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

, son to the preceding, was born at Geneva, Oct. 17, 1623. After pursuing his studies in the classics and philosophy with great credit, he entered on the study of divinity, under the celebrated Calvinistic professors, John Diodati, Theodore Tronchin, Frederick Spanheim, &c. While a student he supported in 1640 and 1644, two theses, “De felicitate morali et politica,” and “De necessaria Dei gratia.” He afterwards went to Leyden, and formed an acquaintance with the most eminent scholars there; and afterwards to Paris, where he lodged with the celebrated Daille", and studied geography under Gassendi, whose philosophical lectures he also attended. He then visited the schools of Saumur and Montauban, and on his return to Geneva in 1647 was ordained, and in the following year served both in the French and Italian churches of that city. In 1650 he refused the professorship of philosophy, which was offered to him more than once, but accepted an invitation to the pastoral office at Lyons, where he succeeded Aaron Morus, the brother of Alexander. In 1653 he was recalled to Geneva to be professor of divinity, an office which Theodore Tronchin was now about to resign from age, and Turretin continued in it during the rest of his life. In 1661 he was employed on a similar business as his father, being sent to Holland to obtain assistance from the States General to fortify the city of Geneva. Having represented the case, he obtained the sum of 75,000 florins, with which a bastion was built, called the Dutch bastion. He had an interview with the prince and princess dowager of Orange at Turnhout in Brabant; a.nd having often preached while in Holland, he was so much admired, that the Walloon church of Leyden, and the French church at the Hague, sent him invitations to settle with them; but this he declined, and returned to Geneva in 1662. He had not been here long before the states general of Holland wrote most pressingly to the republic, requesting that Turretin might be permitted to settle in Holland and similar applications were made from Leyden, &c. in 1666 and 1672 but he could not be reconciled to the change, and resuming his functions, acquired the greatest fame, both as a divine and professor. He died Sept. 28, 1687.

, a learned English divine, was educated at Jesus college, Cambridge, where he proceeded B. A. in 1704-. In 1733 the university of Oxford conferred on him the degree of M. A. by diploma, in approbation, as we presume, of his “Critical Examination, &c.” hereafter mentioned. He was at that time vicar of St. Mary’s at Marlborough; but in 1737 was presented to the united rectories of St. Matthew, Friday-street, and St. Peter, Cheap. He was also a prebendary of St. Paul’s, and one of the lecturers of St. Dunstan’s in the West. Some of these promotions came late, nor had he more than 100l. a year to support a family of five children till within five years of his death, which took place Feb. 19, 1741-2. By the advice of some friends, two volumes of his sermons at Boyle’s and lady Moyer’s lectures were published for the benefit of his family, 1743, in 2 vols. 8vo. His publications in his life-time were, 1. “A Critical Examination of the late new text and version of the Testament, in Greek and English, in three parts;” the first two were printed in 1731, and the last in 1732, 8vo. The work here examined was entitled “The New Testament in Greek and English, containing the original text corrected, from the authority of authentic Mss. and a new version formed agreeably to the illustrations of the most learned commentators and critics, with notes and various readings, &c.” Mr. Twells’s object is to prove that the editor’s text is corrupt, his version false, and his notes fallacious, and that the tendency of the work is to injure Christianity in general, and the tenets of the Church of England in particular. Mr. Twells also published, 2. “A Vindication of the gospel of St. Matthew,” 1735, 8vo; and “A Supplement to the Vindication.” 3. “Answer to the Inquiry into the meaning of the Demoniacks in the New Testament,” 1737, 8vo. 4. “Answer to the ‘ Further Inquiry,’ 1738,” 8vo. 5. “The Theological Works of Dr. Pocock,” 1740, 2 vols. fol. with a life of Pocock, to which we have already referred, replete with curious information respecting that great orientalist, his contemporaries, and the times in which he lived. Mr. Twells, we are sorry to add, gained little by this pub-. Hcation. He himself states that his reward for writing the life, compiling indexes, collating and correcting the errors of the old edition, which with soliciting for subscriptions, travelling to London, Oxford, &c. more or less employed his time and exercised his patience for five years, would be in all probability not more than 50l.

, a learned divine, was the only son of an eminent tea-merchant by his first marriage, and born in 1734. He was intended by his father to succeed him in that house, which he had so well established; but the son, feeling an impulse towards literature and science, entreated his father to let him devote himself to study and a classical education; and, being indulged in his wish, he was matriculated at Sidney-college, Cambridge. Mr. T. was contemporary in that university with Gray, Mason, and Bate; and so able a musician, that, besides playing the harpsichord and organ in a masterly manner, he was so excellent a performer on the violin as to lead all the concerts, and even oratorios, that were performed in the university during term-time, in which Bate played the organ and harpsichord. His taste in music was enlarged and confirmed by study as well as practice, as few professors knew more of composition, harmonics, and the history of the art and science of music, than this intelligent and polished Dilettante.

In 1760 he took his degree of B. A. and that of A. M. in 1763. He became rector of White Notley, Essex, in private patronage, 1788, and of St. Mary’s, Colchester, to which he was presented by the bishop of London, on the death of Philip Morant, 1770. He died Aug. 6, 1804, in the seventieth year of his age. Sound learning, polite literature, and exquisite taste in all the fine arts, lost an ornament and defender in the death of this scholar and worthy divine. His translation of the “Poetics of Aristotle” must convince men of learning of his knowledge of the Greek language, of the wide extent of his classical erudition, of his acute and fair spirit of criticism, and, above all, of his good taste, sound judgment, and general reading manifested in his dissertations. Besides his familiar acquaintance with the Greek and Roman classics, his knowledge of modern languages, particularly French and Italian, was such as not only to enable him to read but to write those languages with facility and idiomatic accuracy. His conversation and letters, when science and serious subjects were out of the question, were replete with wit, humour, and playfulness. In the performance of his ecclesiastical duties Mr. T. was exemplary, scarcely allowing himself to be absent from his parishioners more than a fortnight in a year, during the last forty years of his life, though, from his learning, accomplishments, pleasing character, and conversation, no man’s company was so much sought. During the last 12 or 14 years of his life he was a widower, and has left no progeny. His preferment in the church was inadequate to his learning, piety, and talents; but such was the moderation of his desires, that he neither solicited nor complained. The Colchester living was conferred upon him by Dr. Lowth, bishop of London, very much to his honour, without personal acquaintance or powerful recommendation; but, from the modesty of his character, and love of a private life, his profound learning and literary abilities were little known till the publication of his Aristotle.

, a very learned nonconformist divine, was descended from German ancestors, of whom his grandfather is said to have been the first who settled in England. He was born about 1575. His father, who was a clothier at Newbury in Berkshire, perceiving this his sou to be weil qualified for a learned education, sent him to Winchester-school, whence he was in 1596 elected probationer fellow of New-college, Oxford, and two years after became actual fellow. According to Wood, he studied divinity for sixteen years together. In 1604 he proceeded in arts, and about that time taking orders, was a frequent and diligent preacher, “noted to the academicians for his subtile wit, exact judgment, exemplary life and conversation, and for the endowment of such qualities that were befitting men of his function.” He was not less esteemed as a logician and philosopher, and his learning appeared not only in his public lectures and disputations, but in the accuracy with which he corrected the works of the celebrated Bradwardine, published by sir Henry Savile. Besides his catechistical lectures, which he read every Thursday in term-time in the college chapel, he preached every Sunday at St. Aldate’s church; and at length his fame reaching the court, king James appointed him chaplain to his daughter Elizabeth, afterwards the unfortunate queen of Bohemia, who was then about to leave her native country and go to the Palatinate. On this he was admitted to his degree of D. D.

His stay abroad, however, was not long. In about two months he was called back to England, but on his arrival took a final leave of the court, and devoted himself to a learned retirement at Newbury, the place of his birth, of which he obtained the curacy. Here, such was his attachment to the quiet enjoyment of his studies, and the discharge of his parochial duties, that he refused some valuable preferments offered him entirely on the score of merit; among these were the wardenship of Winchester college, a prebend of Winchester, and a valuable living. This last he had some thoughts of accepting, provided the people of Newbury could be furnished with a suitable successor. With this view he waited upon the archbishop of Canterbury, who received him very kindly, granted his request, an'd added, that he would mention him to the king as a pious and learned divine, and no puritan. Twiss seems to have been alarmed at this last compliment, which he knew he did not deserve, and upon more mature consideration, remained at Newbury. About the same time he refused a professor’s chair at Oxford, and another in the university of Franeker.

others, were dug up and thrown into was nothing inDr.Twiss’s conduct to rena pit, in St. Margaret’s churchyard, derhis memory particularly obnoxious. personal character, there seems no difference of opinion among historians. Fuller denominates him “a divine of great abilities, learning, piety, and moderation;” and Wood says, “his plain preaching was esteemed good; his solid disputations were accounted better; but his pious life was reckoned best of all.” Nor less favourably does bishop Sanderson speak of him, even while differing greatly from some of his opinions. Mr. Clark says, that he “had his infirmities, whereof the most visible was this: that he was of a facile nature, and too prone to be deceived by giving too much credit to those, whom, by information from others, or in his own opinion, he judged to be godly. Whence it came to pass that he was often imposed upon, especially by certain crafty heads, who solemnly professed that their chiefest care was the preservation of the purity of doctrine, and reformation of discipline, whereas, in deed and truth, they sought the utter subversion of both.”

, a learned divine and ingenious artist, was the only child of the rev. Michael Tyson, dean of Stamford, archdeacon of Huntingdon, &c. who died in 1794, aged eighty-four, by his first wife, the sister of Noah Curtis, of Wolsthorp, in Lincolnshire, esq. He was born in the parish of All Saints, in Stamford, Nov. 19, 1740, and received his grammatical education in that country. He was then admitted of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, and passed regularly through his degrees; that of B. A. in 1764, of M. A. in 1767, and of B. D. in 1775; and after taking his bachelor’s degree was elected a fellow of his college. In the autumn of 1766 he attended a young gentleman of his college, Mr. Gough (afterwards the celebrated antiquary) in a tour through the north of England and Scotland, and made an exact journal of his several stages, with pertinent remarks on such places as seemed most interesting. At Glasgow and Inverary he had the freedom of the corporations bestowed upon him. After his return, in the following year he was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries, and in 1769 a fellow of the royal society. In 1770 he was ordained deacon at Whitehall chapel, by Dr. Green, bishop of Lincoln. In 1773, his father being promoted to the archdeaconry of Huntingdon, he gave the officiality of it to his son, which was worth about 50l. per ann. and about the same time, being bursar of the college, he succeeded Mr. Cohnan in the cure of St. Benedict’s church, in Cambridge, as he did also in 1776, in the Whitehall preachership, at the request of the late Dr. Hamilton, sori-in-law of bishop Terrick, who had formerly been of Bene’t college.

, a loyal divine, although of the puritan stamp, was the son of John Udal, an eminent nonconformist of the sixteenth century, and a great sufferer for his nonconformity, being frequently silenced and imprisoned, and at last condemned to die for writing a seditious book called “A Demonstration of Discipline;” but he appears to have been respited, and died in the Marshalsea prison about the end of 1592. He wrote “A Commentary on the Lamentation’s of Jeremiah” “The State of the Church of England laid open in a conference, &c.” and probably the work above-mentioned for which he was condemned b.ut he is better known in the learned world, as the author of the first Hebrew grammar. in English, published onder the title of a “Key to the Holy Tongue,” with a Hebrew Dictionary, which is omitted in the second edition. The first is dated 1593, a year after his death.

Among other authors of the same name, was John Henry Ursinus, a learned Lutheran divine, superintendant of the churches of Ratisbon, where he died May 14, 1667, leaving “Parallela Evangelii” “Comment, in Joel, Amos, Jonam, Ecclesiasten” “Sacra Analecta;” “De Christianis Officiis” “Arboretum Biblic.” “Exercitationes de Zoroastre, Hermete, Sanchoniatone,” Norimbergae, 1661,8vo; “Sjlva TheologiaB Symbolicae,” 1685, 12mo; “Jeremiae virga vigilans;” “De Ecclesiarum Germanicarum origine et progressu,” 1664, 8vo. &LC. His son, George Henry Ursinus, a learned philologist, who died Sept. 10, 1707, aged sixty, left the following works: “Diatribe de Taprobana, Cerne et Ogyride veterum” “Disputatio de locustis” “Observationes Philologies;” “De variis vocum etymologicis et significationibus,” &c. “De Creatione mundi” “Notulce Criticae ad Eclogas Virgilii” “Annotationes in Senecae Troada;” “De primo et proprio Aoristorum usu” “Dioiiysii Terrse orbis descriptio cum notis.” He must be distinguished from George Ursinus, a learned Danish divine, who acquired honour by his “Hebrew Antiquities.”

Being now settled to his liking, and freed from worldly connexions and cares, he devoted himself entirely to the pursuit of every species of literature, human and divine; He was admitted fellow of the college, and acknowledged to be a model of piety, modesty, and learning. About this time, the learned Jesuit Fitz-simons (See Fitz-Simons), then a prisoner in Dublin-castle, sent out a challenge , defying the ablest champion that should come against him, to dispute with him about the points in controversy between the Roman and the Protestant churches. Usher, though but in his nineteenth year, accepted the challenge; and when they met, the Jesuit despised him as but a boy; yet, after a conference or two, was so very sensible of the quickness of his wit, the strength of his arguments, and his skill in disputation, as to decline any farther contest with him. This appears from the following letter of Usher, which Dr. Parr has inserted in his life; and which serves also to confute those who have supposed that there was not any actual dispute between them. “I was not purposed, Mr. Fitz-simons, to write unto you, before you had first written to me, concerning some chief points of your religion, as at our last meeting you promised; s but, seeing you have deferred the same, for reasons best known to yourself, I thought it not amiss to inquire farther of your mind, concerning the continuation of the conference begun betwixt us. And to this I am the rather moved, because I am credibly informed of certain reports, which I could hardly be persuaded should proceed from him, who in my presence pretended so great love and affection unto me. If I am a boy, as it hath pleased you very contemptuously to name me, I give thanks to the Lord, that my carriage towards you hath been such as could minister unto you no just occasion to despise my youth. Your spear belike is in your own conceit a weaver’s beam, and your abilities such, that you desire to encounter with the stoutest champion in the host of Israel; and therefore, like the Philistine, you contemn me as being a boy. Yet this I would fain have you know, that I neither came then, nor now do come unto you, in any confidence of any learning that is in me; in which respect, notwithstanding, I thank God I am what I am: but I come in the name of the Lord of Hosts, whose companies you have reproached, being certainly persuaded, that even out of the mouths of babes and sucklings he was able to shew forth his own praises. For the farther manifestation thereof, I do again earnestly request you, that, setting aside all vain comparisons of persons, we may go plainly forward in examining the matters that rest in controversy between us; otherwise I hope you will not be displeased, if, as for your part you have begun, so 1 also for my own part may be bold, for the clearing of myself and the truth which I profess, freely to make known what hath already passed concerning this matter. Thus intreating you in a few lines to make known unto me your purpose in this behalf, I end; praying the Lord, that both this and all other enterprises that we take in hand may be so ordered as may most make for the advancement of his own glory and the kingdom of his son Jesus Christ.” Tuus ad Aras usque,

, in German Von Watte, one of the most learned men of his nation or time, was born at St. Gal, Nov. 29, 1484, of which city his father, Joachim Von Watte, was a senator. After some education at home he was sent to Vienna to pursue the higher studies, but for some time entered more into the gaieties of the place, and was distinguished particularly for his quarrels and his duels, until by the sensible and affectionate remonstrances of a merchant of that city, to whose care his father had confided him, he was induced to devote his whole time and attention to books, and never relapsed into his former follies. When he had acquired a competent share of learning he wished to relieve his father from any farther expence, and with that honourable view taught a school at Villach, in Carinthia; but finding this place too remote from literary society, he returned to Vienna, and in a short time was chosen professor of the belles lettres, and acquitted himself with such credit, and gained such reputation by some poetry which he published, that the emperor Maximilian I. honoured him with the laurel crown at Lintz in 1514. After some hesitation between law and physic, both of which he had studied, he determined in favour of the latter, as a profession, and took his doctor’s degree at Vienna in 1518. He appears to have practised in that city, and afterwards at St. Gal, until the controversies arose respecting the reformation. After examining the arguments of the contending parties, he embraced the cause of the reformers; and besides many writings in favour of their principles, befriended them in his rank of senator, to which he had been raised. In 1526 he was farther promoted to the dignity of consul of St. Gal, the duties of which he performed so much to the satisfaction of his constituents that he was re-elected to the same office seven times. He died April 6, 1551, in his sixty-sixth year. He bequeathed his books to the senate of St. Gal, which were ordered to be placed in the public library of the city, with an inscription, honourable both to his character and talents. The latter were very extensive, for he was well versed and wrote well on mathematics, geography, philosophy, and medicine. He was also a good Latin poet, and, above all, a sound divine and an able controversial writer. Joseph Scaliger places him among the most learned men of Germany. He was intimate with our illustrious prelate, archbishop Cranmer, but preceded him in some of the doctrines of the reformation. About 1536 he wrote a book entitled “Aphorismorum libri sex de consideratione Eucharistiae,” &c. which was levelled at the popish doctrine of the corporal presence, and thinking it a proper work for the archbishop to patronize, presented it to him; but Cranmer had not yet considered the question in that view, and therefore informed Vadian that his book had not made a convert of him, and that he was hurt with the idea of being thought the patron of such unscriptural opinions. Vadian therefore pursued the subject at home, and wrote two more volumes on it. The only medical work he published was his “Consilium contra Pestem, Basil, 1546, 4to. Those by which he is best known in the learned world, are, 1. A collection of remarks on various Latin authors, in his” Epistola responsoria ad Rudulphi Agricolas epistolam,“ibid. 1515, 4to. 2. His edition of” Pomponius Mela,“first printed at Vienna in 1518, fol. and often reprinted. 3.” Scholia qoaedam in C. Plinii de Nat. Hist, librum secundum,“Basil, 153 1, fol. 4.” Chronologia Ablmtum Monasterii St.Galli“”De obscuris verborum significationibus epistola;“” Farrago antiquitatum Alamannicarum,“&c. and some other treatises, which are inserted in Goldnst’s” Alamanniae Scnptores."

The French edition of Valdesso referred to above was published at Paris in 1565, and was taken from an Italian translation of the original Spanish: in which, it is said, were preserved, not only some of the idioms, but also many words of the Spanish original. Mr. Ferrar’s English translation was printed at Oxford in 1638, but without his name; and if it should be asked why Mr. Ferrar, who was perfect master of the Spanish, as well as the Italian language, chose to translate from a translation rather than the original, he himself has given the reason in his own preface: “These truly divine meditations of sir John Valdesso, a nobleman of Spain (who died almost a hundred years ago), having been so acceptable to pious Vergerius, to learned Caelius Secundus Curio, and to many other both French and Italian Protestants, that they have been translated out of the original Spanish copy, and printed three or four times in those languages; it seemeth to me a reasonable, and a charitable desire, to print them now in English, without any alteration at all from the Italian copy, the Spanish being either not extant, or not easy to be found.”

The translation of the above work of Valdesso was printed at Oxford 1638, 8vo, and entitled “The hundred and ten Considerations of Signior John Valdesso, &c.” Subjoined is an epistle, written by Valdesso to lady Donna Julia de Gonzaga, to whom he dedicates “A Commentary upon the Epistle to the Romans.” It appears, that along with this commentary he sent to her all St. Paul’s epistles, translated from the Greek into the ordinary Castilian language. He says, that he had before translated the Psalms of David from the original Hebrew, for her use; and he promises to furnish her with the history of Christ in the same language, at such time and manner as shall please the “divine Majesty.”

, a writer who has generally been distinguished by the title of Atheist, was born at Tourosano, in the kingdom of Naples, in 1585; and was the son of John Baptist Vanini, steward to Don Francis de Castro, duke of Tourosano, and viceroy of Naples. His Christian name was Lucilio: but it was customary with him to assume different names in different countries. In Gascony, he called himself Pompeio; in Holland, Julius Ceesar, which name he placed in the title-pages of his books; and, at Toulouse, when he was tried, he was called Lucilio. He had an early taste for literature, and his father sent him to Rome to study philosophy and divinity, and on his return to Naples, he continued his studies in philosophy, and applied himself some time to physic. Astronomy likewise employed him much, which insensibly threw him into the reveries of astrology: but he bestowed the principal part of his time upon divinity. The title of “Doctor in utroque Jure,” which he assumes in the title-page of his dialogues, may indicate that he had applied himself to the civil and canon law; and from his writings, it certainly appears that he understood both. He finished his studies at Padua, where he resided some years, and procured himself to be ordained priest, and became a preacher, with what success is not known. His mind appears to have been perverted or confused by the reading of Aristotle, Averroes, Cardan, and Pomponatius, who became his favourite guides. His admiration of Aristotle was such, that he calls him “the god of philosophers, the dictator of human nature, and the sovereign pontiff of the sages.” The system of Averroes, which is but a branch of that of Aristotle, was so highly approved of by him, that he recommended it to his scholars at their first entrance upon the study of philosophy. He styles Pomponatius his “divine master,” and bestows great encomiums upon his works. He studied Cardan very much, and gives him the character of “a man of great sense, and not at all affected with superstition.” It is supposed that he derived from these authors those infidel doctrines which he afterwards endeavoured to propagate. Father Mersene assures us, that Vanini, before he was executed at Toulouse, confessed to the parliament, that at Naples he had agreed with thirteen of his friends to travel throughout Europe, for the sake of propagating atheism, and that France had fallen to his share: but this is very improbable, as the president Gramond, who was upon the spot, says nothing of such a scheme in his account of Vanini’s trial and execution. It is more probable, that his inclination to travelling, or perhaps the hopes of procuring an agreeable settlement, led him to the several places through which he passed; and that he spread his singular sentiments according as he had opportunity.

, a pious divine of the church of England, was the son of the rev. Richard Venn, rector of St. Antholiri’s, London, who distinguished himself as a noted disputant in his day, particularly in conjunction with bishop Gibson, in opposing the promotion of Dr. Rundle to a bishopric, on account of a conversation in which the doctor had expressed sentiments rather favourable to deism. Mr. Venn also assisted Dr. Webster in writing the “Weekly Miscellany,” a periodical publication which, under the venerable name of Richard Hooker, laboured zealously in defence of high church principles. He died in 1740; and a volume of his sermons and tracts was published by his widow, the daughter of Mr. Ashton, who had been executed in the reign of William III. for being concerned in a plot to bring back the Stuart family.

Mr. Henry Venn was born at Barnes, in the county of Surrey, 1725. He was educated, partly under Dr. Pitman, at Market-street, and partly under the reverend Mr. Catcott, rector of St. Stephen, Bristol, a Hutchinsonian divine of great ingenuity and learning, the author of a curious treatise on the deluge, and a volume of sermons. In 1742 Mr. Venn was admitted of Jesus college, Cambridge, proceeded to the degree of B.A. in 1745, and to that of M.A. in 1749. There being no fellowship vacant in his own college, the fellows of Queen’s unanimously elected him a member of their society, in which he continued till his marriage in 1757. The lady to whom he became united was daughter of Dr. Bishop of Ipswich, author of an Exposition of the creed, and a volume of Sermons preached at Lady Moyer’s lecture in 1724.

, a nonconformist divine, was born about 1620, and educated in Emmanuel college, Cambridge. He does not appear to have had any preferment in the church, except the lectureship of St. Olave’s, Southwark, from which he was ejected for nonconformity in 1662. After this he preached at a dissenting meeting at Pewterers’-hall, Lime-street, as colleague to a Mr. Bragge, who outlived him and preached his funeral sermon. As Mr. Venning was a man of no faction himself, men of different factions and sects were generally disposed to do justice to his character, which was that of a man, the object of whose labours and writings was to promote piety. He was, in his charity sermons, a powerful advocate for the poor, among whom he distributed annually some hundreds of pounds. His oratory on this topic is said to have been almost irresistible; as some have gone to church with a resolution not to give, and have been insensibly and involuntarily melted into compassion, and bestowed their alms with uncommon liberality. He died March 10, 1673. He was the author of nine practical treatises, specified by Calamy, among which the principal are, 1. “Orthodox and Miscellaneous Paradoxes,” 1647, 12mo. 2. “Things worth thinking on, or helps to piety,” 12mo, often reprinted. 3. “His Remains,” with a portrait by Hollar," &c. He was also one of the compilers of the English-Greek Lexicon published in 1661, 8vo.

, a nonconformist divine of great popularity, courage, and piety, was born in the month of May 1634, in Hertford. He was the eldest son of the rev. John Vincent, who died possessed of the valuable living of Sedgfield in the county of Durham, but who was so often troubled on account of his nonconformity, that although he had a numerous family, it is said that not two of his children were born in the same county. This son, Thomas, was educated at Westminster-school, whence he was, in 1647, elected to Christ Church, Oxford. There he made such proficiency, that, after taking h'is degree of M. A. in 1654, the dean, Dr. Owen, chose him catechist, an office which, Wood says, usually belongs to a senior master. On leaving Oxford he became chaplain to Robert, earl of Leicester, and afterwards succeeded to the living of St. Mary Magdalen, Milk-street, London, from which he was ejected for nonconformity in 1662. He then taught school for some time with another famous nonconformist, the rev. Thomas Doolittle, at x lslington, and occasionally preached when it could be done with safety. In 1665 the memorable and last-plague with which this kingdom was visited, broke out in the metropolis with uncommon fury, and Mr. Vincent informed his colleague that be now thought it his duty to relinquish his present employment, and devote himself to the service of the sufferers in this great calamity. Doolittle endeavoured in vain to dissuade him, and Mr. Vincent, that he might not seem obstinate, agreed to refer the case to the city ministers, who, after hearing his reasons, and admiring his courage and humanity, gave all the approbation that such an act of self-devotion could admit, and Mr. Vincent came to lodge in the city, and throughout the whole continuance of the plague preached constantly every Sunday in some parish church. This was not ouly connived at by government, but he was followed by persons of all ranks. He also visited the sick whenever called upon, and yet aontinued in perfect health during the whole time, although seven persons died of the plague in the house where he resided. This remarkable instance of courage and humanity probably reconciled many to him who disapproved of his nonconformity; for although he preached afterwards at a dissenting meeting at Hoxton, and was the founder of another at Hand-alley, Bishopsgate-street, we do not find that he was molested. He died Oct. 15, 1678, in the forty-fourth year of his age. He was the author of several pious tracts, which went through many editions in his life-time, and afterwards; and had some controversy with Penn the quaker, and with Dr. William Sherlock. The most popular of his tracts were his “Explanation of the Assemblies Catechism,” which still continues to be printed; and his “God’s terrible voice to the city by Plague and Fire,” in which are some remarkable accounts of both these fatal events. This work, which was first printed in 1667, 12mo, went through thirteen editions before 1671. He published a work of the same kind, occasioned by an eruption of Mount Etna, entitled “Fire and Brimstone,” &c. 1670, 8vo. He had a brother, Nathanael, also educated at Christ Church, who was ejected from the living of Langley-march, in Buckinghamshire, in 1662, and afterwards was frequently prosecuted for preaching in conventicles. He was also imprisoned, as being concerned in Monmouth’s expedition, but nothing was proved against him. He died in 1697, and left several practical treatises, and funeral sermons. Wood attributes to him more Cl brisk and florid parts“than belong to his fraternity, and adds, that he was” of a facetious and jolly humour," which certainly does not correspond with the other characters given of him.

, a learned and excellent divine, a popular and laborious preacher, and a most industrious and useful man in his college, was born at Blaston in Leicestershire, and educated in Magdalen college, Cambridge, where he commenced M. A. and was remarkable for his sober and grave behaviour, not being chargeable even with the venial levities of youth. From the university he was elected (most probably at the recommendation of his contemporary Thomas Cleiveland) school-master at Hinckley; where he entered into holy orders, and (as appears by an extract from the register of that parish) married, and had at least one child. After remaining some time in the faithful discharge of his office at Hinckleyschool, he obtained the rectory of Weddington, in Warwickshire; and, at the beginning of the civil war, was driven from his parish, and forced to take shelter in Coventry. When the assembly of divines which established the presbyterian government in 164 1 was called, Mr. Vines, who was a good speaker, was unanimously chosen of their number; and, as Fuller says, was the champion of the party. While he was at London he became the minister of St. Clement Danes, and vicar of St. Lawrence Jewry; afterwards he removed to Watton, in Hertfordshire; and was appointed master of Pembroke Hall, in Cambridge, in 1645, by the earl of Manchester, on the ejection of Dr. Benjamin Lavey; but resigned that and his living of St. Lawrence Jewry in 1650, on account of the engagement. He joined in a letter from the principal ministers of the city of London (presented Jan. 1, 1645, to the assembly of divines sitting at Westminster by authority of parliament), complaining against the independents. He was a son of thunder, and therefore compared to Luther; yet moderate and charitable to them that differed from him in judgment. The parliament employed him in all their treaties with the king; and his majesty, though of a different judgment, valued him for his ingenuity, seldom speaking to him without touching his hat, which Mr. Vines returned with most respectful language and gestures. This particular was the more remarkable, as no other of the parliament commissioners ever met with the same token of attention. Dr. Grey, in his answer to Neal, relates that when Mr. Vines returned from this treaty, he addressed one Mr. Walden, saying, “Brother, how hath this nation been fooled We have been told that our king is a child, and A foot- but if I understand any thing by my converse with him, which I have had with great liberty, he is as much of a Christian prince as ever I read or heard of since onr Saviour’s time. He is a very precious prince, and is able of himself to argue with the ablest divines we have. And among all the kings of Israel and Jndah, there was none like him.”

, an eminent and learned protestant divine, was born May 16, 1659, at Leuwarden, in Friesland. He took a doctor’s degree in divinity at Leyden, July 9, 1679, and was successively professor of oriental languages, divinity, and sacred history at Franeker, in which city he married, 1681, and died March 3, 1722, of an apoplexy. His works are, 1. an excellent “Commentary on Isaiah,” 2 vols. fol. in Latin. 2. “Apocalypseos anachrisis,” 1719, 4to. 3. “Typus Theologiae Practices,” 8vo, 4. “Hypotyposis Historiae et Chronologies sacra,” 8vo. 5. “Synagoga vetus,” 4to. 6. “Archisynagogus, 4to. 7.” De Decemviris otiosis Synagoga?,“4io. 8.” Observationes sacrae,“17U,4to, &c. Campegius Vitringa, one of his sons, born March 23, 1693, was also professor of divinity at Franeker, and died nine months after his father, January 11, 1723, aged thirty-one, leaving an ”Abridgment of natural Theology,“1720, 4to, and” Sacred Dissertations," which do him honour.

, an eminent Dutch divine, and the founder of a sect, if it may be so called, who were in opposition to the Cartesian philosophy, was born at Heusden, March 3, 1589, of an ancient and considerable family. His education commenced in the schools of his native place, and was greatly promoted by a memory of more than common retention, which he displayed to the astonishment of his teachers and friends, while he was learning Greek and Latin, rhetoric, arithmetic, and logic. It is said that he could repeat without book three entire comedies of Terence, as many of Plautus, the first book of Ovid’s Metamorphoses, the first book of Horace’s Odes, &c. and many other extensive parts of the authors he read. After finishing his classical course, he was sent in 1604 to Leyden, where he passed seven years, increasing his knowledge of the Greek language, but particularly employed on the study of the belles lettres, philosophy, and theology. In general science he had made such progress, as to be able to give lectures on logic, during his divinity course, and had among other pupils the celebrated Burgersdicius, afterwards professor of philosophy at Leyden. Voetius was also solicited to take the degree of doctor, but some particular reasons prevented him at this time. Having completed his academical studies in 1611, he returned to Heusden, and became a candidate for the ministry. He had also a design to have visited Germany, France, and England, but was long confined by an illness; and on his recovery was appointed to officiate in the church of Vlymen, a village between Heusden and Bois-le-Duc. He preached also occasionally at Engelen, about a league from Vlymen, and in both places with great ability and reputation, for about six years. In 1617 he accepted a call to Heusden, where he settled for seventeen years, although repeatedly invited to superior situations in Rotterdam and other parts of the United Provinces. In 1619, he assisted for six months at the synod of Dort, and during this time, along with three of his brethren, preached at Gouda against the Arminians or Remonstrants, to whom he was always a decided enemy, and was as zealous a friend to the doctrines of Calvin. While at Heusden, he preached occasionally at other places, and in 1629 to the army which besieged Bois-le-duc, and after the capture of that city he officiated there for about nine months alone with three other ministers. During his residence here, he and his brethren published a sort of manifesto, inviting all the inhabitants, and particularly the clergy, to a conference, either public or private, on the points in dispute between the reformed and the Romish church. Jansenius answered this manifesto in a work entitled '“Alexipharmacum civibus Sylvsc-ducensibus propinatum ad versus mi nistrorum suorum fascinum,” Brussels, 1630, This produced a controversy, of whicu we have already given an account. (See Jansen, p. 470——471).

