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

, in Latin Sammartbanus, is the name of a family in France, which produced many men of letters. The first, Gaucher de Sainte-Marthe, had a son Charles, born in 1512, who became physician to Francis II. and was remarkable for his eloquence. Queen Margaret of Navarre and the duchess of Vendome honoured him with their particular esteem; and when they died in 1550, he testified his grief by a funeral oration upon each, published the same year. That upon the queen was in Latin, the o.ther in French. There is also some Latin and French poetry of his in being. He died in 1555. Scevole, or Sclevola, the nephew of Charles, was born at Lou dun in 1536, and became very distinguished both in learning and business. He loved letters from his infancy, attained an intimate acquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew tongues and became an orator, a lawyer, a poet, and an historian he is also represented as a good friend, zealous for his country, and of inviolable fidelity to his prince. He had, in the reigns of Henry III. and Henry IV. several considerable employments, which he filled with great reputation. In 1579, he was governor of Poitiers, and afterwards treasurer of France for this district. In 1593 and 1594, he exercised the office of intendant of the finances, in the army of Breta^ne, commanded by the duke de Montpensier: and, in the latter of these years, he reduced Poitiers to the subjection of Henry IV, Some time after, he conceived thoughts of retiring to his own country, and devoting the remainder of his life to contemplation: but was again made governor of Poitiers, in so honourable a manner that he could not decline it. Upon the expiration of this office, he went to Paris, and thence to Loudun, where he passed the rest of his days “in otio cum dignitate.” This town had been often protected from ruin in the civil wars merely by his credit, and therefore regarded hiui as its protector. He died there in 1623, universally regretted; and his funeral oration was pronounced by the famous Urban Graudier. He was the author of “La louange de la ville de Poitiers,” 1573; “Opera Poetica,” consisting of odes, elegies, epigrams, and sacred poems, in French and Luiin, 1575; “Gallorum doctrina illustrium elogia,” 1598:“hut ins chief work, and that which keeps his lame still alive in the republic of letters, is his work called” Paedotrophia, seu de puerorum eciucatione,“printed in 1584, and dedicated to Henry III. This poem^vent through ten editions in the author’s life time, and hath gone through, as many since. It was neatly printed at London in 1708, in 12mo, together with the” Calliurfdia“of Quillet. It is also printed with a complete edition of his and his son Abel’s works, under the title” Sammarthanorum patris et lilii opera Latina et Gallica, turn soluta oratione, turn versa scnpta,“Paris, 16:33, 4to. Scevole left several sons; of whom Abel, the eldest, born at Loudun in 1570, applied himself, like his father, to literature. He cultivated French and Latin poetry; the latter were printed with those of his father in the edition just mentioned, but are inferior to them. Lewis XIII. settled on him a pension, for the services he had -lone him, and made him a counsellor of state. In 1627, he was made librarian to the king at Fontainebleau; and had after that other commissions of importance. He died at Poitiers in 1652, where his” Opuscula Varia“were printed in 1645, 8vo. This Abe) had a son of his own name, born in 1630, and afterwards distinguished by his learning. He succeeded his father as librarian at Fontainebleau, and in that quality presented to Lewis XIV. in 1668,” Un Discours pour le r6tablissement de cette Bibliorheque." He died in 1706.

, a Welsh antiquary, was born of an ancient family in Denbighshire, and studied for some time at Oxford, whence he removed to Thaives-lnn, London. Here he applied to the law, but does not appear to have risen to any eminence, as Wood speaks of him as living, in his latter days in the house of a bookseller in St. Paul’s church-yard. His principal object appears to have been the cultivation of the Welsh Janguage, and the translation into it of the Bible, &c. It would appear that queen Elizabeth gave him a patent, for seven years, for printing in Welsh the Bible, CommonPrayer, and “Administration of tjie Sacraments.” “He compiled” A Dictionary in English and Welsh,“Lond. 1547, 4to.” A Little Treatise of the English pronunciation of the Letters.“” A plain and familiar introduction“to the same, Lond. 1550, 4to.” 'Battery of the Pope’s Bottereulx, commonly called the High-Altar,“ibid. 1550, 8vo.” The Laws of Howell Dha.“” A Welsh Rhetorick," revised, enlarged, &c. by Henry Perry, B. D. The period of his death is uncertain, but he was living in 1567.

Upon the death of his father, in 1640, he returned for a time into France; and, on going to Paris, was much caressed by cardinal Richelieu, who used all possible means to detain him, and even offered him his own terms; but could not prevail. The obligation he had to the States of Holland, the love of freedom and independence, and the necessity of a privileged place, in order to publish such things as he was then meditating, were the reasons which enabled him to withstand the cardinal. Salmasius also refused the large pension, which the cardinal offered him, to write his history, because in such a work he thought he must either give offence, or advance many things contrary to his own principles, and to truth, While he was in Burgundy to settle family affairs, the cardinal died, and was succeeded by Mazarin, who, upon our author’s return to Paris, honoured him with the same solicitations as his predecessor had done. Salmasius, however, declined his offers, and after about three years absence, returned to Holland: whence, though attempts were afterwards made to draw him back to France, it does not appear that he ever entertained the least thought of removing. In the summer of 1650, he went to Sweden, to pay queen Christina a visit, with whom he continued till the summer following. The reception and treatment he met with, as it is described by the writer of his life, is very characteristic of that extraordinary patroness of learned men. “She performed for him all offices,” says he, “which could have been expected even from an equal. She ordered him to choose apartments in her palace, for the sake of having him with her, * ut lateri adhaereret,' whenever she would But Sal^ masius was almost always ill while he stayed in Sweden, the climate being more than his constitution could bear: at which seasons the queen would come to the side of his bed, hold long discourses with him upon subjects of the highest concern, and, without any soul present, but with the doors all shut, would mend his fire, and do other necessary offices for him.” She soon, however, changed her mind with regard to Salmasius, and praised his antagonist Milton, with whom his celebrated controversy had now begun. After the murder of Charles I Charles II., now in Holland, employed Salmasius to write a defence of his father and of monarchy. Salmasius, says Johnson, was at this time a man of skill in languages, knowledge of antiquity, and sagacity of emendatory criticism, almost exceeding all hope of human attainment; and having, by excessive praises, been confirmed in great confidence of himself, though he probably had not much considered the principles of society or the rights of government, undertook the employment without distrust of his own qualifications, and, as his expedition in writing was wonderful, produced in 1649 his “Defensio Regia pro Carolo I. ad Serenissimum Magnae Britannise Regem Carolum II. filium natu majorem, hseredem et successorem legitimum. Sumptibus Regiis, anno 1649.” Milton, as we have noticed in his life, was employed, by the Powers then prevailing, to answer this book of Salmasius, and to obviate the prejudices which the reputation of his great abilities and learning might raise against their cause; and he accordingly published in 1651, a Latin work, entitled “Defensio pro Populo Anglicano contra Claudii Salmasii Defensionem Regiam.” Of these two works Hobbes declared himself unable to decide whose language was best, or whose arguments were worst, he might have added, or who was most to blame for scurrility and personal abuse. Dr. Johnson remarks, that Salmasius had been so long not only the monarch, but the tyrant of literature, that almost all mankind were delighted to find him defied and insulted by a new name, not yet considered as any one’s rival. There is no proof, however, that Salrnasius’s general reputation suffered much from a contest in which he had not employed the powers which he was acknowledged to possess. His misfortune was to treat of subjects which he had not much studied, and any repulse to a man so accustomed to admiration, must have been very galling. He therefore prepared reply to Milton, but did not live to finish' it, nor did it appear until published by his son in the year of the restoration, when the subject, in England at least, was no longer fit for discussion. He died at the Spa, Sept. 3, 1653, in consequence of an imprudent use of the waters; but as he had reproached Milton with losing his eyes in their contest, Milton delighted himself with the belief that he had shortened Salmasius’s life. Nothing, however, can be more absurd, if any credit is to be given to the account which Salmasius’s biographer, Clement, gives of his feeble constitution, and long illness.

