delivered by; Peter, which he will receive from that sacred hand.” In a letter addressed to herself, he desires her to direct a hydroscope to be maJe and bought for him, which he there describes. That famous silver astrolabe, which he presented to Peonius, a man equally excelling in philosophy and arms, he owns to have been perfected by the directions of Hypatia. In a long epistle, he acquaints her with his reasons for writing two books, which he sends her; and asks her judgment of one, resolving not to publish it without her approbation. But it was not Synesius only, and the disciples of the Alexandrian school, who admired Hypatia for her great virtue and learning: never woman was more caressed by the public, and yet never woman had a more unspotted character. She was held as an oracle for her wisdom, which made her consulted by the magistrates in all important cases; and this frequently drew her among the greatest concourse of men, without the least censure of her manners. “On account of the confidence and authority,” says Socrates, “which she had acquired by her learning, she sometimes came to the judges with singular modesty. Nor was she any thing abashed to appear thus among a crowd of men; for all persons, by reason of her extraordinary discretion, did at the same time both reverence and admire her.” The same is confirmed by Nicephorus, and other authors, whom we have already cited. Danaascius and Suidas relate, that the governors and magistrates of Alexandria regularly visited her, and paid their court to her; and, when Nicephorus intended to pass the highest compliment on the princess Eudocia, he thought he could not do it better, than by calling her “another Hypatia.”

While Hypatia thus reigned the brightest ornament of Alexandria, Orestes was governor of the same place for the emperor Theodosius, and Cyril bishop or patriarch. Orestes, having had a liberal education, admired Hypatia, and frequently consulted her. This created an intimacy between them that was highly displeasing to Cyril, who had a great aversion to Orestes: which intimacy, as it is supposed, had like to have proved fatal to Orestes, as we may collect from the following account of Socrates. “Certain of the Monks,” says he, “living in the Nitrian mountains, leaving their monasteries to the number of about five hundred, flocked to the city, and spied the governor going abroad in his chariot: whereupon approaching, they called him by the names of Sacrificer and Heathen, using many other scandalous expressions. The governor, suspecting that this was a trick played him by Cyril, cried out that he was a Christian; and that he had been baptized at Constantinople by bishop Atticus. But the monks giving no heed to what he said, one of them, called Ammonius, threw a stone at Orestes, which struck him on the head; and being all covered with blood from his wounds, his guards, a few excepted, fled, some one way and some another, hiding themselves in the crowd, lest they should be stoned to death. In the mean while, the people of Alexandria ran to defend their governor against the monks, and putting the rest to flight, brought Ammonius, whom they apprehended, to Orestes; who, as the laws prescribed, put him publicly to the torture, and racked him till he expired.”

But though Orestes escaped with his life, Hypatia afterwards fell a sacrifice. This lady, as we have observed, was profoundly respected by Orestes, who much frequented and consulted her “for which reason,” says Socrates, “she was not a little traduced among the Christian multitude, as if she obstructed a reconciliation between Cyril and Orestes. This occasioned certain enthusiasts, headed by one Peter a lecturer, to enter into a conspiracy against her; who watching an opportunity, when she was returning home from some place, first dragged her out of her chair; then hurried her to the church called Cæsars; and, stripping her naked, killed her with tiles. After this, they tore her to pieces; and, carrying her limbs to a place called Cinaron, there burnt them to ashes.” Cave endeavours to remove the imputation of this horrid murder from Cyril, thinking him too honest a man to have had any hand in it; and lays it upon the Alexandrian mob in general, whom he calls “levissimum hominum genus,” “a very trifling inconstant people.” But though Cyril should be allowed to have been neither the perpetrator, nor even the contriver of it, others have thought that he did not discountenance it in the manner he ought to have done: and was so farfrom blaming theoutrage committed by the Nitrian monks upon the governor Orestes, that “he afterwards received the dead body of Ammonius, whom Orestes had punished with the rack; made a panegyric upon him, in the church where he was laid, in which he extolled his courage and constancy, as one that had contended for the truth; and, changing his name to Thaumasius, or the Admirable, ordered him to be considered as a martyr. However, continues Socrates, the wiser sort of Christians did not approve the zeal which Cyril shewed on this man’s behalf; being convinced, that Ammonius had justly suffered for his desperate attempt.” We learn from the same historian, that the death of Hypatia happened in March, in the 10th year of Honorius’s, and the 6th of Theodosius’s, consulship that is, about A. D. 415.

, an Athenian orator, disciple of Plato and Isocrates, flourished about 335 years before the Christian aera. He was a sincere patriot, and so strenuous a lover of justice and liberty, that he did not hesitate to accuse his I'riend Demosthenes of receiving money from Harpalus, and actually drove him into banishment. They were afterwards reconciled, and perished about the same time. When the Athenians were beaten at Cranon, he was dragged out of the temple of Ceres, and delivered up to Antipater. He died about 322. He published many of his orations, of which one only is extant, and that in some degree dubious. It stands the 17th among those of Demosthenes. There are also some fragments. His style of eloquence has been variously estimated by the critics of his own country.

, a celebrated Lutheran divine and professor of divinity, was born at Ypres in Flanders, whence he took his name, May 16, 1511. His father, who was a civilian, and had sent him to study at various places, when near his death in 1528, removed him to Paris, where he studied philosophy for three years, in the college of Calvi; and after he had taken a journey to Ypres, he returned to Paris in 1532, and studied divinity there till 1535. He went afterwards to Louvain, and then he travelled through several provinces of the Low- Countries and of Germany which rendered ineffectual the pains his friends had taken to procure him a living without his knowledge; for as soon as it was represented to Carondilet, archbishop of Palermo and chancellor to the emperor, that he had travelled in Germany, this rendered him so much suspected of heresy, that he was obliged to think of a sanctuary. He went into England, and lived about four years with an English nobleman, Charles lord Mountjoy, who was a lover of learning, and settled a handsome pension on him. He crossed the sea again in 1541, and designed to visit the university of Strasburg, and particularly to see Bucer, who made that university very famous. But as he passed through the country of Hesse, he met at Marpurg with a professor of divinity, named Geldenhaur, who was one of his friends, and who, in order to keep him there, gave him hopes of some employment in the university of that city. He accordingly settled there, and soon after succeeded his friend, who died in January 1542. He continued in that employment until his death at Marpurg, February the 1st, 1564. He was author of numerous works, some of which were published by himself, and the rest were published after his death. They consist of “Commentaries on the Scriptures;” “Theological Dissertations;” “Controversial Tracts;” treatises in rhetoric, logic, arithmetic, geometry, astronomy, optics, natural philosophy, &c. Several of these, enumerated by Ames and Herbert, were translated into English, and published here in the sixteenth century. Hyperius had a very clear head, and a very happy talent in conveying instruction. He was meek and polite in conversation, and delighted in social convivial intercourse, possessed true wit and good sense, and added to those qualities a high degree of virtue and zeal.

, of Alexandria, a disciple of Isidorus, flourished under M. Aurelius, and Lucius Verus, in the second century. He has been supposed to be the author of a certain work called “Anaphoricus,” or a book of ascensions, which was written in opposition to the doctrines of some astronomer. It was published in Greek, with the Latin version of Mentelius, and in conjunction with the Optics of Heliodorus, at Paris, in 1680, 4to. Vossius, in his book “de Scientiis Mathematicis,” has erroneously supposed him to have lived at a much earlier period.

, an Arabian philosopher, was contemporary with Averroes, who died about the year 1198. He composed a philosophical romance, entitled “The Life or History of Hai Ebn Yokdhan” in which he endeavours to demonstrate, how a man may, by the mere light of nature, attain the knowledge of things natural and supernatural; particularly the knowledge of God, and the affairs of another life. He lived at Seville in Spain, as appears from one or two passages in this work, and was famous for his medical skill, and for his knowledge of the Peripatetic philosophy, of which this work exhibits a favourable specimen, as it was taught among the Saracens. He wrote some other pieces, which are not come to our hands; but, that this was well received in the East, appears from its having been translated by R. Moses Narbonensis, into Hebrew, and illustrated with a large commentary. It was published in 1671, with an accurate Latin version, by Mr. Edward Pococke, son of Dr. Pococke, professor of the Oriental languages at Oxford; and, in 1708, an English translation of it from the Arabic was given by Simon Ockley, soon after Arabic professor at Cambridge. It is written with great elegance of language, and vigour of imagination.

, a Polish prince, devoted himself chiefly to the sciences, and, for the sake of improvement, frequently visited Germany and France. When the troubles broke out in Poland he resigned his senatorial dignity, left the country, and took up his residence at Leipsic, where he distinguished himself not only as a friend and protector of science, but as a man of great literary acquirements. He founded a society which was named after himself, and assigned a liberal sum for the purpose of distributing premiums to the authors of the best answers to questions proposed on various literary subjects. This society still exists, holds its meetings at Leipsic, and occasionally presents the world with the fruit of its labours. The prince died in 1777, at the age of sixty-five. His works are, “The Lives of Twelve Generals,” written in the Polish language “A Treatise on the Sclavonic Poetry” and some pieces of a similar nature.

, a learned Polish Protestant divine, was born Nov. 20, 1660, at Dantzic, and had the first part of his education in Germany; after which he travelled into Holland, and thence to England, for further improvement in his studies. Thus accomplished, he became successively minister of Magdebourg, Lissa, Koningsberg, and Berlin, and was at length ecclesiastical counsellor and president of the society of sciences in this last city. His zeal against infidelity, both in the atheists and deists, shewed itself on all occasions; and he took a deal of pains to effect an union betwixt the Lutherans and Calvinists, but to no purpose. The truth is, considering the rooted prejudices on each side, such a coalition, like that between the church of England and the Dissenters, is rather to be wished than expected. Mr. Jablonski died in May 1741.

There is a Latin translation by him of “Bentley’s Sermons at Boyle’s Lectures;” there are also several Latin “Dissertations upon the Land of Gessen;” “Meditationes de divina origine Scripturse sacrae;” also a piece entitled “Thorn afflige'e,” homilies, and some other works in good esteem.

, brother to the preceding, and born at Dantzic in 1654, was counsellor of the court of Prussia, and secretary of the royal society of sciences at Berlin. He was a man of the most exact probity and a strict piety, united to a sweetness of temper, a polite urbanity, and an inclination to oblige all that applied to him. He loved the sciences, and did them honour, without that ambition which is generally seen in men of learning. It was owing to this modesty that he did not put his name to the greater part of his works; the chief of which are, “Dictionaire Francois- Allemand & Allemand -Francois,” printed in 1711 “A Course of Morality in the German Tongue, 1713;” “An Universal Dictionary of Arts and Sciences, 1721;” a translation into High Dutch of “Tacitus- de moribus Germanorum,” with remarks, 1724. He died in 1731.

, the son of Daniel-Ernest, above- mentioned, was a native of Berlin, a Protestant divine, and a professor of theology at Francfort on the Oder, as well as pastor there. He was born in 1693, and in 1714 published a learned dissertation, entitled “Disquisitio de Lingua Lycaonic^,” ad Act. Apost. xiv. 11. It appeared at Berlin in quarto. A oreat expectation of his talents was excited by this publication, which he fully justified in his subsequent life. He published also, 2. “De Memnone Graecorum, 1753,” Francfort, 1753. 3. “Institutiones Histories Ecclesiasticae,” in 2 vols. 8vo. But his most learned and important work was, 4 “Pantheon Ægyptiorum, sive de Diis eorum Commentarius, cum Prolegomenis de Religione et Theologia Egyptiorum,” in three volumes, 8vo, published at Francfort in 1750 and 1752. It is a book of great and extensive erudition. Jablonski died in 1757.

, an Italian writer, was born at Florence, in 1466, and was the disciple of Marsiiius Ficinus, under whom he studied the- Platonic philosophy, and became a great master of it. He was also a good orator, and succeeding Ficinus in his professorship, held it till his death, which happened in 1522. There is extant by him, “A Treatise of Beauty,” and another of “Love,” according to the doctrine of Plato, besides several others, which were all printed together at Basil in 1563.