, an ingenious doctor, and one of the most learned men of the seventeenth century, in Hebrew and the Oriental languages, was a native of Bourdeaux, descended from a respectable family of distinction in the law. He at first held the office of counsellor to the parliament in his native city; but having afterwards chosen the ecclesiastical profession, was raised to the priesthood, and became preacher and almoner to Armand de Bourbon, prince of Conti. M. de Voisin was extremely well skilled in rabbinical learning, and the ecclesiastical authors. He died 1685. His principal works are, a “System of Jewish Theology,” 1647, 4to, in Latin; a treatise “On the Divine Law,” 8vo another “On the Jubilee of the Jews,” 8vo, both in Latin learned notes on Raymond Martin’s “Pugio Fidei” 1651; “Defense du Traite de M. le Prince de Conti centre la Comédie et les Spectacles,” 1672, 4to a French " Translation of the Roman Missal, 4 vols. 12mo, which made much noise, and was suppressed, yet it has nevertheless been printed and sold since, &c. His enemies accused him of intending to have mass said in French, but L'Avocat maintains that he never had such an idea.

, an eminent divine of the Arminian persuasion, was born at Cologn, July 19, 1569. His father, who was a dyer, had not yet renounced popery, and caused him to be baptised in the forms of that religion, but he afterwards secretly joined the protestants. He had ten children, and designing Conrade for a learned profession, had him taught grammar at a school in the village of Bedberdyk, whence he sent him, in 1583, to Dusseldorp, and there he continued his classical studies till 1586. He afterwards removed to St. Lawrence’s college in Cologn, but was prevented from taking his degrees in philosophy by two impediments, which are so dissimilar that it is difficult to say which predominated. The one was because he could not conscientiously take an oath to submit to the decisions of the council of Trent; the other, because on account of the declining state of his father’s affairs, it became necessary for him to give up his studies, and go into trade. Whether he would have refused the oaths, if this had not been the case, is left to conjecture, but he now employed two years in acquiring arithmetic, the French and Italian languages, and such other knowledge as might be useful in trade. He was soon after, however, enabled by some circumstances, not related in our authority, to resume his more learned studies, and going to Herborn in 1589, studied divinity under Piscator, who from a Calvinist had become an Armiriian. Vorstius also, probably for a maintenance, took pupils, and accompanied some of them to Heidelberg in 1593, where the following year he was admitted to the degree of D. D. In 1595 he paid a visit to the universities of Switzerland, and that of Geneva. At Basil, he twice maintained two theses, the one on the Sacraments, the other on the causes of Salvation. He was preparing a third dispute against Socinus* “De Christo servatore” (concerning Christ the saviour); but being desirous of concluding his journey, he did not finish this

Accordingly, having introduced our divine at court, the bishop took him with him to Rome, where they were lodged in the palace of cardinal Gabriel a Trejo, the bishop’s brother, who employed Wadding in compiling or composing from the libraries and archives of Rome such arguments and proofs as related to the question before them; and he even visited Assisi, Perugia, Naples, and many other places fr the same purpose. Besides this, at the request of some who had perused what he had brought together with great satisfaction, he was induced to write a history of that legation, not indeed with a view to publication, but having intrusted the ms to some who were of opinion it ought not to be concealed, it was at last published by Maximilian de Bouchorne, at Louvaine, under the title “Legatio Philippi III. et IV. Hispaniae regum, ad sanctissimos D. D. Paulum V- et Gregorium XV. et Urbanum VIII. pro definienda controversia conceptions B. Mariae Virginia; per illustrissimum, &c. Anthonium a Trejo,” &c. Lonvain, 1624, folio.

This was once a place of great fame in the university, and may be traced to very high antiquity. In 1251, pope Innocent IV. granted a power to the friars eremites of St. Austin, to travel into any countries, build monasteries, and celebrate divine service. With this permission, they first established a house in London, but deputed some of their number to go to Oxford, where they hired an obscure bouse near the public schools. Acquiring some reputation for their skill in philosophy and divinity, or at least what were then so called, they attracted the attention of sir John Handlove, or Handlow, of Burstall in Buckinghamshire, a very opulent gentleman, who purchased for them a piece of ground, enlarged afterwards by a gift from Henry III. On this tney built a house and chapel in a sumptuous form, and held schools for divinity and philosophy of such reputation, that, before the divinity school was built, the university acts were kept, and the exercises in arts were performed in this place. It was in particular enjoined that every bachelor of arts should once in ea^h year dispute, and once answer, at this house, and this continued until the dissolution, when the disputations were removed to St. Mary’s, and afterwaids to the schools. Alter the dissolution, the premises were let, on a lease of twenty-one years, at 3l. yearly, to Thomas Carwarden, or Carclon, esq. who appears to have demolished the whole, and carried off the materials. In 1552, king Edward VI. sold the site to Henry duke of Suffolk, and Thomas Duport, gentleman, who almost immediately conveyed it to Henry Baylie, M. D. formerly a fellow of New college, for forty-five shillings yearly. In 1553, Baylie sold it to his father-in-law, Edward Freere, of Oxford, who left it to his son William, by whom, in 1587, it was again sold to the mayor, bailiffs, and commonalty of Oxford lor the principal sum of 450l.

, a learned nonjuring divine and able writer, was of a gentleman’s family in Warwickshire, and was born February 15, 1645. He was educated at the Charterhouse school under Mr. Wood. In Lent-­term 1660, he was admitted commoner of New-Inn at Oxford, where he took the degree of bachelor of arts October 15, 1664, and that of master June 20, 1G67. He was ordained deacon by Dr. John Hacket, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, June 6, 1669; and priest by Dr. Joseph Henshaw, bishop of Peterborough, November 19, 1669. He was instituted to the rectory of Martins-Thorpe in the county of Rutland, by Joseph, bishop of Peterborough, November 19, 1669. After that he lived in the family of sir Richard Temple at Stow, in the county of Bucks, and entered upon the curacy of that church April 12, 1676. In December 1684, he was presented by king Charles II. and instituted by William, archbishop of Canterbury, to the chancellorship of the cathedral church of Lichfield, together with the prebendary of Alderwas in the same church. In March 1684 he was presented by Henry, bishop of London, to the rectory of St. Margaret Pattens in London. Upon the revolution, being deprived of his preferments for not taking the new oaths, he practised physic for many years afterwards in the City of London with good success, and wore his gown all the while. In February 1693 he vvas consecrated bishop by Dr. William Lloyd, bishop of Norwich, Dr. Francis Turner, bishop of Ely, and Dr. Thomas White, bishop of Peterborough, at the bishop of Peterborough’s lodgings, at the reverend Mr. Giffard’s house at Southgate, at which solemnity Henry earl of Clarendon was present Mr. Wagstaffe was consecrated suffragan of Ipswich, and Dr. Hickes at the same time suffragan of Thetford. Mr. Wagstaffe died October 17, 1712, in the sixty- seventh year of his age. He published few sermons, but wrote many pieces in defence of the constitution both in Church and State, with great strength of reason and perspicuity.

That for which archbishop Wake appears to have been most blamed, was the share he had in a scheme of union between the English and Gallican churches; but in this, as in other parts of his conduct, the blame seems to have arisen principally from misrepresentation, at the same time that we are willing to allow that the scheme itself was a weak one, and never likely to produce any good. The outline of the affair, which is related more at large in the Appendix to the last edition of Mosheim’s History, No IV. is this. In 1717 some mutual civilities had passed between the archbishop and the celebrated ecclesiastical historian Dupin, as men of letters, by means of the rev. Mr. Beauvoir, then chaplain to lord Stair, the English ambassador at Paris. In the course of these civilities, Dupin wrote to the archbishop a Latin letter in Jan. 1718, in which, having congratulated the church of England on the enjoyment of so eminent a prelate for its metropolitan, he took occasion to express his desire for an union between the two churches of England and France, and wished to enter into a correspodence with his grace with that view. The archbishop, in return, after thanking him for his compliment, observed, that it was full time both for himself (Dupin) and the rest of his brethren of the Sorbonne, to declare openly their true sentiments of the superstition and ambition of the court of Rome; that it was the interest of all Christians to unmask that court, and thereby reduce it to those primitive limits and honours which it enjoyed in the first ages of the church. In some farther correspondence, the archbishop explained the belief, tenets, and doctrine of the chuch of England, the manner of its beginning to reform and shake off all foreign power and superstition both in church and state, and its acknowledgment that our Lord Jesus Christ is the only founder, source, and head of the church. In all his letters both to Dupin and others, he insisted constantly on this article, and always maintained the justice and orthodoxy of every individual article of the church of England, without making the least concession towards any approbation of the ambitious pretensions of the church of Rome. Some of the doctors of the Sorbonne readily concurred in this scheme, and Dupin drew up an essay towards an union, which was to be submitted for approbation to the cardinal de Noailles, and then to be transmitted to his grace. This essay, which was called a “Commonitorium,” was read by, and had the approbation of the Sorbonne, and in it was ceded the administration of the sacrament in both kinds, the performing of divine service in the vulgar tongue, and the marriage of the protestant clergy; and the invocation of saints was given up as unnecessary. The project engrossed the whole conversation of the city of Paris, and the Engiish ambassador was congratulated upon it by some great personages at court. The regent duke of Orleans himself, and the abbe Du Bois, minister of foreign affairs, and De Fleury, the attorney general, at iirst seemed to acquiesce, or at least not to interfere; but, after all, no considerate person could expect much from the scheme, which was entirely prevented by the Jesuits, who sounded the alarm, and represented the cardinal de Noailles and his friends the Jansenists as about to make a coalition with the heretics.

Of archbishop Wake’s kindness to father Courayer we have taken some notice in our account of that divine. His grace towards the end of his life became so much disabled by age and infirmities, that some part of the care of the church was transferred to Dr. Gibson, bishop of London. The archbishop lingered on in a very enfeebled state for a considerable time, and at length expired at Larnbeth palace, Jan. 24, 1737, and was interred in a private manner at Croydon. He was in the seventy-ninth year of his age, but the inscription on his tomb erroneously fixes his death in 1733.

"Although Mr. Wakefield’s principles had induced him to renounce his clerical office in the church of England, and he had become a dissenter from her doctrine and worship, yet he was far from uniting with any particular class of those who are usually denominated dissenters. He had an insuperable repugnance to their mode of performing divine service; and he held in no high estimation the theological and philosophical knowledge which it has been the principal object of their seminaries of education to communicate. It has already been observed, that the basis of his own divinity was philology. Classical literature, therefore, as containing the true rudiments of all other science, was that on which he thought the greatest stress should be laid, in a system of liberal education. This point he inculcated with an earnestness which probably appeared somewhat dictatorial to the conductors of the institution.

, a learned divine in the reign of Henry VIII. was born in the north of England, and educated at the university of Cambridge, whence, after taking his degrees in arts, he went abroad to study the Oriental languages. In a few years he made a considerable progress in the Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, and Syriac; and taught those languages both in Paris and in Germany. In 1519 he was Hebrew professor at Louvain, but after holding that office only a few months, he returned home, and became chaplain to Dr. Pace, then dean of St. Paul’s, who recommending him to the king as an able linguist, he was sent to Cambridge, and there honoured with the degree of B. D. which qualified him for ecclesiastical preferments. When the controversy relating to king Henry VIII.'s divorce commenced, Wakefield is said to have been of the queen’s party, and thought the divorce unjustifiable, but was afterwards induced to be of the king’s opinion. Dodd says that the reason he gave for changing sides was the circumstance of prince Arthur’s having consummated the marriage, of which he was not before aware; and Dodd adds, that “as the world is apt to judge the worst of things of this nature, Mr. Wakefield was represented as a mercenary writer, especially by those that maintained the queen’s cause.” We have, however, the evidence of another Roman catholic biographer that the world was not much to blame for its unfavourable opinion. Phillips, in his Life of cardinal Pole, assures us, that a letter is extant, “to Wakefield’s eternal infamy,” addressed by secretary Pace to the king, in which he informs him, that “he had treated with Dr. Wakefield of the divorce, and that the doctor was ready to solve the question, either in the negative or affirmative, just as the king thought proper, and in such a manner as all the divines in England should not be able to make any reply.” This letter is dated 1526. Accordingly he soon after wrote a work in favour of the divorce; and in 1530, the king sent him to Oxford, and made him public professor of Hebrew; by which means he had an opportunity of being more serviceable to his majesty. In 1532, he was made a canon of Wolsey’scollege, and incorporated bachelor of divinity. He appears to have been a lover of learning, and when, in 1536, the lesser monasteries were dissolved, he took care to save from destruction several valuable books and Mss. especially such as were in Greek and Hebrew; and, among others, several curious Mss. in Ramsay-abbey, particularly a Hebrew dictionary, which had been lodged there by Robert Holbeach, a monk of that monastery in the reign of Henry IV. Wakefield died at London, Oct. 8, 1537. He left some learned works, as, 1, “Oratio de laudibus et militate trium linguarum, Arabics, Chaidaicae, et liebraicae, atque id -viaicis qua- ii utfoque Testajnr- io niveniuntur,” 15^4, 4to. Thepmuei w. Wynix lie Worde; and the author complains, that he was obliged to omit his whole third part, because the printer had no Hebrew types. Some few Hebrew and Arabic characters, however, are introduced, but extremely rude, and evidently cut in wood. They are the first of the sort used in England. 2. “Koster Codicis,” &c. the same mentioned by Bale and Pits, with the title “De non ducenda fratria,” and is the book he wrote in favour of king Henry’s -divorce, Lond. 1628, 4to. Tanner and Wood attribute other pieces to him, but they are probably in ms. except “Syntagma de Hebraeorum codicum incorruptione,” 4to, without date; and " Paraphrasis in Hbrum Koheleth (Ecclesiasticen) succincta, clara, et fidelis, 4to.

, a very eminent Protestant divine, was born October 3, 1573, at Ghent, of an ancient family, which has produced many distinguished magistrates. He officiated as pastor at several different places; declared in favour of the Counter-remonstrants, enjoyed the friendship and confidence of prince Maurice, and was one of those who drew up the canons of the famous synod of Dort. Walæus became afterwards professor of divinity at Leyden, and died July 9, 1639, leaving “Compendium EthicaeAristotelicae,” Leyden, 1636, 12mo. The greatest part of the Flemish translation of the Bible, made by order of the States, and which first appeared in 1637, was executed by him, and almost the whole of the New Testament. John Walæus his son, was professor of medicine at Leyden, where he died in 1649. He made some discoveries on the circulation of the blood, and taught Harvey’s system, although not without some attempt to deprive him of the honour of being the original inventor. His principal publication was “Epistolas de motu chyli et sanguinis,” Leyd. 1641.

, an eminent Puritan divine, was born at Hawkshead in Lancashire, in 1581, and was educated at St. John’s-college, Cambridge. After completing his studies there he went to London, and in 1614 became rector of St. John’s the Evangelist in Watling-street, where he continued nearly forty years, refusing every other offer of preferment. About the same time he became chaplain to Dr. Felton, bishop of Ely, who made choice of him the very morning of his consecration. He distinguished himself in the popish controversy; and, in 1623, held a public disputation with a priest of the name of Smith, before a very large assembly, and by consent of both parties, an account of it was afterwards published. He had likewise some encounters with Fisher, the celebrated Jesuit, and others who were deemed the most able disputants on the side of the church of Rome. In 1635 he was brought into trouble, for having preached a sermon in favour of the sacred observance of the Sabbath; archbishop Laud was so unwise as to admonish him for thjs, and afterwards had hitn prosecuted in the Star-chamber, fined and imprisoned. The parliament reversed this sentence, and condemned the whole proceedings against Mr. Walker, and he was restored to his living of St. John’s. In 1643, he was chosen one of the assembly of divines, and was also one of the witnesses against archbishop Laud, and one of those who took upon them to swear that the unfortunate prelate had endeavoured to introduce popery. In his sermons, too, before the parliament, he made use of those expressions, which tended to lessen the king in the eyes of the people; and although he was one of those who afterwards petitioned against his majesty’s death, he was also one of those who did not reflect how much their violent harangues and sermons had contributed to that event. He died in 1651, aged seventy years, and was interred in his own church in Watling-street. Fuller gives him a high character, as a man “well skilled in the Oriental languages, and an excellent logician and divine. He was a man of a holy life, an humble spirit, and a liberal ham!, who well deserved of Zion college library and who, by his example and persuasion, advanced a thousand pounds for the maintenance of preaching ministers in his native country.” He published, 1. “The sum of a Disputation between Mr. Walker, pastor of St. John the Evangelist, and a Popish priest, calling himself Mr. Smith, but indeed Norris,” 1623. 2. “Fisher’s folly unfolded, or the vaunting Jesuit’s challenge answered,” 1624. 3. “Socinianism in the fundamental point of Justification discovered and confuted.” 4. “The doctrine of the Holy Weekly Sabbath,” 1641. 5. “God made visible in all his Works,” 1644; besides several sermons preached before the parliament. We shall have occasion to mention another publication of Mr. Walker’s, when we come to speak of Anthony Wotton.

, an Irish divine, celebrated for his military courage, was born of English parents in the county of Tyrone in Ireland, and educated in the university of Glasgow in Scotland. He became afterwards rector of Donoghmore, not many miles from the city of London* derry. When king James II. after the revolution, landed in Ireland, Mr. Walker, alarmed at the danger of the prctestaut religion, raised a regiment at his own expence to defend the cause he was bound to espouse. Apprehensive that James would visit Londonderry (for he had taken Coleraine and Kilmore), he rode full speed to Lundee, the governor, to apprize him of the danger. That officer at first slighted the information, but was soon convinced h'ow much he was indebted to him. Walker, returning to Lifford, joined colonel Crafton, and by Lunclee’s direction, took post at the Long Causeway, which he defended a whole night; but at length, obliged to give way to a superior force, he retreated to Londonderry, where he endeavoured to inspire the panic-struck governor with -courage to brave the storm, but in vain; he left the place either through fear or treachery. Walker, however, bravely united with major Baker to defend the place, which would have appeared bordering upon rashness, if they had been able generals. James commanded a numerous army in person, which was well supplied with every requisite for a siege. The besieged had no means for a long defence; they were men who, flying from their houses, had taken shelter in this place; they had not more than twenty cannon, nor more than ten days’ provision, and had no engineers, nor horses for foraging parties or sallies. Still resolved to suffer the greatest extremities rather than yield, they did all that desperate men could effect. They sent to king William to inform him of then-determination, imploring speedy relief. Major Baker dying, the command devolved chiefly on Walker, who exercised it with a stoic philosophy that has few parallels. Horses, dogs, cats, rats, and mice, were devoured by the garrison, and even salted hides were used as food. Mr. Walker suffered in common with his men, and even prompted them to make several sallies; and as the Irish constantly fled, the officers suffered dreadfully. Londonderry having a good harbour, he hoped that the king might be enabled to raise the siege that way, for by land there were no hopes of succour. But the fatality which frustrated every attempt of James, prevented him from storming the place, which might at any time have been done; on the contrary he determined on a blockade, and to starve the garrison into a surrender. With this view he had a bar made across the arm of the sea, which, as be supposed, would prevent vessels from entering the town. This succeeded, and all hope to the besieged seemed to be destroyed. Walker, perceiving the danger of a general defection, assembled his wretched garrison in the cathedral, and endeavoured to inspire them with a reliance on Providence. In this he was so successful, that they returned to their labours invigorated, and immediately had the happiness to discover three ships, under the command of major-general Kirk, who had sent a message to Walker before, intimating that when he could hold out no longer, he would raise the siege at the hazard of himself, his men, and his vessels. Whilst both parties were preparing for the dreadful trial, Kirk sailed round the bar, under a heavy discharge from the enemy, and succeeded in crossing it, by which the siege was raised in the night of July 21, 1689.

, a learned divine, first of the church of England, and then of the Romish church, was born at Worsbrough, near Barnsley, in the west riding of Yorkshire, not in 1615, as is said in the Biographia Britannica, but probably in the following year, as he was baptised Sept. 17, 1616. He was educated at University college, Oxford, under the tuition of Abraham Woodhead, who proved afterwards a great champion for the popish cause. Having taken his degree of bachelor of arts in July 1635, he was in August following chosen fellow of his college. In April 1638, he proceeded master of arts, entered into holy orders, and became a noted tutor. During the rebellion, he was one of the standing extraordinary delegates of the university for public business, and one of the preachers before the court of Charles I. at Oxford. According to Smith, he preached once, probably in his turn, and was requested by his majesty to preach a second time, on which account the convocation granted him his grace for bachelor of divinity, whenever he should think fit to take that degree; but in May 1648 he was ejected from his fellowship by the parliamentary visitors, and then went to the continent, residing principally at Rome, where he is said to have “improved himself in all kinds of polite literature.” He seems also to have confirmed the secret liking he had to the Roman catholic religion, although as yet he thought proper to conceal the circumstances. After the restoration he was reinstated in his fellowship, but went again to Rome as travelling tutor to some young gentlemen. After his return he might have been elected master of his college, on the death of his namesake, but no relation, Dr. Thomas Walker, in 1665. This he declined for the present, but accepted it in 1676, after the death of Dr. Richard Clayton, who had succeeded Dr. Thomas Walker.

While these repeated offers of the mastership show in what estimation he was held by the college on account of his learning, it seems rather singular that the change in his principles should be either not known, or disregarded, for at this time, we are told, ^he was assistant to his tutor Abraham Woodhead, who kept a popish seminary at Hoxton. It was not long, however, before his conduct attracted the notice of parliament, partly on account of his assisting in this popish seminary at Hoxton, and partly on account of the “Life of Alfred,” then published, by which he evidently appeared to be popishly affected. We do not find that any proceedings followed this notice of his conduct, and when king James II. came to the throne, and measures were openly taking for the establishment of popery, Walker thought it no longer necessary to conceal his sentiments, but went to London in July 1685, in order to be consulted, and employed in such changes as it was hoped might be brought about in the university. On his return to college, he absented himself from the chapel^and in the beginning of March following, openly declared himself a Roman catholic, which exposed him to every kind of insult, popery being at this time, as ^lagdalen college soon shewed, the utter aversion of the university. Disregarding this, he had mass privately in his lodgings, until he could fit up a chapel within the limits of the college. Ii 1687, by virtue of letters patent from king James, he set up a press, for the avowed purpose of printing books against die reformed religion. The patent specifies the names of the books (many of which were written by his friend Abraham Woodhead), and exempts him from any penalties to which he might be subject by the statutes against popery. The number of copies to be published of each work is limited to 20,000 within the year. He procured also other letters patent, by which he, and some fellows of his college, were excused from attending the public service of the church. Under this authority he opened his new chapel for mass. This, says Smith, he did by seizing “the lower half of a side of the quadrangle, next adjoining to the college chapel, by which he deprived us of two low rooms, their studies and their bed-chambers: and after all the partitions were removed, it was some way or other consecrated, as we suppose, to divine services: for they had mass there every day, and sermons at least in the afternoon on the Lord’s days.” He also procured a mandate from rhe king to sequester the revenue of a fellowship towards the maintenance of his priest. He put up a statue of James II. over the inside of the gate, and when the king came to Oxford, he entertained him at vespers in this new chapel.

Sir Wilfem Waller was elected a member of the long parliament for Andover; and having suffered under the severity of the star-chamber, on the occasion of a private quarrel with one of his wife’s relations, as well as imbibed in the course of his foreign service early and warm prejudices in favour of the presbyterian discipline, he became a determined opponent of the court. While employed at the head of the parliamentary forces, under the earl of Essex, he was deputed to the command of the expedition against Portsmouth, when colonel Goring, returning to his duty, declared a resolution of holding that garrison for his majesty. In this enterprise, sir William conducted himself with such vigour and ability, that he reduced the garrison in a shorter time and upon better terms than could have been expected; and afterwards obtained the direction of several other expeditions, in which he likewise proved remarkably successful. After many signal advantages, however, he sustained some defeats by the king’s, forces, particularly at Roumlway Down near the Devizes, and at Cropready-bridge in Oxfordshire. On each or those occasions, the blame was thrown by him on the jealousy of other officers; and neither the spirit nor the judgment of his own operations were ever questioned. The independents, who weie becoming the strongest party, both in the army and the parliament, had wished him to become their general, on terms which, either from conscience or military honour, he could not comply with. By the famous self-denying ordinance he was removed from his command, but still maintained so great an influence and reputation in the army, as rendered him not a little formidable to the rising party; and he was thenceforth considered as a leader of the presbyterians against the designs of the independents. He was one of the eleven members impeached of high treason by the army. This forced him to withdraw for some time; but he afterwards resumed his seat in parliament, until, in 1648, with fifty others, he was expelled by the army, and all of them committed to ifferent prisons, on suspicion of attachment to the royal cause. He was afterwards committed to custody on suspicion of being engaged in sir George Booth’s insurrection, m Aug. 1658, but in November was released upon bail. In Feb. 1659 he was nominated one of the council of state, and was elected one of the representatives of Middlesex, in the parliament which began April 25, 1660. He died at Osterley-park in Middlesex, Sept. 19, 1668, and was buried in the chapel in Tothill-street, Westminster. Mr. Seward very erroneously says he was buried in the Abbey-chnrch at Bath. It is his first wife who was buried there, but there is a monumental statue of sir William, as well as of the lady, which perhaps occasioned the mistake. There is a tradition that when James II, visited the Abbey, he defaced the nose of sir William upon this monument, which Mr. Warner in his “History of Bath” allows to be defaced, but Mr Seward asserts that “there appear at present no traces of any disfigurement.” Of a circumstance so easily ascertained, it is singular there should be two opinions. Anthony Wood gives, as the literary performances of sir William Waller, some of his letters and dispatches respecting his victories, but the on,ly article which seems to belong to that class is his “Divine meditations upon several occasions; with a daily directory,” Lond. 1680, 8vo. These were written during his retirement, and give a very faithful picture of his honest sentiments, and of his frailties and failings. Wood also mentions his “Vindication for taking up arms against the king,” left behind in manuscript, in which state it remained until 17y3, when it was published under the title of “Vindication of the Character and Conduct of sir William Waller, knight; commander in chief of the parliament forces in the West: explanatory of his conduct in taking up arms against king Charles I. Written by himself And now first published from the original manuscript. With an introduction by the editor,” 8vo. The ms. came from one of the noble families descended from him. It appears to be written with great sincerity, as well as precision, and contains many interesting particulars, relative to the democratical parties which struggled for superiority after the king had fallen into their power. The style seems to bear a stronger resemblance to that of the age of James the First, or his immediate predecessor, than to the mode of composition generally practised in England about the middle of the last century. If any thing can confirm the declaration that sir William was actuated solely by disinterested motives, it is the veneration which he professes to entertain for the constitution of his country. He avows himself a sincere friend to the British form of government, consisting of king, lords, and commons; and it appears, that, from the beginning, his imputed apostacy from the cause of public freedom, or rather of democratical tyranny,- ought justly to he ascribed to the cabals of the republican leaders, and not to any actual change which had ever taken place in his own sentiments. The volume, indeed, is not only valuable as an ingenuous and explicit vindication, but as a composition abounding with shrewd observation’s, and rendered interesting by the singular manner, as well as the information of the author, who seems to have been no less a man of vivacity and good sense, than of virtue and learning.

, a worthy English divine, and botanical writer, was born in 1714, in or near the parish of Ireby, in Cumberland. He was of Queen’s college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1740, and acquired some reputation as a sound scholar. Though possessed of good natural abilities, and no small share of acquired knowledge, he lived and died in an humble station. His disposition was so mild, and his sense of duty so proper, that he passed through life without a murmur at his lot. Early in life he married a lady near Portsmouth, where he at that time resided on a curacy. For fifty-six years they enjoyed the happiness of their'matrimonial connexion an happiness that became almost proverbial in their neighbourhood. After spending a few years in the south of England, he became curate of Simonburn, in Northumberland; and while here, indulged his taste for the study of botany, and filled his little garden with curious plants. This amusement led him gradually into deeper researches into natural history; and, in 1769, he published a “History of Northumberland,” 2 vols. 4to, the first of which, containing an account of minerals, fossils, &c. found in that country, is reckoned the most valuable. In other respects, as to antiquities, &c. it is rather imperfect, and unconnected. His fortune, however, did not improve with the reputation which this work brought him, and a dispute with his rector occasioned him to leave his situation, when he and his wife were received into the family of a clergyman who had formerly been his friend at college. He was curate for a short time at Haughton, near Darlington, in 1775, and soon afterwards removed to Billingham, near Stockton, where he continued until increasing infirmities obliged him to resign. He then removed to the village of Norton, where he died July 23, 1793, in the seventyninth year of his age. About two years before his death a small estate fell to him by the death of a brother; and to the honour of the present bishop of Durham (but certainly not to the surprize of any one that knows that munificent prelate), when the circumstances and situation of Mr. Wallis were represented to him, he allowed him an annual pension from the time of his resigning his curacy. From a sense of gratitude, Mr. Wallis, just at the close of life, was employed in packing up an ancient statue of Apollo, found at Carvoran, a Roman station on the wall, on the confines of Northumberland, as a present to the learned Daines Barrington, brother to the bishop. In the earlier part of his life Mr. Wallis published a volume of letters to a pupil, on entering into holy orders.

On August 12, 1645, he was incorporated in the university of Oxford. Here it was that he formed the noble scheme of publishing the Polyglott Bible; and, upon the decline of the king’s cause, he retired to the house of Dr. William Fuller, his father-in-law, in London, where, though frequently disturbed by the prevailing powers, he lived to complete it. The “Biblia Polyglotta” was published at London in 1657, in 6 vols. folio; wherein the sacred text was, by his singular care and oversight, printed, not only in the vulgar Latin, but also in the Hebrew, Syriac, Chaldee, Samaritan, Arabic, Æ'thiopic, Persic, and Greek, languages each having its peculiar Latin translation joined therewith, and an apparatus fitted to each for the better understanding of those tongues. In this great work, so far as related to the correcting of it at the press, and the collating of copies, he had the assistance of several learned persons; the chief of whom was Mr. Edmund Castell, afterwards professor of Arabic at Cambridge. Among his other assistants were Mr. Samuel Clarke of Mertou college, and Mr. Thomas Hyde of Queen’s college, Oxford: he had also some help from Mr. Whelock, Mr. Thorndike, Mr. Edward Pocock, Mr. Thomas Greaves, &c. Towards printing the work, he had contributions of mqney from many noble persons and gentlemen, which were put intothe hands of sir William Humble, treasurer for the said work. The Prolegomena and Appendix to it were attacked in 1659, by Dr. John Owen, in “Considerations,” &c. who was answered the same year by Dr. Walton, in a piece under the title of “The Considerator considered: or, a brief View of certain Considerations upon the Biblia Polyglotta, the Prolegomena, and Appendix. Wherein, among other things, the certainty, integrity, and the divine authority, of the original text is defended against the consequences of Atheists, Papists, Ariti-Scripturists, &c. inferred from the various readings and novelty of the Hebrew points, by the author of the said Considerations; the Biblia Polyglotta and translations therein exhibited, with the various readings, prolegomena, and appendix, vindicated from his aspersions and calumnies; and the questions about the punctuation of the Hebrew text, the various readings, and the ancient Hebrew character, briefly handJed,” 8vo. These prolegomena, which have always beeti admired, and afford indeed the principal monument of his learning, consist of sixteen parts: 1. Of the nature, origin, division, number, changes, and use of languages. 2. Of letters, or characters, their wonderful use, origin and first invention, and their diversity in the chief languages. 3. Of the Hebrew tongue, its antiquity, preservation, change, excellency, and use, ancient characters, vowel points, and accents. 4. Of the principal editions of the Bible. 5. Of the translations of the Bible. 6. Of the various readings in the Holy Scripture. 7. Of the integrity and authority of the original texts. 8. Of the Masora, Keri, and Ketib, various readings of the Eastern and Western Jews, Ben Ascher, and Ben Napthali, and of the Cabala. 9. Of the Septuagint, and other Greek translations. 10. Of the Latin Vulgate. 11. Of the Samaritan Pentateuch, and the versions of the same. 12. Of the Chaldee language, and versions.13. Of the Syriac tongue, and versions. 14. Of the Arabic language and versions. 15. Of the Ethiopia tongue and versions; and, 16. Of the Persian language and versions. As these instructive prolegomena were highly valued by scholars on the continent, they were reprinted at Zurich in 1573, fol. by Heidegger, with Drusius’s collection of Hebrew proverbs; and about 1777 Dr. Dathe printed an edition at Leipsic in 8vo, with a preface containing many judicious and learned remarks on several of Dr. Walton’s opinions.