, an English antiquary, was the son of the rev. Thomas Salmon, M. A. rector of Mepsall in Bedfordshire, by a daughter of the notorious Serjeant Bradshaw. He was admitted of Bene‘t college, Cambridge, June 11, 1690, where his tutors were dean Moss and archdeacon Lunn, and took the degree of LL. B. in 1695. Soon after he went into orders, and was for some time curate of Westmill in Hertfordshire; but, although he had taken the oaths to king William, he had so many scruples against taking them to his successor, queen Anne, that he became contented to resign the clerical profession, and with it a living of 140l. per annum ’offered him in Suffolk. He then applied himself to the study of physic, which he practised first at St. Ives in Huntingdonshire, and afterwards at Bishops Stortford, in the county of Hertford. His leisure time appears to have been employed in studying the history and antiquities of his country, on which subjects he published, 1. “A Survey of the Roman Antiquities in the Midland Counties in England,” 1726, 8vo. 2. “A Survey of the Roman Stations in Britain, according to the Roman Itinerary,” 1721, 8vo. 3. “The History of Hertfordshire, describing the county and its ancient monuments, particularly the Roman, with the characters of those that have been the chief possessors of the lands, and an account of the most memorable occurrences,” 1728, folio. This was designed as a continuation of Chauncey’s History, and was dedicated to the earl of Hertford. 4. “The Lives of the English Bishops from the Restoration to the Revolution, fit to be opposed to the Aspersions of some late Writers of Secret History,” 1733, a work which we have occasionally found very useful, although the author’s prejudices, in some instances, appear rather strong. 5. “A Survey of the Roman Stations in England,” 1731, (an improved edition probably of the first two works above mentioned) 2 vols. 8vo. C. “The Antiquities of Surrey, collected from the most ancient records, and dedicated to Sir John Evelyn, bart. with some Account of the Present State and Natural History of the County,” 1736, 8vo. 7. “The History and Antiquities of Essex, from the Collections of Mr. Strangeman,” in folio, with some notes and additions of his own; but death put a stop to this work, when he had gone through about two thirds of the county, so that the hundreds of Chelmsford, Hinkford, Lexden, Tendring, and Thurstable, were left unfinished.

, a learned English divine, was the eldest son of Dr. Samuel Salter, prebendary of Norwich, and archdeacon of Norfolk, by Anne-Penelope, the daughter of Dr. John Jeffery, archdeacon of Norwich. He was educated for some time in the free-school of that city, whence he removed to that of the Charter-house, and was admitted of Bene't-college, Cambridge, June 30, 1730, under the tuition of Mr. Charles Skottowe. Soon after his taking the degree of B. A. in 1733, he was chosen into a fellowship, and took his master’s degree in 1737. His natural and acquired abilities recommended him to sir Philip Yorke, then lord-chief-jqstice of the King’s-bench, and afterwards earl of Hardwicke, for the instruction of his eldest son the second earl, who, with three of his brothers, in compliment to abp. Herring, was educated at that college. As soon as that eminent lawyer was made Jordehancellor, he appointed Mr. Salter his domestic chaplain, and gave him a prebend in the church of Gloucester, which he afterwards exchanged for one in that of Norwich. About the time of his quitting Cambridge, he was one of the writers in the “Athenian Letters.” Soon after the chancellor gave Mr. Salter the rectory of Burton Goggles, in the county of Lincoln, in 1740; where he went to reside soon after, and, marrying Miss Seeker, a relation of the then bishop of Oxford, continued there till 1750, when he was nominated minister of Great Yarmouth by the dean and chapter of Norwich. Here he performed the duties of that large parish with great diligence, till his promotion to the preachership at the Charter-house in January 1754, some time before which (in July, 1751), abp. Herring had honoured him with the degree of D. D. at Lambeth. In 1756, he was presented by the lord-chancellor to the rectory of St. Bartholomew near the Royal Exchange, which was the last ecclesiastical preferment he obtained; but in Nov. 1761, he succeeded Dr. Bearcroft as master of the Charter-house, who had been his predecessor in the preachership. While he was a member of Bene't college, he printed Greek Pindaric odes on the nuptials of the princes of Orange and Wales, and a copy of Latin verses on the death of queen Caroline. Besides a sermon preached on occasion of a music-meeting at Gloucester, another before the lord-mayor, Sept. 2, 1740, on the anniversary of the fire of London, a third before the sons of the clergy, 1755, which was much noticed at the time, and underwent several alterations before it was printed; and one before the House of Commons, Jan. 30, 1762; he published “A complete Collection of Sermons and Tracts” of his grandfather Dr. Jeffery, 1751, in 2 vols. 8vo, with his life prefixed, and a new edition of “Moral and Religious Aphorisms,” by Dr. Whichcote, with large additions of some letters that passed between him and Dr. Tuckney, “concerning the Use of Reason in Religion,” &c. and a biograpiiical preface, 1751, 8vo. To these may be added, “Some Queries relative to the Jews, occasioned by a late sermon,” with some other papers occasioned by the “Queries,” published the same year. In 1773 jmd 1774, he revised through the press seven of the celebrated “Letters of Ben Mordecai;” written by the rev. Henry Taylor, of Crawley in Hants. In 1776, Dr. Salter printed for private use, “The first 106 lines of the First Book of the Iliad; nearly as written in Homer’s Time and Country;” and printed also in that year, “Extract from the Statutes of the House, and Orders of the Governors, respecting the Pensioners or poor Brethren” (of the Charterhouse), a large single sheet in folio; in 1777, he corrected the proof-sheets of Bentley’s “Dissertation on Phalaris;” and not long before his death, which happened May 2, 1773, he printed also an inscription to the memory of his parents, an account of all which may be seen in the “Anecdotes of Bowyer.” Dr. Salter was buried, by his own express direction, in the most private manner, in the common burial-ground belonging to the brethren of the Charter-house.