, a nonconformist divine, was born at Little Waldingfield in Suffolk in 1593; his father, who was a Spanish merchant in London, died when he was young. He was educated at Trinity college, Cambridge, where he appears to have taken his degrees in arts, and in 1617 was incorporated M. A. at Oxford. While at college he commenced the habit of rising every morning at three or four o'clock, both summer and winter, and studied from fourteen to sixteen hours every day. He continued at Cambridge until his marriage in 1519, soon after which.he was chosen by the inhabitants of St. Michael, Wood-street, London, to be their lecturer, and on the death of Mr. Brogden, their pastor. During the plague in 1624, he was one of those who remained at his post, and administered such aid to the sick and dying as he could, and was in other respects scrupulously diligent in preaching, catechizing, &c. When the reading of the “Book of Sports” was enjoined, he refused that foolish and imprudent mandate; yet such was his character, that when complained of to archbishop Laud for this omission, that prelate said, “Mr. Jackson is a quiet and peaceable man, and therefore I will not have him meddled with.” He was not less respected by archbishop Sheldon, notwithstanding his very different opinion on church-government and ceremonies. He afterwards accepted the living of St. Faith’s under St. Paul’s, whence he was ejected in 1662. He was no friend to the tyranny of Cromwell, and was imprisoned above four months for refusing to give evidence against Mr. Love, before what was called the high court of justice, and was also fined 500l. On the restoration, when Charles II. made his entry into London, Mr. Jackson was appointed by the London clergy to present to him a Bible, as his majesty passed through St. Paul’s churchyard. After his ejection, he employed his leisure in pursuing his annotations on the Bible, during the short remainder of his life. He died Aug. 5, 1666. His “Annotations on the Bible,” as far as the book of Isaiah, were published in 4 vols. 4to, the last by his son, who prefixed ta it some memoirs of the author.

, an English divine, son of the rev. John Jackson, first rector of Lensey, afterwards rector of Rossington, and vicar of Doncaster in Yorkshire, was born at Lensey, April 4, 1686. He was educated at Doncasterschool under the famous Dr. Bland, who was afterwards head master of Eton-school, dean of Durham, and from 1732 to 1746 provost of Eton college. In 1702, he was admitted of Jesus college, Cambridge; and, after taking the degree of B. A. at the usual period, left the university in 1707. During his residence there, he learned Hebrew under Simon Ockley, the celebrated orientalist; but never made any great proficiency. In 1708, he entered into deacon’s orders, and into priest’s two years after; when he took possession of the rectory of Rossington, which had been reserved for him from the death of his father by the corporation of Doncaster. That politic body, however, sold the next turn of this living for 800l. and with the money paved the long street of their town, which forms part of the great northern road. In 17)2, he married Elizabeth, daughter of John Cowley, collector of excise at Doncaster; and, soon after, went to reside at Rossington. In 1714, he commenced author, by publishing three anonymous letters, in defence of Dr. S. Clarke’s “Scripture-Doctrine of the Trinity,” with whom he soon after became personally acquainted and nine treatises by Jackson on this controversy, from 1716 to 1738, are enumerated in the supplementary volume of the “Biographia Britannica.” In 1718, he offered himself at Cambridge for the degree of M. A. but was refused on account of his heretical principles. Upon his return, he received a consolatory letter from Dr. Clarke, who also procured for him the contratership of Wigston’s hospital in Leicester; a place which is held by patent for life from the chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and was particularly acceptable to Jackson, as it requires no subscription to any an ides of religion. To this he was presented, in 1719, by lord Lechmere, in whose gift it was then, as chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, and from whom Dr. Clarke had the year before received the mastership of that hospitah He now removed from Rossington to“Leicester; where, between politics (Leicester being a great party-town) and religion, he was engaged in almost continual war: and his spirit was by no means averse from litigation. In May 1720, he qualified himself for afternoon-preacher at St. Martin’s church in Leicester, as confrater; and, in the two following years, several presentments were lodged against him in the bishop’s and also in the archdeacon’s court, for preaching heretical doctrines; but he always contrived to defeat the prosecutions; and, after the” Case of the Arian Subscription“was published by Dr. Waterland, he resolved, with Dr. Clarke, never to subscribe the articles any more. By this he lost, about 1724, the hopes of a prebend of Salisbury, which bishop Hoadly refused to give him without such subscription.” The bishop’s denial,“says his biographer,” was the more remarkable, as he had so often intimated his own dislike of all such subscriptions:" Jackson, however, had keen presented before by sir John Fryer to the private prebend of Wherwell in Hampshire, where ho such qualification was required.

On the death of Dr. Clarke, in May 1729, he succeeded, by the presentation of the duke of Rutland, thdn chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, to the mastership of Wigston’s hospital, which situation he preserved to“his death. The year before, 1728, he had published, in 8vo,” Novatiani Opera, ad antiquiores editiones castigata, & a multis mendis expurgata:“and now, intent upon books, and perhaps the more so by being incapable of rising to preferment, ha continued from time to time to send out various publications. In 1730,” A Defence of Human Liberty, against Cato’s Letters;“and, in the second edition,” A Supplement against Anthony Collins, esq. upon the same subject.“In 1730 and 1731,” Four Tracts in Defence of Human Reason, occasioned by bishop Gibson’s second Pastoral Letter.“In 1731, a piece against” Tindal’s Christianity as old as the Creation;“in 1733, another by way of answer to Browne bishop of Corke’s book, entitled” Things Divine and Supernatural, conceived by Analogy with Things Natural and Human;“in 1734,” The Existence and Unity of God, &c.“which led him into a controversy with Law, and other writers; and, in 1735,” A Dissertation on Matter and Spirit,“with remarks on Baxter’s” Inquiry into the Nature of the Human Soul.“In 173G, he published” A Narrative of his being refused the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper at Bath:" this had been done in a very public manner by Dr. Coney, and was the second refusal of that kind he had experienced; for, in 1730, he had been denied the use of the pulpit at St. Martin’s in Leicester, by the vicar, who set the sacristan at the bottom of the stairs to restrain him from ascending.

In 1742, he had an epistolary debate with his friend William Whiston, concerning the order and times of the high priests. In 1744, he published “An Address to the Deists, &c.” in answer to Morgan’s “Resurrection of Jesus considered by a Moral Philosopher;” and, in 1745, entered the lists against Warburtori, in “The Belief of a Future State proved to be a fundamental article of the religion of the Hebrews, and held by the philosophers, &c.” and two or three polemic pieces with Warburton were the consequence of this. His next work was, “Remarks upon Middleton’s Free Inquiry into the Miraculous Powers, &c.” and, after this, he does not appear to have published any thing till 1752, except that, in 1751, he communicated to Mr. John Gilbert Cooper, for the use of his “Life of Socrates,” some learned notes; in which he contrived to avenge himself upon his old antagonist Warburton. At the same time he exposed the young and incautious writer to the resentment of that veteran, who did not fail to shew it in one of his notes upon Pope. In 1752, came out his last and best work, “Chronological Antiquities,” in 3 vols. 4to. He afterwards made many collections and preparations for an edition of the New Testament in Greek, with Scholia in the same language; and would have inserted all the various readings, had not the growing infirmities of age prevented him. An account of the materials of this intended edition, with notes containing alterations, corrections, additions to his “Chronology,” are inserted in an appendix to “Memoirs” of him printed in 1764, by Dr. Sutton of Leicester.

He died May 12, 1763. By his wife, who died before him, he had twelve children; but only four survived him. He was a man of great application and learning, but not of parts or genius, and totally devoid of taste. His knowledge too was confined to the precincts of Greek and Latin: for he knew nothing of oriental languages, except a little Hebrew; and of the modern languages, even the French, was altogether ignorant. Though of a spirit somewhat litigious, and not a little bigoted to his opinions, he was good-natured, hospitable, and cheerful; and easy, complacent, and agreeable to all who were connected with or dependent upon him,

, an ingenious letter-founder, whose history affords one of those edifying examples which cannot be too often placed before the eyes of the young artisan, was born in Old-street, London, Sept. 4, 1733, and was educated at Fuller’s school in that neighbourhood. At the usual age he was put apprentice to Mr. Caslon, letterfounder, son to the first of that family. Having acquired a knowledge of the common operations, he had an ambition to learn the method of cutting punches; which was so much a secret, that both his master and his master’s father always locked themselves into a private apartment, when employed in that important branch of the business. Mr. Jackson, however, surmounted this difficulty, by boring a hole through the wainscot, and prying into their operations with such success, that he was soon enabled to finish a punch, and brought it in triumph to his master, probably expecting some reward. His surprise and chagrin must have therefore been great, when his master gave him a hard blow, and threatened him with Bridewell, if ever he made such another felonious attempt. Mr. Jackson, however, whose conscience was more easily reconciled to his crime, than his temper was to his punishment, was, by the assistance of his mother, provided with the necessary tools, and took every opportunity of improving himself in the art at her house. He continued also to work for his master for some time after the expiration of his apprenticeship, until a dispute respecting wages occasioned his being discharged, along with a Mr. Cottrell, with whom he united in partnership; but, on the death of his mother, in 1759, went on board the Minerva frigate, as armourer. He appears to have returned to London after the peace of 1762-3, and worked for some time under Mr. Cottrell, until, determining to adventure in business for himself, he was encouraged in the scheme, by two life-guardsmen, his felJow workmen, who engaged to allow him a small pittance for his subsistence, and to supply money to carry on the trade, for two years. Taking a small house in Cock-lane, he soon satisfied his partners that the business would be productive, before the time promised. When he had pursued his labours about six months, Mr. Bowyer, the cele.­brated printer, accidentally calling to inspect some of his punches (for he had no specimen), approved them so much, that he promised to employ him. Business increasing rapidly, Mr. Jackson removed to larger premises in Dorsetstreet; and about 1771 was applied to by the late duke of Norfolk, to make a mould to cast a hollow square. His grace informed him, that he had applied to allthe skilful mechanics in London, Mr. Caslon not excepted, who declared it impossible. Mr. Jackson howeve'r undertook, and in the course of three months produced it. He proceeded then in raising the reputation of his foundery; and among other articles of superior difficulty, we may mention the fac-simile types for the Domesday-book, and for the Alexandrian New Testament, and the types for Macklin’s Bible. Mr. Jackson died at his house in Dorset-street, Salisburysquare, Jan. 14, 1722.

, a learned English divine, was born at Willowing, in the bishopric of Durham, 1579. Many of his relations being merchants in Newcastle, he was designed to have been bred in that profession; but his great inclination to learning being observed, he was sent to Oxford, and admitted into Queen’s college in 1595, and removed to Corpus- Christi the year after. He took his degrees in arts at the stated times; and May 10, 1606, became probationer-fellow, being then well-grounded in arithmetic, grammar, philology, geometry, rhetoric, logic, philosophy, the oriental languages, history, &c. with an insight into heraldry and hieroglyphics. But he made all his knowledge subservient to the study of divinity, to which he applied with great vigour, and became so distinguished in it, that he not only read a divinity-lecture in his college every Sunday morning, but another on the week-day at Pembroke college (then newly founded) at the request of the master and fellows. He was al|p chosen vice-president of his college for many years successively, by virtue of which office he moderated at the divinity disputations, with remarkable learning, and no less candour and modesty. He commenced D. D. in 1622, and quitted the college two years afterwards, being preferred to a living in his nativfc county, and soon after to the vicarage of Newcastle. In that large and laborious cure, he performed all the duties of an excellent parish-priest, and was particularly admired for his discourses from the pulpit. At this time he was a rigid Calvinist, but yielded the point of absolute predestination to the persuasions of Dr. Richard Neile, bishop of Durham, who took him for his chaplain, and joined with Dr. Laud in bringing him back to his college, where he was elected president by their interest, in 1630. Upon this promotion he resigned the vicarage of Newcastle; and, in 1635, was collated to a prebend of Winchester, having been made king’s chaplain some time before. Dr. Towers being advanced to the bishopric of Peterborough, Dr. Jackson succeeded him in the deanery in 1638; but he did not enjoy this dignity quite two years, being taken from it by death, in 1640. He was interred in the inner chapel of Corpus-Christi college. He was a man of a blameless life, studious, humble, courteous, and remarkably charitable, pious, exemplary in his private and public conversation; so that he was respected and beloved by the most considerable persons in the nation; and indeed the greatest esteem was no more than his due, on account of his learning, for he was well skilled in all the learned languages, arts, sciences, and physics. As an instance of his charitable disposition, we are told, that while he was vicar of Newcastle, whenever he went out, he usually gave what money he had about him to the poor, who at length so flocked about him, that his servant took care he should not have too much in his pocket. Dr. Jackson was profoundly read in the fathers, and endued with an uncommon depth of judgment. His works are very numerous, printed at different times, but were all collected and published in. 1672 and 1673, in three volumes, folio, consisting chiefly of sermons, besides his “Commentaries on the Apostles’ Creed,” which are his principal work. His writings were much admired and studied by the late bishop Home, in the account of whose life his merits are thus displayed by the biographer. “Dr. Jackson is a magazine of theological knowledge, every inhere penned with great elegance and dignity, so that his style is a pattern of perfection. His writings, once thought inestimable by every body but the Calvinists, had been greatly neglected, and would probably have continued so, but for the praises bestowed upon them by the celebrated Mr. Merrick, of Trinity college, Oxford, who brought them once more into repute with many learned readers. The early extracts of Mi;. Home, which are now remaining, shew how much information he derived from this excellent writer, who deserves to be numbered with the English fathers of the church.”