Living, while in London, in the parish of St. Dunstan in the West, of which Dr. John Donne, dean of St. Paul’s, was vicar, he became of course a frequent hearer of that excellent preacher, and at length, as he himself expresses it, his convert. Upon his decease, in 1631, sir H. Wotton requested Walton to collect materials for a life of the doctor, which sir Henry had undertaken to write; but, sir Henry dying before he had completed the life, Walton undertook it himself; and in 1640 finished and published it, with a collection of the doctor’s sermons, in folio. Sir H. Wotton dying in 1639, Walton was importuned by King to undertake the writing of his life also and it was finished about 1644. The precepts of angling, that is, the rules and directions for taking fish with a hook and line, till Walton’s time, having hardly ever been reduced to writing, were propagated from age to age chiefly by tradition; but Walton, whose benevolent and communicative temper appears in almost every line of his writings, unwilling to conceal from the world those assistances which his long practice and experience enabled him, perhaps the best of any man of his time, to give, in 1653 published in a very elegant manner his K Complete Angler, or Contemplative Man’s Recreation,“in small 12mo, adorned with exquisite cuts of most of the fish mentioned in it. The artist who engraved them has been so modest as to conceal his name; but there is great reason to suppose they are the work of Lombart, who is mentioned in the” Sculptura“of Mr. Evelyn; and also that the plates were of steel.” The Complete Angler“came into the world attended with en. comiastic verses by several writers of that day. What reception in general the book met with may be naturally inferred from the dates of the subsequent editions; the second came abroad in 1655; the third in 1664; the fourth in 1668, and the fifth and last in 1676, Sir John Hawkins bad traced the several variations which the author from time to time made in these suhsequent editions, as well by adding new facts and discoveries as by enlarging on the more entertaining parts of the dialogue. The third and fourth editions of his book have several entire new chapters; and the fifth, the last of the editions published in his life-time, contains no less than eight chapters more than the first, and twenty pages more than the fourth. Not having the advantage of a learned education, it may seem unaccountable that Walton so frequently cites authors that have written only in Latin, as Gesner, Cardan, Aldrovandus, Rondeletius, and even Albertus Magnus; but it may be observed, that the voluminous history of animals, of which the first of these was author, is in effect translated into English by Mr. Edward Topsel, a learned divine, chaplain, as it seems, in the church of St. Botolph, Aldersgate, to Dr. Neile, dean of Westminster: the translation was published in 1658, and, containing in it numberless particulars concerning frogs, serpents, caterpillars, and other animals, though not of fish, extracted from the other writers above-named, and others, with their names to the respective facts, it furnished Walton with a great variety of intelligence, of which in the later editions of his book he has carefully availed himself: it was therefore through the medium of this translation alone that he was enabled to cite the other authors mentioned above; vouching the authority of the original writers, as he elsewhere does sir Francis Bacon, whenever occasion occurs to mention his natural history, or any other of his works. Pliny was translated to his hand by Dr. Philemon Holland; as were also Janus Dubravius” de Piscinis & Piscium natura,“and Lebault’s” Maison Rustique,“so often referred to by him in the course of his work. Nor did the reputation of” The Complete Angler“subsist only in the opinions of those for whose use it was more peculiarly calculated; but even the learned, either from the known character of the author, or those internal evidences of judgment and veracity contained in it, considered it as a work of merit, and for various purposes referred to its authority. Dr. Thomas Fuller, in his” Worthies,“whenever he has occasion to speak of fish, uses his very words. Dr. Plot, in his” History ofMaffordshire,“has, on the authority of our author, related two of the instances of the voracity of the pike, and confirmed them by two other signal ones, that had then lately fallen out in that county. These are testimonies in favour of Walton’s authority in matters respecting fish and fishing; and it will hardly be thought a diminution of that of Fuller to say, that he was acquainted with, and a friend of, the person whom he thus implicitly commends. About two years after the restoration, Walton wrote the life of Mr. Richard Hooker, author of the” Ecclesiastical Polity:“he was enjoined to undertake this work by his friend Dr. Gilbert Sheldon, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, who, by the way, was an angler. Bishop King, in a letter to the author, says of this life,” I have often seen Mr. Hooker with my father, who was afterwards bishop of London, from whom, and others at that time, I have heard of the most material passages which you relate in the history of his life.“Sir William Dugdale, speaking of the three posthumous books of the” Ecclesiastical Polity,“refers the reader” to that seasonable historical discourse lately compiled and published, with great judgment- and integrity, by that much-deserving person Mr. Isaac Walton."

, an upright statesman, was the son and heir of sir George Wandesforde, knight, of Kirklington, in Yorkshire, and was born at Bishop Burton, in the East Riding of that county, in Sept. 1592. His family was very ancient and honourable, the pedigree beginning with Geoffrey de Clusters, of Kirklington, in the reign of Henry II. He was taught by his virtuous mother the rudiments of the English tongue, and of the Christian religion, and sent, as soon as it was proper, to the free-school of Wells, and there instructed in due course in the Latin and Greek languages. About the age of fifteen he was judged fit for the university, and admitted of Clare-hall, Cambridge, under the tuition of Dr. Milner. Here, it is supposed,his acquaintance commenced with Mr. Wentwortb, afterwards earl of Strafford, which grew into the strictest friendship and fraternal affection. Mr. Wandesforde is said to have made great progress at college in the arts and sciences, and the knowledge of things natural, moral, and divine; but applied himself closely at the same time to the study of the classics, and particularly to oratory, as appears from his subsequent speeches in parliament. At the age of nineteen he was called from the university by his father’s death, to a scene of important business, the weighty regulation of family affairs, with an estate heavily involved; his necessary attention to which prevented him from pursuing the studies preparatory to the church, which he had originally chosen as a profession, and now relinquished.

In the close of the first edition of the “Alliance” was announced the scheme of “The Divine Legation of Moses,” in which he had at this time made a considerable progress. The first volume of this work was published in January 1737-8, under the title of “The Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated on the principles of a religious deist, from the omissions of the doctrine of a future state of rewards and punishments in the Jewish dispensation: in six books.” This was, as the author afterwards observed, fallen upon in so outrageous and brutal a manner as had been scarcely pardonable had it been “The Divine Legation of Mahomet.” It produced several answers, and so much abuse from the authors of “The Weekly Miscellany,” that in less than two months he was constrained to defend himself in “A Vindication of the Author of the Divine Legation of Moses, from the aspersions of the Country Clergyman’s Letter in the Weekly Miscellany of February 14, 1737-8,” 8vo. The principle of the “Divine Legation” was not less bold and original than the execution. That the doctrine of a future state of reward and punishment was omitted in the books of Moses, had been insolently urged by infidels against the truth of his mission, while divines were feebly occupied in seeking what was certainly not to be found there, otherwise than by inference and implication. But Warburton, with an intrepidity unheard of before, admitted the proposition in its fullest extent, and proceeded to demonstrate from that very omission, which in all instances of legislation, merely human, had been industriously avoided, that a system which could dispense with a doctrine, the very bond and cement of human society, must have come from God, and that the people to whom it was given must have been placed under his immediate superintendence. But it has been well observed, that although in the hands of such a champion, the warfare so conducted might be safe, the experiment was perilous, and the combatant a stranger: hence the timid were alarmed, the formal disconcerted; even the veteran leaders of his own party were scandalized by the irregular act of heroism; and he gave some cause of alarm, and even of dissatisfaction, to the friends of revelation. They foresaw, and deplored a consequence, which we believe has in some instances actually followed; namely, that this hardy and inventive champion has been either misconceived or misrepresented, as having chosen the only firm ground on which the divine authority of the Jewish legislator could be maintained; whereas that great truth should be understood to rest on a much wider and firmer basis: for could the hypothesis of Warburton be demonstrated to be inconclusive; had it even been discovered (which, from the universal knowledge of the history of nations at present is impossible) that a system of legislation, confessedly human, had actually been instituted and obeyed without any reference to a future state, still the divine origin and authority of the Jewish polity would stand pre-eminent and alone. Instituted in a barbarous age, and in the midst of universal idolatry, a system which taught the proper unity of the Godhead; denominated his person by a sublime and metaphysical name, evidently implying self-existence; which, in the midst of fanatical Bloodshed and lust, excluded from its ritual every thing libidinous or cruel, (for the permission to offer up beasts in sacrifice is no more objectionable than that of their slaughter for human food, and both are positively humane,) the refusal in the midst of a general intercommunity of gods, to admit the association of any of them with Jehovah: all these particulars, together with the purity and sanctity of the moral law, amount to a moral demonstration that the religion came from God.

Warburton’s Divine Legation, says the same masterly writer to whom we are indebted for the preceding observavations , is one of the few theological, and still fewer controversial works, which scholars perfectly indifferent to such subjects will ever read with delight. The novelty of the hypothesis, the masterly conduct of the argument, the hard blows which this champion of faith and orthodoxy is ever dealing about him against the enemies of both, the scorn with which he represses shallow petulance, and the inimitable acuteness with which he exposes dishonest sophistry, the compass of literature which he displays, his widely extended views of ancient polity and religion, but, above all, that irradiation of unfailing and indefectible genius which, like the rich sunshine of an Italian landscape, illuminates the whole, — all these excellences will rivet alike the attention of taste, and reason, and erudition, as Jong as English literature shall exist while many a< standard work, perhaps equally learned and more convincing, is permitted to repose upon the shelf. But it is in his episodes and digressions that Warburton'S powers of reason and brilliancy of fancy are most conspicuous. They resemble the wanton movements of some powerful and half-broken quadruped, who, disdaining to pace along the highway under a burden which would subdue any other animal of his species, starts aside at every turn to exercise the native elasticity of his muscles, and throw off the waste exuberance of his strength and spirits. Of these the most remarkable are his unfortunate hypothesis concerning the origin and late antiquity of the Book of Job, his elaborate and successful Disquisition on Hieroglyphics and Picturewriting, and his profound and original Investigation of the Mysteries.

Mr. Warburton’s extraordinary merit had now attracted the notice of the heir-apparent to the crown, in whose immediate service we find him in June 1738, when he published “Faith working by Charity to Christian edification; a sermon preached at the last episcopal visitation for confirmation in the diocese of Lincoln; with a preface, shewing the reasons of its publication; and a postscript, occasioned by some letters lately published in the Weekly Miscellany: by William Warburton, M. A. chaplain to his royal highness the prince of Wales.” A second edition of “The Divine Legation” also appeared in November 1738. In March 1739, the world was in danger of being deprived of this extraordinary genius by an intermitting fever, which with some difficulty was relieved by a plentiful use of the bark. His reputation was now rising everyday; and he about this time rendered a service tt> Pope, by means of which he acquired an ascendancy over that great poet, which will astonish those who observe the air of superiority which, until this connection, had been shewed in all Pope’s friendships, even with the greatest men of the age. The “Essay on Man” had been now published some years and it is universally supposed that the author had, in the composition of it, adopted the philosophy of lord Bolingbroke, whom on this occasion he had followed as his guide, without understanding the tendency of his principles. In 1758 M. de Crousaz wrote some remarks on it, accusing the author of Spinosism and Naturalism; which falling into Mr. Warburton’s hands he published a defence of the first epistle in “The Works of the Learned,” and soon after of the remaining three, in seven letters, of which six were pri.nted in 1739, and the seventh in June 1740, under the title of “A Vindication of Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man, by the author of the Divine Legation.” The opinion which Mr. Pope conceived of these defences, as well as of their author, will be best seen in his letters. In consequence, a firm friendship was established between them, which continued with much undiminished fervour until the death of Mr. Pope, who, during the remainder of his life, paid a deference and respect to his friend’s judgment and abilities which will be considered by many as almost bordering on servility.

In 1741 the second volume of “The Divine Legation,” in two parts, containing books IV. V. VI. was published; as was also a second edition of the “Alliance between Church and State.” In the summer of that year Mr. Pope and Mr. Warburton, in a country-ramble, took Oxford in their way, where they parted; Mr. Pope, after one day’s stay, going westward; and Mr. Warburton, who stayed aday after him to visit Dr. Conybeare, then dean of Christ Church, returning to London. On that day the vice chancellor, Dr. Leigh, sent a message to his lodgings with the usual compliment, to know if a doctor’s degree in divinity would be acceptable to him; to which such an iuiiswer was returned as so civil a message deserved. About the same time Mr. Pope had the like offer made him of a doctor’s degree in law, which he seemed disposed to accept, until he learnt that some impediment had been thrown in the way of his friend’s receiving the compliment intended for him by the vice-chancellor. He then absolutely refused that proposed to himself. “Mr. Pope,” says Hurd, “retired with some indignation to Twickenham, but consoled himself and his friend with this sarcastic reflection, ' We shall take our degree together in fame, whatever we do at the university?” This biographer also informs us that “the university seemed desirous of enrolling their narmes among their graduates,” but that “intrigue and envy defeated this scheme.” He adds, that this was “the fault of one or two of its (the university’s) members,” a number surely insufficient to produce such an effect. But the real history of this matter seems never to have been given.

Mr. Pope’s affection for Mr. Warburton was of service to him in more respects than merely increasing his fame. He introduced and warmly recommended him to most of his friends, and amongst the rest to Ralph Allen, esq. of Prior Park, whose niece he some years afterwards married. In consequence of this introduction, we find Mr. Warburton at Bath in 1742. There he printed a sermon which had been preached at the abbey-church, on the 24th of October, for the benefit of Mr. Allen’s favourite charity, the general hospital, or infirmary. To this sermon, which was published at the request of the governors, was added, “A* short account of the nature, rise, and progress, of the General Infirmary, at Bath.” In this year also he printed a dissertation on the Origin of Books of Chivalry, at the end of Jarvis’s preface to a translation of Don Quixote, which, Mr. Pope tells him, he had not got over two paragraphs of before he cried out, < Aut Erasmus, aut Dmbolus. 1 “I knew you,” adds he, “as certainly as the ancients did the Gods, by the first pace and the very gait. I have not a moment to express myself in; but could not omit this, which delighted me so much.” Mr. Tyrwhitt, however, has completely demolished Warburton’s system o-n this subject. Pope’s attention to his interest did not rest in matters which were in his own power; he recommended him to some who were more able to assist him; in particular, he obtained a promise from lord Granville, which probably, however, ended in nothing. He appears also to have been very solicitous to bring lord Bolingbroke and Mr. Warburton together, and the meeting accordingly took place, but we are told by Dr. Warton, they soon parted in mutual disgust with each other. In 1742 Mr. Warburton published “A critical and philosophical Commentary on Mr. Pope’s Essay on Man: in which is contained a Vindication of the said Essay from the misrepresentations of Mr. de Resnel, the French translator, and of Mr. de Crousaz, professor of philosophy and mathematics in the academy of Lausanne, the commentator.” It was at this period, when Mr. Warburton had the entire confidence of Pope, that he advised him to complete the Dunciad, by changing the hero,- and adding to it a fourth book. This was accordingly executed in 1742, and published early in 1743, 4to, with notes by our author, who, in consequence of it, received his share of the castigation which Gibber liberally bestowed on both Pope and his annotator. In the latter end of the same year. he published complete editions of “The Essay on Man,” and “The Essay on Criticism:” and,from the specimen which he there exhibited of his abilities, it may be presumed Pope determined to commit to him the publication of those works which he should leave. At Pope’s desire, he about this time revised and corrected the “Essay on Homer,” as it now stands in the last edition of that translation. The publication of “The Dunciad” was the last service which our author rendered Pope in his life-time. After a lingering and tedious illness, the event of which had been long foreseen, this great poet died on the 30th of' May, 1744; and by his will, dated the 12th of the preceding December, bequeathed to Mr. Warburton one half of his library, and the property of all such of his works already printed as he had not otherwise disposed of or alienated, and all the. profits which should arise from any edition to be printed after his death; but at the same time directed that they should be published without any future alterations. In 1744 Warburton’s assistance to Dr. Z. Grey was handsomely acknowledged in the preface to Hudibras; but with this gentleman he had afterwards a sharp controversy (See Grey.) “The Divine Legation of Moses” had now been published some time; and various answers and objections to it had started up from different quarters. In this year, 1744, Mr Warburton turned his attention to these attacks on his favourite work; and defended himself in a manner which, if it did not prove him to be possessed of much humility or diffidence, at least demonstrated that he knew how to wield the weapons of controversy with the hand of a master. His first defence now appeared under the title of “Remarks on several Occasional Reflections, in answer to the Rev, Dr. Middleton, Dr. Pococke, the master of the Charter-house, Dr. Richard Grey, and others; serving to explain and justify divers passages in the Divine Legation as far as it is yet advanced: wherein is considered the relation the several parts bear to each other and the whole. Together with an Appendix, in answer to a late pamphlet, entitled” An Examination of Mr. W's Second Proposition,“8vo. And this was followed next year by” Remarks on several Occasional Reflections; in answer to the Rev. Doctors Stebbing and Sykes; serving to explain and justify the Two Dissertations, in the Divine Legation, concerning the command to Abraham to offer up his son, and the nature of the Jewish theocracy, objected to by those learned writers. Part II. and last;“8vo. Both these answers are couched in those high terms of confident superiority which marked almost every performance that fell from his pen during the remainder of his life. Sept. 5, 1745, the friendship between him and Mr. Allen was more closely cemented by his marriage with his niece, Miss Tucker, who survived him. At this juncture the kingdom was under a great alarm, occasioned by the rebellion breaking out in Scotland. Those who wished well to the then-established government found it necessary to exert every effort which could be used against the invading enemy. The clergy were not wanting on their part; and no one did more service than Mr. Warburton, who published three very excellent and seasonable sermons at this important crisis. I,” A faithful portrait of Popery by which it is seen to be the reverse of Christianity, as it is the destruction of morality, piety, and civil liberty. A sermon preached at St. James’s church, Westminster, Oct. 1745,“Sva. II.” A sermon occasioned by the present unnatural Rebellion, &e> preached in Mr. Allen’s chapel, at Prior Park, near Bath, Nov. 1745, and published at his request,'? 8vo. III. “The nature of National Offences truly stated. A sermon preached on the general fast-day, Dec. 18, 1745,” 1746, 8vo. On account of the last of these sermons he was again involved in a controversy with his former antagonist, Dr. Stebbing, which occasioned “An Apologetical Dedication to the Rev. Dr. Henry Stebbing, in answer to his censure and misrepresentations of the sermon preached on the general fast-day to be observed Dec. 18, 1745,” 1746, 8yo. Notwithstanding his great connections, his acknowledged abilities, and his established reputation, a reputation founded on the durable basis of learning, and upheld by the decent and attentive performance of every duty incident to his station; yet we do not find that he received any addition to the preferment given him in 1728 by sir Robert Sutton (except the chaplaihship to the prince of Wales) until April 1746, when he was unanimously called by the society of Lincoln’s Inn to be their preacher. In November he published “A Sermon preached on the Thanksgiving appointed to be observed the 9th Oct. for the suppression of the late unnatural Rebellion,” 1746, 8vo. In 1747 appeared his edition of “Sbakspeare,” from which he derived very little reputation. Of this edition, the nameless critic already quoted, says, “To us it exhibits a phenomenon unobserved before in the operations of human intellect a mind, ardent and comprehensive, acute and penetrating, warmly devoted to the subject and furnished with all the stores of literature ancient or modern, to illustrate and adorn it, yet by some perversity of understanding, or some depravation of taste, perpetually mistaking what was obvious, and perplexing what was clear; discovering erudition of which the author was incapable, and fabricating connections to which he was indifferent. Yet, with all these inconsistencies, added to the affectation, equally discernible in the editor of Pope and Shakspeare, of understanding the poet better than he understood himself, there sometimes appear, in the rational intervals of his critical delirium, elucidations so happy, and disquisitions so profound, that our admiration of the poet (even of such a poet), is suspended for a moment while we dwell on the excellencies of the commentator.”

In the same year he published, 1. “A Letter from an author to a member of parliament, concerning Literary Property,” 8vo. 2. “Preface to Mrs. Cockburn’s remarks upon the principles and reasonings of Dr. Rutherforth’s Essay on the nature and obligations of Virtue,” &c. 8vo. 3. “Preface to a critical enquiry into the opinions and practice of the Ancient Philosophers, concerning the nature of a Future State, and their method of teaching by double Doctrine,” (by Mr. Towne), 1747, 8vo, 2d edition. In 1748 a third edition of “The Alliance between Church and State corrected and enlarged.” In 1749, a very extraordinary attack was made on the moral character of Mr. Pope from a quarter whence it could be the least expected. His “Guide, Philosopher, and Friend,” lord Bolingbroke, published a book which he had formerly lent Mr. Pope in ms. The preface to this work, written by Mr. Mallet, contained an accusation of Mr. Pope’s having clandestinely printed an edition of his lordship’s performance without his leave or knowledge. (See Pope.) A defence of the poet soon after made its appearance, which was universally ascribed to Mr. Warburton, and was afterwards owned by him. It was called “'A Letter to the editor of Letters on the Spirit of Patriotism, the Idea of a patriot King, and the State of Parties, occasioned by the editor’s advertisement;” which soon afterwards produced an abusive pamphlet under the title of “A familiar epistle to the most Impudent Man living,” &c. a performance, as has been truly observed, couched in Janguage bad enough to disgrace even gaols and garrets. About this time the publication of Dr. Middleton’s “Enquiry concerning the Miraculous Powers,” gave rise to a controversy, which was managed with great warmth and asperity on both sides. On this occasion Mr. Warburton puolished an excellent performance, written with a degree of candour and temper which, it is to be lamented, he did not always exercise. The title of it was “Julian or, a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption which defeated the emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, 1750,” 8vo. A second edition of this discourse, <c with Additions,“appeared in 1751. The critic above quoted has some remarks on this work too important to be omitted.” The gravest, the least eccentric, the most convincing of Warburton’s works, is the ' Julian, or a discourse concerning the Earthquake and Fiery Eruption, which defeated that emperor’s attempt to rebuild the Temple at Jerusalem, in which the reality of a Divine interposition is shewn, and the objections to it ar are answered/ The selection of this subject was peculiarly happy, inasmuch as this astonishing fact, buried in the ponderous volumes of the original reporters, was either little considered by an Uninquisitive age, or confounded with the crude mass of false, ridiculous, or ill-attested miracles, which “with no friendly voice” had been recently exposed by Middleton. But in this instance the occasion was important: the honour of the Deity was concerned; his power had been defied, and his word insulted. For the avowed purpose of defeating a well-known prophecy, and of giving to the world a practical demonstration that the Christian scriptures contained a lying prediction, the emperor Julian undertook to rebuild the temple of Jerusalem; when, to the astonishment and confusion of the builders, terrible flames bursting from the foundations, scorched and repelled the workmen 'till they found themselves compelled to desist. Now this phenomenon was not, the casual eruption of a volcano, for it had none of the concomitants of those awful visitations: it may even be doubted whether it were accompanied by an earthquake; but the marks of intention and specific direction were incontrovertible. The workmen desisted, the flames retired, they returned to the work, when the flames again burst forth, and that as often as the experiment was repeated.

In 1751, Mr. Warburton published an edition of Pope’s “Works,” with notes, in nine volumes, octavo and in the same year printed “An Answer to a Letter to Dr. Middleton, inserted in a pamphlet entitled The Argument of the Divine Legation fairly stated,” &c. 8vo. and “An Account of the Prophecies of Arise Evans, the Welsh Prophet, in the last Century;” the latter of which pieces afterwards subjected him to much ridicule. In 1753, Mr. Warburton published the first volume of a course of Sermons, preached at Lincoln’s-inn, entitled “The Principles of natural and revealed Religion occasionally opened and explained;” and this, in the subsequent year, was followed by a second. After the public had been some time promised lord Bolingbroke’s Works, they were about this time printed. The known abilities and infidelity of this nobleman had created apprehensions, in the minds of many people, of the pernicious effects of his doctrines; and nothing but the appearance of his whole force could have convinced his friends how little there was to be dreaded from arguments against religion so weakly supported. The personal enmity, which had been excited many years before between the peer and our author, had occasioned the former to direct much of his reasoning against two works of the latter. Many answers were soon published, but none with more acuteness, solidity, and sprightliness, than “A View of Lord Bolingbroke’s Philosophy, in two Letters to a Friend,” 1754. The third a/id fourth letters were published in 1755, with another edition of the two former; and in the same year a smaller edition of the whole; which, though it came into the world without a name, was universally ascribed to Mr. Warburton, and afterwards publicly owned by him. To some copies of this is prefixed an excellent complimentary epistle from the president Montesquieu, dated May 26, 1754. At this advanced period of his life, that preferment which his abilities might have claimed, and which had hitherto been withheld, seemed to be approaching towards him. In September 1754 he was appointed one of his majesty’s chaplains in ordinary, and in the 'next year was presented to a prebend * in the cathedral of Durham, worth 500l. per annum, on the death of Dr. Mangey. About the same time, the degree of doctor of divinity was conferred on him by Dr. Herring, then archbishop of Canterbury; and, a new impression of “The, Divine Legation” having being called for, he printed a fourth edition of the first part of it, corrected and enlarged, divided into two volumes, with a dedication to the earl of Hardwicke. The same year appeared “A Sermon preached before his grace Charles duke of Marlborough president, and the Governors of the Hospital for the small-pox and for inoculation, at the parish church of St. Andrew, Holborn, on Thursday, April the 24th, 1755,” 4to; and in 1756 “Natural and Civil Events the Instruments of God’s moral Government, a Sermon preached on the last public Fast-day, at Lincoln’s-inn Chapel,” 4to. In 1757, a pamphlet was published, called “Remarks on Mr. David Hume’s Essay on the Natural History of Religion;” which is said to have been composed of marginal observations made by Dr. Warburton on reading Mr. Hume’s book; and which gave so much offence to the author animadverted upon, that he thought it of importance enough to deserve particular mention in the short account of his life. On Oct. 11, in this year, our author was ad­* Soon after he attained this pre- Neal’s History of the Puritans, which ferment, he wrote the Remarks on are now added to his Works. “vanced to the deanery of Bristol and in 175&republished the second part of” The Divine Legation,“divided into two parts, with a dedication to the earl of Mansfield, which deserves to be read by every person who esteems the wellbeing of society as a concern of any importance. At the latter end of next year, Dr. Warburton received the honour, so justly due to his merit, of being dignified with the mitre, and promoted to the vacant see of Gloucester. He was consecrated on the 20th of Jan. 1760; and on the 30th of the same month preached -before the House of Lords. In the next year he printed” A rational Account of the Nature and End of the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper,“12mo. In 1762, he published” The Doctrine of Grace: or, the office and operations of the Holy Spirit vindicated from the insults of Infidelity and the abuses of Fanaticism,“2 vols. 12mo, one of his performances which does him least credit; and in the succeeding year drew upon himself much illiberal abuse from some writers of the popular party, on occasion of his complaint in the House of Lords, on Nov. 15, 1763, against Mr. Wilkes, for putting his name to certain notes on the infamous” Essay on Woman.“In 1765, anotber edition of the second part of” The Divine Legation“was published, as volumes III. IV. and V.; the two parts printed in 1755 being considered as volumes I. and II. It was this edition which produced a very angry controversy between him and Dr. Lowth, whom in many respects he found more than his equal. (See Lowth, p. 438.) On this occasion was published,” The second part of an epistolary Correspondence between the bishop of Gloucester and the late professor of Oxford, without an Imprimatur, i.e. without a cover to the violated Laws of Honour and Society,“1766, 8vo. In 1776, he gave a new edition of” The Alliance between Church and State;“and” A Sermon preached before the incorporated Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in foreign Parts, at the anniversary Meeting in the parish church of St. Mary-le-bow, on Friday, Feb. 21,“8vo. The next year produced a third volume of his” Sermons,“dedicated to lady Mansfield and with this, and a single” Sermon preached at St. Lawrence-Jewry on Thursday, April 30, 1767, before his royal highness Edward duke of York, president, and the governors of the London Hospital. &c.“4to, he closed his literary labours. His faculties continued unimpaired for some time after this period; and, in 1769, he gave the principal materials to Mr. Ruffhead, for his” Life of Mr. Pope." He also transferred 500l. to lord Mansfield, judge Wilmot, and Mr. Charles Yorke, upon trust, to found a lecture in the form of a course of sermons; to prove the truth of revealed religion in general, and of the Christian in particular, from the completion of the prophecies in the Old and New Testament, which relate to the Christian church, especially to the apostacy of Papal Rome. To this foundation we owe the admirable introductory letters of bishop Hurd and the well- adapted continuation of bishops Halifax and Bagot, Dr. Apthorp, the Rev. R. Nares, and others. It is a melancholy reflection, that a life spent in the constant pursuit of knowledge frequently terminates in the loss of those powers, the cultivation and improvement of which are attended to with too strict and unabated a degree of ardour. This was in some degree the misfortune of Dr. Warburton. Like Swift and the great duke of Marlborough, he gradually sunk into a situation in which it was a fatigue to him to enter into general conversation. There were, however, a few old and valuable friends, in whose company, even to the last, his mental faculties were exerted in their wonted force; and at such times he would appear cheerful for several hours, and on the departure of his friends retreat as it were within himself. This melancholy habit was aggravated by the loss of his only son, a very promising young gentleman, who died of a consumption but a short time before the bishop himself resigned to fate June 7, 1779, in the eighty-first year of his age. A neat marble monument has been lately erected in the cathedral of Gloucester, with the inscription below *.

, master of Sidney-Sussex college, Cambridge, a learned divine of the seventeenth century, was born of a good family in the bishopric of Durham, at a place called Bishops-Middleham. He was first sent to Christ’s college, Cambridge, where he became a scholar of the house, whence he was, on account of his extraordinary merit, elected into a fellowship at Emmanuel, and succeeded to the mastership of Sidney-Sussex college on Jan. 5, 1609. On April 29, 1615, he was installed archdeacon of Taunton, and was at that time D. D. and prebendary of Bath and Wells. On Feb. 11, 1617, he was promoted to a stall in the metropolitical church of York, where he had the prebend of Ampleford, which he kept to his death. In 1620 he was vice-chancellor of the university, and the year following was made lady Margaret’s professor of divinity. In 1622 he was at Salisbury with bishop Davenant, his intimate and particular friend, with whom, together with bishops Hall and Carleton, he had been sent by king James to the synod of Dort in 1613, as persons best able to defend the doctrine of the Church of England, and to gain it credit and reputation among those to whom they were sent.

After his majesty’s garrisons were given up he was forced to compound for his temporal estate, now four years sequestered, at the rate of the tenth part real and personal; but all oaths to the usurping government he refused to the last; and having, although after a heavy deduction, saved a considerable part of his estate, he devoted it to the assistance of his suffering brethren, and was a great support to such of the sequestered clergy and their families as vver^ reduced to absolute poverty. Of this, bishop Rennet, in his life of Somner, affords the following proof and instance “When in the days of usurpation an honest friend paid a visit to him (Warner), and upon his lordship’s importunity told him freely the censures of the world, aJi being of a close and too thrifty a temper, the bishop produced a roll of distressed clergy, whom in their ejectments he had relieved with no less than eight thousand pounds; and inquirked of the same friend, whether he knew of any other like objects of charity; upon which motion the gentleman soon after by letter recommended a sequestered divine, to whom at the first address he gave 100l.”

In the exercise of his profession as a divine, Mr. Mant has not heard that he was much distinguished. He went through the routine of parochial duty in a respectful manner; but a hurried mode of speaking, partly owing to habit and partly to a natural impediment, prevented his being heard with advantage. It is a more serious objection, that he has, particularly in his notes on Milton, expressed opinions on religious topics, the consequence of which he had not deliberately considered. He hated Puritans and Calvinists, but does not seem to have understood very clearly that his own church, and every pure church, has many doctrines in common with them. His opinions on Psalmody, and on the observation of Sunday, are particularly objectionable.

That Dr. Warton advanced no novel opinions is proved from Phillips’s Preface; and Phillips, there is reason to suppose, may have been indebted to his uncle Milton for an idea of poetry so superior to what was entertained in his day. It has already been noticed, that the opinions of the two Wartons, “the learried brothers” as they have been justly styled, were congenial on most topics of literature; but, perhaps, in nothing more than their ideas of poetry, which both endeavoured to exemplify in their own productions, although with different effect. Dr. Warton was certainly in point of invention, powers of description, and variety, greatly inferior to the laureate. The “Enthusiast,” the “Dying Indian,” the “Revenge of America,” and one or two of his Odes, are not deficient in spirit and enthusiasm but the rest are more remarkable for a correct and faultless elegance than for any striking attribute of poetry. His “Odes,” which were coeval with those of Collins, must have suffered greatly by comparison. So different is taste from execution, and so strikingly are we reminded of one of his assertions, that “in no polished nation, after criticism has been much studied, and the rules of writing established, has any very extraordinary work appeared.” But while we are reminded of this by his own productions, it may yet be doubted whether what may be true when applied to an individual who has lived a life of criticism, will be equally true of a nation. Even among our living poets, we may find more than one who have given proofs that extraordinary poetry may yet be produced, and that the rules of writing are not so fixed, nor criticism so studied, as to impede the progress of real genius. All that can be concluded respecting Dr. Warton is, that if his genius had been equal to his taste, if he could have produced what he appreciates with such exquisite skill in others, he would have undoubtedly been in poetry what he was in erudition and criticism. As an instructor and divine, Mr. Wooll’s opinion of him may be adopted with safety. “His professional exertions united the qualities of criticism and instruction. When the higher classes read under him the Greek tragedians, orators, or poets, they received the benefit, not only of direct and appropriate information, but of a pure, elegant lecture on classical taste. The spirit with which he commented on the prosopopoeia of Œdipus, or Electra, the genuine elegance and accuracy with which he developed the animated rules and doctrines of his favourite Longinus, the insinuating but guarded praise he bestowed, the well-judged and proportionate encouragement he uniformly held out to the first dawning of genius, and the anxious assiduity with which he pointed out the paths to literary eminence, can never, I am confident, be forgotten by those who have hung with steadfast attention on his precepts, and enjoyed the advantage of his superior guidance. Zealous in his adherence to the church-establishment, and exemplary in his attention to its ordinances and duties, he was at the same time a decided enemy to bigotry and intolerance. His style of preaching was unaffectedly earnest, and impressive; and the dignified solemnity with which he read the liturgy (particularly the communion-service), was remarkably awful. He had the most happy art of arresting the attention of youth on religious subjects. Every Wiccamical reader will recollect his inimitable commentaries on Grotius on the Sunday-evenings, and his discourse annually delivered in the school on Good Friday the impressions made by them cannot be forgotten.”