, an eminent puritan divine, was, according to Strype, born at Playford in Suffolk, and was a fellow of Pembroke hall, Cambridge. Wood says he was born in 1517, without specifying where; but adds, that he was educated ac Oxford, which seems most probable, as that university was the scene of much of his future life; He appears to have imbibed the principles of the reformation at a very early period, and became such an acute reasoner that Wood informs us he was the means of converting John Bradford, the famous martyr. He began likewise very early to entertain those prejudices against the hahits which occasioned so much mischief in the church, and which were confirmed in him, and many others, by. associating with the Geneva reformers during their exile in the time of queen Mary. He was ordained by archbishop Cranmer and bishop Ridley, who, at his request, dispensed with the habits, to which now, and ever after, he attached the idea of idolatry. He was chaplain in the army of lord Russel in his expedition against the Scots. In 1551, he was preferred to the rectory of Allhallows, Bread-street, London, which he resigned in 1553, and the year following to the deanery of Chichester. During the reign of Edward VI. he was accounted one of the* ablrst and most useful preachers in confirming the people in the doctrines of the reformation. On the accession of queen Mary he concealed himself for some time; but having been active in collecting money for the support of poor scholars in the two universities, narrowly escaped beingapprehended, and was obliged to go abroad, where he resided chiefly at Strasburgh, with the other English exiles, and had some hand in the Geneva translation of the Bible.

On the accession of queen Elizabeth he returned home, not only confirmed in his aversion to the habits, but with a dislike, it would appear, to the whole of the hierarchy, and refused the bishopric of Norwich because dissatisfied with the nature of the office. He continued, however, to preach, particularly at Paul’s cross, where his wonderful memory and eloquence were very much admired; and in September 1560 he was made a prebendary of Durham. In Michaelmas-term 1561, he was instalied clean of Christ-church, Oxford. On this occasion some members of that society, who recommended him for the situation, said, that “it was very doubtful, whether there was a better man, a greater linguist, a more complete scholar, or a more profound divine;” and it is certain that for some years he and Dr. Lawrence Humphrey were the only protestant preachers at Oxford of any celebrity. In 1562, he resigned his prebend of Durham, and became so open and zealous in his invectives against the habits, that after considerable forbearance, he was cited, with Dr. Humphrey, before the high commission court at Lambeth, and Sampson was Deprived of his deanery, and for some time imprisoned. Notwithstanding his nonconformity, however, he was presented, in 1568, to the mastership of Wigston-hospitaJ, at Leicester, and had likewise, according to Wood, a prebend in St. Paul’s. He went to reside at Leicester, and continued there until his death, April 9, 1589. He mar-? ried bishop Latimer’s niece, by whom he had two sons, John and Nathaniel, who erected a monument to his memory, with a Latin inscription, in the chapel of the hospital at Leicester, where he was buried. His works are tew 1. “Letter to the professors of Christ’s Gospel, in the parish of Allhallows in Breadstreet,” Strasburgb, 1554, 8vo, which is reprinted in the appendix to Strype’s “Ecclesiastical Memorials,” vol. III. 2. “A Warning to take heed pf ‘Fowler’s Psalter’,” Loud. 1576 and 1578, 8vo. This was a popish psalter published by John Fowler, once a Fellow of New-college, Oxford, but who went abroad, turned printer, and printed the popish controversial works for some years. 3, ' Brief Collection of the Church and Ceremonies thereof,“Lond. 1581, 8vo. 4.” Prayers and Meditations Apostolike; gathered and framed out of the Epistles of the Apostles,“&c. ibid. 1592, J6mo. He was also editor of two sermons of his friend John Bradford, on repentance and the Lord’s-supper, Lond. 1574, 1581, and, 1589, 8vo. Baker ascribes to him, a translation of” a Sermon of John Chrysostome, of Pacience, of the end of the world, and the last judgment,“1550, 8vo; and of” An Homelye of the Resurrection of Christ," by John Brentius, 1550, 8vo. Other works, or papers in which he was concerned, may be seen in pur authorities.

After William and Mary were settled on the throne, he and seven other bishops refused to own the established government, from a conscientious regard to the allegiance they had sworn to king James. Refusing likewise to take the oaths appointed by act of parliament, he and they were suspended Aug. 1, 1689, and deprived the 1st of Feb. following. On the nomination of Dr. Tillotson to this see, April 23, 1691, our archbishop received an order, from the then queen Mary, May 20, to leave Lambethhouse within ten days. But he, resolving not to stir till ejected by law, was cited to appear before the barons of the exchequer on the first day of Trinity-term, June 12, 1691, to answer a writ of intrusion; when he appeared by his attorney; but, avoiding to put in any plea, as the case stood, judgment passed against him, in the form of law, June 23, and the same evening he took boat in Lambethbridge, and went to a private house in Palsgrave-headcourt, near the Temple. Thence, on Aug. 5, 1691, he retired to Fresingfield (the place of his birth, and the estate [50l. a year] and residence of his ancestors above three hundred years), where he lived in a very private manner, till, being seized with an intermitting fever, Aug. 26, 1693, he died on Friday morning, Nov. 24, and was buried very privately, as he himself had ordered, in Fresingfield churchyard. Soon after, a tomb was erected over his grave, with an inscription composed by himself; on the right side of which there is an account of his age and dying-day in Latin; on the left, the following English: “William Sancroft, born in this parish, afterwards by the providence of God archbishop of Canterbury, at last deprived of all, which he could not keep with a good conscience, returned hither to end his life, and professeth here at the foot of his tomb, that, as naked he came forth, so naked he must return: the Lord gave, and the Lord hath taken away (as the Lord pleases, so things come to pass), blessed be the name of the Lord.” The character Burnet has given of him is not an amiable one, nor in some respects a true one , yet he allows, what none could deny, that archbishop Sancroft was a good man. He bestowed great sums of money in charity and endowments, and was particularly bountiful to Emanuel college in Cambridge: and he certainly gave the strongest instance possible of sincerity, in sacrificing the highest dignity to what he thought truth and honesty; and although his opposition both to James II. and William III. may appear rather irreconcileable, we have the testimony of those who knew him best, that he did every thing in the integrity of his heart .