, an eminent musical composer, was the son of a tradesman of Exeter, where he was born in 1730. As he early discovered a great genius for music, he was educated to that profession under the celebrated Travers, and may be said to have jtnbibed no small portion of that composer’s spirit. It must be allowed that Jackson possessed a considerable share of intellectual ability, and evinced on many occasions a very distinguished taste for the fine arts. His judgment in general was sound; genius will not be denied him; and when genius, judgment, and taste are united in the same person, we are entitled to expect an approximation to human excellence. At the same time it must be confessed, thatthese qualities were strongly alloyed by a mixture of selfishness, arrogance, and an insatiable rage for superiority. In many of his musical compositions he has displayed traits o'.;ioveity, but these are not the most estimable of nis productions. The “Eltgies,” the best of his works, possess superior melody, for which we may allow him credit but the harmony of these- is in some measure derived from his old master; that is, they are constructed upon the model of that composer’s canzonets. Indeed, many of Jackson’s early compositions savour much of the spirit and contrivance of Travers.

Jackson’s fame, in a great measure, may be said to be founded in his judgment of selection with regard to poetry; though he sometimes took unwarrantable liberties with his author, in order to accommodate the lines to his music. Perhaps no composer copied less from others than Jackson, jet at the same time it must be admitted that he was a palpable mannerist. His most interesting and novel melodies are too frequently associated with common passages that have existed almost from the origin of music; the descent of four notes in the diatonic order is sufficient to illustrate our meaning. Jackson’s peculiar fort existed in giving an elegant and plaintive melody to elegiac poetry. In constituting harmony, without rendering the middle part or parts of a composition destitute of melody, Jackson stands unrivalled. This is no trivial praise, when it is known that, before his time, composers were, and are at present, very defective in this part of their art. It was a defect in Jackson’s music, that his melody would suit any species of plaintive lines: few of his compositions displayed the art of mingling expression with melody, and preserving the latter in its purity. His “Fairy Fantasies,” not yet published, evince more congruity than any others of his works.

He long taught music at Exeter, and in 1777 was appointed organist of that cathedral. In 1782 he rose at once to literary fame by the publication of “Thirty Letters on various subjects,” 2 vols. 12mo. These principally consisted of essays on the belles lettres, and evinced taste, learning, vivacity, and even genius. In 1798 he published “The Four Ages, together with Essays on various subjects,” 8vo, which consisted of so much instructive, original, and entertaining matter, that it added considerably to the author’s well-earned fame. It contained, however, some opinions on religion, not sufficiently considered, which gavel offence to serious readers. He also published “A Treatise on the present state of Music,” 1791, and eighteen musical works, consisting of hymns, songs, canzonets, elegies, and “An Ode to Fancy.” Mr. Jackson also paid his court to the graphic muse, but never looked at nature, believing, that by copying other masters he might at last arrive at excellence. His great model was his friend Gainsborough, whose colouring and composition he constantly endeavoured to imitate, sometimes with a degree of success which induced him to lay a false claim to the merit of originality. But, had he succeeded in even equalling that great artist, his pictures would not have spoken the language of nature; the man who merely copies another, either in music or painting, can never be considered a great artist; he can only be a faint echo, and ranked among the servum pecus imitatorum.

Though his general mode of living was temperate, yet he thought that a still greater abstinence would prolong his existence. In his latter days, he dined on milk-porridge, and drank water. This experiment was fatal. His habit necessarily became impoverished, and his existence terminated in a dropsy, at the age of 73, July 12, 1803.

, a poetical and dramatic writer, was the son of a considerable maltster of Romsey, in the county of Southampton, at which place he was born in 1686. He was bred to the Jaw under an eminent attorney, and was afterwards steward and secretary to the Hon. William Blathwayt, esq. a celebrated courtier in the reign of king William, and who enjoyed great preferments in that and the subsequent reign. These are the only particulars of his life which have been handed down, and are what he inserted in his “Poetical Register,” where he also informs us that he was a great admirer of poets. He died May 8, 1744. His admiration of poetry, although it could not make him a poet, led him to inquire into poetical history, and gradually produced his “Poetical Register, or Lives and Characters of the English dramatic poets,” 1723, 2 vols. which, says Baker, notwithstanding some few errors in it, is by much the best book of the kind hitherto extant; and yet so little merit had his own two dramatic pieces, Love in a Wood“and” The Soldier’s Last Stake,“that, according to Whincop, Dr. Sewel, who was by no means remarkable for ill-nature, on reading his” Love in a Wood," wrote the following very severe lines in the title-page:

He also published several poems: “A Journey to Bath and Bristol,” “The Lover’s Miscellany,” “Essays relating to the conduct of Life,” and “An Essay on Criticism, &c.” But as a law-writer, few men have left more ample testimonies of industry, and one at least of his productions still preserves his name. He published, 1. “The Accomplished Conveyancer,” 1714, reprinted in 1736 and 1750, 3 vols. 8vo. 2. “The Clerk’s Remembrancer.” 1714, reprinted 1730. 3. “The Grand Precedent,” 1716, 8vo. 4. “A Catalogue of all Writs and Processes of the Courts at Westminster,” 1717, 8vo. 5. “Lex Mercatoria, or the merchants’ companion,” 1718, 8vo, reprinted 1729. 6. “The Laws of Appeals and Murder,” from the Mss. of Mr. Gale, an eminent practiser, 1719, 8vo. 7. “Lex Constitutions, or the gentleman’s law,” 1719, 8vo, reprinted 1737. 8. “The Modern- Justice, containing the business of a justice of peace, with precedents,” 1720, reprinted in 1726 and 1729. 9. “Review of the Statutes,” 3720, and again the same year. 10. “A Treatise of the Laws, or a general introduction to the common, civil, and canon law,” 1721, 8vo. 11. “The complete Court Keeper, or lord steward’s assistant,” 1724, 8vo, reprinted 1740, 1752, 1764, and 1781, which last edition, much improved, is called the seventh. 12. “The Student’s Companion, or reason of the law,” 1725, again in 1734 and 1743. 13. “The Common Law common-placed/' 1726, 8vo, reprinted in fol. 1733. 14.” The new Law Dictionary,“1729, reprinted in 1733, and often since, with the valuable improvements of Ruffhead, Morgan, and lastly of Sir Thomas Edlyne Tomlyns, in 1797: an abridgment of it was published in 1743. 15.” The complete Chancery Practitioner,“1730, 2 vols. 8vo. 16.” Tables to the Law,“1736, fol. 17.” The complete. Attorney’s Practice,“1737, 2 vols. 8vo. 18.” City Libertie,“1732, and with a new title only, 1737. 19.” General Law of Estates,“1740, 8vo. 20.” Game Law,“1740, 12mo. the seventh edition. 21.” New complete Conveyancer,“1744, 8vo. 22.” The Statute Law common-placed,“1748, 8vo, fifth edition, 23. Law Grammar,” 1749 and 1754, 12mo. and again in folio, to bind up with the author’s Law Dictionary.

, the founder of the first independent or congregational church in England, was a native of Kent, and received his academical education at St. Mary’s hall, Oxford. Having entered into holy orders, he was made precentor of Corpus Christi college, and afterwards obtained the benefice of Cheriton in Kent. In the year 1604 he published “Reasons taken out of God’s word, and the best of human testimonies, proving the necessity of reforming our churches of England.” The publication of this, and of another work against what was falsely called “learned preaching,” would have brought him under ecclesiastical censure if he had not fled to Holland. At Leyden he became a convert to the Brownist principles, since known by the name of Independency. In Holland he published several treatises, and upon his return he avowed a design of setting up a separate congregation upon the model of those in Holland. This, in a short time, he carried into effect, and thus laid the foundation of the first independent congregational chinch in England. He was elected pastor of the church, and continued with his people till the year 1624, when he went to Virginia, where he soon afterwards died. He was author of many publications which were highly esteemed in his day, particularly, 1. “A treatise of the Sufferings and Victory of Christ in the work of our Redemption, &c. written against certain errors in those points publicly preached in London, 1597,” Lond. 1598, 8vo. The points which he endeavours to confute were, 1. That Christ suffered for us the wrath of God, which we may well term the pains of hell. 2. That Christ, after his death on the cross, went not into hell in his soul. 2. “Of the Church and Ministry of England, written in two treatises against the reasons and objections of Mr. Francis Johnson,” Middleburg, 1599, 4to. Our author and Mr. Johnson, who was a Brownist, and lived in Holland, had several disputes at Amsterdam about the church of England’s being a true church. 3. “Defence of a treatise touching the Sufferings and Victory of Christ in the work of our Redemption,” 1600, 4to. 4. “Reasons taken out of God’s word,” &c. already merrtioned, 16CH, 4to. 5. “A Position against vain-glorious> and that which is falsely called learned preactiing,” 1604, 8vo. 6. “The divine beginning and institution of Christ’s true, visible, and material Church,” Leyden, 1610, 8vo. 7. “Plain and clear Exposition of the Second Commandment,” 1610, 8vo. 8. “Declaration and opening of certain points, with a sound confirmation of some others, in a treatise entitled * The divine beginning,' &c.” Middleburg, 1611. He wrote and published likewise several pieces, as the “Counter- Poison,” &c. which being printed privately, or on the continent, are rarely to be met with.