, a learned English divine, and able assertor of the doctrine of the Trinity, was born Feb. 34, 1683, at Waseley, or Walesiy, in the Lindsey division of Lincolnshire, of which parish his father, the rev. Henry Waterland, was rector. He received his early education partly at Flixborough, of which also his father was rector, under his curate Mr. Sykes, and partly under his father, until he was fit to be sent to the free-school at Lincoln, then in great reputation. His uncommon diligence and talents recommended him to the notice of Mr. Samuel Garmstone and Mr. Antony Read, the two successive masters of that school, at whose request, besides the ordinary exercises, he frequently performed others, which were so excellent as to be handed about for the honour of the school. In 1699, he went to Cambridge, and on March 30, was admitted of Magdalen college, under the tuition of Mr. Samuel Barker. In December 1702 he obtained a scholarship, and proceeding A. B. in Lent term following, was elected fellow in Feb. 1703-4. He then took pupils, and was esteemed a good teacher. In 1706 he commenced A.M. In February 1713, on the death of Dr. Gabriel Quadrin, master of the college, the earl of Suffolk and Binden, in whose family the right is vested, conferred the mastership upon Mr. Waterland, who having taken holy orders, was also presented by that nobleman to the rectory of Ellingham in Norfolk. But this made little or no addition to his finances, as he gave almost the whole revenue of it to his curate, his own residence being necessary at college, where he still continued to take pupils, and for their advantage wrote his “Advice to a young student, with a method of study for the first four years,” which went through several editions.

, a nonconformist divine of considerable eminence, was educated at Emmanuel college, Cambridge, where he was remarked to be a very hard student. In 1646, he became rector of St. Stephen’s, W r albrook, by the sequestration of his predecessor, and was a preacher of great fame and popularity until the restoration, when he was ejected for nonconformity. In other respects he was a man rather of loyal principles, and besides a vigorous opposition to the measures adopted against the life of Charles 1. and a remonstrance to Cromweli r against the murder of that sovereign, he was concerned in what was called Love’s plot to bring in Charles II. and was for some time imprisoned in the Tower on that account. After his ejectment from St. Stephen’s, Walbrook, he occasionally preached where he could with safety, until undulgence being granted in 1672, he fitted up the great hall in Crosby House, Bishopsgate-street, which then belonged to sir John Langham, a nonconformist, and preached there several years. At length he retired to Essex, where he died sud* denly, as is supposed about 1689 or 1690. The time, either of his birth or death, is no where mentioned. He published a variety of small works on practical subjects, particularly “The Art of Divine Contentment,” which has gone through several editions; but his greatest work is his “Body of Divinity,” 1692, fol. consisting of a series of sermons on the Assembly’s Catechism, reprinted a few years ago in 2 vols. 8vo.

Soon alter his admission he distinguished himself as a botanist, and communicated some ingenious papers to the society, which are printed in their Transactions, particularly “Critical remarks on the Rev. Mr. Pickering’s paper concerning the Seeds of Mushrooms,'” which that gentleman considered as a new discovery, whereas Mr. Watson shewed that they had been demonstrated several years prior to that period by M. Micheli, in his “Nova plantarucn genera,” printed at Florence in 1729. But "that which attracted the attention of foreign botanists mostly, was his description of a rare and elegant species of fungus, called from its form geaster. This was written in Latin, and accompanied with an engraving. In 1748 Mr. Watson had an opportunity of showing attention to M. Kalm, during his abode in England, which was from February till August, when' he embarked for America. He introduced him to the curious gardens, and accompanied hjm in several botanical excursions in the environs of London. This eminent pupil of Linnæus, who was a Swedish divine, on his return home, became professor of osconomy at Abo, where he died Nov. 16, 1779. (See Kalm.) The same civilities were manifested by Dr. Watson to the eminent Dr. Pallas, of Petersburgh, during his abode in England, which was from July 1761 to April 1762.

In this retreat, he wrote the whole or nearly the whole of those works which have immortalized his name as a divine, poet, and philosopher. He occasionally preached, and in the pulpit, says Dr. Johnson, though his low stature, which very little exceeded five feet, graced him with no advantages of appearance, yet the gravity and propriety of his utterance made his discourses very efficacious. Such was his flow of thoughts, and such his promptitude of language, that in the latter part of his life he did not precompose his cursory sermons; but having adjusted the heads, and sketched out some particulars, trusted for success to his extemporary powers.

, a distinguished antiquary, born in 1700, was regularly bred to the profession of the law: and was admitted an attorney before Mr. Justice Price, June 20, 1724: he lived then in the Old Jewry, but afterwards removed to Budge-row, and thence to Great Queen-street, Lincoln’s-Inn fields. He was peculiarly learned in the records of this kingdom, and particularly able as a parliamentary and constitutional lawyer. In 1747, he published “Observations on the Course of Proceedings in (he Admiralty-courts,” 8vo. In 1751. he assisted materially in obtaining the charter of incorporation for the Society of Antiquaries, remitting in that business the customary fees which were due to him as a solicitor; and on many other occasions proved himself a very useful member of that learned body. Purchasing a house and estate at Busbridge, Surrey, where he resided in the summer, it ga?e him 'an influence in the borough of Haslemere, for which he was chosen member in 1754, and again in 1761. He became, under the patronage of lord chancellor Hardwicke, secretary of bankrupts in the Court of Chancery, and was appointed one of the joint solicitors of the treasury in 1756. In July 1758, he obtained a silver medal from the Society of Arts for having planted a large quantity of acorns for timber. In 1760 he had the honour of presenting the famous Heraclean table to the king of Spain, by the hands of the Neapolitan minister, from whom he received in return (in November that year) a diamond-ring, worth 300l. In April 17G3, the period of Mr. Wilkes’ s being apprehended for writing “The North Briton,” No. 45, Mr. Webb became officially a principal actor in that memorable prosecution, but did not altogether approve of the severity with which it was carried on; and printed, on that occasion, “A Collection of Records about General Warrants;” and also “Observations upon discharging Mr. Wilkes from the Tower.” He held the office of solicitor to the Treasury till June 1765, and continued secretary of bankrupts till lord Northington quitted the seals in 1766. He died at Busbridge, June 22, 1770, aged seventy; and his Library (including that of John Godfrey *, esq. which he had purchased entire) was sold, with his Mss. on vellum, Feb. 25, and the sixteen following days, 1771. A little before his death he sold to the House of Peers thirty ms volumes of the rolls of parliament. His ms& on paper were sold, by his widow and executrix, to the late marquis of Lansdowne, and are now in the British Museum, The coins and medals were sold by auction the same year, three days sale; in which were all the coins and medals found in his collection at the time of his decease; but he had disposed of the most valuable part to different persons. The series of large brass had been picked by a nobleman. The noble series of Roman gold (among which were Pompey, Lepidus, &c.) and the collection of Greek kings and towns, had been sold to Mr. Duane, and afterwards formed part of the valuable museum collected by the late Dr. Hunter. The ancient marble busts, bronzes, Roman earthen-ware, gems, seals, &c. of which there were 96 lots, were sold in the above year. On the death of the late Mrs. Webb, the remainder of the curiosities was sold by Mr. Langford, Mr. Webb’s publications were, 1. “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. William Warburton, M. A. occasioned by some passages in his book, entitled ‘The Divine Legation of Moses demonstrated.’ By a gentleman of Lincoln’s Inn,” 1742, 8vo. 2. “Remarks on the Pretender’s Declaration and Commission,” 1745, 8vo. 3. “Remarks on the Pretender’s eldest Son’s second Declaration, dated the 10th of October 1745, by the author of the Remarks on his first Declaration,” 1745, 8vo. Of these

, ar learned and laborious divine, grandson to bishop Sparrow, was born in December 1689,. and having been admitted a student of Caius-college, Cambridge, there took his degrees of B. A. 1711, M. A. 1716, and D. D. 1752. In 1715 he was made curate of St. Dunstan in the West, London; and in 1725, edited the “Life of General Monk,” from the original manuscript of Dr. Skinner. This volume he Dedicated to the countess Granville, and to John lord Gower, who were descended from the family of Monk. His next production was, “The Clergy’s Right of Maintenance vindicated,” 8vo, which is also inscribed to lord Gower, who was afterwards his patron.

, a learned English divine, was the sbn of John Welchman of Banbury in Oxfordshire. He was born about 1665, and became a commoner of Magdalen hall in 1679. He took his degree of bachelor of arts in April 1683, was admitted probationer fellow of Merton college in 1684, and master of arts in June 1688. After entering into holy orders, he was presented by the society of Merton college to the rectory of Lapworth, with which he held that of Solihull in Warwickshire. He became also archdeacon of Cardigan. He died May 28, 1739. One of his sons was afterwards reduced to keep an inn at Stratford on Avon.

, a learned English divine, of whom we are sorry our materials are so scanty, was admitted a scholar at Westminster school in 1680, and was thence elected to Christ-church, Oxford, in 1686, where he proceeded M.A. in 1693, and B. and D. D, in 1704. He was a tutor in his college, and among others had under his care, the celebrated antiquary Browne Willis, who presented him to the rectory of Blechley in Buckinghamshire, where his nephew, Edward Wells, was his curate. Dr. Wells also obtained the rectory of Cottesbach in Leicestershire in 1717, and died in August 1727. Among Dr. Wells’s useful publications are, l.'“An historical Geography of the Old and New Testament, illustrated xvith maps and chronological tables,” 4 vols. 8vo. 2. “The young gentleman’s course of Mathematics,” 3 vols. 8vo. 3. “An historical Geography of the New Testament,” 8vo. 4. “Arithmetic and Geometry,” 3 vols. 8vo. 5. “A paraphrase, with annotations on all the books of the Old and New Testament,” 6 vols. 4to. 6. “An help for the right understanding of the several divine laws and covenants,” 8vo. 7. “Controversial Treatises against the Dissenters.” 8. “An Exposition of 'the Church Catechism.” 9. “Prayers on common occasions,” a sequel to the preceding. 10. “Harmonia Grammaticalis or a view of the agreement between the Latin and Greek tongues, as to the declining of words,” &c. 11. “A Letter to a friend concerning the great sin of taking God’s name in vain.” 12. “Elementa Arithmetics numerosoe et speciosae.” He published also some other tracts on subjects of practical religion, particularly specified in our authority; and was the editor of a good edition of “Dionysius’s Geography,” Gr. and Lat. Oxford, 1706. He was esteemed one of the most accurate geographers of his time.

, a nonconformist divine, the son of Mr. William Wells, of St. Peter’s East, in Oxford, was born there August 18, 16 J 4, and brought up in Magdalen college, but is not mentioned by Wood. He commenced M. A. in 1636; married Mrs. Dorothy Doyley, of Auborn in Wilts, 1637, being the twenty-second year of his age. He was ordained Dec. 23, 1638, at which time he kept a school in Wandsworth. He was assistant to Dr. Temple,* at Battersea, in 1639. In the war-time, for their security, he removed his family into Fetter-lane, London, about 1644; and about that time was in the army, chaplain to Col. Essex. He was fixed minister at Remnam, in Berks, 1647, where his income is said to be 200l. per annum, but not above twenty families in the parish. He was invited to Banbury in Oxfordshire; accepted the offer, and settled there in 1649, though a place of less profit, namely, about 100l. per annum. His reason for leaving Remnam was, that he might do good to more souls. When the troubles were over, he had the presentation of Brinkworth, said to be about 300l. per annum, but declined it for the former reason. When the Bartholomew-Act displaced him, he remitted 100l. due from Banbury; and afterwards would cheerfully profess, “that he had not one carking thought about the support of his family, though he had then ten children, and his wife big with another.” The Five-Mile act removed him to Dedington, about five miles distant from Banbury, but as soon as the times would permit, he returned to Banbury, and there continued till his death. There Mr. (afterwards Dr.) White, of Kidderminster, the church minister, was very friendly and familiar with him, frequently paying each other visits; and one speech of his, when at Mr. Weils’s, is still remembered. “Mr. Wells,” said he, “I wonder how you do to live so comfortably. Methinks you, with your numerous family, live more plentifully on the providence of God than I can with the benefits of the parish.” Mr Wells was of a cheerful disposition, and of a large and liberal heart to all, but especially to good uses. It was the expression of one who had often heard him preach, “That his auditory’s ears were chained to his lips.” As he used to hear Mr. White in public, so Mr. White, though secretly, went to hear him in private; and once, upon his taking leave, he was heard to say, “Well, I pray God to bless your labours in private, and mine in public.” There is a small piece of Mr. Weils’s printed; the title, “A Spirituall Remembrancer,” sold by Cockrell. >

, an eminent, but unfortunate statesman, of an ancient family, the son of sir William Wentworth of Yorkshire, was born April 13, 1593, in Chancery-lane, London, at the house of his maternal grandfather, a barrister of Lincoln’s-inn. Being the eldest of twelve children, and destined to inherit the honours and estate of the family, he was early initiated in those accomplishments which suited his rank; and completed his literary education at St. John’s college, Cambridge; but of the plan or progress of his early studies, no particulars have been preserved. His proficiency at the university seems, however, to have impressed his friends with a favourable opinion of his talents, and at a future period of his life, we find him patronising the cause of his university with much earnestness, and receiving their acknowledgments of his favours. Having occasion to represent some misconduct of a church dignitary who had been educated at Oxford, he could not help adding that such a divine was never produced at Cambridge. Notwithstanding this, somewhat illiberal, sentiment, it was not from his own university that he was destined to receive a tutor, when he commenced his travels. That office fell upon Mr. John Greenwood, fellow of University college, Oxford, of whom he long after spoke in the highest terms, and while he could retain him in his family, uniformly consulted him in all matters of importance. With this gentleman he spent upwards of a year in France.

, an eminent protestant divine, was the grandson of John James Werenfels, a clergyman at Basil, who died November 17, 1655, leaving ' Sermons“in German, and” Homilies on Ecclesiastes“in Latin. He was the son of Peter Werenfels, likewise an eminent protestant divine, born 1627, at Leichtal; wtio, after having been pastor of different churches, was appointed archdeacon of Basil in 1654, where he gave striking proofs of his piety and zeal during the pestilence which desolated the city of Basil in 1667 and 1668. His sermons, preached at that time from Psalm xci. have been printed. He was appointed professor of divinity in 1675, and died May 23, 1703, aged seventy-six, leaving a great number of valuable ”Dissertations,“some” Sermons,“and other works. His son, the immediate subject of the present article, was born March I, 1657, at Basil. He obtained a professorship of logic in 1684, and of Greek in the year following, and soon after set out on a literary journey through Holland and Germany, and then into France, with Burnet, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, and Frederick Battier. At his return to Basil he was appointed professor of rhetoric, and filled the different divinity chairs successively. He died in that city, June 1, 1740. His works have all been collected and printed in 2 vols. 4to; the most complete edition of them is that of Geneva and of Lausanne, 1739. They treat of philology, philosophy, and divinity, and are universally esteemed, particularly the tract” De Logomachiis Eruditorum.“In the same collection are several poems, which show the author to have been a good poet as well as an able philosopher and learned divine. We have also a vol. 8vo, of his” Sermons," which are much admired.

, an English divine, of whom some account may be acceptable, preparatory to that of his more celebrated son, was the son of a nonconformist minister, ejected in 1662. He was born about 1662. He was educated in nonconformist sentiments, which he soon relinquished, owing to the violent prejudices of some of his sect in favour of the murder of Charles I. He spent some time at a private academy, and at the age of sixteen walked to Oxford, and entered himself of Exeter college, as a servitor. He had at this time no mure than two pounds sixteen shillings, nor any prospect of 'future supply but from his own exertions. But by industry, and probably by assisting his fellow students, he supported himself until he took his bachelor’s degree, without any preferment or assistance from ^his friends, except five shillings. He now came to London, having increased his little stock to 10l. 15s. Here he was ordained deacon, and obtained a curacy, which he held one year, when he was appointed chaplain of the Fleet. In this situation he remained but a year, and returned to London, where he again served a curacy for two years, during which time he married and had a son. He now wrote several pieces which brought him into notice and esteem, and a small living was given him in the country, that, if we mistake not, of South Ormesby, in the county of Lincoln. He was strongly solicited by the friends of James II. to support the measures of the court in favour of popery, with promises of preferment if he would comply with the king’s desire. But he absolutely refused to read the king’s declaration; and though surrounded with courtiers, soldiers, and informers, he preached a bold and pointed discourse against it, from Daniel iii. 17, 18. “If it be so, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace, and he will deliver us out of thine hand, O king. But if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that we will not serve thy gods, nor worship the golden image which thou hast set up.” When the revolution took place he wrote a work in defence of it, dedicated to queen Mary, who, in consequence of it, gave him the living of Epworth, in Lincolnshire, about 1693; and in 1723 he was presented to the living of Wroote, in the same county, in addition to Epworth, which last he held upwards of forty years.

, a very learned divine of Germany, was descended from an ancient and distinguished family, and born at Basil in 1693. He was trained with great care, and had early made such a progress in the Greek and Latin tongues as to be thought fit for higher pursuits. At fourteen he applied himself to divinity under his uncle John Rodolph Wetstein, a professor at Basil, and learned Hebrew and the Oriental languages from Buxtorf. At sixteen, he took the degree of doctor in philosophy, and four years after was admitted into the ministry; on which occasion he publicly defended a thesis, " De variis Novi Testament! Leetionibus,' in which he demonstrated that the vast variety of readings in the New Testament are no argument against the genuineness and authenticity of the text. These various readings he had for some time made the object of his attention and, while he was studying the ancient Greek authors, as well sacred as profane, kept this point constantly in view. He was also very desirous of examining all the manuscripts he could come at; and his curiosity in this particular was the chief motive of his travelling to foreign countries. In 1714 he went to Geneva, and, after some stay there, to Paris; thence to England; in which last place he had many conferences with Dr. Bentley relating to the prime object of his journey. Passing through Holland, he arrived at Basil in July 1717, and applied himself to the business of the ministry for several years. Still he went on with his critical disquisitions and animadversions upon the various readings of the New Testament; and kept a constant correspondence with Dr. Befntley, who was at the same time busy in preparing an edition of it, yet did not propose to make use of any manuscripts less than a thousand years old, which are not easy to be met with.

, an English divine and critic, the son of Richard Whalley, of an ancient Northamptonshire family, was born at Rugby, in the county of Warwick, Sept. 2, 1722. He was admitted at Merchant-Taylor’s-school, London, Jan. 10, 1731, whence, in June 1740, he was elected scholar of St. John’s-college, Oxford, and, in 1743, was admitted Fellow. On quitting the university, he became vicar of St. Sepulchre’s, Northamptonshire. It was here that he probably laid the foundation of that topographical knowledge which, in 1755, induced a committee of gentlemen of that county to elect him as the proper person to prepare for the press Bridges’s and other Mss. for a History of Northamptonshire.

, an English divine, of most uncommon abilities, was born Nov. 9, 1664, at Worstead in Norfolk; of which parish his father Edmund, who survived him, was vicar. He was educated under his father; and made such a progress in the Greek and Latin tongues, that, from his first entrance into the university, he was thought an extraordinary young man. On Feb. 17, 1679—80, he was admitted into 'Caius-college, Cambridge, of which his father had been fellow, under the tuition of John, afterwards sir John Ellys, one of the senior fellows. Here he prosecuted his studies with the greatest vigour, and was instructed in the mathematics by Mr. (afterwards sir) Isaac Newton, then fellow of Trinity-college and Lucasian professor, amongst a select company, to whom that great man read lectures in his own private chamber. He took a bachelor of arts degree in 1683-4, and resided in the college till 1686, was a scholar on the foundation of his great uncle Stockys, but, observing no probability of a vacancy among the fellowships, he left it, and was recommended by Dr. Barker, afterwards chaplain to archbishop Tillotson, to Dr. Cave, whom he assisted in compiling his “Historia Literaria.” Of the nature of that assistance, and the manner in which he conducted himself, we shall have occasion to speak afterwards. In 1687 he was ordained deacon; and the same year proceeded master of arts by proxy; which favour was indulged him on account of being then dangerously ill of the small-pox at Islington. About this time the reputation he had acquired recommended him to the notice of Dr. Tenison, vicar of St. Martin’s in the Fields, London, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, who employed him to prepare for the press a manuscript on “The incurable Scepticism of the Church of Rome,” written in Latin by Placette of Hamburgh. This Wharton translated into English and epitomized. Tenison also recommended him to lord Arundel of Trerice, as tutor for his son. Soon after being presented to archbishop Sancroft, his grace put into his hands, in April 1788, the manuscript of archbishop Usher’s dogmatical history of the Holy Scriptures, which he published, in 4to, under the title, “J. Usserii, &c. Hist. Dogmatica controversial inter orthodoxos et pon-r tificios de scripturis, &c.” to which he added an “auctarium,” or supplement. He also published before and about this time several treatises against popery, among which are, 1. “The Speculum Ecclesiasticum considered, inits false reasonings and quotations,” Lond. 1687, 4to. The “Speculum Ecclesiasticum” was a production of Thomas. Ward, whom we have noticed already. 2. “A treatise proving Scripture to be the rule of Faith, writ by Reginald Pecock, bishop of Chichester, before the reformation, about 1450,” Lond* 1688, 4to. This, to which Mr. Wharton prefixed a preface on the same subject, is the only production of that learned prelate which has been pub-, lished. 3. “A treatise of the Celibacy of the Clergy, wherein its rise and progress are historically considered, 7 * ibid. 1688, 4to. In this he proves that the celibacy of the clergy was not enjoined either by Christ or his apostles; that it has nothing excellent in itself; that the imposition of it is unjust, and that, in point of fact, it was never universally imposed or practised in the ancient church. 5. A, translation of Dellon’s” History of the Inquisition of Goa. n 6. About the same time he translated some homilies of St. Macarius, the prologue and epilogue of Euronius to his “Apologetic Treatise” (formerly transcribed by him out of a manuscript of Dr. Tenison) with a treatise of “PseudoDorotheus,” found by Mr. Dodwell jn the Bodleian library, out of Greek into Latin, and the famous Bull “in Ccena Domini” out of Latin into English annexing a short preface containing some reflections- upon the Bull, and animadversions on the account of the proceedings of the parliament of Paris. 7. He gave his assistance likewise to a new edition of Dr. Thomas James’s “Corruption of the Scriptures, Councils, and Fathers, by the Prelates of the Church of Rome for the maintenance of Popery;” and at the request of Mr. Watts he revised the version of “Philalethe & Philirene,” fitting it for the press. 8. “A brief declaration of the Lord’s Supper, written by Dr. Nicholas Ridley, bishop of London, during his imprisonment. Witfo some other determinations and disputations concerning the same argument, by the same author. To which is annexed an extract of several passages to the same purpose out of a book entitled * Diallecticon,' written by Dr. John Poynet, bishop of Winton in the reigns of Edward VI. and queen Mary,” 1688, 4to. 9. “The Enthusiasm of the Church of Rome demonstrated in some observations upon the Life of Ignatius Loyola,” 1688, 4to.

This letter seems to confirm what Burnet had asserted of Wharton’s temper, and which, indeed, will be found confirmed by other passages in our authorities. But Wharton, upon the whole, is certainly a man to be venerated for his uncommon zeal as an ecclesiastical antiquary, and his incessant labours. Perhaps no man ever applied so diligently, or produced so much in the short space allotted to him, for he was little more than thirty years old. He probably began his researches early, and it is certain that he was a mere youth when Cave employed him, and conceived that high opinion of his talents which he so liberally expressed in the preface to his “Historia Literaria.” The second edition of this work, it must not be forgot, has many additions from Wharton’s Mss. at Lambeth, which have improperly been ascribed to Tenison. Mr. Wharton had some property, and by his will ordered the greatest part of it “to be disposed of to a religious use in the parish of Worstead, in which he was born.” His executors were his father, the rev. Edmund Wharton, the rev. Dr. Thorp, one of the prebendaries of Canterbury, and Mr. Charles Battely. His biographer informs us that “he never undertook any matter of moment without first imploring the divine assistance and blessing thereupon,” and that “in all his journeys, which his learned designs engaged him in, he was ever wont so to order his affairs, as not to omit being present at the monthly sacrament wherever he came.” To such a man some irregularities of temper and displays of conceit may be forgiven.

, an eminent puritan divine, was born at Banbury in Oxfordshire, in May 1583, where his father, Thomas Whately, was justice of the peace, and had been several times mayor. He was educated at Christ’scollege, Cambridge, under the tuition of Mr. Potman, a man of learning and piety, and was a constant hearer of Dr. Chaderton, Perkins, and other preachers of the Puritan-stamp. It does not appear that he was originally destined for the church, as it was not until after his marriage with the daughter of the Rev. George Hunt that he was persuaded to study for that purpose, at Edmund -hall, Oxford. Here he was incorporated bachelor of arts, and, according to Wood, with the foundation of logic, philosophy, and oratory, that he had brought with him from Cambridge, he became a noted disputant and a ready orator. In 1604, he took his degree of M. A. as a member of Edmund-hall, “being then esteemed a good philosopher and a tolerable mathematician.” He afterwards entered into holy orders, and was chosen lecturer of Banbury, his native place. In 1610, he was presented by king James to the vicarage of Banbury, which he enjoyed until his death. He also, with some of his brethren, delivered a lecture, alternately at Stratford-upon-Avon. In his whole conduct, Mr. Leigh says, he “was blameless, sober, just, holy, temperate, of good behaviour, given to hospitality”,&c. Fuller calls him “a good linguist, philosopher, mathematician, and divine;” and adds, that he “was free from faction?' Wood, who allows that he possessed excellent parts, was a noted disputant, an excellent preacher, a good orator, and well versed in the original text, both Greek and Hebrew, objects, nevertheless, that,” being a zealous Calvinist, a noted puritan, and much frequented by the precise party, for his too frequent preaching, he laid such a foundation of faction at Banbury, as will not easily be removed.“Granger, who seems to have considered all these characters with some attention, says, that” his piety was of a very extraordinary strain; and his reputation as a preacher so great, that numbers of different persuasions went from Oxford, and other distant places, to hear him. As he ever appeared to speak from his heart, his sermons were felt as well as heard, and were attended with suitable effects.“In the life of Mede, we have aa anecdote of him, which gives a very favourable idea of his character. Having, in a sermon, warmly recommended his hearers to put in a purse by itself a certain portion from every pound of the profits of their worldly trades, for works of piety, he observed, that instead of secret grudging, when objects of charity were presented, they would look out for them, and rejoice to find them. A neighbouring clergyman hearing him, and being deeply affected with what he so forcibly recommended, consulted him as to what proportion of his income he ought to give.” As to that,“said Whately,” lam not to prescribe to others; but I will tell you what hath been my own practice. You know, sir, some years ago, I was often beholden to you for the loan of ten pounds at a time; the truth is, I could not bring the year about, though my receipts were not despicable, and I was not at all conscious of any unnecessary expenses. At length, I inquired of my family what relief was given to the poor; and not being satisfied, I instantly resolved to lay aside every tenth shilling of all my receipts for charitable uses; and the Lord has made me so to thrive since I adopted this method, that now, if you have occasion, I can lend you ten times as much as I have formerly been forced to borrow."

, an English divine of great name, was descended of an ancient and good family in the county of Salop, and was the sixth son of Christopher Whichcote, esq. at Whichcote-hall in the parish of Stoke, where he was born March 11, 1609-10. He was admitted of Emanuel-college, Cambridge, in 1626, and took the degrees in arts: that of bachelor in 1629; and that of master in 1633. The same year, 1633, he was elected fellow of the college, and became a most excellent tutor; many of his pupils, as Wallis, Smith, Worthington, Cra,­dock, &c. becoming afterwards men of great eminence. Jn 1636 he was ordained both deacon and priest at Buckden by Williams bishop of Lincoln; and soon after set up an afternoon-lecture on Sundays in Trinity church at Cambridge, which, archbishop Tillotson says, he served near twenty years. He was also appointed one of the university-preachers; and, in 1643, was presented by the master and fellows of his college to the living of North-Cadbury in Somersetshire. This vacated his fellowship; and upon this, it is presumed, he married, and went to his living; but was soon called back to Cambridge, being appointed to succeed the ejected provost of King’s-college, Dr. Samuel Collins, who had been in that office thirty years, and was also regius professor of divinity. This choice was perfectly agreeable to Dr. Collins himself; though not so to Dr. Whichcote, who had scruples about Accepting what was thus irregularly offered him: however, after some demurring, he complied, and was admitted pro-r vost, March 16, 1644. He had taken his bachelor of divinity’s degree in 1640; and he took his doctor’s in 1649. He now resigned his Somersetshire living, and was presented by his college to the rectory of Milton in Cambridgeshire, which was void by the death of Dr. Collins. Jt must be remembered, to Dr. Whichcote’s honour, that, during the life of Dr. Collins, one of the two shares out of the common dividend allotted to the provost was, not only with Dr. Whichcote’s consent, but at his motion, paid punctually to him, as if he had still been provost. Dr. Whichcote held Milton as long as he lived; though, after the Restoration, he thought proper to resign, and resume it by a fresh presentation from the college. He still continued to attend his lecture at Trinity, church with the same view that he had at first set it up; which was, to preserve and propagate a spirit of sober piety and rational religion in the university of Cambridge, in opposition to the style of preaching, and doctrines then in vogue: and he may be said to have founded the school at which many eminent (divines after the Restoration, and Tillotson among them, who had received their education at Cambridge, were formed, and were afterwards distinguished from the more orthodox by the epithet latitudinarian. In 1658 he wrote verses upon the death of Oliver Cromwell, which, his biographer supposes, were done entirely out of form, and not put of any regard to the person of the protector. Nor had Dr. Whichcote ever concurred with the violent measures of those times by signing the covenant, or by any injurious sayings or actions to the prejudice of any man. At the Restoration, however, he was removed from his provostship by especial order from the king; but yet he was not disgraced or frowned upon. On the contrary, he went to London, and in 1662 was chosen minister of St. Anne’s, Blackfriars, where he continued till his church was burned down in the dreadful fire of 1666. He then retired to Milton for a while; but was again called up, and presented by the crown to the vicarage of St. Lawrence Jewry, vacant by the promotion of Dr. VVilkins to the see of Chester. During the building of this church, upon invitation of the court of aldermen, in the mayoralty of sir William Turner, he preached before the corporation at Guildhall chapel, with great approbation, for about seven years. When St. Lawrence’s was rebuilt, he preached there twice a week, and had the general love and respect of his parish, and a very considerable audience, though not numerous, owing to the weakness of his voice in his declining age. A little before Easter in 1683, he went down to Cambridge; where, upon taking cold, he fell into a distemper, which in a few days put an end to his life. He died at the house of his ancient and learned friend Dr. Cuclworth, master of Christ’s-college, in May 1683 and was interred in the church of St. Lawrence Jewry. Dr. Tillotson, then lecturer there, preached his funeral-sermon, where his character is drawn to great advantage. Burnet speaks of him in the following terms: “He was a man of a rare temper; very mild and obliging. He had credit with somewhat had been eminent in the late times; but made all the use he could of it to protect good men of all persuasions. He was much for liberty of conscience; and, being disgusted with the dry systematical way of those times, he studied to raise those who conversed with him to a nobler set of thoughts, and to consider religion as a seed of a deiform nature (to use one of his own phrases) . In order to this, he set young students much on reading the ancient philosophers, chiefly Plato, Tully, and Piotin; and on considering the Christian religion as a doctrine sent from God, both to elevate and sweeten human nature, in which he was a great example as well as a wise and kind instructor. Cudworth carried this on with a great strength of genius, as well as a vast compass of learning.” Baxter numbers him with “the best and ablest of the conformists.”

The fate of his “Sermons,*' which have been so much admired, was somewhat singular. They were first ushered into the world by one who could not be supposed very eager to propagate the doctrines of Christianity, the celebrated earl of Shaftesbury, author of the” Characteristics,' 7 &c. In 1698 his lordship published “Select Sermons of Dr. Whichcote, in two parts,” 8vo. He employed on this occasion the rev. William Stephens, rector of Sutton, in Surrey, to revise, and probably superintend the press; but the long preface is unquestionably from his lordship. In addition to every other proof we may add the evidence of the late Mr. Harris of Salisbury, who informed a friend that his mother, lady Betty Harris, (who was sister to the earl of Shaftesbury) mentioned her having written the preface from her brother’s dictation, he being at that time too ill to write himself. That his lordship should become the voluntary editor and recommender of the sermons of any divine, has been accounted for by one of Dr. Whichcote’s biographers in this way: that his lordship found in these sermons some countenance given to his own peculiar sentiments concerning religion, as sufficiently practicable by our natural strength or goodness, exclusive of future rewards or punishments. To this purpose lord Shaftesbury has selected some passages of the sermons, and adds, “Thus speaks our excellent divine and truly Christian philosopher, whom for his appearing thus in defence of natural goodness, we may call the preacher of good nature. This is what he insists on everywhere, and to, make this evident is in a manner the scope of all his discourses. And in conclusion it is hoped, that what has been here suggested, may be sufficient to justify the printing of these sermons.” Whatever may be in this, it is rather singular that the same collection was republished at Edinburgh in 1742, 12mo, with a recommendatory epistle by a presby* terian divine, the rev. Dr. William Wish art, principal of the college of Edinburgh.

Three more volumes of Dr. Whichcote’s sermons were published by Dr. Jeffery, archdeacon of Norwich, in 1701—3, and a fourth by Dr. Samuel Clarke in 1707. The best edition of the whole was published in 1751, at Aberdeen, in 4 vols. 8vo, under the superintendence of Drs. Campbell and Gerard, two well-known names in the literary history of Scotland. Dr. Jeffery also published in 1703, “Moral and religious Aphorisms” collected from Dr. Whichcote’s manuscript papers. Of these an elegant edition was reprinted in 1753 by Dr. Samuel Salter, with large additions, and a correspondence with Dr. Tuckney which we have already noticed in our account of that divine. Long before this, in 1688, some " Observations and Apophthegms’ 7 of Dr. Whichcote’s, taken from his own mouth by one of his pupils, were published in 8vo, and passed through two editions, if not more. Whichcote excelled in moral aphorisms, and many might be collected from his sermons.