, a Roman catholic writer of considerable fame, and one of the principal champions of popery in the sixteenth century, was born about 1527, at Charlewood in Surrey, and educated at Winchester school, whence he removed to New college, Oxford. Here he studied chiefly canon law, and was made fellow of his college in 1548, and in 1550, or 1551, took the degree of bachelor of laws. When queen Mary came to the throne, he had the offer of being Latin secretary to her majesty, which he declined for the sake of a studious, academical life, and remained at Oxford during the whole of her reign. In 1557 he was one of the professors of canon law, and read what were called the “shaggling lectures,” i. e. lectures not endowed, until the accession of queen Elizabeth, when his principles induced him to quit England. He arrived at Rome about the latter end of 1560, and studying divinity, became doctor in that faculty, and was ordained priest by Dr. Thomas Goldwell, bishop of St. Asaph, who at that time resided in the English hospital at Rome. Soon after, cardinal Hosius, president of the council of Trent, hearing of his abilities, took him into his family, and made use of him, as his theologal, in the council. When the council broke up, Dr. Sanders accompanied the cardinal to Poland, Prussia, and Lithuania, where he was instrumental in settling the discipline of the Romish church; but his zeal disposing him to think most of his native country, he returned to Flanders, and was kindly entertained by sir Francis Englefield, formerly privy-counsellor to queen Mary, and then in great favour with the court of Spain; through whose hands a great part of those charitable collections passed, which his catholic majesty ordered for the subsistence of the English popish exiles. Sanders was appointed his assistant, and being settled at Louvaine, together with his mother and sister, he lived there twelve years, and performed many charitable offices to his indigent countrymen. Much of this time he employed in writing in defence of popery against Jewell, Nowell, and other eminent protestant divines.

Some years after, having received an invitation from the pope, he took a journey to Rome, whence he was sent as nuncio to the popish bishops and clergy in Ireland, and landed there in 1579. At this time Gerald Fitzgerald, earl of Desmond, was in arms, as he pretended, in defence of the liberties and religion of his country; but in 1583 his party was routed and himself killed. The part Sanders took in this rebellion is variously represented. Camden says that he was sent over purposely to encourage Desmond, and that several companies of Spanish soldiers went over with him, and that when their army was routed, he fled to the woods, and died of hunger. All that the catholics deuy in this account, is, that Sanders was sent purposely i but this they deny very feebly. With regard to the manner of Sanders’s death, Dodd seems inclined to prefer Wood’s account, who says that he died of a dysentery, and Dodd likewise adopts the report of Rushton and Pits, who say that he died at the latter end of 1580, or the beginning of 1581, because this was long before Desmond’s defeat, and consequently dissolves in some measure the supposed connection between him and Sanders. Dodd, however, who is generally impartial, allows that several catholics, his contemporaries, were of opinion that he was engaged in the Spanish interest against queen Elizabeth; and his writings prove that he maintained a deposing power both in the church and people, where religion was in danger. He was, according to all accounts, a man of abilities, and was considered as the most acute adversary for the re-establishment of popery in England, which his party could boast of. He had, however, to contend with men of equal ability, who exposed his want of veracity as well as of argument, and few of his works have survived the times in which they were written. Among them are, 1. “The Supper of our Lord, &c.” a defence of the real presence, being what he calls “A confutation of Jewel’s Apology, as also of Alexander Newel’s challenge,” Louvain, in 1566, 1567, 4to. 2. “Treatise of the Images of Christ and his Saints; being a confutation of Mr. Jewel’s reply upon that subject,” ibid. 1567, 8vo.- 3. “The Rock of the Church/ 1 eoncerning the primacy of St. Peter, ibid. 1566, 1567, St. Omer’s, 1624, 8vo.' 4.” A brief treatise on Usury,“ibid. 1566. 5.” De Visibili monarchia Ecclesia,“ibid. 1571, folio, Antwerp, 1581, Wiceburg, 1592. 6.” De origine et progressu Schismatis Anglicani,“Colon. 1585, 8vo, reprinted at other places in 1586, 1588, and 1590, and translated into French in 1673, with some tracts on the tenets of his church, which seem not of the controversial kind. Mo’st of the former were answered by English divines of eminence, particularly his large volume” De visibili monarchia ecclesise," by Dering, Clerk, and others, of whose answers an account may J>e seen in Strype’s Life of Parker. That on the English schism is refuted, as to his more important assertions, in the appendix to Burnet’s History of the Reformation, vol. II.

In 1704 he published a translation of “Original Letters from William III. whilst Prince of Orange, to Charles II., Lord Arlington, and others, with an Account of the Prince’s Reception at Middleburgh, and his Speech on that occasion;” dedicating the book to lord Woodstock. He also wrote “A History of Henry V.” in the way of annals, in nine volumes, of which the first four have been lost, and the others still remain in manuscript amongst his papers. In 1714 he became a candidate for the place of historiographer to queen Anne, and received a very handsome offer of assistance from Matthew Prior, at that time ambassador to the court of France. His success, however, was prevented by the change of ministry which succeeded on the queen’s death. On the 28th of November, 1726, he was appointed usher of the high court of chancery, by sir Joseph Jekyll, the master of the rolls. He succeeded, in 1727, by the death of an elder brother, to a considerable landed property in Cumberland, the north riding of Yorkshire, and Durham. After this, though he continued chiefly to reside in London, he occasionally visited his country seat at Armathwaite castle, a mansion pleasantly situated on the banks of the Eden, about ten miles from Carlisle. He was married four times; for the last time to Elizabeth Hickes of London, when he had completed his 70th year. He died Dee. 25, 1741, at his house in Chancery-lane, in the 79th year of his age, and was buried in Red-Lion-Fields. He was a devout man, well read in divinity, attached to the forms of the church of England, and very regular in his attention to public and private worship. He was slightly acquainted with the Hebrew language, and conversant in the Greek, Latin, Spanish, Italian, and French. He made a choice collection of books in various languages, and left behind him several volumes of Mss. relating chiefly to history, and the court of chancery, and including a transcript of Thurloe’s State Papers. He kept a diary, in which he noted down, with minute attention, the slightest occurrences of his life. As he left no issue, his estates d^cended, on the death of his last wife, in 1753, to the family of Margaret, his eldest sister, married to Henry Milbourne, of Newcastle-upon-Tyne; whose great grandson, William Henry Milbourne, was high sheriff of Cumberland in 1794.