, son of the preceding, was born either in 1606 or 1607. As his father was warmly attached to puritanical principles, he was sent abroad for education; in the course of which he was put under the tuition of the celebrated Erpenius, professor of Arabic in the university of Leyden, and by the help of strong natural parts, united with a vigorous application, he in a short time made a surprising progress in philological and oriental literature. When he was about twenty-two years of age he returned to England, and was recommended by Mr. William Bedwell, a noted orientalist of that time, to William earl of Pembroke, chancellor of Oxford, as an extraordinary young man, who deserved particular encouragement. Accordingly, that generous nobleman immediately wrote to the university letters in his behalf, requesting that he might be created bachelor of arts to which degree he was admitted in Jan. 1628-9. In the earl’s recommendation, Jacob was described as having profited in oriental learning above the ordinary measures of his age. Soon after he obtained the patronage of John Selden, Henry Briggs, and Peter Turner, and, by their endeavours, was elected probationer fellow of Mertonr college in 1630. Not, however, being sufficiently skilled in logic and philosophy to carry him through the severe exercises of that society, the warden and fellows tacitly assigned him the situation of philological lecturer. He was then, for a while, diverted from his studies by attending to some law-suits concerning his patrimony, at the conclusion of which he fell into a Dangerous sickness, and, by the sudden loss of his patron, the earl of Pembroke, his life was in danger. Bishop Laud, that great encourager of literature, having succeeded the earl in the chancellorship of Oxford, a way was found out, from Merton college statutes, to make Mr. Jacob Socius Grammaticus, that is, Reader of Philology to the Juniors, a place which had been disused for about a hundred years. Being now completely settled in his fellowship, he occasionally resided with Mr. Selden, and assisted him as an amanuensis in one of the works which he was publishing, and which, we apprehend, must have been the “Mare clausum.” Selden, in acknowledging his obligations, styles him, “doctissimus Henricus Jacobus.” It is even understood, that Jacob added several things to the book, which Mr. Seldeir, finding them to be very excellent, permitted to stand. Nay, it is said, that Jacob improved Selden in the Hebrew language. In 1636, Mr. Jacob was created master of arts, and in June 1641, he was elected superior beadle of divinity. At the beginning of the November of the following year, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of ptiysic: “but his head,” says Anthony Wood, “being always over-busy about critical notions (whicbr made him sometimes a little better than crazed), he neglected his duty so much, that he was suspended once, if not twice, from his place, and had his beadle’s staff taken from him.” In consequence of the rebellion, and his attachment to archbishop Laud, he soon became exposed to other calamities. Sir Nathaniel Brent, the republican warden of Merton college, silenced Mr Jacob as philological lecturer; and at length he was totally deprived of his fellowship by the parliamentary visitors. Being now destitute of a sufficient maintenance, he retired to London, where Mr. Selden assisted him, gave him his clothes, and, among the rest, an old scarlet cloak, the wearing of which rendered poor Jacob an object of mirth to some of his acquaintance, who, when they saw it upon his back, used to call him “Young Selden.” “But being,” says Wood, “a shiftless person, as most mere scholars are, and the benefactions of friends not sufficing him,” he sold a small patrimony which he had at Godmersham in Kent, to supply his necessities, and died before the money was spent. He had brought on a bad habit of body by his close application to his studies. In September 1652, he retired to the city of Canterbury, where he was kindly entertained by Dr. William Jacob, a noted physician of that place; but who, though of the same name, was not related to our author. By this gentleman he was cured of a gangrene in his foot; but this being followed by a tumour and abscess in one of his legs, the discharge proved too violent for his constitution, and he died Nov. 5, 1652. The next day Dr. Jacob buried him in a manner answerable to his quality, in the parish-church of All Saints in Canterbury. Anthony Wood says, that Mr. Jacob died about the year of his age forty-Spur. But if the circumstances of his history be carefully compared together, it will be found that he was probably not less than forty-six years old at the time of his decease. As to his character, it appears that he was an innocent, harmless, careless man, who was entirely devoted to the pursuits of literature, and totally ignorant of the world.

Mr. Jacob’s other works, which have never found their way to the press, excepting the “Delphi Phrenicizantes,” of the credit of which he is said to have been robbed by Dr. Dickinson, were as follows: “Etymotechnia Catholica,” containing four diatribes concerning the original of letters. The first, “De Ordine Alphabet;” the second, “De Transitu Alphabet;” the third, “De Numero, Figura, Potentate et Divisione Literarum;” and the fourth called “Geographistor Etymotechnicus.” “Grammatica Ebraea.” “Σβω, vel Osiris inventus; de Coptiatis Originibus Commentatio.—Geographumena,” in wliich are many Assyriac and Egyptic antiquities discovered. “Pancarpia, opus ex artibus et linguis miscellan.” imperfect. “Magnetologia, in lib. 3, agentibus de triplici Motu Magnetico, Lapidali, Cœlesti et Animali,” &c. “De Mari rubro,” and another, “De Historia Beli et Draconis.” “Libri Ebraeo Rabbinici in Bib. Bodleiana recensiti,” an. 1629.

, was a rabbi of the sixteenth century, who rendered himself famous by the collection of the Masora, which was printed at Venice in 1525 with the text of the Bible, the Chaldee paraphrase, and the commentaries of some rabbies upon Scripture. This edition of the Hebrew Bible, and those which follow it with the great and small Masora compiled by this rabbi, are much esteemed by the Jews; there being nothing before exact or accurate upon the Masora, which is properly a critique upon the books of the Bible, in order to settle the true reading. In the preface to his great Masora he shews the usefulness of his work, and explains the keri and ketib, or the different readings of the Hebrew text: he puts the various readings in the margin, because there are just doubts concerning the true reading; he observes also, that the Talmudish Jews do not always agree with the authors of the Masora. Besides the various readings collected by the Masorets, and put by this rabbi in the margin of his Bible, he collected others himself from the ms copies, which must be carefully distinguished from the Masora.

, an industrious French author and bibliographer, was born at Chalons sur Saone, Aug. 20, 1608. He was educated among the Carmelites, and entered into that order in 1625, and, during his studies, the distinguished progress he made in theology and 'he belles lettres, procured him easy access to the libraries and the collections of literary men of eminence, who contributed very readily to promote his taste for bibliography and literary history. In 1639 he went to Italy, and resided some time at Rome, consulting the libraries, and collecting materials for his future works, particularly his “Bibliotheca Pontificia,” which he undertook at the solicitation of Gabriel Naude“, and published at Lyons in 1642; but this is by far the worst specimen of his talents, and has many ridiculous errors, which we can only ascribe to his having hastily copied erroneous catalogues, without consulting the books themselves. On his return to Paris he became librarian to de Gondi, afterwards cardinal de Retz, and was likewise appointed counsellor and almoner to the king. We find him then librarian to de Harlay, first president of the parliament of Paris, in whose house he lodged, and where he died May 10, 1670. He was a man of great industry and application, and continually employed in inquiries into the history of literature and literary men; but he was deficient in critical taste, undertook too many things at once, and hence committed errors which have thrown a suspicion on the general accuracy of all his works. Niceron has enumerated thirty-seven of his publications, of which the principal are, 1.” Bibliotheca Pontificia,“already mentioned, Lyons, 1643, 4to. 2.” Traite“des plus belles Bibliotheques du monde,” Paris, 1644, 8vo. 3. “Bibliotheca Parisina, hoc est Catalogus omnium librorum Parisiis annis 1643 & 1644 inclusive excusorum,” Paris, 1645, 4to. This catalogue, for such it simply is, without any thing but the titles of the books, he continued to the year 1650; and by way of supplement compiled his “Bibliotheca Gallica universalis,” for the same or a greater number of years, including books published in other parts of France. 4. “De Claris Scriptoribus Cabilonensibus, libri tres,” 1652, 4to. Among the many plans which he meditated, one was an universal library of French authors, which he is said to have compiled, but what became of it is not known. If completed, as Mr. Dibdin says, in 1638, it could not have been a work of much accuracy, for he had then scarcely attained his thirtieth year, and published long afterwards works which sufficiently shew that he never attained much experience and correctness in his researches.

, a professor of physic and philosophy at Copenhagen, was born in July 1650-1, at Arhusen in the peninsula of Jutland, where his father was bishop, who took all possible care of his son’s education; but dying in 1671, he was sent by his mother, the famous Caspar Bartholin’s daughter, to the university of Copenhagen, where he took the usual degrees, and then travelled to France, Italy, Germany, Hungary, England, and the Netherlands, with a view to improve himself in his profession. On his return home in 1679, he received letters from his prince, appointing him professor of physic and philosophy in the capital of his kingdom. He entered upon the discharge of this post in 1680, and performed the functions of it with the highest reputation; so that, besides the honour conferred on him by the university, Christian V. king of Denmark, committed to him the charge of augmenting and putting into order that celebrated cabinet of curiosities which his predecessors bad begun; and Frederic IV. in 1698, made him a counsellor in his court of justice. Thus loaded with honours, as well as beloved and respected by his compatriots, he passed his days in tranquillity, till the loss of his wife, Anne Marguerete, daughter of Thomas Bartholin, who, after seventeen years of marriage, died in 1698, leaving him father of six boys. This threw him into a melancholy, which at length proved fatal. In vain he sought for a remedy, by the advice of his friends, in a second marriage with Anne Tistorph: his melancholy increased; and, after languishing under it near three years, he died, in 1701, at the age of fifty-one.

His works are as follow: 1. “De Ranis dissertatio, Romae,” 1676, of which a better edition was published at Paris in 1682, 8vo. 2. “Bartholomei Scalae equitis Florentini historia Florentinorum,” &c. Romae, 1677: the famous Magliabecchi furnished him with this ms. from the Medicean library. 3. “Oratio in obitum Tho, Bartholini,” 1681. 4. “Compendium institutionum medicarum,” Hafniae, 1684, 8vo. 5. “De Ranis & Lacertis dissertatio,” 1686. 6. “Francisci Ariosti de oleo mentis Zibinii, seu petroleo agri Mutinensis,” &c. 1690. 7. “Panegyricus Christiano Vto dictus,” 1691. 8. “Gaudia Arctoi orbis ob thalamos augustos Frederici & Ludovicae,” 1691. 9. “Museum regium, sive catalogus rerum, &c. quee in basilica bibliotheca Christiani V. Hafnise asservantur,” 1696, fol. reprinted with valuable additions in 1710. He had af great talent for poetry, and composed several excellent poems upon various subjects, some of which have been published. He left the character of a good husband, a good master, a good neighbour, and a good friend.

, bishop of Lucera, was employed in various important affairs by Sixtus IV. and his successors, and created cardinal in 1517, by Leo X. He died July 2, 1527, aged 84. He left a “Treatise on the Councils,” in Latin, which is sold very dear, though justly considered by the learned as worth very little. It is in the last volume of P. Labbe’s councils; the first edition is Rome, 1538, fol. but the edition of Paris., made for Labbe’s councils, is the only one which is esteemed, and no copy of Labbe can be complete without it. The re-impression of Venice is not valued.

, commonly called Lucas Van Leyden, and by the Italians, Luca d'Ollanda, was born at Leyden, 1494. He was the disciple of his father Hugh Jacobs, and after him of Cornelius Engelbrecht, and distinguished himself in very early life as a painter and engraver. With fewer faults than his contemporaries, he possessed qualities to them unknown, more freshness and mellowness of colour, more aerial perspective, and equal dexterity in oil, distemper, and on glass. He delighted in subjects of extensive composition, though he was ignorant of light and shade in masses. His forms, like those of Albert Durer, are implicit copies of the model, but with less variety and less intelligence, lank, meagre, ignoble. Of expression he had little more than the vulgar grimace. Though he was without attention or knowledge of the costume in the general attire of his figures, his drapery is often ample and broad, but rather snapt than folded. Many pictures of this master in oil and distemper still exist in public places and private collections, at Leyden, Amsterdam, Paris, Vienna, and elsewhere. His name, however, chiefly survives in the numerous prints which he engraved with equal diligence and facility of touch. He died in 1533.

, an ancient Italian poet, a contemporary and friend of Dante, whose true name was Jacopo de' Benedetti, was born at Todi of a noble family. Late in life he became a widower, upon which he distributed his wealth to the poor, and entered into the order of minors, where, through humility, he remained always in the class of servitors. He died, at a very advanced age, in 1306; and the reputation of sanctity he had acquired procured him the title of The happy. He composed sacred canticles, full of fire and zeal; which are still admired in Italy, notwithstanding their uncultivated style, which abounds with barbarous words, from the Calabrian, Sicilian, and Neapolitan dialects. He wrote also some poems of the same stamp in Latin, and was the author of the “Stabat Mater.” The completest edition of his canticles is that of Venice, printed in 1617, in quarto, with notes.

, an eminent Protestant divine, and celebrated preacher, was born December 16, 1647, at Vassy, of which place his father was minister. He distinguished himself so much by his studies that he was ordained at the age of twenty-one, and appointed colleague, and assistant to his father. On the revocation of the edict of Nantes, Jacquelot quitted France, and retiring to Heidelberg, received public marks of favour from the electress Palatine. He went afterwards to the Hague, where he gained great reputation by his sermons; and the king of Prussia being in that city, and having heard him preach, desired to have him far his French chaplain at Berlin, and settled a large pension upon him. Jaequelot went into Prussia, 17>02, and died at Berlin, October 15, 1708. His works are, 1. “Traite de l'Existence de Dieu,” Amsterdam, 1697, 4to. 2. “Dissertations sur le Messie,” Hague, 1699, 8vo. 3. Three books against Bayle’s Dictionary; the first entitled '“Conformite de la Foi avec la Raison,” 8vothe second, “Examen de la Theologie de M. Bayle,” I2nio; and the third, “Reponse aux Entretiens composes par M. BayLe,” 12mo. 4. “Traitede l'Inspiration des Livres Sacres,” 1715, 8vo, two parts, the first of which is excellent. To these may be added two small pamphlets, entitled, “Avis sur le Tableau du Socinianisme.” This last work occasioned much trouble to Jacquelot from Jurieu, author of the “Tableau du Socinianisme.” He wrote also twenty-eight “Letters” to the French bishops, persuading them to a mild conduct towards the Calvinists; and published “Sermons,” 2 vols. 12mo. All his works are distinguished by learning and strength of argument, but are thought to be defective in method.