, an English divine of very uncommon parts and more uncommon learning, but of a singular and extraordinary character, was born Dec. 9, 1667, at Norton near Twycrosse, in the county of Leicester; of which place his father Josiah Whiston, a learned and pious man, was rector. He was kept at home till he was seventeen, and trained under his father; and this on two accounts: first, because he was himself a valetudinarian, being greatly subject to the flatus hypocondriaciis in various shapes all his life long; secondly, that he might serve his father, who had lost his eye-sight, in the quality of an amanuensis. In 1684, he was sent to Tamvvorth school, and two years after admitted of Clare-hall in Cambridge, where he pursued his studies, and particularly the mathematics, eight hours a day, till 1693. During this time, and while he was under-graduate, an accident happened to him, which he relates for a caution and benefit to others in the like circumstances. He observed one summer, that his eyes did not see as usual, biU dazzled after an aukward manner. Upon which, imagining it arose fro'm too much application, he remitted for a fortnight, and tried to recover his usual sight, by walking much in green fields; but found himself no better. At that time he met with an account of Mr. Boyle’s having known a person, who, having new-whited the wall of his chamber on which the sun shone, and having accustomed himself to read in that glaring light, thereby lost his sight for some time; till, upon hanging the place with green, he recovered it again: and this, he says, was exactly his own case, in a less degree, both as to the cause and the remedy.

In this manner Whiston went on to the last, bewildering himself in a maze of errors and changes, more, one would think, from temper than conviction. A short review of the progress of his opinions, with which a late eminent divine Jias furnished us, will not be without its use.

Mr. Whiston died after a week’s illness, Aug. 22, 1752, in the eighty-fifth year of his age, and was buried afe Lyndon in Rutlandshire. Of his character little more need be added. He enjoyed a certain degree of celebrity during a very long life, but that he produced rrwch influence on the state of public opinion may be doubted. He was not well calculated to form, or to support, a sect already formed; his absurdities were too many and too glaring, and he received no applause, even from the Arians of his day, that was not mixed with compassion. Still his profound erudition, and his disinterested attachment to Arianism, supported by an ostensible love of truth, were likely to attract the notice of young men, who, in the ardour of free inquiry, did not immediately perceive the pernicious tendency of their new opinions. That these were sometimes eagerly imbibed was a grateful compliment to his vanity; and that they were as readily renounced, provoked the most pointed invective, which he scrupled not to use with intemperate indulgence, whenever his cause declined by the secession of his proselytes. Having himself renounced secular emoluments, as incompatible with his idea of primitive Christianity, he considered them as the only barrier to the general reception of his tenets. And he therefore upbraided those who afterwards relinquished them, as yielding only to the bias of interest: too confident to suspect a possible fallacy in his opinions, or a detection of s his own misrepresentations of the Holy Scriptures. Nor was his mind, ample and strong as it certainly often appeared to be, uninfluenced by the most consummate vanity. He flattered himself, that he was one of those luminaries, by whose etherial light we are happily assisted in the pursuit of reason and the divine truths. But it would he uncandid to deny, that he exhausted a long life in scholastic labour and self-denial, in elaborate investigations of abstruse doctrinal positions, which he inculcated with indefatigable diligence, in inflexible integrity, and a resolute contempt of wealth acquired at the expence of conscience. His moral character was blameless, but not amiable. His severe manners and systems are more readily admired than imitated; while we must yet lament his want of orthodoxy, and his pertinacious scepticism.

, a learned English divine, and able antiquary, was born at Manchester, about 1735. He went early to Oxford, where he was elected fellow of Corpus Chrisii college, and where he discovered, in a very short tune, those fine originalities, those peculiarities of rniiui, which afterwards so strongly marked him as an author and as a man. He took the degree of' M. A. 1759; and proceeded B. D. 1767. His uncommon vigour of intellect at once displayed itself among hisacquaintance but, whilst his animated conversation drew many around him, a few were repelled from the circle by his impatience of contradiction (a failing which frequently accompanies powers like his), and by the consciousness, his biographer thinks, of their own inferiority. The character of his gepjus, however, was soon decided in literary composition. In 1771, Mr. W. published the first volume of his “History of Manchester,*' in quarto; a work which, for acute* ness of research, bold imagination, independent sentiment, and correct information, has scarcely its parallel in the literature of the country. Nor does its composition less merit our applause, whether we have respect to the arrangement of the materials, the style, or the language. In some passages there is” supreme elegance;“in others a magnificence of thought, a force of expression, a glow of diction, truly astonishing. The introduction of Christianity into this island, in particular, is uncommonly beautiful. With regard to the general subject of the” Manchester,“he was the first writer who could so light up the region of antiquarianism as to dissipate its obscurity, even to the eyes pf ordinary spectators; his” Manchester“being perhaps the book in which the truth of our island history has been test elucidatedr It is rather singular that this work was in the order of merit, as well as time, the first of Mr.Wbitaker’s publications. In proportion as he advanced in life, his imagination seems, by a strange inversion of what is characteristic of our nature, to have gained an ascendancy pver his judgment; and we shall perceive more of fancy and passion, of conjecture and hypothesis, in some of his subsequent productions, than of just opinion, or deliberate investigation. Mr. Whitaker’s” Genuine History of the Britons asserted,“an octavo volume, published in 1772, may be considered as a sequel to the” Manchester.“It contains a complete refutation of” the unhappy Macpherson,“whose” Introduction to the History of Great Britain and Ireland" is full of palpable mistakes and misrepresentations.

He also, as just noticed, translated NowelPs Catechisms into Greek, the larger of which was printed in 1573, and dedicated to the lord treasurer, sir William Cecil, and the smaller in 1575, dedicated to Nowell. He also translated into Latin, bishop Jewel’s reply to Harding. These increased his reputation, extending it to Oxford, where he wa incorporated doctor of divinity. On the preferment of Dr. William Chaderton to the bishoprick of Chester, Dr. Whitaker succeeded him in 1579 in the office of regius professor at Cambridge. Although considered by many as rather too young for a place to which many of his seniors had pretensions, he proved, by his course of lectures, that he was deficient in none of the qualities of an able divine and accomplished professor. He soon displayed copious reading, sound judgment, and an eloquence and vigour which greatly increased the number as well as quality of his hearers. While in this office he remained the indefatigable student, making himself acquainted with the writings of the fathers, both Greek and Latin, and of the eminent divines and ecclesiastical historians. In his lectures, he began with various select parts of the New Testament, and then entered upon the controversies between the papists and protestants. The latter were matters of the first importance at that time, and Whitaker accordingly took an ample share in confirming the protestant establishment, and carried on a successful controversy with some of the champions of the Romish church, particularly Campian, Dury, Saunders, &c. Cardinal Bellarmine, though often foiled by his pen, honoured his picture with a place in his library; aud said, he was the most learned heretic he had ever read.

, a learned divine, but of unsteady character, was born in 1638, at Rushden, -or Rusden, in Northamptonshire, and was in 1653 admitted of Trinity college, Oxford, of which he was elected a scholar in June 1655. He took his degree of B. A. in 1657, and that of M. A. in 1660. In 1664, he was elected fellow of his college, and the same year he engaged in controversy with the popish writers, by publishing, 1. “Romish Doctrines not from the beginning: or a Reply to what S. C. (Serenus Cressy), a Roman catholick, hath returned to Dr. Pierce’s Sermon preached before his Majesty at Whitehall, Feb. 1, 1662, in vindication of our Church against the novelties of Rome,” Lond. 4to. This was followed in 1663 by another piece against Serjeant, entitled, 2. “An Answer to Sure Footing, so far as Mr Whitby is concerned in it,” &c. 8vo. 3. “An endeavour to evince the certainty of Christian Faith in general, and of the Resurrection of Christ in particular.” Oxford, 1671, 8vo. 4. “A Discourse concern”, ing the idolatry of the Church of Rome; wherein that charge is justified, and the pretended Refutation of Dr. Stillingfleet’s Discourse is answered.“London, 1674, 8vo. 5.” The absurdity and idolatry of Host-Worship proved, by shewing how it answers what is said in Scripture and the Writings of the Fathers; to shew the folly and idolatry committed in the worship of the Heathen Deities. Also a full answer to all those pleas hy which Papists would wipe off the charge of Idolatry; and an Appendix against Transubstantiation; with some reflections on a late Popish book, called, The Guide of Controversies,“London, 1679, 8vo. 6.” A Discourse concerning the Laws Ecclesiastical and Civil made against Heretics by Popes, Emperors, and Kings, Provincial and General Councils, approved by the Church of Rome. Shewing, I. What Protestant subjects may expect to suffer under a Popish Prince acting according to those Laws. II. That no Oath or Promise of such a Prince can give them any just security that he will not execute these laws upon them. With a preface against persecuting and destroying Heretics,“London, 1682, 4to. Reprinted at London, 1723, in 8vo, with an Introduction by bishop Kennet, who ascribes this piece to Dr. Maurice, but it was reclaimed by Dr. Whitby himself in his” Twelve Sermons preached at the Cathedral of Sarum."

Thus far Dr. Whitby had proceeded with credit to himself, and with satisfaction to the church to which he belonged, and the patron who had befriended him. Dr. Seth Ward, bishop of Salisbury, who made him his chaplain, and in Oct. 1668 collated him to the prebend of Yatesbury in that cathedral, and in November following to the prebend of Husborn Tarrant and Burbach. He was also in September 1672 admitted precentor of the same church, about which time he accumulated the degrees of B. D. and D. D. and was preferred to the rectory of St. Edmund’s church in Salisbury. But in 182 he excited general censure by the publication of, “The Protestant Reconciler, humbly pleading for condescension to Dissenting Brethren in things indifferent and unnecessary, for the sake of peace; and shewing how unreasonable it is to make such things the necessary conditions of Communion. By a well-wisher to the Church’s Peace, and a Lamenter of her sad Divisions,” Lond. 1683, in 8vo. What kind of work this was, wili appear most clearly by his own declaration hereafter mentioned. It was published without his name, but he must have been soon discovered. The first opposition made to it was in the way of controversy, by various divines who answered it. Among these were, Laurence Womack, D. D. in his “Suffragium Protestantium: wherein our governors are justified in their impositions and proceedings against Dissenters, Meisner also, and the Verdict rescued from the cavils and seditious sophistry of the Protestant Reconciler,” Loud. 1683, 8vo; David Jenner, B. D. sometime of Caius college in Cambridge, afterwards rector of Great Wariey in Essex, prebendary of Sarum, and chaplain to his majesty, in his “Bilrons: or a new discovery of Treason under the fair face and mask of Religion, and of Liberty of Conscience, &c.” Lond. 1683, 4to; the author of “An awakening Word to the Grand jury men of the nation,” Lond. 1683, 4to, to which is added, “A brief comparison between Dan. Whitby and Titus Gates: the first protected in his virulence to sacred majesty by one or two of his fautors: the second punished for his abuses of the king’s only brother by the loyal chiefjustice Jefferies. The first saved harmless in many preferments (three of which are in one church of Sarum:) the second fined in mercy no more than 100,Oooz.” Samuel Thomas, M. A. in two pieces printed without his name, viz. “Animadversions upon a late treatise, entitled, the Protestant Reconciler,” &c. Lond. 1683, 8vo, and “Remarks on the Preface to the Protestant Reconciler, in a letter to a friend: dated February the 28ih, 1682,” Lond. 1683, 4to. The author of the pamphlet entitled “Three Letters of Thanks to the Protestant Reconciler. 1. From the Anabaptists at Munster. 2. From the Congregations in New England. 3. From the Quakers in Pensylvania.” It does not appear that Dr. Whitby made any reply to these; and the disapprobation of his book increased so much, that at length it was condemned by the university of Oxford in their congregation held July the 21st, 1683, and burnt by the hands of the university-marshal in the Schools Quadrangle. Some passages, likewise, gave such offence to bishop Ward, that he obliged our author to make a retractation, which he did in the following form: “October the 9th, 1683. I Daniel Whitby, doctor of divinity, chantor of the church of Sarum, and rector of the parish church of St. Edmund’s in the city and diocese of Sarum, having been the author of a book called * The Protestant Reconciler,' which through want of prudence and deference to authority I have caused to be printed and published, am truly and heartily sorry for the same, and for any evil influence it hath had upon the Dissenters from the Church of England establised by law, or others. And whereas it contained several passages, which I am confirmed in my conscience are obnoxious to the canons, and do reflect upon the governors of the said church, I do hereby openly revoke and renounce all irreverent and unmeet expressions contained therein, by which I have justly incurred the censure or displeasure of ray superiors. And furthermore, whereas these two propositions have been deduced and concluded from the said book, viz. 1. That it is not lawful for superiors to impose any thing in the worship of God, that is not antecedently necessary; 2. The duty of not offending a weak brother is inconsistent with all human authority of making laws concerning indifferent things: I do hereby openly renounce both the said propositions, being false, erroneous, and schismatical, and do revoke and disclaim all tenets, positions, and assertions contained in the said book, from whence these positions can be inferred. And whereinsoever I have offended therein, I do heartily beg pardon of God and th church for the same.” This retractation is styled by one of his biographers “an instance of human weakness,” but it was of such weakness as seems to have adhered to this divine throughout life, for we shall soon find him voluntarily retracting opinions of far greater consequence. In the mean time he carried the same weakness so far, as to publish a second part of his “Protestant Reconciler, earnestly persuading the Dissenting Laity to join in full Communion with the Church of England; and answering all the objections of Nonconformists against the lawfulness of their submission unto the rights and constitutions of that Church,” Lond. 1683, 8vo. His next publications were two pamphlets in vindication of the revolution, and the oath of allegiance. He also published some more tracts on the popish controversy, and an excellent compendium of ethics. “Ethices compendium in usum academicae juventutis,” Oxford, 1684, 12mo, which has often been reprinted and used as a text-book. In 1691 he published “A Discourse concerning the truth and certainty of the Christian faith, from the extraordinary gifts and operations of the Holy Ghost, vouchsafed to the Apostles and primitive professors of that faith.”

Some extracts from the preface to this work will shew by what process Dr. Whitby was led to those changes of opinion, which ended at last in a denial of all he had written on many other important points. It is a curious process, and not, we are afraid, peculiar to him only. In this Preface he observes, “That what moved him narrowly to search into the” principal of the Caivinistical Doctrines, especially that of the imputation of Adam’s sin to all his posterity, was the strange consequences which attended it. After some years study he met with one who seemed to be a Deist; and telling him, that there were arguments sufficient to prove the truth of the Christian Faith and of the Holy Scriptures, the other scornfully replied, ‘Yes, and you will prove your doctrine of the imputation of original sin from the same Scripture;’ intimating that he thought that doctrine, if contained in it, sufficient to invalidate the truth and authority of the Scripture. The objection of this Deistical person our author reduces into this form: the truth of the Holy Scripture can no otherwise be proved to any one who doubts it, but by reducing him to SDme absurdity, or the denial of some avowed principle of reason; but the doctrine of the imputation of Adam’s sin to all his posterity, so as to render them obnoxious to God’s wrath and eternal damnation, seems as contrary to the common reason of mankind as any thing can be, and so contains as strong an argument against the truth of Scripture, if it be contained in it, as any that can be offered for it. Upon this account our author searched farther into the places usually alledged to confirm that doctrine, and upon inquiry found them fairly capable of other interpretations. One doubt remained still, whether antiquity did not give suffrage to this doctrine; and though Vossius roundly asserts this, yet our author upon inquiry found, that all the passages, which he had collected, were either impertinent or at least insufficient to prove his point. And having made a collection of these matters, our author finished a treatise of ‘Original Sin’ in Latin about twenty years before, though he did not think proper to publish it. He tells us likewise, that he discoursed another time with a physician, who was of opinion, that there was some cause to doubt of the truth of Scripture, because it seems plainly to deliver the doctrine of ‘ absolute Election and Reprobation’ in the 9th chapter of the Epistle to the Romans; which doctrine is attended with more absurdities than can be charged on them who question the truth of the Scriptures, and seems as repugnant to the common notions which mankind have received of the divine justice, goodness, and sincerity, as even the saying, that God considering man * in massa perdita,‘ as lost in Adam, may delude him with false miracles, seems repugnant to his truth. And reading in Mr. Dodweli that bold stroke, that St. Paul being bred a Pharisee, spake in that chapter ’ ex mente Pbarisaeorum,‘ according to the doctrine of the Pharisees concerning fate, which they borrowed from the stoics; this gave our author occasion to set himself to make the best and exactest search he could into the sense of the Apostle in that chapter; and the best help he had to attain to the sense of that chapter, which he has given in his ’ Paraphrase,' he received from a manuscript of Dr. Simon Patrick, bishop of Ely. Thence he went on to examine all that was urged in favour of tnese doctrines from the Scriptures* It was no small confirmation to him of the places usually produced, and which he rescued from the adversaries of the doctrine he contends for; first, that he found, that he still sailed with the stream of antiquity, seeing only St, Austin with his two boatswains Prosper and Fulgentius tugging hard against it, and often driven back into it by the strong current of Scripture, reason, and common sense: secondly, that he observed, that the heretics of old used many of the same texts of Scripture to the same purposes as the Decretalists do at present. And thirdly, that the Valentinians, Marcionites, Basilidians, Manichees, Priscil*­lianists, and other heretics were condemned by the ancient champions of the church upon the same accounts, and from the same Scriptures and reasons, which he now uses against the Decretalists."

, an English divine, and very ingenious naturalist, was the eldest son of John White of Selborne, in Hampshire, esq. and of Anna, the daughter of the rev. Thomas Holt, rector of Streatham, in Surrey. He was born at Selborne, July 18, 1720, and received his school education at Basingstoke, under the rev. Thomas Warton, vicar of that place, and father of those two distinguished characters, Dr. Joseph, and Mr. Thomas Warton. In Dec. 1739, he was admitted of Oriel college, Oxford, and took his degree of B. A. in 1743. In March 1744 he was elected fellow of his college. He became M. A. in Oct. 1746, and was admitted one of the senior proctors of the university in April 1752. Being of an unambitious temper, and strongly attached to the charms of rural scenery, he early fixed his residence in his native village, where he spent the greater part of his life in literary occupations, and especially in the study of nature. This he followed with patient assiduity, and a mind ever open to the lessons of piety and benevolence, which such a study is so well calculated to afford. Though several occasions offered of settling upon a college living, he could never persuade himself to quit the beloved spot, which is, indeed, a peculiarly happy situation for an observer. He was much esteemed by a select society of intelligent and worthy friends, to whom he paid occasional visits. Thus his days passed, tranquil and serene, with scarcely any other vicissitudes than those of the seasons, till they closed at a mature age on June 26, 1793.

, a puritan divine, and, Wood says, usually called the Patriarch Of Dorchester, was born in the latter end of December, 1574, at Stanton St. John, in Oxfordshire. He was sent for education to Winchester school, and after two years of probation, was admitted perpetual fellow of New college, Oxford, in 1595. Here he took his degrees in arts, was admitted into holy orders, and became a frequent preacher in, or near Oxford. In 1606 he became rector of Trinity church, Dorchester, in the county of Dorset, where in the course of his ministry he expounded the whole of the scripture, and went through about half of it a second time, having, says Wood, “an excellent faculty in the clear and solid interpreting of it.”

, an English philosopher, and Roman catholic priest, who obtained considerable celebrity abroad, where he was usually called Thomas Anglus, or Thomas Albius, was the son of Richard White, esq. of Hatton, in the county of Essex, by Mary, his wife, daughter of Edmund Plowden, the celebrated lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign. His parents being Roman catholics, he was educated, probably abroad, in the strictest principles of that profession, and at length became a secular priest, in which character he resided very much abroad. He was principal of the college at Lisbon, and sub-principal of that at Douay; but his longest stay was at Rome and Paris. For a considerable time he lived in the house of sir Kenelm Digby; and he shewed his attachment to that gentleman’s philosophy by various publications. His first work of this kind was printed at Lyons, in 1646. It is entitled “Institutionum Peripateticarum ad mentem summi clarissimique Philosophi Kenelmi Equitis Digbaei.” “Institutions of the Peripatetic Philosophy, according to the hypothesis of the great and celebrated philosopher sir Kenelm Digby.” Mr. White was not contented with paying homage to sir Kenelm on account of his philosophical opinions, but raised him also to the character of a divine. A proof of this is afforded in a book published by him, the title of which is “Quaestio Theologica, quomodo secundum principia Peripatetices DigbsEanae, sive secundum rationem, et abstrahendo, quantum materia patitur, ab authoritate, human! Arbitrii Libertas sit explicanda, et cum Gratia efficaci concilianda.” “A Theological question, in what manner, according to the principles of sir Kenelm Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy, or according to reason, abstracting, as much as the subject will admit, from authority, the freedom of a man’s will is to be explained and reconciled with efficacious grace.” Another publication to the same purpose, which appeared in 1652, was entitled “Institutiones Theologicae super fundamentis in Peripatetica Digbacana jactis exstructae.” “Institutions of Divinity, built upon the foundations laid down in sir K. Digby’s Peripatetic Philosophy.” By his friend sir Kenelm Mr. White was introduced, with large commendations, to the acquaintance of Des Cartes, who hoped to make a proselyte of him, but without success. White was too much devoted to Aristotle’s philosophy to admit of the truth of any other system. In his application of that philosophy to theological doctrines, he embarrassed himself in so many nice distinctions, and gave such a free scope to his own thoughts, that he pleased neither the Molinists nor the Jansenists. Indeed, though he had a genius very penetrating and extensive, he had no talent at distinguishing the ideas which should have served as the rule and foundation of his reasonings, nor at clearing the points which he was engaged to defend. His answer to those who accused him of obscurity may serve to display the peculiarity of his disposition. “I value myself,” says he, “upon such a brevity and conciseness, as is suitable for the teachers of the sciences. The Divines are the causg that my writings continue obscure; for they refuse to give me any occasion of explaining myself. In short, either the learned understand me, or they do not. If they do understand me, and find me in an error, it is easy for them to refute me; if they do not understand me, it is very unreasonable for them to exclaim against my doctrines.” This, observes Bayle, shews the temper of a man who seeks only to be talked of, and is vexed at not having antagonists enough to draw the regard and attention of the public upon him. Considering the speculative turn of Mr. White’s mind, it is not surprising that some of his books’ were condemned at Rome by the congregation of the “Index Expurgatorius,” and that they were disapproved of by certain universities. The treatises which found their way into the “Index Expurgatorius” were, “Institutiones Peripatetica?;” “Appendix Theologica de Origine Mundi” “Tabula suffragialis de terminandis Fidei Litibus ab Ecclesia Catholica Fixa;” and “Tessera3 Romanae Evulgatio.” In opposition to the doctors of Douay, who had censured two-and-twenty propositions extracted from his “Sacred Institutions,” he published a pieoe entitled “Supplicatio postulativa Justitiae,” in which he complains that they had given a vague uncertain censure of him, attended only with a respective, without taxing any proposiiion in particular; and he shews them that this is acting like prevaricating divines. Another of his works was the “Sonitus Buccina?,” in which he maintained that the church had no power to determine, but only to give her testimony to tradition. This likewise was censured. Mr. White had a very particular notion concerning the state of souls separated from the body, which involved him in a dispute with the bishop of Chalcedon. Two tracts were written by him upon this subject, of which a large and elaborate account is given in archdeacon Blackburne’s Historical View of the controversy 'concerning an intermediate state. The conclusion drawn by the archdeacon is, that Mr. White entered into the questibn with more precision and greater abilities than any man of his time; and that it is very clear, from the inconsistencies he ran into to save the reputation of his orthodoxy, that if the word purgatory had been out of his way, he would have found no difficulty to dispose of the separate soul in a state of absolute unconscious rest.

Soon after his return he had become acquainted with Lady Huntingdon, who hearing of his arrival invited him, to her house at Chelsea. He went, and having preached twice, the countess wrote to him that several of the nobility desired to hear him In a few days the celebrated earl of Chesterfield, and others of the same rank, attended, and having heard him once, desired they might hear him again. “I therefore preached again,” says he, “in the evening, and went home, never more surprised at any incident in xny life. All behaved quite well, and were in some degree affected. The earl of Chesterfield thanked me, and said,” Sir, I will not tell you what I shall tell others, how I approve of you,‘ or words to this purpose. At last lord Bolingbroke came to hear, sat like an archbishop, and was pleased to say, ’ I had done great justice to the Divine Attributes in my discourse'." Those who know the characters of Bolingbroke and Chesterfield will probably think less of these compliments than Mr. Whitefield appears to have done.

, an eminent divine of the sixteenth century, was of the family of Whiteheads of Tuderiey in Hampshire, and was educated at Oxford, but whether at All Souls or Brasenose colleges, Wood has not deter* mined. He was chaplain to queen Anne Boleyn. Wood says, he was “a great light of learning, and a most heavenly professor of divinity.” Archbishop Cranmer says that “he was endowed with good knowledge, special honesty, fervent zeal, and politic wisdom,”' for which, in 1552, he nominated him as the fittest person for the archbishopric of Armagh. This nomination, however, did not succeed. lit the beginning of the tyrannic reign of queen Mary, he retired, with/many pf his countrymen, to Francfort, where he was chosen pastor to the English congregation of exiles, and when differences arose respecting church discipline, endeavoured to compose them by the moderation of his opinions. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he “returned to England, and was one of the committee appointed to review king Edward’s liturgy; and in 1559 was also appointed one of the public disputants against the popish bishops* In this he appeared to so much advantage, that the queen is said to have offered him the archbishopric of Canterbury, but this he declined, as well as the mastership of the Savoy, excusing himself to the queen by saying that he could live plentifully by the preaching of the gospel without any preferment. He was accordingly a frequent preacher, and in various places where preaching was most wanted. He remained a single man, which much pleased the queen, who had a great antipathy against the married clergy. Lord Bacon informs us that when Whitehead was one day at court, the queen said,” I like thee better, Whitehead, because thou livest unmarried.“” In troth, madam,“he replied,” I like you the worse for the same cause.“Maddox, in his examination of Neal’s History of the Puritans, thinks that” Whitehead ought to be added to the number of those eminent pious men, who approved of the constitution, and died members of the church of England;“but it appears from Strype’s life of Grindal, that he was deprived in 1564 for objecting to the habits; how long he remained under censure we are not told. He died in 1571, but where buried, Wood was not able to discover. The only works attributed to his pen are,” Lections and Homilies on St. Paul’s Epistles“and in a” Brief Discourse of the Troubles begun at Francfort,“1575, 4to, are several of his discourses, and answers to the objections of Dr. Home concerning matters of discipline and worship. In Parkhurst’s” Epigram. Juvenil." are some addressed to Whitehead; and from the same authority we learn that he had been preceptor to Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk.

On several other occasions he was concerned in applications on behalf of the Quakers to Charles II. and to his successor. After the happy event of the revolution he was eminently assisting to his friends at the time when the Toleration bill was before parliament; and afterwards bore a very considerable part in making those representations which led to the legal allowance of an affirmation instead of an oath, and to other relief. When the bill which has just been adverted to was pending in the House of Commons, a declaration of faith was proposed to be introduced, which to the Quakers, who seem to have been particularly aimed at by it, would not have tyeen perfectly free from objection. In lieu of the declaration so proposed, Whitehead and those who acted with him on behalf of the society, on this important occasion procured another to be substituted, which (thus he expresses himself) "we proposed and humbly offered as our own real belief of the Deity of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, viz. * I profess faith in God the Father, and in Jesus Christ, his eternal Son, the true God, and in the Holy Spirit, one God blessed for ever; and do acknowledge the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament to be given by Divine Inspiration. 7 '

Of the previous conduct and principles of Whitelocke, we are only told that he was often consulted by Hampden when he came to be prosecuted for refusing the payment of ship-money; and that at the beginning of the commotions in Scotland, when solicited in behalf of the covenanters, his advice was, not to foment these differences, far less to encourage a foreign nation against thrir natural prince. About the beginning of the first session of the long parliament, a debate arose respecting writs of habeas corpus, upon which Mr. Selden and other members, who had been committed for their freedom of speech in the parliament of 1628, demanded to be bailed, and had been refused. This svas so far aggravated by some, that they moved that Selden and the rest might have reparation out of the estates of those judges who then sat on tht king’s bench; but when they named, as the obnoxious judges, Hyde, Jones, and Whitelocke, our young member stood up in defence of his father, and vindicated him with great spirit. Except in the case of Strafford, a considerable degree of moderation at first marked his conduct. During the debates in the House of Commons on the question, whether the power of the nSilitia was in the king or in the parliament, he gave it as his opinion that it was not either in the king or parliament separately, but in both conjointly; and when 'it was afterwards debated, whether an army should not be raised for the defence of parliament, he represented in a very strong manner the miseri s of a civil war. As to the origin of the present state of affairs, he says, “It is strange to note how we have insensibly slid into this beginning of a civil war, by one unexpected accident after another, as waves of the sea, which have brought us thus far; and we scarce know how, but from paper combats, by declarations, remonstrances, protestations, notes, messages, answers, and replies, we are now come to the question of raising forces, and naming a general, and officers of an army.” After many other remarks of a similar kind, he added, “Yet I am not for a tame resignation of our religion, lives, and liberties, into the hands of our adversaries, who seek to devour us. Nor do I think it inconsistent with your great wisdom, to prepare for a just and necessary defence of them.” Still he recommended them to consider, whether it was not too soon to take up arms; and advised them to try if means might not be found to accommodate matters with the king before they proceeded to extremities. It must have been his opinion that such means could not Ue found, for as soon as the war commenced, Whitelocke adhered closely to the parliamentary party, and accepted the office of deputy-lieutenant of the counties of Bucks and Oxford, in 1642. Having also a company of horse under his command, he dispersed the commissioners. o,f array at Wellington, and then marching to Oxford, it was proposed to fortify that city and appoint him governor but this was prevented by lord Say, for which that nobleman was much censured by the parliamentary party. We find Whitelocke again among the forces which opposed the king at Brentford, and being now at open war with his sovereign, his seat at Fawley-court was plundered by a party of royalists. In January 1643, he was appointed one of ttie commissioners to treat of peace with the king at Oxford, and there seems no reason to doubt that he was not only active, but sincere in his efforts to accomplish thjs purpose. Why they were not more successful mus be sought ift the conduct of those who employed him, Against which he seems to have ventured to remonstrate Adhering, however, still to the cause he had espoused, he was one of the laymen appoiated to sit in the Westminster assembly of divines and there, as well as in parliament, was the strenuous opponent of those who were for asserting the divine right of presbytery.

, Wicliff, de Wyclif, or Wiclef (John), a very learned English divine in the fourteenth century, and the first champion of that cause which was afterwards called Protestantism, was born at a village then called Wickliffe, from which he took his surname, near Richmond in Yorkshire, in 1324. Of the parents of one who lived in so remote a period, it cannot be expected that we should be able to procure any account. He was sent early to Oxford, and was first admitted commoner of Queen’s college, and afterwards of Merton, where he became probationer, but not fellow, as has been usually reported. While he resided here, he associated with some of the most learned men of the age who were members of that college, and it is said that Geoffry Chaucer was at one time his pupil. Among his contemporaries, he was soon distinguished both for study and genius. He acquired all the celebrity which a profound knowledge of the philosophy and divinity then in vogue could confer, and so excelled in wit and argument as to be esteemed more than human. Besides the learning of the schools, he accumulated a profound knowledge of the civil and canon law, and of the municipal laws of our own country, which have been rarely an object of attention until the establishment of the Vinerian professorship. He also not only studied and commented upon the sacred writings, but translated them into English, and wrote homilies on several parts of them; and to all this he added an intimate acquaintance with the fathers of the Latin church, with St. Austin and St. Jerome, St. Ambrose and St. Gregory.

, a learned divine of the reformed religion, was born at Mansfeld in Upper Saxony in 1523. His parents, who were of the middle rank, perceiving his love of learning, gave him a good education at school, whence he was sent to the university of Wirtemberg, where he studied the arts and languages for about three years; attending, at the same time, the lectures of Luther and Melancthon. He became also acquainted with other contributors to the reformation, as Gruciger, Justus Jonas, &c. and heard the Greek lectures of Vitus. In 1541, by the advice of his tutors and friends, he went to Noriberg, where he was made master of St. Lawrence-school, and taught there for three years; but being desirous of adding to his own knowledge, under the ablest instructors, he returned to Wirtemberg again. There he commenced M. A. before he was twenty-two years old, and begun the study of divinity, which he engaged in with gr/eat assiduity, until the events of the war dispersed the students of this university. He then was invited to his native place, Mansfeld, where he was ordained, and is said to have been the first who was ordained after the establishment of the Protestant religion. He soon became a very useful and popular preacher, and on the week-days read lectures to the youth in logic and philosophy. While here, at the request of the superintendent, John Spangenberg, he wrote a confutation of Sidonius’s popish catechism, which was afterwards printed both in Latin and Dutch. He wrote also a confutation of George Major, who held that a man is justified by faith, but not saved, &c. He was one of those who strongly opposed the Interim.