, a very eminent English prelate, the third son of William Sandys, esq. and Margaret his wife, descended from the ancient barons of Kendal, was born near Hawkshead, in Furness Fells, Lancashire, in 1519. The same neighbourhood, and almost the same year, gave birth to two other luminaries of the reformation, Edmund Grindal and Bernard Gilpin. Mr. Sandys’s late biographer conjectures, that he was educated at the school of Furness Abbey, whence he was removed to St. John’s-college, Cambridge, in 1532 or 1533, where he had for his contemporaries Redmayn and Lever, both great lights of the reformation, beside others of inferior name, who continued in the hour of trial so true to their principles, that, according to Mr. Baker, the learned historian of that house, “probably more fellows were, in queen Mary’s reign, ejected from St. John’s than from any other society in either university.” Several years now elapsed of Sandys’s life, during which in matters of religion men knew not how to act or what to believe; but, though the nation was at this time under severe restraints with respect to external conduct, inquiry was still at work jin secret: the corruptions of the old religion became better understood, the Scriptures were universally studied, and every impediment being removed with the capricious tyranny of Henry VIII., protestantism, with little variation from its present establishment in England, became the religion of the state.

Here they continued until their apartments being wanted for the persons concerned in Wyat’s conspiracy, they were removed to the Marshalsea. On their way there they found the people’s minds greatly changed. Popery, unmasked and triumphant, had already shewn its nature again, and general disgust had followed the short burst of joy which had attended the queen’s accession. Sandys walked along the streets attended by his keeper: and as he was generally known, the people prayed that God would comfort him, and strengthen him in the truth. Struck with these appearances of popularity, the keeper of the Marshalsea said, “These vain people would set you forward to the fire: but you are as vain as they, if you, being a young man, will prefer your own conceit before the judgment of so many worthy prelates, and so many grave and learned men as are in this realm. If you persist, you shall find me as strict a keeper, as one that utterly misliketh your religion.” Dr. Sandys nobly replied, “My years, indeed, are few, and my learning is small but it is enough to know Christ crucified and who seeth not the blasphemies of popery hath learned nothing. T have read in Scripture of godly and courteous keepers, God make you like one of them; if not, I trust he will give me strength and patience to bear your hard dealing with* me.” The keeper then asked, “Are you resolved to stand to your religion” “Yes,” said Dr. Sandys, “by God’s grace.” “1 love you the better, therefore,” said the keeper, " I did but tempt you: every favour which I can show, you shall be sure of: nay, if you die at a stake, I shall be happy to die with you.' 7 And from that day such was the confidence which this good man reposed in Sandys, that many times he permitted him to walk alone in the fields; nor would he ever suffer him to be fettered, like the other prisoners. He lodged him also in the best chamber of the house, and often permitted his wife to visit him. Great resort was here made to Dr. Sandys for his edifying discourses, and much money was offered him, but he would accept of none. Here too the communion was celebrated three or four times by himself and his companions, of whom Saunders, afterwards the martyr, was one, to many communicants.

His danger was not even yet entirely over, for on hi arrival at Antwerp, he received intelligence that king Philip of Spain had sent to apprehend him, on which he escaped to the territory of Cleve, from thence to Augsburgh, where he remained fourteen days, and then removed to Strasburgh. Here he took up his abode for the present, and here unquestionably spent the most gloomy portion of his life. His own health was at this time deeply, injured; he fell sick of a flux (the usual concomitant of hardships and afflictions), which continued without abatement for nine months; his only child died of the plague; and his beloved wife, who had found means to follow him about a year after his flight from England, expired of a consumption, in his arms. In addition to his sorrows, the disputes concerning church discipline broke out among the English exiles, on which several of his friends left the place. After his wife’s death, he went to Zurich, where he was entertained by Peter Martyr, but, his biographer thinks, the time did not permit him to receive any deep tincture either as to doctrine or discipline from Geneva or its neighbours. Within rive weeks the news of queen Mary’s death arrived; and after being joyfully feasted by Bullinger, and the other ministers of the Swiss churches, he returned to Strasburgh, where he preached; after which Grindal and he set out for their native country together, and arrived in London on the day of queen Elizabeth’s coronation.

In 1503, he again returned to Naples, was replaced in his favourite villa, once more frequented the court, and obtained the favour of the reigning queen. Here he found another mistress in Cassandra Marchesia, one of the ladies of honour, whom he describes as very beautiful and very learned, but as he was now too far advanced in years for a passion such as he formerly felt, Cassandra is to be considered merely as his poetical mistress, and the chaste object of his Platonic attachment. The attachment, it is said, was mutual, and a confidential intercourse continued to subsist between them till the poet’s decease, nor does it appear that Cassandra ever formed any matrimonial connection. Sannazarius, however, has been numbered by some among the votaries of pleasure, and they tell us he affected the levity and gallantry of youth when in his old age. In his friendships he is said to have been uniformly ardent and sincere. In gratitude to the memory of Pontanus, who had given a powerful impulse to his youthful studies, he became the editor of his works. He is also commended for his probity, his love of justice, and abhorrence of litigation.

, in Latin Sarravius, a learned French lawyer, was born towards the close of the sixteenth century, of a noble family, and educated by his father, who was a man of letters, with the greatest care. To the study of the law, he joined a taste for polite literature, philosophy, and criticism, wrote elegantly in Latin, and was an excellent Greek scholar. He had perused the classics with great attention; and some Latin and French verses which he wrote, show that he had formed his taste on the best models. He practised at the bar at Rouen, but was an enemy to litigious suits, and always endeavoured to prevent his clients from corning into court, while reconciliation was possible. He lived in intimacy and correspondence with the most learned men of his time, particularly Salmasius, Grotius, and our archbishop Usher. It is not much praise to add after this, that he had Christina queen of Sweden for a correspondent. He was of the protestant religion, and appears to have been displeased with some symptoms of what he thought lukewarm ness in his friend Grotius, and wished him to be more decided. Sarrau died May 30, 1651, advanced in years, and was lamented in poems and eloges by many learned contemporaries. He published the collection of Grotius’s correspondence entitled “Grotii epistolsc ad Gallos,” and his own Latin letters were published in 1654, 8vo, and reprinted at Utrecht with the letters of Marquard Gudius, in 1697, 4to, and again at Leyden by Peter Burman in 1711, who has inserted some of them in his valuable “Sylloge.” They contain many particulars of the literary history of the times. He appears to have been an exceeding admirer of Salmasius.