, a Lutheran divine, was born at Stutgard, 1647, of a father who was counsellor of the dispatches to the duke of Wirtemberg. After he had finished his studies, he was entrusted with the education of duke Eberhard III. with whom he travelled into Italy in 1676, as preceptor. This charge being completed, he taught philosophy and divinity; and in 1698 was nominated a counsellor to the duke of Wirtemberg. The following year he became consistorial counsellor and preacher. to the cathedral of Stutgard, and superintendant-general and abbot of the monastery of Adelberg. At last he was promoted in 1702 to the places of first professor of divinity, chancellor of the university, and provost of the church of Tubingen. He died in 1720. His principal works are, 1. “Ecclesiastical History compared with Profane History,” 2. “A System or Compendium of Divinity.” 3. “Several Pieces upon Mystic Divinity, in which he refutes Poiret, Fenelon,” &c. “4.” Observations upon Puffendorf and Grotius, de jure belli & pacis.“5.” A Treatise of Laws.“6.” An Examination of the life and doctrine of Spinosa.“7.” A Moral Theology," &c. All his works are in Latin.

, an English poet, descended of a Cornish family, was the third son of the rev. Richard Jago, rector of Beaudesert, or Beldesert, in Warwickshire, by Margaret, daughter of William Parker, gent, of Henley in Arden, and was born Oct. 1, 1715. He received his classical education under the rev. Mr. Crumpton, an excellent schoolmaster at Solihull in the same county, but one whose severity our poet has thought proper to record in his “Edge-hill.” At this school he formed an intimacy, which death only dissolved, with the poet Shenstone, whose letters to him have since been published. In their early days they probably exchanged their juvenile verses, and afterwards communicated to each other their more serious studies and pursuits. Somerville also appears to have encouraged our author’s first attempts, which were made at a yet earlier period, when under his father’s humble roof. From school he was entered as a servitor of University college, Oxford, where Shenstone, then a commoner of Pembroke, the late rev. Richard Greaves, Mr. Whistler, and others who appear among Shenstone’s correspondents, showed him every respect, notwithstanding the inferiority of his rank. A young man of whatever merit, who was servitor, was usually visited, if visited at all, with secrecy, but this prejudice is now so much abolished that the same circumspection is not thought necessary. He took his master’s degree July 9, 1738, having entered into the church the year before, and served the curacy of Snitterfield, near Stratford-upon-Avon. His father died in 1740. In 1744, or according to Shenstone’s letters, in 1743, he. married Dorothea Susanna Fancourt, daughter of the rev. Fancourt of Kimcote in Leicestershire, a young lady whom he had known from her childhood.

For several years after his marriage, he resided at Harbury, to which living he was presented in 1746; lord Willoughby de Broke gave him also the living of Chesterton, at a small distance from Harbury. These two benefices together did not produce more than one hundred pounds a year. In 1751 he had the misfortune to lose his wife, who appears to have been an amiable and accomplished woman, and was left with the care of seven very young children. In 1754, lord Clare, the late earl Nugent, procured for him from Dr. Madox, bishop of Worcester, the vicarage of Snitterfield, worth about 140l. In 1759 he married a second wife, Margaret, daughter of James Underwood, esq. of Rudgely, in Staffordshire, who survived him, but by whom he had no children.

Some of his smaller pieces of poetry had before this time been inserted in Dodsley’s collection, but he put in for higher claims, by publishing the poem of “Edgehill,” in 1767; and in 1768, his more popular fable of “Labour and Genius.” In 1771 he was presented by his kind patron lord Willoughby de Broke, to the living of Kimcote, formerly held by his first wife’s father, which being worth near 300l. a year, enabled him to maintain his family with ease and comfort, especially as he retained Snitterfield, and resigned only the trifling living of Harbury. During the latter part of his life, when the infirmities of age made their approach, he resided almost entirely at Snitterfield, where he amused himself with improving the vicarage-house, and ornamenting his grounds, a taste he probably caught from Shenstone, but which he contrived to indulge at a much less expence. He died after a short illness, May 8th, 1781, aged sixty-five years, and was buried according to his desire, in a vault which he had made for his family in the church at Snitterfield. Three of his daughters, by the first wife, survived him.

His personal character is thus given by his biographer “Mr. Jago, in his person, was about the middle stature. In his manner, like most people of sensibility, he appeared reserved among strangers; amongst his friends he was free and easy; and his conversation sprightly and entertaining. In domestic life, he was the affectionate husband, the tender parent, the kind master, the hospitable neighbour, and sincere friend; and both by his doctrine and example, a faithful and worthy minister of the parish over which he presided.”

In 1784, his poems, as corrected, improved, and enlarged by the author a short time before his death, with some additional pieces, were published by his friend, the late John Scott Hylton, esq. of Lapall- house near Hales Owen, who was likewise the correspondent of Shenstone. To this publication Mr. Hylton prefixed some account of Jago’s life, which, however meagre and unsatisfactory, is all that can now be procured. A very few particulars, indeed, but perhaps’ of no great importance, have been gleaned from Shenstone’s Letters, &c. His life, it may be presumed, was that of a man not dependent on fame, and whose productions formed the amusement of his leisure hours. It would appear by one of Shenstone' s letters that he occasionally used his pencil as well as his pen. His rank as a poet cannot be thought very high. Yet we have few more beautiful specimens of tenderness and sensibility than in, his elegies on the Blackbirds and Goldfinches. The fable of “Labour and Genius” has a pleasing mixture of elegance and humour. The “Elegy on Blackbirds” appeared first in the “Adventurer,” to the editor of which it was sent by Gilbert West, and published as his. The author claimed it, however, when added to Dodsley’s collection, a circumstance which Dr. Johnson has noted, but not with sufficient precision, in his life of that excellent man. Even when Mr. Jago put his name to it, a manager of the Bath theatre endeavoured to make it pass for his own, and with great effrontery asserted that Jago was a fictitious name Adopted from the play of Othello. His longest poem, “Edge-hill,” has some passages not destitute of animation, but it is so topographically exact, that to enjoy it the reader must have a map constantly before him; and perhaps with that aid, if he is not conversant with the various scenery, the effect will be languor and indifference. Even his friend Shenstone seems to speak coldly of it. “You must by no means lay aside the thoughts of perfecting Edge-hill, at your leisure. It is possible, that in order to keep clear of. flattery, I have said less in its favour than I really ought but I never considered it otherwise than as a poem which it was very adviseable for you to complete and finish.” Shenstone did not live to see it published in its finished state; and whatever his objections, probably bestowed the warmest praise on the tender and simple episode of Lydia and the blind lover, taken from a story in the Tatler.

His other pieces require no distinct notice. Shenstone, in a letter dated 1759, mentions an “Essay on Electricity,” written by Jago, but whether published we have not been able to discover. In 1755 he printed a very sensible and seasonable discourse, entitled “The Causes of Impenitence considered, preached at Harbury, May 4, 1755, on occasion of a conversation said to have passed between one of the inhabitants and an apparition, in the church-yard belonging to that place.” From this incident, which he does not consider it as his business either to confirm or disprove, he takes an opportunity to enforce the necessity of repentance. Another Sermon, 1763, is attributed to him in. Cooke’s Historical Register, of which we can find no mention any where else.

, a native of Chalcis in Ccelosyria, an eminent philosopher, flourished about the beginning of the fourth century, and was the scholar first of Anatolius, and afterwards of Porphyry. Having become perfect master of the mysteries of the Piotinian system, he taught it with great credit and success, and gained the profound reverence of his scholars by certain wonders which he professed to perform, by means of an intercourse with invisible beings. His writings discover extensive reading, but his style is deficient in accuracy and elegance, and he borrows freely from other writers, particularly Porphyry, without the smallest acknowledgment. His philosophical works are exceedingly obscure, but valuable as authentic documents respecting the Alexandrian school. Those extant are, “The Life of Pythagoras” “An exhortation to the study of Philosophy” “Three books on Mathematical learning” “A commentary upon Nicomachus’s Institutes of Arithmetic,” and a “Treatise on the Mysteries of the Egyptians, Chaldeans, and Assyrians.” The time and place of his death are uncertain; but it appears probable that he died about the year 333. This Jarnblicus must be distinguished from the person of the same name, to whom the emperor Julian dedicates his epistles; for Julian was scarcely born at the time when Porphyry’s successor died.

The school of Jamblicus produced many eclectic philosophers, who were dispersed through various parts of the Roman empire. But the fate of one of their number, Sopater, who was put to death by order of the emperor (probably for insidious practices against the peace of the state), and the discredit into which the Pagan theology was now, through the general spread of Christianity, almost universally fallen, induced these philosophers to propagate their tenets, and practise their mysteries, with caution and concealment. In this state of depression the sect continued through the reigns of Constantine and Constantius. But under the emperor Julian, who apostatised from the Christian faith, the Alexandrian sect revived, and again flourished in great vigour. The best editions of Jamblicus’s works are those “De Myst. Ægypt. Chald. et Assyr. necnon et alii Tractatus Philosophici,” printed by Aldus, at Venice, 1497, fol. “De Myst Ægypt, necnon Porphyrii Epistola, &.c. Gr. et Lat. ex Interpretatione et cum Notis Thomae Gale,” Oxon. 1678, fol.; and “De Vita Pythag. Liber. Gr. et Lat. ex emendatione et cum notis Ludolphi Kusteri,” Amster. 1707, 4to.

king of Scotland, of the house of Stuart, was born in 1394. In 1405 his father Robert III. sent him to France, in order that he might escape the dangers to which he was exposed from his uncle the duke of Albany, but being taken by an English squadron, he and his whole suite were carried prisoners to the Tower of London. Here the young prince received an excellent education, to which Henry IV. of England was remarkably attentive, thereby making some atonement for his injustice in detaining him. Sir John Pelham, a man of worth and learning was appointed his governor, under whose tuition he made so rapid a progress, that he soon became a prodigy of talents and accomplishments. Robert died in the following year, and James was proclaimed king, but during the remainder of the reign of Henry IV. and the whole of that of Henry V. he was kept in confinement, with a view of preventing the strength of Scotland from being united to that of France against the English arms. At length, under the regency of the duke of Bedford, James was restored to his kingdom, having been full eighteen years a prisoner in this country. James was now thirty years of age, well furnished with learning, and a proficient in the elegant accomplishments of life, and dextrous in the manly exercises, which at that period were in high estimation. He married Joanna Beaufort, daughter of the duchess of Clarence, a lady of distinguished beauty, descended from the royal family of England; and on his return to Scotland, finding that the dujte of Albany and his son had alienated many of the most valuable possessions of the crown, instantly caused the whole of that family and their adherents to be arrested. The latter were chiefly discharged; but the late regent, his two sons, and his father-in-law, he caused to be convicted, executed, and their estates to be confiscated to the crown. Whatever other objections were made to James’s conduct, he procured the enactment of many good laws in his parliaments, which had a tendency to improve the state of society; but at the same time his desire of improving the revenues of the crown led him to many acts of tyranny, which rendered him odious to his nobility. In 1436 he gave his daughter Margaret in marriage to the dauphin of France, and sent with her a splendid train and a vast body of troops. The English, who had in vain attempted to prevent this union by negociation, now endeavoured to intercept the Scotch fleet in its passage, but they missed their object, and the princess arrived in safety at Rochelle. James, exasperated at this act of hostility, declared war against England, and summoned the whole array of his kingdom to assist in the siege of Roxburgh; which, however, he abandoned upon an intimation of a conspiracy being formed against himself by his own people. He now retired to the Carthusian monastery of Perth, which he had himself founded, where he lived in privacy, but this, instead of preventing, facilitated the suecess of the plot formed against his life. The chief actors in this tragedy were Robert Graham, and Walter earl of Athol, the king’s uncle. The former was actuated by revenge for the sufferings of some of his family, the latter by the hope of obtaining the crown for himself. The assassins obtained by bribery admission into the king’s apartments; the alarm was raised, and the ladies attempted to secure the chamber-door; one of them, Catharine Douglas, thrust her arm through a staple, making therewith a sort of bar, in which state she remained till it was dreadfully broken by the force of the assailants. The instant they got admission, they dragged the king from his concealment, and put him to death with a thousand wounds on Feb. 20, 1437, in the forty-fourth year of his age. He is introduced in this work chiefly on account of his literary reputation, for he was a poet as well as a sovereign, and his works, descriptive of the manners and pastimes of the age, were once extremely popular, and are still read with delight by those who can relish the northern dialect. He is said by all the British historians to have been a skilful musician; and it is asserted, that he not only performed admirably on the lute and harp, but was the inventor of many of the most ancient and favourite Scottish melodies, but this Dr. Burney is inclined to doubt. Where this prince acquired his knowledge in music is not ascertained; but it is probable that it was in France, in his passage home from which country he was taken prisoner by the English. Before the reformation we hear of no music being cultivated in Scotland but plain-song, or chanting in the church; nor afterwards, for a long time, except psalmody.