, a nonconformist divine, poet, and wit, was born at St. Ives in Huntingdonshire in 1609, and was educated at the university of Cambridge. In 1642 he was created bachelor of divinity at Oxford, and, probably had the degree of doctor there also, as he was generally called Dr. Wild. In 1646 he was appointed rector of Aynho in Northamptonshire, in the room of Dr. Longman, ejected by the parliamentary visitors; and on this occasion Calamy’s editor gives us one of his witticisms. He and another divine had preached for the living, and Wild being asked whether he or his competitor had got it, he answered “We have divided it; I have got the Ay, and he the No.” Wood says he was “a fat, jolly, and boon presbyterian,” but Calamy asserts that those who knew him commended him not only for his facetiousness, but also his strict temperance and sobriety; and he was serious, where seriousness was wanted. He was ejected from Aynho at the restoration. He died at Oundle, in Northamptonshire in 1679, aged seventy. His works afford a curious mixture. 1. “The tragedy of Christopher Love at Tower-hill,” Lond. 1660, a poem in one sheet 4to. 2. “Iter Boreaie, attempting something upon the successful and matchless march of the L Gen. George Monk from Scotland to London,” ibid. 1660, 4to, in ridicule of the republican party. This was at that time a favourite subject, and Wood mentions three other Iter Borealt’s by Eades, Corbet, and Master. 3. “A poem on the imprisonment of Mr. Edmund Calamy in Newgate,” 1662, printed on a broad sheet, which produced two similar broadsheets in answer, the one “Antiboreale, an answer to a lewd piece of poetry upon Mr. Calamy, &c.” the other “Hudibras on Calamy’s imprisonment and Wild’s poetry.” These, with his Iter Boreaie, and other pieces of a similar cast and very indifferent poetry, but with occasional flashes of genuine humour, were published together in 1668 and 1670. Wood mentions “The Benefice, a comedy,” written in his younger years, but not printed till 1689. Wood adds, that there “had like to have been” a poetical war between Wild and Flaxman, but how it terminated he knows not. Wild had the misfortune to have some of his poems printed along with some of lord Rochester’s. He has a few serrrjons extant.

, a learned divine and editor, was born in 1685, but when, or where educated we are not told. His name does not appear among the graduates of either university, except that among those of Cambridge, we find he was honoured with the degree of D.D. in 1717. Two years before this, he was appointed by archbishop Wake te succeed Dr. Benjamin Abbot, as keeper of the archiepiscopal library at Lambeth and in three years drew up a very curious catalogue of all the Mss. and printed books in that valuable collection. As a reward for his industry and learning, archbishop Wake collated him to the rectory of Mongham-Parva, in Kent, in April 1716, to that of Great Chart in 1719, and to the rectory of Hadleigh in the same year. He was also constituted chaplain to the archbishop and collated to the rectories of Monks-Ely and Bocking; appointed commissary of the deanery of Bocking, jointly and severally with W. Beauvoir; collated to a prebend of Canterbury in 1720, and collated to his grace’s option of the archdeaconry of Suffolk in May 1724. In consequence of these last preferments, he resigned the former, and was only archdeacon of Suffolk and rector of Hadleigh and Monks-Ely at his death, which happened 8ept. 6, 1745, in the sixtieth year of his age. He married, Nov. 27, 1725, the eldest daughter of Thomas lard Fairfax of Scotland, a lady who survived him, and erected a monument to his memory at Hadleigh.

, a learned divine, was born in the city of Ely in 1562. His father, Mr. Thomas Willet, was sub-almoner to Edward VI. and a sufferer during the persecutions in queen Mary’s reign; but in that of queen Elizabeth, was preferred to the rectory of Barley in Hertfordshire, and to a prebend in the church of Ely. His son, who had been a very diligent and successful student while at school, was sent in his fourteenth year to Peter-house, Cambridge, whence he afterwards removed to Christ’s college, and obtained a fellowship. After passing thirteen years in the university, during which he afforded many proofs of extraordinary application and talents, queen, Elizabeth gave him his father’s prebend in Ely, about 1598, the year his father died. One of his name was also rector of Reed, in Middlesex, in 1613, and of Chishall Parva$ in Essex, in 1620, but it is doubtful whether this was the same person. It seems more certain, however, that he had the rectory of Childerley, in Cambridgeshire, and in 1597 that of Little Grantesden, in the same county, for which he took in exchange the rectory of Barley, vacant by his father’s death. He was also chaplain to prince Henry. About this time he married a relation to Dr. Goad, by whom he had eleven sons and seven daughters.

, an eminent divine among the dissenters, aud a munificent benefactor to their and other societies, both of the learned and charitable kind, was born about 1644, at Wrexham, in the county of Denbigh, in North Wales. No particulars are known of his parents, or of his early years, but it appears that he laboured under some disadvantages as to education, which, however, he surmounted by spirit and perseverance. He says of himself, that “from five years old, he had no employment, but his studies, and that by nineteen he was regularly admitted a preacher.” As this was among the nonconformists, it is probable that his parents or early connections lay among that society. As he entered on his ministry about 1663, when the exercise of it was in clanger of incurring the penalties of the law, he was induced to go to Ireland, and was there invited to be chaplain to the countess of Meath. Some time after he was called to be pastor to a congregation f dissenters assembling in Wood-street, Dublin, in which situation he continued for nearly twenty years, and was highly approved and useful. Here he married Ins first wife, a lady of family and fortune, which last, while it gave him a superior rank and consequence to many of his brethren, he contemplated only as the means of doing good.

, an English prelate of great abilities and very distinguished character, was the youngest son of Edward Willjams, esq. of Aber-Conway, in Caernarvonshire, in Wales, where he was born March 25, 1582. He was educated at the public school at Rutbin, in 1598, and at sixteen years of age admitted at St. John’s college, in Cambridge. His natural parts were very uncommon, and his application still more so; for he was of so singular and happy a constitution, that from his youth upwards he never required more than three hou'rs sleep out of the twentyfour for the purposes of perfect health. He took the degree of A. B. in 1602, and was made fellow of his college; yet this first piece of preferment was obtained by a mandamus from James I. His manner of studying had something particular in it. He used to allot one month to a certain province, esteeming variety almost as refreshing as cessation from labour; at the end of which he would take up some other subject, and so on, till he came round to his former courses. This method he observed, especially in his theological studies; and he found his account in it. He was also an exact philosopher, as well as an able divine, and admirably versed in all branches of literature. In 1605, when he took his master’s degree, he entertained his friends at the commencement in a splendid manner, for he was naturally generous, and was liberally supplied with money by his friends and patrons. John lord Lumley often furnished him both with books and money; and Dr. Richard Vaughan, bishop of London, who was related to him, gave him an invitation to spend his time at his palace at vacation times. Being thus introduced into the best company, contributed greatly towards polishing his manners.

The lord keeper made use of his influence with the king, in behalf of several noblemen who were under the royal displeasure and in confinement. He prevailed with his majesty to set at liberty the earl of Northumberland, who had been fifteen years a prisoner in the Tower. He procured also the enlargement of the earls of Oxford and Arundel, both of whom had been a considerable time under confinement. He employed likewise his good offices with the king, in behalf of many others of inferior rank, particularly some clergymen who offended by their pulpit freedoms. One instance we shall extract from his principal biographer, as a proof of his address, and knowledge of king James’s peculiar temper. A Mr. Knight, a young divine at Oxford, had advanced in a sermon somewhat which was said to be derogatory to the king’s prerogative. For this he was a long time imprisoned, and a charge was about to be drawn up against him, to impeach him for treasonable doctrine. One Dr. White, a clergyman far advanced in years, was likewise in danger of a prosecution of the same kind. Bishop Williams was very desirous of bringing both these gentlemen off, and hit on the following contrivance. Some instructions had been appointed to be drawn up by his care and direction, for the performance of useful and orderly preaching; which being under his hand to dispatch, he now besought his majesty that this proviso might pass among the rest, that none of the clergy should be permitted to preach before the age of thirty years, nor after three-score. “On my soul,” said the king, “the devil, or some fit of madness is in the motion; for I have many great wits, and of clear distillation, that have preached before me at Royston and Newmarket to my great liking, that are under thirty. And my prelates and chaplains, that are far stricken in years, are the best masters of that faculty that Europe affords.” “I agree to all this,” answered the lord keeper, “and since your majesty will allow both young and old to go up into the pulpit, it is but justice that you shew indulgence to the young ones if they run into errors before their wits be settled (for every apprentice is allowed to mar some work before he be cunning in the mystery of his trade), and pity to the old ones, if some of them fall into dotage when their brains grow dry. Will your majesty conceive displeasure,' and not Jay it down, if the former set your teeth on edge sometimes, before they are mellow- wise and if the doctrine of the latter be touched with a blemish, when they begin to be rotten, and to drop from the tree?” “This is not unfit for consideration,” said the king, “but what do you drive at?” “Sir,” replied Williams, “first to beg your pardon for mine own boldness; then to remember you that Knight is a beardless boy, from whom exactness of judgment could not be expected. And that White is a decrepit, spent man, who had not a fee-simple, but a lease of reason, and it is expired. Both these that have been foolish in their several extremes of years, I prostrate at the feet of your princely clemency.” In consequence, of this application, king James readily granted a pardon to both of them.

After the king was beheaded, the archbishop spent hig days in sorrow, study, and devotion; and is said to have risen constantly every night out of his bed at midnight, and to have prayed for a quarter of an hour on his bare knees, without any thing but his shirt and waistcoat on. He lived not much above a year after, dying the 25th of March 1650 he was buried in Llandegay church, where a monument was erected to him by his nephew and heir, sir Griffith Williams. Besides several sermons, he published a book against archbishop Laud’s innovations in church-matters and religious ceremonies, with this title, “The Holy Table, Name, and Thing, more antiently, properly, and literally, used under the New Testament, than that of Altar. Written long ago by a minister in Lincolnshire, in answer to D. Coel, a judicious divine of queen Marie’s dayes. Printed for the diocese of Lincoln, 1637;” in quarto. Lord Clarendon, though far from being favourable 10 this prelate, yet represents this “book so full of good learning, and that learning so closely and solidly applied, tnough it abounded with too many light expressions, that it gained him reputation enough to be able to do hurt; and shewed, that in his retirement he had spent his time with his books very profitably. He used all the wit and all the malice he could, to awaken the people to a jealousy of these agitations, and innovations in the exercise of religion; not without insinuations that it aimed at greater alterations, for which he knew the people would quickly find a name: and he was ambitious to have it believed, that the archbishop Laud was his greatest enemy, for his having constantly opposed his rising to any government in the church, as a man whose hot and hasty spirit he had long known.”

Hacket likewise, after observing that he was a man of great hospitality, charity, and generosity, especially to gentlemen of narrow fortunes, and poor scholars in both universities, informs us that his disbursements this way every year-amounted to 1000l. or sometimes 1200l. Hacket had reason to know his private character; for he was his chaplain, and although he may be supposed partial to so eminent a benefactor, the character he gives of archbishop Williams is, in general, not only consistent with itself, but with some contemporary authorities. He appears, amidst all his secular concerns, to have entertained a strong sense of the importance of religion, When a divine once came to him for institution to a living, Williams expressed himself thus; “I have passed through many places of honour and trust, both in church and state, more than any of my order in England these seventy years before. But were I but assured, that by my preaching I had converted but one soul unto God, I should take therein more spiritual joy and comfort, than in all the honours and offices which have been bestowed upon me.”

, an able divine, and bishop of Chichester, was born in Northamptonshire in 1634. In 1651 he entered a commoner of Magdalen-hall, Oxford, where in 1658 he completed his degrees in arts, and was ordained. In 1673 he was collated to the rectory of St. Mildred in the Poultry, London, and in 1683 to the prebend of Reymere in the cathedral of St. Paul. After the revolution he became chaplain to king William and queen Mary, and was preferred to a prebend of Canterbury, and in December 1696 advanced to the bishopric of Chichester, in which he died in 1709. He was a considerable writer in the controversies with the papists and dissenters, and preached the lectures founded by Mr. Boyle, his sermons on that occasion being published in 1695, 4to, under the title of “The characters of Divine Revelation.” He wrote also a “History of the Gunpowder Treason,” and many controversial pamphlets enumerated by Wood. He lived in great intimacy with Tillotson, who says of him, “Mr. Williams is really one of the best men I know, and most unwearied in doing good, and his preaching is very weighty and judicious.” When Firmin, the Socinian, published his “Considerations on the explications of the doctrine of the Trinity,” Pr. Williams wrote the same year (1694) a “Vindication of archbishop Tillotson’s Four Sermons (concerning the divinity and incarnation of our blessed Saviour) and of the bishop of Worcester’s sermon on the mysteries of the Christian faith.” In this, which was not published till 1695, after 'Tillotson’s death, Dr. Williams observes that it was not without the archbishop’s direction and encouragement, that he entered upon it, and that had he lived to have perused the whole, as he did a part of it a few days before his last hours, it had come with greater advantage into the world, &c.

, an illustrious English physician, was of a reputable family, and born at Great Bedwin, in Wiltshire, Jan. 27, 1621, in a house that was often visited by his grandson Browne Willis, and of which there is an engraving in the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1798. He was instructed in grammar and classical literature by Mr. Ed-­ward Sylvester, a noted schoolmaster in the parish of AllSaints, Oxford; and, in 1636, became a member of Christ church. He applied himself vigorously to his studies, and took the degrees in arts; that of bachelor in 1639, that of master in 1642. About this time, Oxford being turned into a garrison for the king, he with other scholars bore arms for his majesty, and devoted his leisure hours to the study of physic; in which faculty he took a bachelor’s degree in 1646, when Oxford was surrendered to the parliament. He pursued the business of his profession, and kept Abingdon market. He settled in an house over against Merton college, and appropriated a room in it for divine service, where Mr. John Fell, afterwards dean of Christ church, whose sister he had married, Mr. John Dolben, afterwards archbishop of York, and sometimes Mr. Richard Allestree, afterwards provost of Eton college, exercised the liturgy and sacraments according to the church of England, and allowed to others the privilege of resorting thither. This measure of theirs is commemorated by a painting in the hall of Christ church, Oxford.

Dr. Willis was one of the first members of the Royal Society, and soon made his name as illustrious by his writings as it was already by his practice. In 1666, after the fire of London, he removed to Westminster, upon an invitation from archbishop Sheldon, and took a house in St. Martin’slane. As he rose early in the morning, that he might be present at divine service, which he constantly frequented before he visited his patients, he procured prayers to be read out of the accustomed times while he lived, and at his death settled a stipend of 20l. per annum to continue them, He was a liberal benefactor to the poor wherever he came, having from his early practice allotted part of his profits to charitable uses. He was a fellow of the college of physicians, and refused the honour of knighthood. He was regular and exact in his hours; and his table was the resort of most of the great men in London. After his settlement there, his only son Thomas falling into a consumption, he sent him to Montpellier in France for the recovery of his health, which proved successful. His wife also labouring under the same disorder, he offered to leave the town; but she, not suffering him to neglect the means of providing for his family, died in 1670. He died, at his house in St. Martin’s, Nov. 11, 1675, and was buried near her in Westminster-abbey. His son Thomas, above mentioned, was born at Oxford in Jan. 1657-8, educated some time in Westminster-school, became a student a Christ church, and died in 1699. He was buried in Bletcbley church, near Fenny-Stratford, the manors of which places his father had purchased of the duke of Buckingham, and which descended to his eldest son Browne Willis of Whaddon-hall, esq. eminent for his knowledge in antiquities, and of whom some memoirs will be given. Wood tells us, that “though Dr. Willis was a plain man, a man of no carriage, little discourse, complaisance, or society, yet for his deep insight, happy researches in natural and experimental philosophy, anatomy, and chemistry, for his wonderful success and repute in his practice, the natural smoothness, pure elegancy, delightful unaffected neatness of Latin style, none scarce hath equalled, much less outdone, him, how great soever. When at any time he is mentioned by authors, as he is very often, it is done in words expressing their highest esteem of his great worth and excellency, and placed still as first in rank among physicians. And, further, also, he hath laid a lasting founJation of a body of physic, chiefly on hypotheses of his own framing.” These hypotheses, by far too numerous and fanciful for his reputation, are contained in the following works: 1. “Diatribse duae Medico-philosophicae de ft-rmentatione, altera de febribus,” Hague, 1659, 8vo, London, 1660, 1665, &c. 12mo. This was attacked by Edm. de Meara, a doctor of physic of Bristol, and fellow of the college of physicians, but defended by Dr. Richard Lower in his “Diatribse Thomas Wiilisii Med. Doct. & Profess. Oxon de Febribus Vindicatio contra Edm. de Meara,” London, 1665, 8vo. 2. “Dissertatio Epistolica de Uriuis” printed with the Diatribes above mentioned. 3. “Cerebri Anatome,” London, 1664, 8vo, Amsterdam, 1667, in 12mo. 4. “De ratione motus musculorum,” printed with the “Cerebri Anatome.” 5. “Pathologise Cerebri & nervosi generis specimina, in quo agiiur de morbis convulsivis & descorbuto,” Oxford, 1667, 4to, London, 1668, Amsterdam, 1669, &c. 12mo. 6. “Affectionum quae dicuntur hystericae & hypochondriacae Pathologia spasmodica, vindicata contra responsionem Epistolarem Nath. Highmore, M. D.” London, 1670, 4to, Leyden, 1671, 12mo, &c. 7. “Exercitationes Medico-physicae duae, 1. De sanguinis accensione. 2.” De motu musculari,“printed with the preceding book. 8.” De anim& Brutorum, quag hominis vitalis ac sensativa est, exercitationes duac, &c.“London, 1672, 4to and 8vo, Amsterdam, 1674, 12mo, All these books, except” Affection um quae dicuntur hystericae, &c.“and that” de am ma Brutorum,“were translated into English by S. Pordage, esq. and printed at London, 1681, folio. 9.” Pharmaceutice Rationalis: sive Diatriba de medicamentorum operationibus in humano corpore." In two parts, Oxford, 1674 and 1675, 12mo, 4to. Published by Dr. John Fell. In the postscript to the second part is the following imprimatur put to it by Dr. Ralph Bathurst, the author dying the day before.

In Oct. 1679, when he was slowly recovering from a severe disease, he was visited by Dr. Burnet, upon an intimation that such a visit would be very agreeable to him. With great freedom he laid open to that divine all his thoughts both of religion and morality, and gave him a full view of his past life: on which the doctor visited hick often, till he went from London in April following, and once or twice after. They canvassed at various times the principles of morality, natural and revealed religion, and Christianity in particular; the result of all which, as it is faithfully related by Dr. Burnet in a book, which, Dr. Johnson observes, “the critic ought to read for its elegance, the philosopher for its arguments, and the saint-far its piety,” was, that this noble earl, though he had lived the life of an atheist and a libertine, yet died the death of a sincere penitent. The philosophers of the present age will naturally suppose, that his contrition and conviction were purely the effects of weakness and low spirits, which scarcely suffer a man to continue in his senses, and certainly not to be master of himself; but Dr. Burnet affirms him to have been “under no such decay as either darkened or weakened his understanding, nor troubled with the spleen or vapours, or under the power of melancholy.” The reader may judge for himself from the following, which is part of a letter from the earl to Dr. Burnet, dated “Woodstock-park, June 25, 1680, Oxfordshire.” There is nothing left out, but some personal compliments to the doctor.

, an English divine and writer, was born in 1689, and became a member of Trinity-college, Oxford, where he took his degree of B. A. in 1712, and that of A. M. in 1719. In the following year he was pre^ bendary of Lowtb, and afterwards of Scamblesbey in the church of Lincoln in 1727, about which time he was also vicar of Newark in Nottinghamshire, master of the hospital there, and an alderman. He is thought to have owed his preferments chiefly to bishop Reynolds of Lincoln. From the crown he had a prebend of Worcester, and another of Carborough in LichnVld, where he had a house given him by bishop Chandler. In July 1735, he was presented to Bottesford in Leicestershire, but never took possession of it. In 1737 he took his degree of D. D. He died April 30, 1772, aged eighty-three, and was interred in the church of Newark with an inscription, extolling his extensive benevolence, by his nephew Robert Wilson Cracroft, esq.

, a statesman and divine in the reign of queen Elizabeth, celebrated for the politeness of his style and the extent of his knowledge, was the son of Thomas Wilson of Stroby in Lincolnshire, by Anne daughter and heir of Roger Comberwortb, of Comberworth in the same county. He was educated at Eton, and atKing’scollege, Cambridge; and went thence into the family of Charles Brandon, duke of Suffolk, who intrusted him with the education of his two sons. During the reign of Mary, to whose persecution many fugitives owed their qualifications for future honours, he lived abroad, received the degree of doctor of laws at Ferrara, and was for some time imprisoned by the inquisition at Rome, on account of his two treatises on rhetoric and logic, which he had published in England, and in the English language, several years before. He is said to have suffered the torture, and would have been put to death, on refusing to deny his faith, had not a fire happened, which induced the populace to force open the prison, that those confined there might not perish > by which means he escaped; and, returning to England, after queen Mary’s death, was appointed one of the masters of requests, and master of St. Katherine’s hospital near the Tower. This was in the third year of queen Elizabeth, at which time he was her majesty’s secretary; but finding his patent for the mastership of St. Catherine’s void, because he was not a priest, according to queen Philippa’s charter, he surrendered the office, and had a new patent, with a non obstante, Dec. 7, 1563. According to Dr. Ducarel, his conduct in this office was somewhat objectionable, as he sold to the city of London the fair of St. Katherine’s, for the sum of 700 marks, surrendered the charter of Henry VI. and took a new one 8. Elizabeth, leaving out the liberty of the aforesaid fair; and did many other things very prejudicial to his successors. In 15lhe had been admitted a civilian; and in 1576 he was sent on an embassy to the Low Countries, where he acquitted himself so well, that in the following year he was named to succeed sir Thomas Smith as secretary of state; and in 1579 obtained a deanery of Durham. He died in 1581, and was buried in St. Katherine’s church. He was endowed with an uncommon strength of memory, which enabled him to act with N remarkable dispatch in his negociations. Yet he was more distinguished as a scholar than as a minister, and was perhaps unfortunate in having served jointly with the illustrious Walsingham, whose admirable conduct in his office admitted of no competition. Sir Thomas Wilson married Anne, daughter of sir William Winter, of Lidney in Gloucestershire, and left three children: Nicholas, who settled at Sheepwash in Lincolnshire; Mary, married, first, to Robert Burdett, of Bramcote in Warwickshire, secondly to sir Christopher Lowther, of Lowther in Westmoreland; and Lucretia, wife of George Belgrave, of Belgrave in Leicestershire.

a puritan divine, of the sixteenth century, was minister of St. George’s church, in Canterbury, one of the six preachers in that city, chaplain to lord Wotton, and a man of high reputation. We have, however, no particulars of his early life. He preached at Canterbury thirty-six years, and was assiduous and indefatigable in all the duties of his saqred office. He died in Jan. 1621, on the 25th of which month his funeral sermon, which has been printed, was preached by William Swift, minister of St. Andrew’s, at Canterbury, and great grandfather of dean Swift. His works are, 1. “A Commentary on the Romans,” 1614, a work much approved. 2. “Christ’s farewell to Jerusalem,” 1614. 3. “Theological Rules,” 1615. 4. “A complete Christian Dictionary,” fol. of which the sixth edition, with a continuation by Bagwell and Symson, was published in 1655. This was one of the first attempts, in English, towards a concordance of the Bible. Mr. Wilson wrote some other pieces of less note.

Bishop Wilson’s life was an uniform display of the most genuine and active benevolence. Considering himself as the steward, not the proprietor, of the revenues of the bishopric, he devoted his income to what he esteemed its proper use. The annual receipts of the bishopric, as we have just mentioned, did not exceed 300l. in money; some necessaries in his house were of course to be paid for in money; distressed or shipwrecked mariners, and some other poor objects, it was also requisite to relieve with money; but the poor of the island were fed and clothed, and the house in general supplied from his demesnes by exchange, without money. The poor who could spin or weave, found the best market at Bishop’s-court, where they bartered the produce of their labour for corn. Taylors an'd shoemakers were kept in the house constantly employed, to make into garments or shoes that cloth or leather which his corn had purchased; and the aged and the infirm were supplied according to their several wants. At the same time he kept an open hospitable table, covered with the produce of his own demesnes, at which he presided with equal affability and decorum. His manners, though always consistently adorned with Christian gravity, were ever gentle and polite; and in his conversation he was one of the most entertaining and agreeable, as well as instructive of men. With these qualities of the gentleman, the bishop united the accomplishments and virtues of the scholar and the divine. He was well skilled in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin languages; and there was hardly any part of science that could be serviceable in his diocese which he did not understand. In his younger days he had a poetical turn, but afterwards laid aside such amusements, as thinking them inconsistent with his episcopal character. During the fiftyeight years that he held the bishopric, he never failed, unless on occasions of sickness, to expound the scripture, to preach, or to administer the sacrament, every Sunday, at one or other of the churches in his diocese, and, if absent from the island, he always preached at the church where he resided for the day. He alternately visited the different parishes of his diocese on Sundays (which the dimensions of the island will permit in a carriage) without giving them notice, and, after doing the duty of the day, returned home to dinner. His family prayers were as regular as his public duties. Every summer morning at six, and every winter morning at seven o'clock, his whole household attended him in his chapel, where he himself, or one of those divinity-students whom he maintained in his house, performed the service of the day; and in the evening they did the same. Thus it was that he formed his young clergy for the pulpit, and for a graceful delivery. He was so great a friend to toleration, that the papists who resided in the island, loved and esteemed him, and not unfrequently attended his ministrations. Dissenters likewise even attended the communion-service, as he admitted them to receive the sacrament, either standing or sitting, at their own option, so that there was neither schism nor separate- congregation in his diocese. The few quakers also, who were resident on the island, visited and respected him. Many other amiable, and some singular traits of the character of this excellent prelate may be seen in the work from which the above particulars are taken.

, a learned English divine, was the son of a reputable surgeon at Farringdon, in the county of Berks, where he was born. He was educated at Magdalen-college, Oxford, as a chorister and demy; proceeded M.A. in 1736, B. D. in 1747, and D. D. in 174-9. In July 1747 he was elected fellow, having been for some years before, as he was afterwards, a considerable tutor in the college. In 1761 he resigned his fellowship, on being presented by the society to the rectory of Appleton, Berkshire, at a small distance from his native place; and in the same year, June 10, he married Lucretia Townson, sister of Thomas Townson, rector of Malpas, Cheshire, who had also been fellow of Magdalen-college. She died-at Appleton, greatly esteemed and lamented, Jan. 26, 1772. Five years afterwards he married Jennett, widow of his fellowcollegian, Richard Lluellyn, B. D. and sister of the late Thomas Lewis, esq, of Frederick’s-place, London, one of the directors of the Bank of England. To the sincere and lasting regret of all who knew him, he was seized with a paralytic stroke, which proved fatal May 17, 1780, and was buried in the chancel of his own church, near the remains of his wife. His only preferment, besides the rectory of Appleton, was the curacy of Astley-chapel, near Arbury, Warwickshire, a donative given him by his esteemed friend sir Roger Newdigate, bart.

Dr. Winchester paid great attention to such controversies in his time as concerned the doctrine and discipline of the church, and contributed some valuable remarks to contemporary writers who were more particularly involved in these disputes. He also wrote some letters in the Gentleman’s Magazine on the Confessional controversy, and topics arising from it. The only separate publication from his pen was published, but without his name, in 1773, under the title of “A Dissertation on the XVIIth article of the Church of England; wherein the sentiments of the compilers, and other contemporary reformers, on the subject of the divine decrees, are fully deduced from their own writings, to which is subjoined a short tract, ascertaining the reign and time in which the royal declaration before the XXXIX articles was first published.” This work was reprinted in 1803, on occasion of the controversy being revived by Mr. Overton, “with emendations from the author’s corrected copy, and the addition of a biographical preface.” The latter is written by the rev. archdeacon Churton, and to it we are indebted for the preceding particulars.

, an eminent Greek scholar, was the son of Francis Winterton of Lutterworth in Leicestershire, A. M. where he was born. That he was an excellent Greek scholar appears from many of his productions in that language, which entitled him to be a competitor, though an unsuccessful one, in 1627, for the Greek professorship at Cambridge, on the death of Andrew Downes, with four other candidates, who all read solemn lectures in the schools on a subject appointed them by the electors. He was educated at KingVcollege, Cambridge, where he had the misfortune, during the early part of his residence, to be somewhat disordered in his intellects; but, recovering, he took to the study of physic, and was allowed to excel all of that profession in his time. In 1631 he 'published the first book of Hippocrates’s Aphorisms in a Greek metrical version at Cambridge, in quarto, and the year following the whole seven books together, in the same manner. In 1633, by the advice of Dr. John Collins, regius professor of physic, he published an edition of the Aphorisms in octavo at Cambridge, with Frere’s Latin poetical translation, and his own Greek version, with a Latin prose translation by John Heurnus of Utrecht. At the end is annexed a small book of epigrams and poems, composed by the chiefest wits of both universities, but chiefly of Cambridge, and of KingVcollege in particular. In 1631 he printed, in octavo, at Cambridge, a translation of “Gerard’s Meditations,” whicfi went through six editions in about nine years. In 1632 he published likewise at Cambridge, in octavo, Gerard’s “Golden Chain of Divine Aphorisms.” He published also, for the use of Etonschool, an edition of “Dionysius de situ Orbis,” with some Greek verse* at the end of it, addressed to the scholars, and exhorting them to the study of geography. This was reprinted at London in 1668, 12mo. In the above year (1632), he translated “Drexelius on Eternity,” which was printed at Cambridge. In the preface to this, he has some sentiments which shew that he was of a pious but somewhat singular turn of mind. In 1634, being M. D. he was nominated by the king his professor of physic for forty years, if he should live so long. The year following he published at Cambridge in octavo an edition of the “Minor Greek Poets,” with observations upon Hesiod. This has passed through many editions. His advancement to the professorship appears to have interrupted his employment as an author; but he did not survive that honour long, dying in the prime of life Sept. 13, 1636. He vva^ buried at the east end of King’s- college chapel, but without any memorial. After his death was published a translation by him of Jerome Zanchius’s “Whole Duty of the Christian Religion,” Lorid. 1659, 12mo. He appears to have contributed his assistance in the publication of many learned works, which have escaped our research. His character was that of an industrious and judicious scholar, an able physician, and a just and upright man.

, a learned divine, of whom our memorial is but scanty, was born at Gloucester -28th April 1737. He was educated chiefly in his native city, and distinguished by his thirst after^knowledge, and his diligent application to school-exercises. Obtaining an exhibition at Pembroke-college, Oxford, he there became scholar^ fellow, and tutor, taking his degree of M. A. in 1759. In 1767, archbishop Seeker made him rector of Wittri.shamin Kent, and called him to be one of his domestic chaplains and the following year he went to Oxford, and took his degree of bachelor of divinity. After the deathof his grace, in the following year, he resided at Wittrisham, or on the small living of St. Peter, in Wallingford; until, in 1774, relinquishing these preferments, he was presented,. by the late bisbrop of Winchester, to the rectory of Brightwell, Berks. At Brightwell he lived constantly forty years, and at Brightwell he died, July 29, 1814, leaving a widow, two sons, and one grand -daughter. In early life Mr. Wintle was unremitting in the attainment of useful learning, and in the practice of religion and virtue; and in his more mature and later years he ceased not, by precept and example, to set forth the expediency and advantages of religion, while his fame in the literary world was not inconsiderable. He published, 1st, “An improved Version of Daniel attempted, with a Preliminary Dissertalion, and Notes critical, historical, and explanatory.” 2. “A Dissertation on the Vision contained in the second chapter of Zechariah.”3. “Eight Sermons on the Expediency, Prediction, and Accomplishment, of the Christian Redemption, preached at the Bampton Lecture.” 4. “Christian Ethics, or Discourses on the Beatitudes, with isome preliminary and subsequent Discourses the whole designed to explain, recommend, or enforce, the Duties of the Christian Life.” 5. “A Letter to the Lord Bishop of Worcester, occasioned by his Strictures on Archbishop Seeker and Bishop Lowth, in his Life of Bishop Warburton.” The two first of, these publications will class Mr. Wintle with the most distinguished Biblical scholars, and the Bampton Lectures and Christian Ethics are not less valuable, as illustrations of the Christian system.

, an eminent divine in Scotland and America, and a lineal descendant from Knox the celebrated Scotch reformer, was born Feb. 5, 1722, at Yester near Edinburgh, of which parish his father was minister. After some previous education at the public school at Haddingtonj he was, at the age of fourteen, sent to the university of Edinburgh, and having gone through the usual course of academical studies, was licensed to preach, and soon after was ordained minister of the parish of Beith, in the west of Scotland, whence, in a few years, he was removed to be minister at the large and flourishing town of Paisley. During his residence here he was much admired for his general learning, his abilities in the pulpit, and for his writings, one of which, his “Ecclesiastical Characteristics,” is perhaps one of the most humorous satires ever written on a subject which apparently did not admit of that mode of treatment. No satire in our time was read with more approbation and interest than Witherspoon’s a Characteristics“for many years in Scotland. It is levelled at the party in the general assembly of Scotland, who were called the moderate men, in contradistinction to those called the orthodox, of who adhered strictly to the doctrines contained in their national” Confession or Faith.“From this publication, and from his speeches in the general assembly, Witherspoon acquired much influence, but he had to contend with almost all the literary force of the assembly, the Blairs, Gerards, Campbells, and Robertsons, who were considered as the leaders of the moderate party. One day, after carrying some important questions against Dr. Robertson, the latter said in his pleasant manner,” I think you have your men better disciplined than formerly.“”Yes,“replied Witherspoon,” by urging your politics too far, you have compelled us to beat you with your own weapons."