As he was instructing the academical youth in the principles of the Newtonian philosophy, it was not long before he became acquainted with the incomparable author, although he had left the university several years; and enjoyed his frequent conversation concerning the more difficult parts of his works. He lived in friendship also with the most eminent mathematicians of the age? with Halley, Cotes, De Moivre, &c. Upon the removal of Whiston from his professorship, Saunderson’s mathematical merit was universally allowed so much superior to that of any competitor, that an extraordinary step was taken in his favour, to qualify him with a degree, which the statutes require. Upon application made by the heads of colleges to the duke of Somerset, their chancellor, a mandate was readily granted by the queen for conferring on him the degree of master of arts: upon which he was chosen Lucasian professor of the mathematics, Nov. 1711, sir Isaac Newton all the while interesting himself very much in the affair. His first performance, after he was seated in the chair, was an inauguration-speech made in very elegant Latin, and a style truly Ciceronian; for he was well versed in the writings of Tully, who was his favourite in prose, as Virgil and Horace were in verse. From this time he applied himself closely to the reading of lectures, and gave up his whole frime to his pupils. He continued among the gentlemen of Christ’s college till 1723; when he took a house in Cambridge, and soon after married a daughter of the rev. Mr. Dickens, rector of Boxworth in Cambridgeshire, by whom he had a son and a daughter. In 1728, when George II. visited the university, he was pleased to signify his desire of seeing so remarkable a person; and accordingly the professor waited upon his majesty in the senatehouse, and was there created doctor of laws by royal favour. Saunderson was naturally of a strong healthy constitution; but being too sedentary, and constantly confining himself to the house, he became at length a valetudinarian. For some years he frequently complained of a numbness in his limbs, which, in the spring of 1739, ended in an incurable mortification of his foot. He died April 19, aged fifty-seven, and was buried, according to his request, in the chancel at Boxworth. He was a man rather to be admired than loved. He had much wit and vivacity in conversation, and many reckoned him a good companion. He had also a great regard to truth, but was one of those who think it their duty to express their sentiments on men and opinions, without reserve or restraint, or any of the courtesies of conversation, which created him many enemies; nor was he less offensive by a habit of profane swearing, and the obtrusion of infidel opinions, which last he held, notwithstanding the kindness of providence towards him throughout his extraordinary life*. He is said, however, to have received the notice of his approaching death with great calmness and serenity; and after a short silence, resuming life and spirit, talked with as much composure as usual, and at length, we are told, appointed to receive the sacrament the evening before his death, which a delirium that never went off prevented him from doing.

, a very celebrated preacher, was the son of an eminent protestant lawyer, and was born at Nismes in 1677. His father retired, after the repeal of the edict of Nantz, to Geneva, at which place he died. Saurin made no small progress in his studies, but abandoned them for some time, that he might follow arms. In 1694, he made a campaign as a cadet in lord Galloway’s company, and soon afterwards procured a pair of colours. But as soon as the duke of Savoy had concluded a peace with France, Saurin quitted a profession for which he never was designed; and, on his return to Geneva again, applied himself to philosophy and divinity, under Turretin and other professors. In 1700, he visited both Holland and England. In this last country he remained five years, and preached among the French refugees in London. Here also he married in 1703, and returned to the Hague in 1705. Soon after he became pastor to the church of French refugees, who were permitted to assemble in the chapel belonging to the palace of the princes of Orange at the Hague, in which he officiated during the remainder of his life. When the princess of Wales, afterwards queen Caroline, passed through Holland on her way to England, Saurin had the honour of paying his respects to her, and she, upon her return, desired Dr. Boulter, the preceptor to prince Frederic, the father of the present king, to write to Saurin, to draw up a treatise “on the education of princes.” The work was done, but never printed, and the author received a handsome present from the princess, and afterwards a pension from George II. to whom he dedicated a volume of his sermons. Saurin died Dec. 30, 1730. He possessed great talents, with a fine address, and a strong, clear, and harmonious voice, while his style was pure, unaffected, and eloquent. His principles were what are called moderate Calvinism. Five volumes of his sermons have made their appearance at different times; the first in 1708, the second in 1712, the third some years after, the fourth in 1722, and the fifth in 1725. Since his death, the sermons relating to the passion of Jesus Christ, and other subjects, were published in two volumes. In 1727 he published “The State of Christianity in France.”

As he had an impediment in his voice, he was advised by M. Bossuet, to give up the church, and to apply himself to the study of physic: but this being against the inclination of his uncle, from whom 'he drew his principal resources, Sauveur determined to devote himself to his favourite study, so as to be able to teach it for his support. This scheme succeeded so well, that he soon became the fashionable preceptor in mathematics, and at twenty- three years of age he had prince Eugene for his scholar, He had not yet read the; geometry of Des Cartes but a foreigner of the first quality desiring to be taught it, he made himself master of it in an inconceivably small space of time. Basset being a fashionable game at that time, the marquis of Dangeau asked him for some calculations relating to it, which gave such satisfaction, that Sauveur had the honour to explain them to the king and queen.

The first effort of his uncultivated genius was a poem against Hoadly, bishop of Bangor; of which the author was afterwards ashamed. He then attempted to write for the stage, but with little success: yet this attempt was attended with some advantage, as it introduced him to the acquaintance of sir Richard Sieele and Mr. Wilks. Whilst he was in dependence on these gentlemen, he was an assiduous frequenter of the theatres, and never absent from a play in several years. In 1723 he brought a tragedy on the stage, in which himself performed a part, the subject of which was “Sir Thomas Overbury.” If we consider the circumstances under which it was written, it will afford at once an uncommon proof of strength of genius, and an evenness of mind not to be ruffled. Whilst he was employed upon this work, he was without a lodging, and often without food nor had he any other conveniences for study than the fields or the street and, when he had formed a speech, he would step into a shop, and beg the use of pen, ink, and paper. The profits of thjs play amounted to about 200l.; and it procured him the notice and esteem of many persons of distinction, some rays of genius glimmering through all the clouds of poverty and oppression. But, when the world was beginning to behold him with a more favourable eye, a misfortune befel him, by which not only his reputation, but his life, was in danger. In a night-ramble he fell into a coffee-house of ill-fame, near Charing-Cross; when a quarrel happened, and one Mr. Sinclair was killed in the fray. Savage, with his companion, was taken into custody, tried for murder, and capitally convicted of the offence. His mother was so inhuman, at this critical juncture, as to use all means to prejudice the queen against him, and to intercept all the hopes he had of life from the royal mercy; but at last the countess of Hertford, out of compassion, laid a true account of the extraordinary story and sufferings of poor Savage before her majesty; and obtained his pardon.