The genuine and ancient Scots melodies are so truly national, that they resemble no music of any other part of Europe. They seem to have been wholly preserved by tradition till the beginning of the last century, when a collection of Scots songs was published by a Mr. Thomson of Edinburgh, for which there was a very large subscription; and in February 1722, a benefit concert was advertised for the editor, to be terminated at the desire of several persons of quality, with a Scottish song. To this publication and concert may be ascribed the subsequent favour of their national, singular, and often touching melodies, south of the Tweed. Tassoni, indeed, (lib. x. cap. 22.) tells us, that “Jarnes I. king of Scotland, had not only composed sacred music, but invented a new species of plaintive melody different from all others in which he has beenimitated by the prince of Venosa; who,” he adds, “in our times has embellished music with many admirable inventions.” This assertion, says Dr. Burney, greatly increased our desire to examine works in which so many excellencies were concentred; particularly as we had long been extremely desirous of tracing the peculiarities of the national melodies of Scotland, from a higher source than David Rizzio. But in a very attentive perusal of all the several parts of the whole six books of the prince of Venosa’s madrigals, we were utterly unable to discover the least similitude or imitation of Caledonian airs in any one of them; which, so far from Scots melodies, seem to contain no melodies at all; nor, when scored, can we discover the least regularity of design, phraseology, rhythm, or, indeed, any thing remarkable in these madrigals, except unprincipled modulation, and the perpetual embarrassments and inexperience of an amateur, in the arrangement and filling up of the parts. As a poet, however, there is less room to doubt James’s talents. He has found abundance of editors, but no complete and accurate impression of his works has hitherto made its appearance. Mr. Park, in his excellent edition of the “Royal and Noble Authors,” has given a list of them, and more particulars may be found in our principal authorities.

king of England, and VI. of Scotland, was the son of the unfortunate Mary queen of Scotland, by her cousin Henry, lord Darnley, and was born at Edinburgh-castle in June 1566, at the time when his mother had fixed her affections on the earl of Bothwell; the young prince, however, was committed to the charge of the earl of Mar, and in the following year, his mother being forced to resign the crown, he was solemnly crowned at Stirling, and all public acts from that time ran in his name. He was educated by the celebrated Buchanan while he was at Stirling castle; his progress in school-learning was rapid, and he manifested talents which presaged the future great man: but he became the prey of flatterers, who urged him to unpopular measures, which in 1582 produced a conspiracy of the nobles against him, who took possession of his person at Ruthven castle. From thence he was conveyed to the palace of Holyrood-house, and treated with much external respect, while in reality he was held in the utmost restraint. A new confederacy of other nobles produced his liberation, and he put himself under the sway of his favourite the earl of Arran, who was violent and unprincipled, and who carried on measures of severity againsf the nobles of the former conspiracy, and against the clergy who favoured them. He contrived to engage the mind of the young king with a constant round of amusement, and he himself exercised with unlimited sway all the regal authority, and by his insolence and rapacity rendered himself universally odious. Queen Elizabeth of England had long employed her arts to maintain a party in the country, which policy was become more necessary on account of her conduct to its queen. Though James had hitherto been induced to treat his mother very irreverently, yet when her life appeared to be in imminent danger, from the sentence pronounced against her by an English court of judicature, he felt himself bound to interfere, and wrote a menacing letter to Elizabeth on the occasion. He also applied to other courts for their assistance, and assembled his own nobles, who promised to stand by him in preventing or avenging such an injustice. When he learned the fatal catastrophe, he rejected with a proper spirit of indignation the hypocritical excuses of Elizabeth, and set about preparations for hostilities; but reflecting on his own resources, which were inadequate to the purposes of carrying on a serious war, he resolved to resume a friendly correspondence with the English court. It is to the honour of James that one of the' first acts of his full iriajority, in 1587, was an attempt to put an end to all family feuds among the nobility, and personally to reconcile them with each other at a solemn festival in Holyrood-house. When the invasion of England was resolved upon by Philip, king of Spain, he put his kingdom into a state of defence, resolving to support the queen against her enemies. His people also were zealous for the preservation of Protestantism, and entered into a national bond for the maintenance of true religion, which was the origin and pattern of all future engagements of the kind, under the name of solemn leagues and covenants. In 1589 he married Anne, daughter of Frederic king of Denmark, and as contrary winds prevented her coming to Scotland, he went to fetch her, and passed the winter in a series of feasting and amusements at Copenhagen. On his return he was frequently in danger from conspiracies against his life, particularly from those excited by the earl of Bothwell. In 1600, while the country was in a state of unusual tranquillity, a very extraordinary event took place, the nature and causes of which were never discovered. While the king was upon a hunting excursion, he was accosted by the brother of Ruthven earl of Gowrie, who, by a feigned tale, induced him and a small train to ride to the earl’s house at Perth. Here he was led to a remote chamber on pretence of having a secret communicated td him, where he found a man in complete armour, and a dagger was put to his breast by lluthven, with threats of immediate death. His attendants were alarmed, and came to his relief; in the end Gowrie and his brother were slain, and the king escaped unhurt. In 1603, on the death of queen Elizabeth, James was proclaimed her successor, and proceeded, amidst the acclamations of his new subjects, to London. One of his first acts was to bestow a profusion of honours and titles upon the great men, as well of his own country as those of England. A conference held at Hampton-court in 1604, between the divines of the established church and the Puritans, afforded James a good opportunity of exhibiting his skill in theological controversy, and the ill-will he bore to popular schemes of church-government. Although the king had distinguished himself in his own country by lenity to the Roman Catholics, yet those of that religion in England were so much disappointed in their expectations of his favour, that a most atrocious plot was formed by the zealots of that party to bloxv up the House of Lords at the first meeting of parliament, and with it the king, queen, and prince of Wales, and all the principal nobility and gentry of the kingdom, and then to set upon the throne the young princess Elizabeth, and establish the Catholic religion. This plot was fortunately discovered on the eve of the designed execution, and the principal persons in it suffered the punishment dae to their crimes. His next object was to reduce Ireland to a settled form of law and government. fc

No circumstance, however, in James’s reign was more unpopular than his treatment of the celebrated sir Walter Raleigh, after the detection of a conspiracy with lord Grey, and lord Cobham, to set aside the succession in favour of Arabella Stuart: he was tried and capitally convicted, but being reprieved, he was kept thirteen years in prison. In 1615 he obtained by bribery his release from prison, but the king would not grant him a pardon. He went out on an expedition with the sentence of death hanging over his head; he was unsuccessful in his object, and on his return the king ordered him to be executed on his former sentence. James is supposed to have been more influenced to this deed by the court of Spain than by any regard to justice. The influence of that court on James appeared soon after in his negociations for marrying his son prince Charles to the infanta. The object was, however, not attained, and he afterwards married him to the French princess Henrietta, with the disgraceful stipulation, that the children of that marriage should be educated by their mother, a bigoted papist, till they were thirteen years of age. As he aavanced in years he was disquieted by a concurrence of untoward circumstances. The dissentions of his parliament were very violent, and the affairs of his son-in-law, the elector palatine, now king of Hungary, also were in a very disastrous state. He had undertaken the cause of the protestants of Germany, but instead of being the arbiter in the cause of others, he was stripped of his own dominions. In his defence, James declared war against the king of Spain and the emperor, and sent troops over to Holland to act in conjunction with prince Maurice for the recovery of the palatinate; but from mismanagement, the greater part of them perished by sickness, and the whole enterprise was defeated. Oppressed with grief for the failure of his plans, the king was seized with an intermitting fever, of which he died in March 1625. It would be difficult, says Hume, to find a reign less illustrious, yet more unspotted and unblemished, than that of James in both kingdoms. James possessed many virtues, but scarcely any of them pure or free from the contagion of neighbouring vices. His learning degenerated into pedantry and prejudice, his generosity into profusion, his good nature into pliability and unmanly fondness, his love of peace into pusillanimity, and his wisdom into cunning. His intentions were just, but more adapted to the conduct of private life than to the government of kingdoms. He was an encourager of learning, and was himself an author of no mean genius, considering the times in which he lived. His chief works were, “Basilicon Doron” and “The true Law of free Monarchies” but he is more known for his adherence to witchcraft and demoniacal possessions in his “Demonology,” and for his “Counterblast to Tobacco.” He was also a poet, and specimens of his talent, such as it was, are to be found in many of our miscellanies. He also wrote some rules and cautels t for the use of professors of the art, which, says Mr. Ellis, have been long, and perhaps deservedly disregarded. The best specimen of his poetical powers is his “Basilicon Doron,” which bishop Percy has reprinted in his “Reliques,” and declares that it would not dishonour any writer of that time. Both as a man of learning, and as a patron of learned men, sufficient justice, in our opinion, has never been done to the character of James I.; and although a discussion on the subject would extend this article too far, it would not be difficult to prove that in both respects he was entitled to a considerable degree of veneration.