, a very learned and eminent divine of North Holland, was born at Enckhuisen, Feb. 12, 1636. He was trained to the study of divinity, and so distinguished himself by his uncommon abilities and learning, that he was chosen theological professor, first at Franeker, afterwards at Utrecht, and lastly at Leyden. He applied himself successfully to the study of the Oriental tongues, and was not ignorant in any branch of learning which is necessary to form a good divine. He died Oct. 82, 1708, in the seventy-third year of his age, after having published several important works, which shew great judg^ ment, learning, and piety. One of the principal of these is “Egyptiaca;” the best edition of which, at Amsterdam, 1696, in 4to, has this title “Ægyptiaca, et Decaphylon sive, de Jigyptiacorum Sacrorum cum Hebraicis collatione Libri tres. Et de decem tribubus Israelis Liber singularis. Accessit Diatribe de Legione Fulminatrice Christianorum, &ub Icnperatore Marco Aurelio Antonino,” Amst. 1683, and 1696, 4to. Witsius, in this work, not only compares the religious rites and ceremonies of the Jews and Egyptians, but he maintains particularly, against our sir John Marsham and Dr. Spencer, that the former did not borrow theirs, or any part of them, from the latter, as these learned and eminent writers had asserted in their respective works, “Canon Chronicus,” and “De Legibus Hebrseorum.” “The Oetionomy of the Covenants between God and Man” is another work of Witsius, and the best known in this country, having been often printed in English, 3 vols. 8vo. Of this and its author, Hervey, in his “Theron and Aspasia,” has taken occasion to speak in the following terms: “The Oeconomy of the Covenants,” says he, “is a body of divinity, in its method so well digested, in its doctrine so truly evangelical, and, what is not very usual with our systematic writers, in its language so refined and elegant, in its manner so affectionate and animating, that I would recommend it to every student in divinity. I would not scruple to risk all my reputation upon the merits of this performance; and I cannot but lament it, as one of my greatest losses, that I was no sooner acquainted with this most excellent author, all whose works have such a delicacy of composition, and such a sweet savour of holiness, that I know not any comparison more proper to represent their true character than the golden pot which had manna, and was outwardly bright with burnished gold, inwardly rich with heavenly food.”

, or W1TTEN (Henningus), a German biographer, was born in 1634. We find very few particulars of him, although he has contributed so muc)i to our knowledge of other eminent men. He was a divine and professor of divinity at Riga, where he died Jan. 22, 1696. Morhoff bestows considerable praise on his biographical labours, which were principally five volumes of memoirs of the celebrated men of the seventeenth century, as a sequel to those of Meichior Adam. They were octavo volumes, and published under the titles of “Memoria Theologorum nostri seculi,” Franc. 1674, reprinted in 1695, 2 vols. “Memoria Medicorum” “Memoria Jurisconsultorum” “Memoria Philosophorum,” &c. which last includes poets and polite scholars. The whole consist of original lives, or eloges collected from the best authorises. The greater part are Germans, butthere are a few French and English. In 1688 he published, what we have often found very useful, his * 4 Diarium Biographicum Scriptorum seculi xvii.“vol. I. 4to, 1688, vol, II. 1691. It appears that Wittepaid a visit to England in 1666, and became acquainted with the celebrated Dr. Pocock, to whom he sent a letter ten years afterwards, informing the doctor that he had for some time been engaged in a design of writing the lives of the most famous writers of that age in each branch of literature, and had already published some decades, containing memoirs of divines, civilians, and physicians;” that he was now collecting eloges on the most illustrious phiiologers, historians, orators, and philosophers; but wanted memoirs of the chief Englishmen who, in the present (seventeenth) century, have cultivated these sciences, having no relation of this sort in his possession, except of Mr. Camden; he begs, therefore, that Dr. Pocock, would, by the bearer, transmit to him whatever he had to communicate in this way."

As to his religious sentiments, although he was an advocate for toleration, he invariably asserted the principle of conformity to the sound and apostolic establishments of the land. His practice, even when very infirm, was to attend divine service in his parish church, to read or pro-? cure some friend to read a sermon and prayers to his family and domestics every Sunday evening. He never spoke an unkind word to his servants, and there was hardly an instance known of any one quitting his service for that of another master. He never complained, nor uttered a peevish expression under the greatest privations and the most severe pain. His funeral was, by his own desire,' as his life had been, without parade or ostentation, and the monumental stone declares no more than the name and age of him whose mortal reliques lie near it.

, a learned scholar, hitherto strangely overlooked by most foreign biographers, was a native of Germany, born in 1683, but removed in his youth to Hamburgh, where he was educated under Fabricius, and assisted him in his “Bibliotheca Graeca,” as appears by vol. XIII. of that laborious work. He was a Lutheran divine, and preached at Hamburgh, where he was also professor of the Oriental languages, and where he died in 1739. Many of his works are known in this country, and have been often quoted with approbation by biblical scholars and critics. Among them are, 1. “Historia Lexicorum Hebraicorum,” Wittem. 1705, 8vo. 2. “Dissertatio de Zabiis,” ibid. 1706, 4to. 3. “Origenis Philosophumena recognita et nods illustrata,” Hamb. 1706, Sto. 4. An edition of Pbsedrus, 1709. 5. “Dissertatio de Atheism! falso suspectis,” Wittem. 1710, 4to. 6. “Casauboniana, sive Isaaci Casauboni varia de Scriptoribus, librisque judicia,” Hamb. 1710, 8vo. 7. “Libanii epist. adhuc non editarum centuria selecta Gr. cum versione et nods,” Leipsic, 1711, 8vo. 8. “Anecdota Gneca sacra et profana,” Hamb. 1722, &c. 3 vols. 8vo. 9. “Curse philologicae et criticae in omnes libros N. T.” Hamb. 1725 1735, but the best edition is that of Basil, 1741, 3 vols. 4to. This work, says bishop Watson, has some resemblance, in the manner of its composition, to Pool’s “Synopsis,” but is written with more judgment, and contains the opinions of many expositors who have lived since the publication of Pool’s work. Wolfe, moreover, has not followed Pool in simply relating the sentiments of others, but has frequently animadverted on them with great critical discernment. Wolfe published other works, and new editions, all which display great learning and critical acumen. His brother John Christian, who died in 1770, was the author of the “Monumenta typographies,” Hamburgh, 1740, 8vo, an edition of the fragments of Sappho, and other works.

With respect to the constitution of this college, there is a considerable variation between the account given by the historian of Oxford, and that by Leonard Hutten, canon of Christ Church, in 1599, and many years sub-dean. His manuscript, now in the possession of the college, and quoted in the Monasticon, states that, according to Wolsey’s design, it was to be a perpetual foundation for the study of the sciences, divinity, canon and civil law, also the arts, physic, and polite literature, and for the continual performance of divine service. The members were to be, a dean, and sixty regular canous, but no canons of the second order, as Wood asserts.

Mr. Wood afterwards undertook his more important work, which was published in 1691, folio; and a second edition in 1721. folio, with this title: “Athenæ Oxonienses. An exact history of all the writers and bishops who have had their education in the most ancient and famous university of Oxford, from the fifteenth year of king Henry the seventh, A.D. 1500, to the author’s death in November, 1695; representing the birth, fortune, preferment, and death of all those authors and prelates, the great accidents of their lives, and the fate and character of their writings. To which are added, the Fasti, or annals of the skid university. In two volumes. The second edition, very much corrected and enlarged; with the addition of above 500 new lives from the author’s original manuscript.” Impartiality and veracity being qualities so essential in an historian, that all other qualities without them cannot make a history good for any thing, Wood has taken some pains to prove, that these great qualities were not wanting in him; and for that purpose thought it expedient to prefix to his work the following curious account of himself. “As to the author himself,” says he, “he is a person who delights to converse more with the dead than with the living, and has neither interest with, nor inclination to flatter or disgrace, any man, or any community of men, of whatever denomination. He is such a universal lover of all mankind, that he could wish there was such a standing measure of merit and honour agreed upon among them all, that there might be no cheat put upon readers and writers in the business of commendations. But, since every one will have a double balance herein, one for himself and his own party, and another for his adversary and dissenters, all he can do is, to, amass and bring together what every side thinks will make best weight for themselves. Let posterity hold the scales and judge accordingly; suu m cuique decus. posteritas rependat. To conclude: the reader is desired to know, that this Herculean labour had been more proper for a head or fellow of a college, or for a public professor or officer of the most noble university of Oxford to have undertaken and consummated, than the author, who never enjoyed any place or office therein, or can justly say that he hath eaten the bread of any founder. Also, that it had been a great deal more fit for one who pretends to be a virtuoso, and to know all men, and all things that are transacted; or for one who frequents much society in common rooms, at public fires, in coffee-houses, assignations, clubs, &c. where the characters of men and their works are frequently discussed; but the author, alas! is so far from frequenting such company and topics, that he is as it were dead to the world, and utterly unknown in person to the generality of scholars in Oxon. He is likewise so great an admirer of a solitary and retired life, that he frequents no assemblies of the said university, hath no companion in bed or at board, in his studies, walks, or journeys; nor holds communication with any, unless with some, and those very few, of generous and noble spirits, that have in some measure been promoters and encouragers of this work: and, indeed, all things considered, he is but a degree different from an ascetic, as spending all or most of his time, whether by day or night, in reading, writing, and divine contemplation. However, l>e presumes, that, the less his company and acquaintance is, the more impartial his endeavours -will appear to the ingenious and learned, to whose judgments only he submits them and himself.”

, a divine and poet, eldest son of Robert Woodford, of Northampton, gent, was born in the parish of All-hallows on the Wall, London, April 15, 1636; became a commoner of Waclham college in 1653; took one degree in arts in 1656; and in 1658 returned to the Inner Temple, where he was chamber-fellow with the poet Flatman. In 1660, he published a poem “On the return of king Charles II.” After that period, he lived first at Aldbrook, and afterwards at Bensted in Hampshire, ift^i married and secular condition, and was elected F. R. S. in Nov. 1664. He took orders from bishop Morley, and was soon after presented by sir Nicolas Stuart, bart. to the rectory of Hartley-Maudet in Hampshire. He was installed prebend of Chichester May 27, 1676; made D. D. by the diploma of archbishop Sancroft in 1677; and prebendary of Winchester, Nov. 8, 1680, by the favour of his great patron, the bishop of that diocese. He died in 1700. His poems, which have some merit, are numerous. His “Paraphrase on the Psalms, in five books,” was published in 1667, 4to, and again in 1678, 8vo. This “Paraphrase,” which was written in the Pindaric and other various sorts of verse, is commended by R. Baxter in the preface to his “Poetical Fragments,” 1681 and is called by others “an incomparable version,” especially by his friend Flatman, who wrote a Pindaric ode on it, and a copy of verses on Woodford’s “Paraphrase on the Canticles,” 1679, 8vo. With this latter paraphrase are printed, 1. “The Legend of Love, in three cantos.'. 12.” To the Muse,“a Pindaric ode. 3.” A Paraphrase upon some select Hymns of the New and Old Testament.“4.” Occasional compositions in English rhymes," with some translations out, of Latin, Greek, and Italian, but chiefly out of the last;. some of which compositions and translations were before falsely published by a too-curious collector of them, from very erroneous copies, against the will and knowledge of their author. Dr. Woodford complains, that several of his translations of some of the moral odes had been printed after the same incorrect manner.

, an English divine, very notorious in his day for the pertinacity with which he published the most dangerous opinions, was born in 1669, at Northampton, where his father was a reputable tradesman. After a proper education at a grammar-school, he was entered of Sidney college, in Cambridge, in 1685, where he took both the degrees in arts, and that of bachelor of divinity, and was chosen fellow of his college. From this time, in conformity to the statutes of that society, he applied himself to the study of divinity and entering into holy orders, soon, we are told, became distinguished and esteemed for his learning and piety. Of what sort the latter was, his life will shew. It appears that he had very early conceived some of those notions which afterwards so much degraded his character. His first appearance as an author was in 1705, when he printed at Cambridge a work entitled “The old Apology of the Truth for the Christian Religion against the Jews and Gentiles revived,” 8vo. The design of this work, which is an octavo of near 400 pages, is to prove that all the actions of Moses were typical of Christ, and to shew-tljat some of the fathers did not think them real, but typical relations of what was to come. This allegorical way of interpreting the scriptures of the Old Testament our author is said to have adopted from Origen, whose works, however, he must have studied very injudiciously; yet he became so enamoured of this methocf of interpretation, that he not only thought it had been unjustly neglected by the moderns, but that it might be useful, as an additional proof of the truth of Christianity. He preached this doctrine first in the college chapel, and afterwards before the university at St. Mary’s, to the great surprise of his audience. Yet, as his intentions seemed to be good, and his character respected, and as he had not yet begun to make use of the indecent language which disgraced his subsequent works, no opposition was raised; and when the volume appeared in print, though there were some singular notions advanced, and a new manner of defending Christianity proposed, yet there was nothing that gave particular offence, and many things which shewed great ingenuity and learning. He still continued to reside at Cambridge, applying himself indefatigably to his studies, in a quiet and retired way, until 1720, ^hen he published a Latin dissertation entitled “De Pontii Pilati ad Tiberium Epistola circa res Jesu Christi gestas; per Mystagogum,” 8vo, in which he endeavours to prove that Pontius Pilate wrote a letter to Tiberius Caesar concerning the works of Christ; bwt that the epistle delivered down to us under that name among the writings of the fathers, was forged. The same year he published another pamphlet in Latin, with the title of “Origenis Adamantii Renati Epistola ad Doctores Whitbeium, Waterlandium, Whistonium, aliosque literates hujus saeculi disputatores, circa fidem vere orthodoxam et scripturarum interpretationem;” and, soon after, a second epistle with the same title. The rage of allegorizing the letter of the holy scriptures into mystery, with which this writer was incurably infected, began now to shew itself more openly to the world than it had hitherto done. In 1720 and 1721, he published two letters to Dr. Bennet, rector of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, London; one upon this question, “Whether the people called quakers do not the nearest of any other sect of religion resemble the primitive Christians in principles and practice?” by Aristobulus; the other, “In defence of the Apostles and Primitive Fathers of the Church, for their allegorical interpretation of the law of Moses, against the ministers of the letter and literal commentators of this age;” and, soon after, he himself published an answer to these two letters; in all which his view appears to have been rather to be severe upon the clergy th,an to defend either apostles, fathers, or quakers. At what time he left college does not appear, but he had about this time absented himself from it beyond the time limited by the statutes. The society and his friends, however, compassionating his case, and judging it to be in some degree the effect of a bodily distemper, allowed him the revenues of his fellowship for a support. The supposition hurt his pride, and he went directly to Cambridge to convince the gentlemen of his college that he laboured under no disorder, and as he at the same time refused to reside, he lost his fellowship.

, bishop of Exeter in queen Elizabeth’s reign', was born at Wigan in Lancashire, in 1535; he was nephew to the celebrated dean Nowell. He entered a student of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, in 1553, whence in 1555 he fled to his uncle and the other exiles in Germany. On Iris return in the- beginning of queen Elizabeth’s reign, he was made canon residentiary of Exeter, where he read a divinity lecture twice a week, and preached twice every Lord’s day; and in the time of the great plague, he only with one more remained in the city, preaching publicly as before, and comforting privately such as were infected with the disease. Besides his residentiaryship, he had the living of Spaxton in the diocese of Wells, and in 1575 became Warden of Manchester college. In 1579 he was consecrated bishop of Exeter, and, as he had been before esteemed a pious, painful, and skilful divine, he was now a vigilant and exemplary prelate. His character in this last respect excited some animosity, and a long string of accusations was presented against him to archbishop Parker, which Strype has recorded at length in his appendix to the life of that celebrated primate, all which bishop Woolton satisfactorily answered.

, an excellent divine of the church of England, was born at Manchester, in the beginning of Feb. 1617-18, and was the son of Roger Worthington, a person of “chief note and esteem” in that town. His mother was Mary, the daughter of Christopher Whichcote, esq. and niece to sir Jeremy Whichcote, bart. He was educated at Emanuel college, Cambridge, of which he became a fellow, was created B.D. in 1646, and D. D. in 1655. He was afterwards chosen master of Jesus college, vacant by the ejectment of Dr. Richard Sterne, afterwards archbishop of York, but was with some difficulty prevailed upon to submit to the choice and request of the fellows, his inclination being to a more private and retired life; and soon after the restoration be resigned that mastership to Dr. Sterne. In the mean time he was successively rector of Horton in Buckinghamshire, Gravely and Fen Ditton in the county of Cambridge, Barking, with Needham, in the county of Suffolk, and Ingoldsby in Lincolnshire. During the years 1660 and 1661 he cultivated a frequent correspondence by letters with that great promoter of all useful learning, Mr. Samuel Hartlib; four and twenty of Dr. Worthington’s being published at the end of his Miscellanies; and several others by bishop Kennet in his Register and Chronicle. In 1663, he was collated to the sinecure rectory of Moulton All Saints, in Norfolk. He entered upon the cure of St. Bene't Fink in June 1664, under Dr. George Evans, canon of Windsor, who held a lease from that college of the rectory; and he continued to preach there during the plague-year 1665, coming thither weekly from Hackney, where he had placed his family: and from February 18, 1665-6, till the fire in September, he preached the lecture of that church, upon the death of the former lecturer. Soon after that calamity, he was presented by Dr. Henry More> of Christ’s college in Cambridge, to the living of Ingoldsby, before mentioned, and to the prebend of Asgarby in the church of Lincoln, procured him by archbishop Sheldon, who had a great esteem for him. From Ingoldsby he removed to Hackney, being chosen lecturer of that church with a subscription commencing from Lady-day 1670; and, the church of St. Bene't Fink being then rebuilding, he made suit to the church of Windsor to have his lease of the cure renewed to him, being recommended by the archbishop to Dr. Ryves, dean of that church. This was granted him; but some difficulties arising about the form of the lease, with regard to the parsonage house, agreed to be rebuilt, he did not live to execute it, dying at Hackney Nov. 26, 1671. He was interred in the church there.

, a learned English divine, was born in Merionethshire in 1703, and educated at Oswestry-school, whence he came to Jesus-college, Oxford, where he made great proficiency in learning. From college he returned to Oswestry, and became usher in that school. He took the degree of M. A. at Cambridge in 1742; was afterwards incorporated at Jesus-college, Oxford, July 3, 1758; and proceeded B. and D. D.July 10, in that year. He was early taken notice of by that great encourager of learning bishop Hare, then bishop of St. Asaph, who presented him first to the vicarage of Llanyblodwell, in the county of Salop, and afterwards removed him to Llanrhayader, or Llanrhadra, in Denbighshire, where he lived much beloved, and died Oct. 6, 1778, much lamented. As he could never be prevailed upon to take two livings, bishop Hare gave him a stall at St. Asaph, and a sinecure, “to enable him,” he said, “to support his chanties” (for charitable he was in an eminent degree). Afterwards archbishop Drummond (to whom he had been chaplain for several years) presented him to a stall in the cathedral of York. These were all his preferments. He was a studious man, and wrote several books, of which the principal are here enumerated. I. “An Essay on the Scheme and Conduct, Procedure and Extent, of Man’s Redemption; designed for the honour and illustration of Christianity. To which is annexed, a Dissertation on the Design and Argumentation of the Book of Job,” by William Worthington, M. A. vicar of Blodwel in Shropshire, London, 1743, 8vo. 2. “The historical Sense of the Mosaic Account of the Fall proved and vindicated,” 17. . , 8vo. 3. “Instructions concerning Confirmation,” 17.,. , 8va. 4. “A Disquisition concerning the Lord’s-Supper,” 17. . , 8vo. 5. “The Use, Value, and Improvement, of various Readings shewn and illustrated, in a Sermon preached before the University of Oxford, at St. Mary’s, on Sunday Oct. 18, 1761,” Oxford, 1764, 8vo. 6. “A Sermon preached in the parish-church of Christchurch, London, on Thursday April the 21st, 1768; being the time of the yearly meeting of tl^e children educated in the charityschools in and about the cities of London and Westminster,” 1768, 4to. 7. “The Evidences of Christianity, deduced from Facts, and the Testimony of Sense, throughout all Ages of the Church, to the present Time. In a series of discourses, preached for the lecture founded by the hon. Robert Boyle, esq. in the parish-church of St. James, Westminster, in the years 1766, 1767, 1768; wherein is shewn, that, upon the whole, this is not a decaying, but a growing, Evidence,” 1769, 2 vols. 8vo. 8. “The Scripture Theory of the Earth, throughout all its Revolutions, and all the periods of its existence, from the creation to the final renovation of all things; being a sequel to the Essay on Redemption, and an illustration of the principles on which it is written,” 1773, 8vo. 9. “Irenicum; or, the Importance of Unity in the Church of Christ considered, and applied towards the healing of our unhappy differences and divisions,” 1775, 8vo. 10. “An Impartial Enquiry into the Case of the Gospel-Demoniacs with an appendix, consisting of an Essay on Scripture-­Demonology,” 1777, 8vo. This last was a warm attack on the opinion held out by the Rev. Hugh Farmer, in. his “Essay on the Demoniacs,” 1775, 8vo. and, having produced a spirited reply in 1778, Dr. Worthington prepared for the press (what by the express directions of his will was given to the public after his death) “A farther Enquiry into the case of the Gospel-Demoniacs, occasioned by Mr. Farmer’s on the subject,” 1779, 8vo.

The dean’s life, we have seen, was chiefly devoted to political affairs, yet he was not wholly unemployed as a divine. In 1537, the more learned ecclesiastics of that period were called together in order to the composition of the book entitled “The godly and pious institution of a Christian man;” among these was Dr. Wotton. To their discussion and judgment many of the principal points of religion were submitted. From his compliance under the differing reigns of Henry, Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, he has been concluded to be a time-server, and a man of no decided religious principle; and he certainly is rather to be considered as a politician than an ecclesiastic, for it was in the former character principally that his services were required by his respective sovereigns. His learning is said to have been profound and extensive, and to have been displayed to the greatest advantage in the force of his arguments, and in the easiness of his elocution. In council his sentiments were delivered with admirable discretion, and maintained with undaunted resolution. The vigilance of his political conduct, both at home and abroad, distinguished him as an exemplary statesman; and the facility with which he could discuss the merits of a cause (his method being exact, and his memory tenacious), marked him as an acute civilian. His knowledge of trade ^nd commerce was no less conspicuous, and in an acquaintance with the polity of nations he was inferior to none. To the greatness of his character Holinshed and Camden have bequeathed their testimonies ^ and Henry VIII. is said to have thus addressed him, when he was about to depart on an embassy> “Sir, I have sent a head by Cromwell, a purse by Wolsey, a sword by Brandon, and I must now send the law by you to treat with enemies.”

, an English divine of uncommon parts and learning, was the son of Mr. Henry Wotton, rector of Wrentham, in Suffolk, a man of considerable learning also, and well skilled in the Oriental tongues. He was born at Wrentham the 13th of August, 1666, and was educated by his father. He discovered a most extraordinary genius for learning languages; and, though what is related of him upon this head may appear wonderful, yet it is so well attested that we know not how to refuse it credit. Sir Philip Skippon, who lived at Wrentham, in a letter to Mr. John Ray, Sept. Is, 1671, writes thus of him: “I shall somewhat surprise you with what I have seen in a little boy, William Wotton, five years old the last month, the son of Mr. Wotton, minister of this parish, who hath instructed his child within the last three quarters of a year in the reading the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, which he can read almost as well as English; and that tongue he could read at four years and three months old as well as most lads of twice his age. I could send you many particulars about his rendering chapters and psalms out of the three learned languages into English,” &c. Among sir Philip’s papers was found a draught of a longer letter to Mr. Ray, in which these farther particulars are added to the above: “He is not yet able to parse any language, but what he performs in turning the three learned tongues into English is done by strength of memory; so that he is ready to mistake when some words of different signification have near the same sound. His father hath taught him by no rules, but only uses the child’s memory in remembering words: some other children of his age seem to have as good a fancy and as quick apprehension.” He was admitted of Catharine Hall, Cambridge, in April 1676, some months before he was ten years old; and upon his admission Dr. John Eachard, then master of the college, gave him this remarkable testimony: Gulidmns Wottonus infra decem annos nee Ilammondo nee Grotio secundus. His progress in learning was answerable to the expectations conceived of him; and Dr. Duport, the master of Magdalen-college, and dean of Peterborough, has described it in an elegant copy of verses; “In Gulielmum Wottanum stupendi ingenii et incomparabilis spei puerum vixdum duodecim annorum.” He then goes on to celebrate his skill in the languages, not only in the Greek and Latin, which he understood perfectly, but also in the Hebrew, Arabic, Syriac, Chaldee; his skill too in arts and sciences, in geography, logic, philosophy, mathematics^ chronology.

In 1706 Wotton preached a visitation- sermon, at Newport-Pagnel in Bucks, against Tindal’s bookof “The Rights of the Christian Church,” and printed it. This was the first answer that was written to that memorable performance; and it was also the first piece which Wotton published as a divine. In 1707, archbishop Tenison presented him with the degree of doctor of divinity. In 1708 he drew up a short view of Dr. Hickes’s “Thesaurus;” but the appendix and notes are Hickes’s own. In 1714 the difficulties he was under in his private fortune, for he had not a grain of ceconomy, obliged him to retire into South Wales, where, though he had much leisure, he had few books. Yet, being too active in his nature to be idle, he drew up, at the request of Browne Willis, esq v who afterwards published them, the “Memoirs of the Cathedral Churqh of St. David/' in 1717, and of” Landaff“in 1719. Here he also wrote his” Miscellaneous discourses relating to the traditions and usages of the Scribes and Pharisees,“&c. which was printed 1718, in 2 vols. 8vo. Le Clerc tells us that” great advantage may be made by reading the writings of the Rabbins; and that the public is highly obliged to Mr. Selden, for instance, and to Dr. Lightfoot, for the assistances which they have drawn thence, and communicated to those who study the holy scripture. Those who do not read their works, which are not adapted to the capacity of every person, will be greatly obliged to Dr. Wotton for the introduction which he has given them into that kind of learning." In 1719 he published a sermon upon Mark xiii. 32, to prove the divinity of the Son of God from his omniscience.

, eldest son of the preceding, was born Aug. 20, 1629, at Peter- house, Cambridge, ut which time his father was master of that college. His first education was in that university, heing admitted of St. Peter’s-college in 1642, whence he removed to Oxford, where he was a student, not in a college or hall, but in a private house, as he could not conform to the principles or practises of the persons who then had the government of the university. At the restoration' he was elected burgess of St. Michael in Cornwall, in the parliament which began May8, 1661, and was appointed secretary to the earl of Clarendon, lord high chancellor of England, who visiting the university of Oxford, of which he was chancellor, in Sept. 1661, Mr. Wren was there created master of arts. He was one of the first members of the Royal Society, when they began their weekly meetings at London, in 166O. After the fall of his patron, the earl of Clarendon, he became secretary to James duke of York, in whose service he continued till his death, June 11, 1672, in the fortythird year of his age. He was interred in the same vault with his father, in the chapel of Pembroke- hall, Cambridge. He wrote, 1. “Considerations on Mr. Harrington’s Commonwealth of Oceana, restrained to the first part of the preliminaries, London, 1657,” in 8vo. To this book is prefixed a long letter of our author to Dr. John Wilkins, warden of Wadham-college in Oxford, who had desired him to give his judgment concerning Mr. Harrington’s “Oceana.” Harrington answered this work in the first book of his “Prerogative of popular government,” 1658, 4to, in which he reflects on Mr. Wren as one of those virtuosi, who then met at Dr. Wilkins’ a lodgings at Wad ham- college, the seminary of the Royal Society, and describes them as an assembly of men who “had an excellent fcculty of mag^ nifying a louse, and diminishing a commonwealth.” Mr. Wren replied in 2, “Monarchy asserted; or, the State of Monarchical and Popular Government, in vindication of the considerations on Mr. Harrington’s * Oceana,' London, 1659,” in 8vo. Harrington’s rejoinder was an indecent piece of buffoonery, entitled “Politicaster i or, a Comical Discourse in^answer to Mr. Wren’s book, entitled ‘ Monarchy asserted, &c.’” 1659, 4to. Sir Edward Hyde, after^ wards earl of Clarendon, in a letter to Dr. John Barwick, dated at Brussels the 25th of July, 1659, and printed in the appendix to the doctor’s “Life,” was very solicitous, that Mr. Wren should undertake a confutation of Hobbes’s “Leviathan:” “I hope,” says he, “it is only modesty in Mr. Wren, that makes hirn pause upon undertaking the work you have recommended to him; for I dare swear, by what I have seen of him, he is very equal to answer every part of it: I mean, every part that requires an answer. Nor is there need of a professed divine to vindicate the Creator from making man a verier beast than any of those of the field, or to vindicate scripture from his licentious interpretation. I dare say, he will find somewhat in Mr. Hobbes himself, I mean, in his former books, that contradicts what he sets forth in this, in that part in which he takes himself to be most exact, his beloved philosophy. And sure there is somewhat due to Aristotle and Tuily, and to our universities, to free them from his reproaches; and it is high time, if what I hear be true, that some tutors read his Leviathan, instead of the others, to their pupils. Mr. Hobbes is my old friend, yet I cannot absolve him from the mischiefs he hath done to the king, the church, the laws, and the nation; and surely there should be enough to be said to the politics of that man, who, having resolved all religion, wisdom, and honesty, into an implicit obedience to the laws established, writes a book of policy, which, I may be bold to say, must be, by the established laws of any kingdom or province in Europe, condemned for impious and seditious: and therefore it will be very hard if the fundamentals of it be not overthrown. But I must ask both yours and Mr. Wren’s pardon for enlarging so much, and antedating those animadversions he will make upon it.”

, a learned and loyal divine of the seventeenth century, was the son of Richard Wright, citizen and silk-dyer of London, who was the son of Jeffrey Wright, of Loughborough, in Leicestershire. He was born in Black- Swan alley, Thames-street, in the parish of St. James’s, Garlick Hythe, London, Dec. 23, 1611, and educated partly at Mercers’- chapel school, but principally at Merchant Taylors, whence he was elected scholar of St. JobnVcollege, Oxford, in 1629, by the interest of Dr. Juxon, then president, w/ho became his patron. He was much admired at this time for a natural eloquence, and a love of polite literature. In 1632 he was elected fellow, and while bachelor of arts, made a collection of modern Latin poetry, which he published afterwards under the title of “Delitiae delitiarum, siveepigrammatum ex optimis quibusque hujus novissimi seculi Poetis in amplissima ilia Bibl. Bodleiana, et pene omnino alibi extantibus artthologia in unum corollum connexa,” Ox. 1637, 12mo. In 1636, when archbishop Laud entertained the royal family at St. JohnVcollege, Mr. Wright was selected to make an English address, and afterwards distinguished himself as a performer in a comedy called “Love’s Hospital,” which was acted before their majesties in the hall, by a company of St. John’s men.

, a man of some original genius, but whose works will not entitle him to any very Jjigh rank in literature, was descended from a very respectable family in South Wales, where he was born in 1743. At what time he arrived in London, is not known, but for some time he gained his bread in the printing business, with which he became disgusted, and had interest enough to obtain an appointment in a regiment about to go abroad. Such was the perverseness of his temper while on shipboard vyith liis brother officers, that they refused to associate with him, and actually left him behind when the ship arrived at its first place of destination. From thence he contrived to return to England, where he married a young woman of some property. This was probably soon spent, as about this time he commenced author by profession, but either his works or his employers were of the lowest order, for it was with difficulty he could procure the necessaries of life by his labours. In 1770, however, he began to aim at higher fame, and published “A General History of theJBritish Empire in America: including all the countries in North America and the West-Indies ceded by the peace of Paris, 2 vols. 8vo. This as a compilation did him no discredit.In 1771 he published the” Prostitute, a Poem,“4to; in 1772” Choice Emblems, natural, historical, fabulous, moral, and divine, for the improvement of youth; in verse and prose/* 12mo. The same year appeared his principal work, “A general History of Ireland, from the earliest accounts to the present time,” 2 vols. 8vo., This was more popular, from the nature of the subject, than his History of America, but far enough removed from the merit that would enrol him among historians. Next year he published “tables of Flowers for the Female Sex,” “Evelina, a poem;” and “The Four Seasons, a poem.” In poetry he was ill -qualified to excel, although there are passages in some of his pieces that indicate superior talents, had he cultivated them at leisure, and been possessed of a mind better regulated. In 1787 he published a novel called “The Child of Chance;” and at different periods of his life supplied the magazines and newspapers with essays, poems, &c. generally with his name. All these were written to supply immediate wants, which they did but imperfectly. He died Dec. 2, 1788. It is mentioned to his honour that through a long life of poverty, he abhorred and avoided every mean and dishonest expedient to improve his finances, and was even so extravagant in his notions of independence that to do him an act of kindness unsolicited, was to incur his bitterest reproaches.