Some time after this, Savage formed a resolution of applying to the queen: she had given him his life, and he hoped her goodness might enable him to support it. He published a poem on her birth-day, which he entitled “The Volunteer Laureat.” She graciously sent him fifty pounds, with an intimation that he might annually expect the same bounty. His conduct with regard to this pension was very characteristic; as soon as he had received it, he immediately disappeared, and lay for some time out of the reach of his most intimate friends. At length he was seen again, pennyless as before, but never informed any person where he had been, nor was his retreat ever discovered. His perpetual indigence, politeness, and wit, still raised him new friends, as fast as his misbehaviour lost him his old ones; and sir Robert Walpole, the prime minister, was warmly solicited in his favour. Promises were given, but ended in disappointment; upon which he published a poem in the “Gentleman’s Magazine,” entitled, “The Poet’s Dependence on a Statesman.”

His poverty still increasing, he only dined by accident, when he was invited to the tables of his acquaintance, from which the meanness of his dress often excluded him. Having no lodgings, he passed the night often in mean houses, which are set open for any casual wanderers, sometimes in cellars, amongst the riot and filth of the meanest and most profligate of the rabble; and sometimes, when he was totally without money, walked about the streets till he was weary, and lay down in the summer upon a bulk, and, in the winter, with his associates in poverty, among the ashes of a glass-house. His distresses, however afflictive, never dejected him. In his lowest sphere, his pride kept up his spirits, and set him on a level with those of the highest rank. He never admitted any gross familiarity, or submitted to be treated otherwise than as an equal. This wretched life was rendered more unhappy, in 1738, by the death of the queen, and the loss of his pension. His distress was now publicly known, and his friends, therefore, thought proper to concert some measures for procuring him a permanent relief. It was proposed that he should retire into Wales, with an allowance of 50l. per annum, to be raised by subscription, on which he was to live privately in a cheap place, and lay aside all his aspiring thoughts.

, a most learned man, and a great benefactor to the learning of his country, was the son of Henry Savile of Bradley, in the township of Stainland, in the parish of Halifax, Yorkshire, by Ellen, daughter of Robert Ramsden. He was born at Bradley, Nov. 30, 1549, and first entered of Brasen-nose college, Oxford, whence he was elected to Merton-college in 1561, where he took the degrees in arts, and was chosen fellow. When he proceeded master of arts in 1570, he read for that degree on the Almagest of Ptolemy, which procured him the reputation of a man wonderfully skilled in mathematics and the Greek language; in the former of which, he voluntarily read a public lecture in the university for some time. Having now great interest, he was elected proctor for two years together, 1575 and 1576, an honour not very common, for as the proctors were then chosen out of the whole body of the university, by the doctors and masters, and the election was not, as now, confined to particular colleges, none but men of learning, and such as had considerable interest, durst aspire to that honour. In 1578 he visited the continent, became acquainted with various learned foreigners, and obtained many valuable Mss. or copies of them. He is said to have returned a man of high accomplishment*, and was made tutor in the Greek tongue to queen Elizabeth, or, as it is otherwise expressed, he read Greek and mathematics with her majesty, who had a great esteem for him. In 1585 he was made warden of Mertoncollege, which he governed six and thirty years with great credit, and greatly raised its reputation for learning, by a judicious patronage of students most distinguished for talents and industry. In 1596, he was chosen provost of Eton-college, of which society also he increased the fame by rilling it with the most learned men, among whom was the ever-memorable John Hales. It is said, however, that he incurred some odium among the younger scholars by his severity, and his dislike of those who were thought sprightly wi s. He used to say, “Give me the plodding student. If I would look for wits, I would go to Newgate, there be the wits.” John Earte, afterwards bishop of Salisbury, was the only scholar he ever accepted on the recommendation of being a wit. James 1. upon his accession to the crown of England, expressed a particular regard for him, and would have preferred him either in church or state; but sir Henry declined it, and only accepted the honour of knighthood from his majesty at Windsor on Sept. 21, 1604. His only son dying about that time, he devoted his fortune entirely to the promoting of learning. In 1619 he founded two lectures, or professorships, one in geometry, the other in astronomy, in the university of Oxford; which he endowed each with a salary of 160l. a year, besides a legacy of 600l. for purchasing more lands for the same use. In the preamble of the deed, by which a salary was annexed to these two professorships, it is expressly said that “geometry was almost totally unknown and abandoned in England.” Briggs was his first professor of geometry; but Aubrey says, on the authority of bishop Ward, that he first sent for Gunter for that purpose, who, coming with his sector and quadrant, “fell to resolving of triangles and doing a great many fine things. Said the grave knight, ‘ Do you call this reading of Geometric This is shewing of tricks, man,’ and so dismissed him with scorne, and sent for Brings.” Sir Henry also furnished a library with mathematical hooks near the mathematical school, for the use of his professors; and gave 100l. to the mathematical chest of his own appointing; adding afterwards a legacy of 4C/. a year to the same chest, to the university and to his professors jointly. He likewise gave 120l. towards the new-building of the schools; several rare manuscripts and printed books to the Bodleian library; and a good quantity of matrices and Greek types to the printingpress at Oxford. Part of the endowment of the professorships was the manor of Little Hays in Essex. He died, at Eton -college, Feb. 19, 1621-2, and was buried in the chapel there, on the south side of the communion table, near the body of his son Henry, with an inscription on a black marble stone. The university of Oxford paid him the greatest honours, by having a public speech and verses made in his praise, which were published soon after in 4to, under the title of “Ultima Linea Savilii,” and a sumptuous honorary monument was erected to his memory on the south wall, at the upper end of the choir of Merton- college chapel. Sir Henry Savile, by universal consent, ranks among the most learned men of his time, and the most liberal patrons of learning; and with great justice the highest encomiums are bestowed on him by all the learned of his time: by Isaac Casaubon, Mercerus, Meibomius, Joseph Scaliger, and especially the learned bishop Montagu; who, in his “Diatribes” upon Selden’s “History of Tithes,” styles him “that magazine of learning, whose memory shall be honourable amongst not only the learned, but the righteous for ever.”