, a learned English critic and divine, was born about 1571, at Newport in the Isle of Wight; and, being put to Winchester-school, became a scholar upon the foundation, and thence a fellow of New college in Oxford, 1593. He commenced M. A. in 1599; and the same year, having collated several Mss. of the Philobiblion of Richard of Durham, he published it in 4to at Oxford, with an appendix of the Oxford Mss. and dedicated it:o sir Thomas Bodley, apparently to recommend himself to the place of librarian to him, when he should have completed his design. Meanwhile James proceeded with the same spirit to publish a catalogue of all the Mss. in each college- library of both universities and in the compiling of it, having free access to the Mss. at Oxford, he perused them carefully, and, when he found any society careless of them, he borrowed and took away what he pleased, and put them into the public library. These instances of his taste and turn to books effectually procured him the designation of the founder to be the first keeper of the public library; in which office he was confirmed by the university in 1602. He filled this post with great applause and commencing D. D. in 1614, was promoted to the subdeanery of Wells by the bishop of that see. About the same time, the archbishop of Canterbury also presented him to the rectory of Mongeham in Kent, together with other spiritual preferments. These favours were undeniably strong evidences of his distinguished merit, being conferred upon him without any application on his part. In 1620, he was made a justice of the peace; and the same year resigned the place of librarian, and applied himself more intensely to his studies. Of what kind these were, we learn thus from himself: “I have of late,” says he in a letter, May 23, 1624, to a friend, “given myself to the reading only of manuscripts, and in them I find so many and so pregnant testimonies, either fully for our religion, or against the papists, that it is to be wondered at.” In another letter to archbishop Usher, the same year, he assures the primate he had restored 300 citations and rescued them from corruptions, in thirty quires of paper. He had before written to Usher upon the same subject, Jan. 28, 1623, when having observed that in Sixtus Sinensis, Alphonsus de Castro, and Antoninus’s Summae, there were about 500 bastard brevities and about 1000 places in the true authors which are corrupted, that he had diligently noted, and would shortly vindicate them out of the Mss. being yet only conjectures of the learned, be proceeds to acquaint him, that he had gotten together the flower of the English divines, who would voluntarily join with him in the search. “Some fruits of their labours,” continues he, “if your lordship desires, I will send up. And might I be but so happy as to have other 12 thus bestowed, four in transcribing orthodox writers, whereof we have plenty that for the substantial points have maintained our religion (40l. or 50l. would serve); four to compare old prints with the new; four other to compare the Greek translations by the papists, as Vedelius hath done with Ignatius, wherein he hath been somewhat helped by my pains; I would not doubt but to drive the papists out of all starting-holes. But alas! my lord, I have not encouragement from our bishops. Preferment I seek none at their hands; only 40l. or 60l. per ann. for others is that I seek, which being gained, the cause is gained, notwithstanding their brags in their late books.” In the convocation held with the parliament at Oxford in 1625, of which he was a member, he moved to have proper commissioners appointed to collate the Mss. of the fathers in all the libraries in England, with the popish editions, in order to detect the forgeries in the latter. This project not meeting with the desired encouragement, he was so thoroughly persuaded of the great advantage it would be both to the protestant religion and to learning, that, arduous as the task was, he set about executing it himself. We may form a probable conjecture of his plan, from a passage in the just cited letter to Usher, where he expresses himself thus: “Mr. Briggs will satisfy you in this and sundry other projects of mine, if they miscarry not for want of maintenance: it would deserve a prince’s purse. If I was in Germany, the state would defray all charges. Cannot our estates supply what is wanting? If every churchman that hath 100 per annum and upwards, will lay down but Is. for every hundred towards these public works, I will undertake the reprinting of the fathers, and setting forth of five or six orthodox writers, comparing of books printed with printed or written; collating of popish translations in Greek; and generally whatsoever shall concern books or the purity of them. I will take upon me to be a magister of S. Patalii in England, if I be thereunto lawfully required.”

He had made good progress in this undertaking, and no doubt would have proceeded much farther towards completing his design, had not he been prevented by death. This happened August 1629. He was buried towards the upper end of New college chapel at Oxford. Wood informs us, that he left behind him the character of being the most industrious and indefatigable writer against the papists, that had been educated in Oxford since the reformation; and in reality his designs were so great, and so well known to be for the public benefit of learning and the church of England, that Camden, speaking of him in his ife-time, calls him “a learned man and a true lover of books, wholly dedicated to learning; who is now laboriously searching the libraries of England, and proposeth that for the public good which will be for the great benefit of England.”

His works are, 1. “Philobiblion R. Dunelmensis,” 1599, 4to. 2. “Ecloga Oxonio-Cantabrigiensis,” Lond. 1600, 4to. 3. “Cyprianus Redivivus, &c.” printed with the “Ecloga.” 4. “Spicilegium divi Augustini hoc est, libri de fide ad Pet. Diacon. collatio & castigatio,” printed also with the “Ecloga.” 5. “Bellum papale seu concordia discors Sext. V. & dementis VIII. circa Hieronym. Edition.” Lond. 1600, 4to, and 1678, 8vo. 6. “Catalogus Librorum in Bibliotheca Bodleiana,” Oxford, 1605, 4to, reprinted with many additions in 1620, 4to, to which was added an appendix in 1636: in this catalogue is inserted that of all the Mss. then in the Bodleian library. 7. “Concordantiae Ss. patrum, i.e. vera & pialibri Canticorum per patres universes, &c.” Oxford, 1607, 4to. 8. “Apology for John Wickliffe, &c.” Oxford, 1608, 4to to this is added the “Life of John Wickliffe.” 9. “A Treatise of the Corruption of Scriptures, Councils, and Fathers, &c.” Lond. 1611, 4to, and 1688, 8vo; this is reckoned his principal work. It is amply analyzed by Oldys in his “Librarian.” 10. “The Jesuits’ Downfall threatened for their wicked lives, accursed manners, heretical doctrine, and more than Machiavelian policy,” Oxford, 1612, 4to; to this is added “The Life of father Parsons, an English Jesuit.” 11. “Filius Papae papalis,” ch. 1. Lond. 1621; translated from Latin into English by William Crashaw: the author’s name is not put to it 12. “Index generalis sanct, Patrum ad singulos versus cap. v. secundum Matthseum, &c.” Lond. 1624, 8vo. 13. “Notae ad Georg. Wicelium de methodo concordiae ecclesiasticae,” &c. 1695, 8vo. 14. “Vindiciae Gregorianae, seu restitutus Gregorius Magnus ex Mss. &c. de Genevas,” 1625. 15. “Manuduction, or Introduction unto Divinity, &c.” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 16. “Humble and earnest Request to the Church of England, for and in the behalf of books touching Religion,” in one sheet, 1625, 8vo. 17. “Explanation or enlarging of the Ten Articles in his Supplication lately exhibited to the clergy of the church of England,” Oxford, 1625, 4to. 18. “Specimen Corruptelarum poutificiorum in Cypriano, Ambrosio, Greg. Magno, &c.” Lond. 1626. 19. “Index librorum prohibitorum a pontificiis, Oxford,” 1627, 8vo. 20. “Admonitio ad theologos protestantes de libris pontificiorum caute legendis,” ms. 21. “Enchiridion theologicum,” ms. 22. “Liber de suspicionibus & conjecturis,” ms. These three Wood says he saw in the Lambeth library, under D. 42, 3; but whether printed, says he, I know not, perhaps the “Enchiridion” is. Dr. James likewise translated, from French into English, “The Moral Philosophy of the Stoics,” Lond. 1598, 8vo; and published two short treatises against the order of begging friars, written by Wickliffe; with a book entitled “Fiscus papalis, sive catalogus indulgentiarum,” &c. Lond. 1617, 4to: but some were of opinion this book was published by William Crashaw, already mentioned. Several letters of our author are in the appendix to Parr’s “Life of Usher.”

, nephew of the preceding, was born at Newport, in the Isle of Wight, in 1592, and admitted a scholar of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, Sept. 23, 1608. In October 1611, he took the degree of B A. and in Jan. 1615, that of M. A. in which year also he became probationer fellow of his college. Having entered into holy orders, he preached frequently, and arrived to the degree of bachelor in divinity. Upon what occasion we know not, he travelled abroad; and was in Russia, in 1619, a tour to which country was very uncommon in those days. He was esteemed to be well versed in most parts of learning, and was noted, among his acquaintance, as a good Grecian and poet, an excellent critic, antiquary, and divine; and was admirably skilled i'n the Saxon and Gothic languages. As for his preaching, it was not approved of by any of the university, excepting by some of the graver sort. Of three sermons, delivered by him before the academics, one of them, concerning the observation of Lent, was without a text, according to the most ancient manner; another was against it, and a third beside it; “shewing himself thereby,” says Anthony Wood, “a humourous person.” Selden was much indebted to him for assistance in the composition of his “Marmora Arundeliana,” and acknowledges him, in the preface to that book, to be “Vir multijugae studiique indefatigabilis.” Mr. James also exerted the utmost labour and diligence in arranging and classifying sir Robert Cotton’s library; and it is somewhat singular that bishop Nicolson imputes the same kind of blame to him, of which Osborn, the bookseller, more coarsely accused Dr. Johnson, when compiling the Harieian Catalogue, viz. “that being greedy of making extracts out of the books of our history for his own private use, he passed carelessly over a great many very valuable volumes.” Nothing was wantnig to him, and to the encouragement of his studies, but a sinecure or a prebend; if he had obtained either of which, Wood says, the labours of Hercules would have seen/ted to be a trifle. Sir Symonds D'Ewes has described him as an atheistical profane scholar, but otherwise witty and moderately learned. “He had so screwed himself,” adds sir Symonds, “into the good opinion of sir Robert Cotton, that whereas at first he only permitted him the use of some of his books; at last, some two or three years before his death, he bestowed the custody of his whole library on him. And he being a needy sharking companion, and very expensive, like old sir Ralph Starkie when he lived, let out, or lent out, sir Robert Cotton’s most precious manuscripts for money, to any that would be his customers; which,” says sir Symonds, “1 once made known to sir Robert Cotton, before the said James’s face.” The whole of these assertions may be justly suspected. His being an atheistical profane scholar does not agree with Wood’s account of him, who expressly asserts that he was a severe Calvinist; and as to the other part of the accusation, it is undoubtedly a strong circumstance in Mr. James’s favour, that he continued to be trusted, protected, and supported, by the Cotton family to the end of his clays. (See our account of Sir Robert Cotton, vol. X. p. 326 et seqq.) This learned and laborious man fell a victim to intense study, and too abstemious and mortified a course of living. His uncle, Dr. Thomas James, in a letter to Usher, gives the following character of him: “A kinsman of mine is at this present, by my direction, writing Becket’s life, wherein it shall be plainly shewed, both out of his own writings, and those of his time, that he was not, as he is esteemed, an arch-saint, but an archrebel; and that the papists have been not a little deceived by him. This kinsman of mine, as well as myself, should be right glad to do any service to your lordship in this kind. He is of strength, and well both able and learned to effectuate somewhat in this kind, critically seen both in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, knowing well the languages both French, Spanish, and Italian, immense and beyond all other men in reading of the Mss. of an extraordinary style in penning; such a one as I dare balance with any priest or Jesuit in the world of his age, and such a one as I could wish your lordship had about you; but paupertas inimica bonis est monbus, and both fatherless and motherless, and almost (but for myself) I may say (the: more is pity) friendless.”

Mr. James published several Latin sermons, as, 1. “Anti-Possevinus, sive Concio habita ad Clerum in Acad. Oxon. an. 1625, in 2 Tim. iv. 13.” Oxford, 1625, in 4to. 2. “Concio habita ad Clerum Oxon. de Ecclesia, in Matth. xvi. 18,” Oxford, 1633, in 4to. And several English sermons, as, l “Sermon concerning the Eucharist, delivered on Easter- Day, in Oxford, on Matth. xxvi. ver. 26, 27, 28,” London, 1629, in 4to. 2. “History of Preaching, or concerning the Apostles’ preaching and ours, on 1 Cor. ix. 16,” London, 163O, 4to. 3. “Sermon concerning the observation of Lent-fast,” London, 1630, 4to. There is no text prefixed to this sermon, but it is grounded on Luke iv. 2. 4. “Sermon concerning the times of receiving the Sacrament, and of mutual Forgiveness, delivered in Corpus Christi college at the election of a president, on 1 Cor. xi. 25.” London, 1632, 4to. 5. “Apologetical Essay for the Righteousness of a miserable unhappy People, preached at St. Mary’s in Oxford on Psalm xxxvii. 25,” London, 1632, 4to. He published also “Poemata qutedam in mortem clarissimi Viri Roberti Cottoni & Thomae Allen,” Oxford, 1633, in 4to. With these poems he published sir Thomas More’s Epistle written from Abingdon in Berkshire in 1519 to the university of Oxford, for the cultivation of the Greek tongue, which had been for many years neglected among the members of it. He likewise translated into English Minutius Felix’s “Octavius,” Oxford, 1636, 12mo. All the above-mentioned pieces, except the translation of the “Octavius,” he gave bound up in one volume to the Bodleian library, with a copy of verses of his composition written in a spare leaf before the first of them, beginning thus:

“Dear God, by whom in dark womb’s shade I am to fear and wonder made, &c.”