, one of the most celebrated philosophers of ancient Greece, was born at Chalcedon, B. C. 400. He at first attached himself to Æschines, but afterwards became the disciple of Plato, and always retained a high degree of respect and attachment for that great man, whom he accompanied in a voyage to Sicily. When Dionysius the tyrant threatened Plato one day, saying, “that some person should behead him;” “Nobody shall do that,” said Xenocrates, “till they have first beheaded me.” This philosopher studied under Plato at the same time with Aristotle, but did not possess equal talents: for he had a slow genius and dull apprehension, while Aristotle’s genius was quick and penetrating, whence their master observed of them, “that one wanted a spur, and the other a bridle.” But however inferior Xenocrates might be to Aristotle in genius, he greatly excelled him in the practice of moral philosophy. He was grave, sober, austere, and of a disposition so serious, and so far removed from the Athenian politeness, that Plato frequently exhorted him to “sacrifice to the graces.” He always bore his master’s reproofs with great patience, and when persuaded to defend himself, replied, “He treats me thus only for my good.” Xenocrates is particularly celebrated for chastity, and is said to have acquired so great a command over his passions, that Phryne, the most beautiful courtezan of Greece, who had laid a wager that she would seduce him, could not effect her purpose. Being afterwards laughed at, and the wager demanded, she replied, “I have not lost it; for I undertook to seduce a man, and not a statue.” The conduct of Xenocrates exhibited an equal example of temperance in every other respect. He cared neither for pleasures, wealth, or fame; and was so moderate in his dietj that he often found it necessary to throw away his provisions because they were grown stale and mouldy; whence the proverb among the Grecians, of Xenocrates* s cheese, when they would describe any thing which lasted a long time. This philosopher succeeded Speusippus, who was Plato’s immediate successor in the' academy at Athens, in 339 B. C. He required his disciples to understand mathematics before they placed themselves under his care; and sent back a youth who was ignorant of that science, saying, “that he had not the key of philosophy.” So great was his reputation fqr sincerity and probity, that the magistrates accepted his testimony without an oath; a favour granted to him alone. Polemo, a rich young man, but so debauched, that his wife had begun a prosecution against him for his infamoqs conduct, rambling through the streets, one day, with his dissolute companions, after they had drank freely, entered our philosopher’s school, with an intention to ridicule and insult him. The audience were highly offended at this behaviour; but Xenocrates Continued perfectly calm, and immediately turning his discourse upon temperance, spoke of that virtue in terms so forcible, lofty, and elevated, that the young libertine made a sudden resolution to renounce his licentiousness, and devote himself to wisdom. From that moment, Polemo became the pupil of virtue, and a model of temperance, and at length succeeded Xenocrates in the philosophical chair. Hia conversion made much noise, and so increased the public veneration for Xenocrates, that when he appeared in the streets, no dissolute youths dared to remain there, but turned aside that they might avoid meeting him. The Athenians sent this philosopher on an embassy to Philip, king of Macedon, and, a considerable time after, to Antipater; neither of whom could corrupt him by their presents, which circumstance made him doubly honoured. Alexander the Great so highly esteemed Xenocrates, that he sent him fifty talents, a large sum then; and when his messengers arrived at Athens, Xenocrates invited them to eat with him, but gaVe them only his common farel Upon their inquiring, next morning, to whom they should pay the fifty talents, he replied, “Has not lak night’s supper convinced you that I want no money?” intimating that he was contented with a little, and that money was necessary to kings, not to philosophers. But at the earnest entreaties of Alexander’s messengers, he accepted a small part of the sum, lest he should appear deficient in respect to that great monarch. It is astonishing that ‘the Athenians should suffer a philosopher of such exalted merit to be so ill treated by the collectors and receivers of their taxes 5 for though they were once fined for attempting to imprison Xenocrates, because he had not paid a certain tax imposed on foreigners, yet it is certain that the same collectors and receivers sold him at another time, because he had not enough to pay them. But Demetrius Phalereus, detesting so base an action; purchased Xenocrates’, gave hirri his freedom immediately, and discharged his debt to the Athenians. This philosopher died about 314 B.C. aged eighty-two, in consequence ’of falling in the dark into a reservoir of water. He 1 wrote, at the request of Alexander, *a small tract on the Art of Reigning; six books on Nature; MX books oh Philosophy one on Riches, &c, but none of these have come down to us. There is a tract on Death, under his name, in 'the Jamblicus of Aldus, 1497, folio. Xenocrates used to say, “That we often repent of having spoken, b,ut never of having kept silence; that true philosophers are the only persons who do willingly, and by their own choice, what others are constrained to do by fear of the laws; that it is as great a crime to look into our neighbour’s house as to enter it privately J that there was more necessity for putting iron-plates over the ears of children, to defend and preserve them from hearing vicious discourse, than of gladiators, to guard them from blows,” c. As to his philosophical system, it was truly Platonic; but in his’ method of teaching he made use of the language of the Pythagoreans. He made Unity and Diversity principles in nature, or gods; the former of whom he represented as the father, and the latter as the mother, of the universe. He taught, that the heavens are divine, and the stars celestial gods; and that besides these divinities, there are terrestrial daemons, of a middle order between the gods and man, which partake of the nature both of mind and body, and are therefore, like human beings, capable of passions, and liable to diversity of character. After Plato, he probably conceived the superior divinities to be the Ideas, or intelligible forms, which immediately proceeded from the supreme Deity, and the inferior gods or daemons, to be derived from the soul of the world, and therefore, like that principle, to be compounded of a simple and a divisible substance, or of that which always remains the same, and that which is liable to change.

The doctrine of Xenophanes concerning nature is so imperfectly preserved, and obscurely expressed, that it is no wonder that it has been differently represented by different writers. Some have confounded it with the moden impiety of Spinoza, who supposed all the appearances in nature to be only modifications of one material substance. Others have endeavoured to accommodate it to the ancient system of emanation; and others, to the Pythagoric and Stoic notions of the soul of the world. But none of these explanations accord with the terms, in which the tenets of Xenophanes are expressed. Perhaps the truth is, that he held the universe to be one in nature and substance, but distinguished in his conception between the matter of which all things consist, and that latent divine force, which, though not a distinct substance, but an attribute, is necessarily inherent in the universe; and this is the cause of all its perfection. What Xenophanes maintained concerning the immobility and immutability of nature is to be understood of the universe considered as one whole, and not of its several parts, which his physical tenets supposed liable to change. If he asserted, that there is no motion in nature, he probably understood the term motion metaphysically, and only meant that there is no such thing in nature as passing from nonentity to entity, or the reverse, perhaps the disputes among the ancients concerning motion, like many other metaphysical contests, were mere combats in the dark, for want of settling previously the meaning of terms. Brucker thinks that the notion ascribed to Xenophanes concerning the nature and origin of the celestial bodies, as meteors daily renewed, is so absurd as perhaps to have been defectively or unfairly stated; and he is inclined likewise to suppose, that many of the fancies, ascribed to philosophers, are nothing more than the misconceptions of ignorant or careless biographers.

, an eminent statesman and patron of literature, was born in 1437, at Torrelaguna, in Old Castille, and was the son of Alphonso de Cimeros de Ximenes, procurator of that city. He was educated for the church, at Alcala and Salamanca, and then went to Rome, but having been robbed on his journey home, brought nothing back with him, except a bull for the first prebend which should be vacant. This the archbishop of Toledo refused to grant, and confined him in the tower of Uceda, where it is said a priest, who had long been prisoner there, foretold to him that he should, one day, be archbishop of Toledo. Having recovered his liberty, he obtained a benefice in the diocese of Siguenza, and cardinal Gonsalez de Mendoza, who was bishop there, made him his grand vicar. Ximenes entered soon after among the Franciscans of Toledo, and took the vows; but finding himself embarrassed by visits, he retired to a solitude called Castauel, where he studied the Oriental languages and divinity. On his return to Toledo, queen Isabella of Castille appointed him her confessor, and nominated him to the archbishopric of Toledo, 14.95, without his knowledge. When Ximenes received the bulls from the hand of this princess, he only kissed them, returned them to her, unopened, saying, “Madam, these letters are not addressed to me,” and went immediately back to his convent at Castanel, being determined not to accept the archbishopric. The queen was much pleased with this refusal; but when Ximenes still persisted in his refusal, an express command from the pope became necessary to overcome his resolution. Nor would he even then yield but upon the following conditions: “That he should never quit his church of Toledo; that no pension should be charged on his archbishopric (one of the richest in the world); and that no infringement of the privileges and immunities of his church should ever be attempted.” He took possession of it in 1498, being received with unusual magnificence at Toledo. This prelate’s first care was to provide for the poor, visit the churches and hospitals, and clear his diocese from usurers and licentious houses. Those judges who neglected their duty, he degraded, supplying their places with persons whose probity and disinterestedness were known to him. He held a synod afterwards at Alcala, and another at Talavera, where he made very prudent regulations for the clergy of his diocese, and laboured at the same time to reform the Franciscans throughout Castille and Arragon, in which he happily succeeded, notwithstanding the obstacles he had to encounter. Ximenes established a celebrated university at Alcala, and founded there in 1499, the famous college of St. Ildephonsus, built by Peter Gumiel, one of the best architects of that time. Three years after he undertook the great plan of a Polyglot Bible, for the execution of which he invited many learned men from Alcala to Toledo, who were skilled in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Arabic, and other languages necessary for the perfect understanding the holy scriptures. This Bible, though began in 1502, was not printed till 1517, 6 vols. folio, at Alcala. It contains the Hebrew text of the Bible, the version of the LXX. with a literal translation, that of St. Jerome, and the Chaldee paraphrases of Onkelos on the Pentateuch only. In the original preface, addressed to pope Leo X. the learned archbishop says, “It is doing great service to the church to publish the scriptures in their original language, both because no translation cati give a perfect idea of the original, and because, according to the opinion of the holy fathers, we should refer to the Hebrew text for the Old Testament, and to the Greek for the New Testament.” The work was above fifteen years in finishing. Ximenes himself assisted in it with great assiduity, and paid the whole expence, which amounted to an immense sum. He purchased seven Hebrew copies, that cost four thousand crowns, and gave vast prices for ancient Mss. To the above-mentioned Bible, which is called the Polyglot of Ximenes, he added a dictionary of the Hebrew and Chaldee words in the Bible. In 1507 pope Julius II. gave him a cardinal’s hat; and Ferdinand the catholic entrusted him with the administration of state affairs, from which moment cardinal Ximenes became the soul of all that was done in Spain. He began his ministry by delivering the people from an oppressive tax, which had been continued on account of the war of Grenada; and he laboured so zealously and successfully in the conversion of the Mahometans, that he made near three thousand proselytes, among whom was the prince of the blood royal of Grenada. This great multitude he baptized in a spacious square, awd ordering all the copies of the Koran to be brought thither, set them on fire; which memorable day was afterwarda kept as a festival in Spain. Cardinal Ximenes extended Ferdinand’s dominion over the Moors, 1509, by the conquest of Oran, a city in the kingdom of Algiers. He undertook this conquest at his own expence, and marched himself at the head of the Spanish army in his pontifical habit, accompanied by a great number of ecclesiastics and monks, and at his return was met within four leagues of Seville by Ferdinand, who alighted to embrace him. Foreseeing afterwards an uncommon dearth, he ordered public granaries to be built at Toledo, Alcala, and Torrelaguna, and stored them with corn at his own cost; which made him so generally beloved, that his eulogy was engraved in the senate-house at Toledo, and in the public square, to perpetuate the memory of this noble action. King Ferdinand dying in 1516, appointed him regent of his dominions, and the archduke Charles (afterwards the emperor Charles V.) confirmed this appointment. No sooner was cardinal Ximenes established in the regency, than he became intent on exerting his authority. He introduced a reformation among the officers of the supreme council, and those of the court, ordered the judges to repress all extortions of the rich and of the nobility, and dismissed prince Ferdinand’s two favourites. These changes excited murmurs among the grandees, and some officer’s asked the cardinal, by what authority he thus acted? Ximenes immediately showed them the soldiers who composed his common guard, and replied, that his power consisted in their strength; then shaking his cord of St. Francis, said, “This suffices me to quell my rebellious subjects.” At the same time he ordered the cannon, which he kept behind his palace, to be fired, and concluded with these words: “Haec est ratio ultima regis;” i. e. This is the decisive argument of kings. He opposed the reformation of the inquisition; devoted himself, with indefatigable ardour, to the affairs of the church and state; and omitted nothing that he thought could contribute to the glory of religion, and the advantage of his sovereigns. At length, after having governed Spain twenty -two years, in the reigns of Ferdinand, Isabella, Jane, Philip, and Charles of Austria, he died November 8, 1517, as some think, by poison, in the eighty-first year of his age. His remains were interred in the college of Ildephonsus, at Alcala, where his tomb may be seen. This cardinal had settled several excellent foundations; among others, two magnificent female convents; one for the religious education of a great many young ladies of high rank, but destitute of fortune the other to be an asylum; for such poor maidens as should be found to have a real call to the monastic life. He also founded a chapel in his cathedral for the performance of divine service according to the Mozarabic rites. If we add the fountain of springwater, which he conveyed to the town of Torrelaguna, for public use, to the other sums he expended there, it will appear that he laid out nearly a million in that one place.

, a divine and poet, the sixth son of Mr. John Yalden, of Sussex, was born at Exeter in 1671. Having been educated in the grammar-school belonging to Magdalen college, Oxford, he was, in 1690, at the age of nineteen, admitted commoner of Magdalen Hall, under the tuition of Josiah Pullen, a man whose name is still remembered in the university. He became next year one of the scholars of Magdalen college, where he was distinguished by a declamation, which Dr. Hough, the president, happening to attend, thought too good to be the speaker’s. Some time after, the doctor, finding him a little irregularly busy in the library, set him an exercise, for punishment; and, that he might not be deceived by any artifice, locked the door. Yalden, as it happened, had been latelyreading on the subject given, and produced with little difficulty a composition which so pleased the president that he told him his former suspicions, and promised to favour him. Among his contemporaries in the college were Addison and Sacheverell, men who were in those times friends, and who both adopted Yalden to their intimacy. Yalden continued throughout his life to think, as probably he thought at first, yet did not lose the friendship of Addison. When Namur was taken by king William, Yalden made an ode . He wrote another poem, on the death of the duke of Gloucester. In 1700 he became fellow of the college, and next year entering into orders, was presented by the society with the living of Willoughby, in Warwickshire, consistent with his fellowship, and chosen lecturer of moral philosophy, a very honourable office. On the accession of queen Anne he wrote another poem; and is said, by the author of the “Biographia,” to have declared himself one of the party who had the distinction of high-churchmen. In 1706 he was received into the family of the duke of Beaufort. Next year he became D. D. and soon after he resigned his fellowship and lecture; and, as a token of his gratitude, gave the college a picture of their founder. The duke made him rector of Chalton and Cleanville, two adjoining towns and benefices in Hertfordshire; and he had the prebends, or sinecures, of Deans, Hains, and Pendles, in Devonshire. In 1713 he was chosen preacher of Bridewell Hospital, upon the resignation of Dr. Atterbury. From this time he seems to have led a quiet and inoffensive life, till the clamour was raised about Atterbury’s plot. Every loyal eye was on the watch for abettors or partakers of the horrid conspiracy; and Dr. Yalden, having some acquaintance with the bishop, and being familiarly conversant with Kelly his secretary, fell under suspicion, and was taken into custody. Upon his examination he was charged with a dangerous correspondence with Kelly. The correspondence he acknowledged; but maintained that it had no treasonable tendency. His papers were seized; but nothing was found that could fix a crime upon him, except two words in his pocket-book, f< thorough- paced doctrine.“This expression the imagination of his examiners had impregnated with treason; and the doctor was enjoined to explain them. Thus pressed, he told them that the words had lain unheeded in his pocket-book from the time of queen Anne, and 'that he was ashamed to give an account of them; but the truth was, that he had gratified his curiosity one day by hearing Daniel Burgess in the pulpit, and these words were a memorial hint of a remarkable sentence by which he warned his congregation to” beware of thorough-paced doctrine, that doctrine, which, coming in at one ear, paces through the head, and goes out at the other.“Nothing worse than this appearing in his papers, and no evidence arising against him, he was set at liberty. It will not be supposed that a man of this character attained high dignities in the church; but he still retained the friendship, and frequented the conversation of a very numerous and splendid body of acquaintance. He died July 16, 1736, in the sixty-sixth year of his age. Of his poems which have been admitted into Dr. Johnson’s collection, his” Hymn to Darkness“seems to be his best performance, and is, for the most part, imagined with great vigour, and expressed with great propriety. His” Hymn to Light" is not equal to the other. On his other poems it is sufficient to say that they deserve perusal, though they are not always exactly polished, though the rhymes are sometimes very ill sorted, and though his faults seem rather the omissions of idleness than the negligences of enthusiasm.

In 1719, Dr. Young published ^A paraphrase on part of the book of Job,“prefixed by a dedication to the lord chancellor Parker, which he omitted afterwards, and of whom, says his biographer, he clearly appears to have had no kind of knowledge. Of his” Satires“it is not easy to fix the dates. They probably came out between 1725 and 1728, and were afterwards published collectively under the title of” The Universal Passion.“In his preface he says that he prefers laughing at vice and folly, a different temper than that in which he wrote his melancholy” Night Thoughts.“These satires were followed by” The Installment,“addressed to sir Robert Walpote, but afterwards suppressed: and by” Ocean, an Ode,“accompanied by an” Ode to the King, pater patria“an” Essay on Lyric Poetry,“both afterwards omittedby him. Perhaps no writer ever rejected so many of his own performances, nor were the>e juvenile effusions, for he was now forty-six or forty-seven years old; and at this age, he entered into orders, April 1728, and was soon after appointed chaplain to king George II. It is said by one of the biographers of Pope, but the story is scarcely credible, that when he determined on the church, he did not address himself to any eminent divine for instructions in theology, but to Pope, who jocularly advised the diligent perusal of Thomas Aquinas, and this, Ruffhead says, had almost brought on an irretrievable derangement. But as we have seen that Young had once refused two livings in the gift of All Souls, it is surely not improbable that he had then studied in the theological faculty, although at the duke of Wharton’s persuasion, he had been induced to think of political life. One thing, after taking orders, he thought becoming his new character. He withdrew his tragedy of” The Brothers," which was already in rehearsal, and when at last it was performed in 1753, he made up the profits to the sum of iOOO/. and gave the money to the society for the propagation of the gospel in foreign parts. We know not that that society has been so honoured since, and it certainly never was so before.

, an eminent divine, and ranked among the illustrious band of reformers, was a cousin of the preceding, and most probably born at Bergamo, Feb. 2, 1516, the year before the reformation appeared in Germany under Luther. He was deprived of both his parents, by death, when very young, and resolving on a monastic life, entered the society of the canons regular, where he found some of his relations, and where he had an opportunity of improvement in literature. Here he studied philosophy, the languages, and school divinity, for nineteen years. His first departure from the tenets of the Romish church may be dated from his having an opportunity of hearing Peter Martyr’s lectures on the epistle to the Romans and on the Psalms, which he appears to have done along with count Maximinian and Tremellius, both afterwards converts to the reformed opinions. From this time he began to study the scriptures and the fathers, particularly St. Austin, and preached according to the new light he had received. In 1550, when Peter Martyr was no longer permitted to preach, and was obliged to leave Italy, eighteen of his disciples followed him, and among the rest Zanchins. He first went to the territory of the Orisons, and from that to Geneva, where, after he had resided about a year, he received invitation to fill a divinity professorship in England. This was probably at Oxford, where Peter Martyr was now settled, and had recommended him; but he preferred a similar invitation from Strasburgh, and in 1553, succeeded Caspar Hedio, as divinity professor there.

, an eminent Lutheran divine, was born in 1505, at Zegedin, a city of Lower Hungary; his family name was Kis. He studied under Luther and Melancthon, at Wittemberg; taught and preached Lutheranism afterwards, in several cities in Hungary, and was taken prisoner by the Turks, who used him with great cruelty. Having recovered his liberty, he officiated as minister at Buda, and in many other places. He died at Reven, in Hungary, May 2, 1572, aged sixty-seven, leaving, “Speculum Roman. Pontificum Historicum,” 1602, 8vo. “Assertio de Trinitate,” 1573, 8vo. “Tabulae Analyticae in Prophetas, Psalmos, et Novum Testamentum,” 1592, folio a work very highly recommended for its utility by father Simon.

, called the Eleatic, to distinguish from the preceding, and 'from others, flourished about 463 B.C. He was a zealous friend of civil liberty, and is celebrated for his courageous and successful opposition to tyrants; but the inconsistency of the stories related by different writers concerning him, in a great measure destroys their credit. He chose to reside in his small native city of Elea, rather than at Athens, because it afforded freer scope to his independent and generous spirit, which could not easily submit to the restraints of authority. It is related that he vindicated the warmth with which he resented reproach, by saying, “If I were indifferent to censure, I should also be indifferent to praise.” The invention of the dialecticart has been improperly ascribed to Zeno; but there can be no doubt that this philosopher, and other metaphysical disputants in the Eleatic sect, employed much ingenuity and subtlety in exhibiting examples of most of the logical arts which were afterwards reduced to rule by Aristotle and others. According to Aristotle, Zeno of Elea taught that nothing fcan be produced either from that which is similar or dissimilar; that there is only one being, and that is God; that this being is eternal, homogeneous, and spherical, neither finite nor infinite, neither quiescent nor moveable; % that there are many worlds; that there is in nature no vacuum; that all bodies are composed of four elements, heat and moisture, cold and dryness; and that the body of man is from the earth, and his soul an equal mixture of these four elements. He argued with great subtlety against the possibility of motion. If Seneca’s account of this philosopher deserves credit, he reached the highest point of scepticism, and denied the real existence of external objects. The truth is, that after all that has been advanced by different writers, it is impossible to determine whether Zeno understood the term one, metaphysically, logically, or physically; or whether he admitted or denied a nature properly divine.

, a learned philosopher, mathematician, and divine, of the sixteenth century, was born at Landshut, in Bavaria. He taught at Vienna for a considerable time, and resided afterwards near the bishop of Passau in Bavaria, where he died in 1549, leaving several works; which are different in their spirit, according as they were written before or after he quitted the Romish church. Among these, his notes on some select passages of the Holy Scriptures, Basil, 151?, folio, and his “Description of the Holy Land,” Strasburg, 1536, folio, are particularly esteemed. There is an excellent life of Ziegler in Scbelhorn’s “Amoenitates.”

The Moravians retain the discipline of their ancient church, and make use of episcopal ordination, which has been handed down to them, in a direct line of succession for more than 300 years. In their doctrines they adhere to the confession of Augsburgh, which was drawn up by Melancthon, at the desire of the protestant princes then assembled in that city, and by them presented to the die( of the empire, in 1530. In 1732, count Zinzendorf determining to devote h is whole time to the benefit of the brethren, and to the great work of preaching the gospel among the heathens, resigned his situation as one of the council of regency at Dresden. He had been appointed in 1727, one of the wardens of the congregation. These wardens, where necessary, were to patronize the congregation, and to have an eye to the maintenance of good order and discipline. To them, and to the elders in conjunction, the direction of the congregation, both internally and externally, was committed. This office he resigned in 1730, but upon the urgent entreaties of the congregation, resumed it in 1733. He entered into holy orders in 1734, at Tubingen, in the duchy of Wirtemberg; and in 1737, he received episcopal ordination, on which occasion he received a letter of congratulation from Dr. Potter, archbishop of Canterbury, and from this time we always find him called the Ordinary of the brethren. In 1741, he laid aside his episcopal function, as he believed it would be prejudicial to his intended labours in Pennsylvania, where he purposed to appear merely as a Lutheran divine.

These accusations were first circulated in a pamphlet, published in 1753, entitled “A narrative of the rise and progress of the Herrnhutters, with a short account of their doctrines, c.” by Henry Rimius, Aulic counsellor- to his late majesty the king of Prussia. The representations of this writer were confided in, and the character of the brethren was exhibited in the most odious colours. Bishops Lavington and Warburton, in particular, relying principally on the authority of Rimius, were distinguished as the most formidable of their antagonists. Bishop Lavington, in a pamphlet entitled “The Moravians compared and detected,” instituted a curious parallel between the doctrines and practices of the Moravians and those of the ancient heretics; and Dr. Warburton, in his “Doctrine of Grace,” wrote some very severe invectives against them. The count was at this time (1753) in England, and resided at an old mansion (called Lindsey house) which he had purchased at Chelsea. He was here witness to numerous libels against him. “To one of the first ministers of state,” says Mr. Cranz, “who urged the prosecution of a certain libeller, and promised him all his interest in having him punished, he gave his reasons in writing, why he neither could nor would prosecute him. A certain eminent divine^ who compared the brethren to all the ancient and modern heretics, and charged them with all their errors, though ever so opposite to each other, received from him a very moderate private answer.”

, whose proper name was De Trocznow, was a native of Bohemia, and was educated at the Bohemian court, in the reign of Wenceslaus. He went into the army very young, signalized himself on several occasions, and lost an eye in battle; whence he was called Zisca, which signifies one-eyed. Almost all Bohemia retaining the sentiments, and being shocked at the death of John Huss, Zisca became their leader, and soon saw himself at the head of 40,000 men, determined to rescue their country from civil and ecclesiastical tyranny; and with these troops he gained several victories over the catholics. He built a town in an advantageous situation, and named it Tabor, from which circumstance the Hussites were also called Taborites. Zisca lost his other eye, by an arrow, at the siege of Rubi; but this did not prevent his continuing the war, and obtaining great victories, particularly that of Aussig, on the Elbe, when 9000 catholics were left dead on the spot. The emperor Sigismond^ alarmed by all this, privately offered Zisca very advantageous terms. Zisca accepted theD, and set out to meet Sigismond but died of the plague on his journey, in 1424, after having ordered, as is said, that his body should be left a prev to the birds and beasts, and that a drum should be made of his skin, at the sound of which, he assured his followers, the enemy would immediately fly. The Hussites, it is added, obeyed his command; and the newsof this injunction made so strong an impression on the German catholies, who were not well disciplined, that they actually fled in several battles, on hearing the drum made of John Zisca’s skin. The whole, however, is justly considered as an absurd fiction. Zisca has been ranked among the reformers, and certainly may be considered as the successor of Huss in the propagation of his opinions, but he was more of a general than a divine, and makes a better figure in belligerent history than in that of the church. He was by no means animated with that true spirit of Christianity which his amiable master Huss had discovered on all occasions. His fierce temper, says Gilpin, seems to have been modelled rather upon the Old Testament than the New; and the genius of that religion in a great degree to have taken hold of him, which in its animosities called down fire from heaven. His military abilities were equal to what any age has produced; and as such they are acknowledged by all historians; nor was the end which he proposed unworthy of his great actions. Utterly devoid both of avarice and ambition, he had no aim but to establish, upon the ruins of ecclesiastical tyranny, the civil and religious liberties of his country.

, an eminent German divine, was born at St. Gall, in Switzerland, August 5, 1730.- His father, a worthy practitioner of the law, withheld no expence in his education and, after the usual progress through the school of his native town, being designed for the church, he was sent first to Bremen, and thence to the university of Utrecht, where the divinity professors are said to have been in high repute. Zollikofer was not, however, says his biographer, one of those who adhere pertinaciously to every thing instilled into them in a lecture-room, and are incapable of advancing a stej> beyond the routine of opinions, to which, from custom or articles, the tutors themselves are bound to accede. He was obliged, indeed, to attend lectures, as he once mentioned to a friend, on a systematic theology, resting solely on “unproved formularies, sophisms, technical and scholastic terms of the compendiums at that time in general use, instead of a sound exposition of the Bible, in connection with a strict investigation of ecclesiastical history:” but his sermons and books of devotion did not receive the least taint from the theology into which he became thus initiated. “The little that I know,” said he, “I was obliged to teach myself chiefly after I was come to years of maturity; for I had but a miserable education.”

, a learned divine, was born in 1737, at Sandal, neat* Wakefield, Yorkshire; and in 1757 removed from the school of the latter place to Trinity-college, Cambridge. In 1760, he was elected into one of lord Craven’s scholarships, along with Mr. Joah Bates, celebrated afterwards for his skill in music. The year following, Mr. Zouch took his degree of B. A. and was classed as the third wrangler. Having been chosen fellow of his college in 1763, he was appointed assistant-tutor, which office he discharged with extraordinary credit; though his assiduity so much impaired his health, that he was obliged to quit the university; on which his college presented him in 1770 to the rectory of Wycliffe in the North Riding of Yorkshire. In this country retirement he continued till 1793, performing the office of a parish priest with great diligence, and augmenting his knowledge of natural history. His botanical excursions, in a pleasant and romantic part of Yorkshire, contributed not a little to invigorate his constitution. In 1791, he was appointed deputy commissary of the archdeaconry of Richmond; and in 1793 was chaplain to the master of the rolls, and rector of Scrayingham. By the death of his elder brother, the rev. Henry Zouch, in 1795, he succeeded to an estate at Sandal, where he resided till his death. On the demise of Dr. Smith, the master of Trinity college, one of the most learned mathematicians of his age, he was requested by the vice-master and senior fellows to deliver a Latin funeral oration in honour of his memory, which is said to have been much admired for the classical elegance of its language. In 1798, Mr. Pitt intended to have appointed him to the mastership of Trinity; but this design was set aside in favour of the present bishop of Bristol. On April 9, 1805, Mr. Pitt gave him the second prebend in the church of Durham, and in the same year he took his degree of D.D. In 1808, the see of Carlisle was offered to Dr. Zouch; but, in consequence of his advanced age and retired habits, he thought proper to decline the acceptance. Besides some anonymous publications, he was the author of, 1. “The Crucifixion, a Seaton prize poem,” 1765, 4to. 2. “A Sermon preached at the primary visitation of William lord bishop of Chester, held at Richmond, in Yorkshire, August 21, 1789,” 4to. 3. “An Inquiry into the Prophetic Character of the Romans, as described in Daniel viii. 23 25.” 1792, 8vo. 4. “An Address to the Clergy of the Deaneries of Richmond, Catterick, and Boroughbridge,” 1792, 4to. 5. “A Discourse delivered to the Clergy of the Deaneries of Richmond, Catterick, and Boroughbridge, within the Diocese of Chester, at the visitation held June 20 and 25, 1793, and published at their request,” 4to. 6. “The good Schoolmaster, exemplified in the character of the rev. John Clarke, M. A. formerly fellow of Trinity college, Cambridge, and successively master of the Schools of Skipton, Beverley, and Wakefield,” 1798, 4to. 7. “An Attempt to illustrate some of the Prophecies of the Old and New Testament,” 1800, 12mo. 8. “A Sermon preached in the Cathedral Church of Durham, at the Assizes holden July 30, 1806,” 4to. 9. “Memoir of the Life and Writings of sir Philip Sidney,” 1808, 4to. 10. “Memoir of the Life of John Sudbury, D. D. Dean of Durham,” 1808, 4to.

, a celebrated physician of Basil, was nephew, on the mother’s side, to John Oporinus, the famous printer. He studied at Lyons, Paris, and Padua; and afterwards taught Greek, morality, politics, and physic, at his native place. He died in 1588, aged 54. His principal work is, the “Theatrum Vitae humanae,” which had been begun by Conrad Lycosthenes, his father-in-law. Of this voluminous compilation there is a most splendid copy on vellum in the British Museum. Zwiriger’s family has produced many other illustrious men, and his descendants have distinguished themselves greatly in the sciences. James Zwinger, his son, who died in 1610, was also a skilful physician; he both enlarged and improved the “Theatrum Vitae humanse,” Leyden, 1656, 8 vols. folkr; and left other works. Theodore Zwinger, son of James, a learned protestant divine, married the daughter of Buxtorf the elder. He was pastor and physician when the city of Basil was afflicted with the plague in 1629. He wrote several works, and died in 1651, leaving a son, named John Zwinger, professor of Greek, and librarian at Basil, author of several works: he died in 1696. Theodore Zwinger, his son, professor of rhetoric, natural philosophy, and physic, at Basil, died in that city, 1724, leaving “Theatrum Botanicum,” Basil, 1690, folio, in German. “Fasciculus Dissertationum,” 1710, 4to and “Triga Dissertationum,” 1716, 4to, which are esteemed. John Rodolphus Zwinger, his brother, minister of several protestant churches, and professor of divinity, died 1708, leaving also some works.

He appears to have aimed at establishing in his country, a method and form of divine worship, remarkable for its simplicity, and as far remote as could be from every thing that could have the smallest tendency to nourish a spirit of superstition. His design, says the translator of Mosheim, was certainly excellent; but in the execution of it, perhaps, he went too far, and consulted rather the dictates of reason than the real exigencies of human nature in its present state. The present union between soul and body, which operate together in the actions of moral agents, even in those that appear the most abstracted and refined, renders it necessary to consult the external senses, as well as the intellectual powers, in the institution of public worship. Besides, between a worship purely and philosophically rational, and a service grossly and palpably superstitious, there are many intermediate steps and circumstances, by which a rational service may be rendered more affecting and awakening without becoming superstitious. A noble edifice, a solemn music, a well-ordered set of external gestures, though they do not, in themselves, render our prayers more acceptable to the Deity, than if they were offered up without any of these circumstances, produce, nevertheless, a ^ood effect. They elevate the mind, they give it a composed and solemn frame, and thus contribute to the fervour of its devotion.

Zuinglius also maintained doctrines respecting the divine decrees very opposite to those of some of his brethren, and had a system of his own concerning original sin, and contended for the salvation of infants dying without baptism, as well as of virtuous Pagans, both which points were rejected generally by the Protestants of his time. His works amounted to four volumes in folio, the greatest part of which were written in German, and afterwards were translated into Latin; they were printed at Basil in 1544, at Zurich in 1581, and at Basil again in 159.T. They consist of Commentaries on various books of the Old and New Testament, and of controversial or theological tracts. His commentaries are said to have great merit, and he was one of the first of the reformers who reduced theology to a certain kind of order in his book “Concerning true and false Religion,” which contains a brief exposition of the principal doctrines of Christianity. A few of his lesser pieces were translated into English, and published not many years after his death. His doctrines were afterwards spread into France, with some alterations by Calvin, Beza, and others, who were commonly called Calvinists; while the disciples of Zuinglius, who lived in Switzerland, retained the name of Zuinglians, or Sacramentarians.