He wrote these verses, when he was closely confined by order of the House of Lords. He left behind him about 45 manuscripts either of his own composition, or collected by him from various authors, all written by his own hand, which came first into the hands of his friend Dr. Thomas Greaves, and afterwards into the Bodleian library. Those of his own composition are, 1. “Decanonizatio Thomae Cautuariensis & suorum,” folio. This book, containing 760 pages, begins thus “Viam regiam rnihi patefacit ad decanonizationem ficti & fucati Martyris,” &c. and the beginning of the epistle to the reader is this, “Amice Lector, rogatus sum ssepius,” &c. 2. “Comment, in Evangelia S. Johannis,” in two parts, 4to. The beginning- is, “Postmodo ad textum sacrse histories deveniam, ubi prius,” &c. Both parts contain about twelve sheets. 3. “Notae in aliquot loca Bibliae,” in three sheets, 4to. The beginning is, “Videte sub ficu, Paraphrastes sub umbrosa ficu,” &c. 4. “Antiquitates Insulae Victae,” in seventeen pages, 4to. The beginning is “Angli Saxones Marciarum,” &c. and of the epistle to the reader, “Utrum moriar priusquam hoc opus perfieiam, Deus novit,” &c. It is only a specimen or a foundation for a greater work to be built upon. 5. “Epistoiae ad ainicos suos doctos.” The beginning of the first epistle, which was written to Dr. Sebast. Benefield of Corpus Christi college, is, “Sancte Deus,” &c. This manuscript is a thick 4to, and contains epistles chiefly written to those of his own college, epitaphs, and some English copies of verses. 6. “Epigrams in Latin and English,” with other “Poems.” 7. “Reasons concerning the attempts on the Lives of great Personages,” &c. These reasons, which are six or more, have this beginning, “Sir, if you please to learn my mind concerning the attempts on the lives of great personages,” &c. written in two sheets folio. 8. “Two Sermons: the first on James v. 14, the second on John xii. 32,” both written in folio. 9. “Iter Lancastrense.” It is in English verse, and was written in 1636, and hath this beginning, “High Holt of Wood,” &c. It contains two sheets and a half. 10. “Glossarium Saxonicum-Anglicum. It is a long pocket-book. 11.” Glossarium Sax. Angl.“another part in 8vo. 12.” A Russian Dictionary, with the English to it. 13. “Observations made in his Travels through some parts of Wales, Scotland, on Shetland, Greenland,” &c. in four sheets, 4to. 14. “Observations made on the Countrey, with the Manners and Customs of Russia or Rusland,” ann. 1619, 8vo. It was intended to be transcribed, and to have other things added to it. Besides these fourteen books, Mr. Wood had another of “Epigrams,” chiefly in Latin, and some in Greek, in 8vo, dedicated to his tutor Dr. Sebast. Benefield. His collections are in twenty-four volumes in 4to, and seven in folio, and contain for the most part notes from ancient manuscripts, and sometimes from printed authors, relating to history and antiquity.

, an English physician of great eminence, and particularly distinguished by the preparation of a celebrated fever-powder, was born at Kinverston in Staffordshire, A. D. 1703. His’ father was a major in the army, his mother a sister of sir Robert Clarke. He was educated at St. John’s college in Oxford, where he took the degree of A. B. anc! afterwards practised physic successively at Sheffield, Li'jhneld, and Birmingham. He then removed to London, and became a licentiate in the college of physicians; but in what year we cannot say. At London, he applied himself to writing, as well as practising physic; and, in 1743, published a “Medicinal Dictionary,” 3 vols. folio. Soon after, he published an English translation, with a supplement by himself, of “Ramazzini de morbis artificum;” to which he also prefixed a piece of Frederic Hoffman upon “Endemial Distempers,” 8vo. In 1746, “The Practice of Physic,” 2 vols. 8vo; ia 1760, “On Canine Madness,” 8vo; in 1764, “A Dispensatory,” 8vo. On June 25, 1755, when the king was at Cambridge, James was admitted by mandamus to the doctorship of physic. In 1778, were published “A Dissertation upon Fevers,” and “A Vindication of the FeverPowder,” 8vo; with “A short Treatise on the Disorders of Children,” and a very good print of Dr. James. This was the eighth edition of the “Dissertation,” of which the first was printed in 1751; and the purpose of it was, to set forth the success of this powder, as well as to describe more particularly the manner of administering it. The “Vindication” was posthumous and unfinished: for he died at his house in Bruton-street, March 23, 1776, while he was employed upon it. The editor informs us, that “it is only a part of a much larger tract, which included a defence of his own character and conduct in his profession; and was occasioned,” he says, “by the violent and calumnious attacks of his brethren of the faculty.”

The affectionate remembrance of Dr. James, by Johnson in his Life of Smith, deserves to be preserved among the honourable testimonies to the character of the former. “At this man’s table,” says the biographer, speaking of Mr. Walinsley, “I enjoyed many cheerful and instructive hours, with companions such as are not of‘teh found; with one who has lengthened, and one who has gladdened life; with Dr. James, whose skill in physic will be long remembered: and with David Garrick, whom I hoped to have gratified with this character of our common friend: ’but what are the hopes of man” &c. -It appears from the life of Johnson, that he had gained some knowledge of physic from James, which he in return made useful to his friend, by assisting him in his Medicinal Dictionary. “My knowledge of physic,” said he, “I learnt from Dr. James, whom I helped in writing the proposals for his dictionary, and also a little in the dictionary itself.” Boswell adds, “I have in vain endeavoured to find out what parts Johnson wrote for Dr. James. Perhaps medical men may.” There can be very little doubt, from the style of the address, that the dedication of that work to Dr. Mead belongs entirely to the pen of Johnson. The elegance and originality of the compliments in it sufficiently mark the hand of that great master. It may not be amiss to insert it here, as a model of dedicatory address, highly honourable to Dr. James if his own, and creditable even to have deserved from Johnson.

"Sir, That the Medicinal Dictionary is dedicated to you, is to be imputed only to your reputation for superior skill in those sciences which I have endeavoured to explain and facilitate: and you are therefore to consider this address, if it be agreeable to you, as one of the rewards of merit; and if otherwise, as one of the inconveniences of eminence. However you shall receive it, my design cannot be disappointed; because this public appeal to your judgment will shew, that I do not found my hopes of approbation upon the ignorance of my readers, and that I fear his censure least, whose knowledge is most extensive. I am, sir, &c.

The dictionary is, in effect, considered as a work highly honourable to the author, and retains its credit unimpaired after the continued progress and improvements of medicine for several years. Dr. Johnson certainly held James in high esteem, and though he did not burst out into any passionate exclamation of grief, on reading of his death (as his biographer relates), he doubtless felt considerable regret, as appeared not only by his manner of returning to the subject; but by his mention of him above-cited from the life of Smith. The regret which remains upon the mind after reflection, is as sincere, if not as violent, as that which shews itself at first in impatient lamentations. “No man,” said he, on some occasion, “brings more mind to his profession than James” and undoubtedly no man was better able to judge of mind, than the person who pronounced that opinion.

Dr. James was rough in his manners, and, if not very generally misrepresented, far from temperate in his habits; but strong sense usually appeared in his coarse expressions, and no man had more sagacity, when his head was clear, which of a morning was always the case. Several whimsical stories, perhaps of no precise authority, are told of his evening prescriptions: and he is said, in comparing his patient’s pulse with his own, sometimes to have confused the two; and, finding that one was quickened by intemperance, to have bluntly accused the patient, perhaps a delicate lady, of being in liquor. But James, whatever failings he might have, was without doubt an able and acute physician, and his dictionary will remain a noble monument of his industry and knowledge. His person had not more delicacy than his manners, being large and gross.

His fever powder was for a long time violently opposed by the faculty, who, as the composition was kept a secret, considered it as a nostrum, and refused to prescribe or countenance it. The admirable effects experienced from it forced it into general use, and it is now considered as the most efficacious medicine for fevers that is known. Dr. Pearson, who, in the Philosophical Transactions,vol. LXXXI. took great pains to analyze it, concludes that “by calcining bone ashes, that is, phosphorated lime, with antimony in a certain proportion, and afterwards exposing the mixture to a white heat, a compound may be formed containing the same ingredients, in the same proportion, and possessing the same chemical properties;” and the London Pharmacopoeia of 1788 contains a prescription, under the title of Pulvis Antimonialis, which is intended to answer the same purposes. “It is well known,” says Dr. Pearson, “that this powder cannot be prepared by following the directions of the specification in the court of chancery.” He therefore instituted a laborious chemical inquiry, first analytical, and then synthetical, in order to ascertain the composition.

Whether James was the real inventor of the powder, may admit of a doubt. “The calcination of antimony and bone-ashes produces,” says Dr. Pearson, “a powder called Lile’s and Scbawanberg’s fever powder; a preparation described by Schroeder and other chemists 150 vears ago.”

According to the receipt in the possession of Mr. Bromfield, by which this powder was prepared forty-five years ago, and before any medicine was known by the name of James’s powder, two pounds of hartshorn shavings must be boiled, to dissolve all the mucilage, and then, being dried, be calcined with one pound of crude antimony, till the smell of sulphur ceases, and a light grey powder is produced. The same prescription was given to Mr. Willis above forty years ago, by Dr. John Eaton of the college of physicians, with the material addition, however, of ordering the calcined mixture to be exposed to a given beat in a close vessel, to render it white.“” Schroeder prescribes equal weights of antimony and calcined hartshorn; and Poterius and Michaelis, as quoted by Frederic Hoffman, merely order the calcination of these two substances together (assigning no proportion) in a reverberatory fire for several days." It has been alleged, that Dr. James obtained the receipt for his powder of a German baron named Schwanberg, or one Baker, to whom Schwanberg had sold it. This account we have not been able to verify, but if it- be true, baron Schwanberg, as he is called, was probably the descendant of the Schawanberg mentioned so long ago. Be it as it may, Dr. James was able to give that credit and currency to the medicine which otherwise it would not have had, and the public are therefore indebted to him for publishing, if not for inventing, a preparation of most admirable effect.

Dr. James was married, and left sons and daughters. His eldest son, Robert Harcourt James, was educated at Merchant Taylors’ school, and afterwards at St. John’s college, Oxford, for the profession of physic.

, an eminent English officer in the East India service, was born at Milford Haven about 1721, and embarked in a sea life at twelve years of age. He was not more than twenty when he obtained the command of a ship. He was with sir Edward Hawke in the West Indies in 1738, as a junior officer. Some years after he commanded a ship in the Virginia trade but in her he wsa taken by the Spaniards in the gulph of Florida, and carried a prisoner to the Havannah. After he and his crew, consisting of fifteen persons, were released from the Spanish prison, they embarked in a small brig for Carolina. The second day after putting to sea, a very hard gale of wind came on, the vessel strained, and soon became so leaky that the pumps and the people baling could not keep her free; and at length, being worn out with labour, seven of them, with Mr. James, got into the only boat they had, with a small bag of biscuit and a keg of water: the vessel soon after disappeared, and went down. They were twenty days in this boat without a compass; their biscuit soon got wet with the sea, which for two days made a breach over the boat; a snuff-box sir William had with him served to distribute their daily allowance of water: and after encountering every difficulty of famine and severe labour, on the twentieth day they found themselves on the islam) of Cuba, not ten miles from whence they had been embarked out of a Spanish prison: but a prison had no horrors to them. The Spaniards received them once more into captivity; and it is remarkable, that only one out of the seven perished, though after they got on shore few of them had the use of their limbs for many days.

In the beginning of 1747 Mr. James went to the East Indies as chief officer of one of the East India company’s ships, and performed two voyages in that station. In 1749 the East India company appointed him. to the command of a new ship, the Guardian, equipped as a ship of war. In her he sailed to Bombay, to protect the trade on the Malabar coast, which was much annoyed by the depredations of Angria, and other pirates, with which those seas swarmed; and during the two years occupied by him in convoying the merchant ships from Bombay and Surat to the Red Sea, the gulph of Persia, and along the Malabar coast from the gulph of Cambay to cape Comorin, he was frequently attacked by the vessels of the different piratical states. At one time when he had near seventy sail under his protection, he was assailed by a large fleet of Angria’s frigates and gallivats, not badly provided with guns, and, as usual, full of men. Having formed the line with his little squadron, consisting of the Guardian, Bombay grab, and Drake bomb-ketch, he engaged the enemy, and kept them in close action while his convoy got safe into Tellicherry. In this conflict, which seems on the part of both to have been disputed with great animation, the brave English commander sunk one of the enemy’s largest gallivats, and obliged the rest to take shelter in Ghtriah and Severn-droog.