We have already mentioned several noble instances of his munificence to the republic of letters: and his works exhibit equal zeal for the promotion of literature. In 1581, he published an English version of, 1. “Four Books of the Histories of Cornelius Tacitus, and the Life of Agricola; with notes upon them,” folio, dedicated to queen Elizabeth. The notes were esteemed so valuable as to be translated into Latin by Isaac Gruter, and published at Amsterdam, 1649, in 12mo, to which Gruter subjoined a treatise of our author, published ia 1598, under the title, 2. “A View of certain Military Matters, or commentaries concerning Roman Warfare;” which, soon after its first appearance, was translated into Latin by Marquardus Freherus, and printed at Heidelberg in 1601, but having become exceeding scarce, was reprinted by Gruter. In 1596, he published a collection of the best ancient writers of our English history, entitled, 3. “Rerum Anglicarum Scriptores post Bedain praecipui, ex vetustissimis codicibus nunc primum in lucem editi:” to which he added chronological tables at the end, from Julius Caesar to the coming in of William the Conqueror. This was reprinted at Francfort in 1601, which edition has a complete index to it. The collection contains William of Malmsbury’s history of the kings of England, and the lives of the English bishops; the histories of Henry of Huntingdon the annals of Roger de Hoveden the chronicle of Ethelvverd, and the history of Ingulphus with a dedication to queen Elizabeth, &c. Wharton, in the preface to his “Anglia Sacra,” objects only to Malmsbury’s history, which he says was printed from an incorrect ms. 4. He undertook and finished an edition, most beautifully printed, of “St. Chrysostom’s Works” in Greek, printed in 1613, 8 vols. folio. In the preface, he says, “that, having himself visited, about twelve years before, all the public and private libraries in Britain, and copied out thence whatever he thought useful to his design, he then sent some learned men into France, Germany, Italy, and the East; to transcribe such parts as he had not already, and to collate the others with the best manuscripts.” At the same time, he makes his acknowledgment to several great men for their assistance; as Thuanus, Velserus, Schottus, Isaac Casaubon, Fronto Duca3us, Janus Gruterus, Hoeschelius, &c. In the eighth volume are inserted sir Henry Savile’s own notes, with those of the learned John Bois, Thomas Allen, Andrew Downes, and other learned men. The whole charge of this edition, including the several sums paid to learned men, at home and abroad, employed in finding out, transcribing, and collating, the best manuscripts, is said to have amounted to no less than 8000l.; but, as soon as it was finished, the bishops and clergy of France employed, somewhat unfairly, as has been said, Fronton Due, or Fronto Ducaeus, who was a learned Jesuit, to reprint it at Paris, in 10 vols. folio, with a Latin translation, which lessened the price of sir Henry’s edition; yet we are told, that the thousand copies which he printed were all sold*. In 1618, he published a Latin work, written by Thomas Bradwarclin, abp. of Canterbury, against Pelagius, entitled, 5. “De Causa Dei contra Pelagium, et de virtute causarum;” to which he prefixed the life of Bradwardin. This book was printed from six Mss. carefully collated. 6. “Nazianzen’s Steliteutics,” 1610. Towards this, says Oldys, he was favoured with the ms epistles of Nazianzen out of the Bod* leian library, “which was a singular courtesy, and done because of his affection to the storing and preserving of the library,” as if any thing could have been refused to such a benefactor. 7. “Xenophon’s Institution of Cyrus,” Gr. 1613, 4to. In 1621, he published a collection of his own mathematical lectures. 8. <: Praelectiones Tredecim in principium Elementorum Euclidis Oxoniae habitae,“4to. 9.” Oratio coram Elizabetha Regina Oxonice hahita, anno 1592,“Oxon. 1658, 4to; published by Dr. Barlow from the original in the Bodleian library, and by Dr. Lamphire, in the second edition of *' Monarchia Britannica,” Oxford, 1681, 8vo. 10. He translated into Latin king James’s 46 Apology for the Oath of Allegiance.“Six letters of his, written to Hugo Blotius, and Sebastian Tenguagelius, keepers of the imperial library, were published in Lambecius’s” Bibliotheca,“vol. III.; four are printed among” Camdeni fcpistolae,“and others are in the Cotton and, Harleian Mss. He was also concerned in the new translation of the Bible, executed by command of James I. being one of the eight persons at Oxford who undertook to translate the four Gospels, Acts, and Revelations. He left behind him several Mss. some of which are now in the Bodleian library, such as 1.” Orations.“2.” Tract of the original of Monasteries.“3.” Tract concerning the Union of England and Scotland, written at the command of king James I.' 1 He wrote notes likewise upon the margin of many books in his library, particularly of Eusebius’s

Count Saxe was a man of ordinary stature, of a robust constitution, and extraordinary strength. To an aspect, noble, warlike, and mild, he joined many excellent qualities of disposition. Affable in his manners, and disposed to sympathize with the unfortunate, his generosity sometimes carried him beyond the limits of his fortune. He was remarkably careful of the lives of his men. One day a general officer was pointing out to him a post which would have been of great use “It will only cost you,” said he, “a dozen grenadiers:” “That would do very well,” replied the marshal, “were it only a dozen lieutenant-generals.” He had been educated and died in the Lutheran religion. “It is a pity (said the queen of France, when she heard of his death) that we cannot say a single De-profundis for a man who has made as sing so many Te Dennis” Religion had not much influence on his general conduct, but on his death-bed he is said to have reviewed his errors with remorse, and expressed much penitence.

, a learned member of the royal society, and of the board of longitude, was the eldest son of Mr. Scott, of Bristow, in Scotland, who married Miss Stewart, daughter of sir James Stewart, lord advocate of Scotland in the reigns of William III. and queen Anne. That lady was also his cousin-german, their mothers being sisters, and both daughters of Mr. Robert Trail, one of the ministers of Edinburgh, of the same family as the rev. Dr. William Trail, the learned author of the “Life of Dr. Robert Simson, professor of mathematics at Glasgow.”

A doctrine of this nature, advanced in an age when the reality of witches was so universally believed, that even the great bishop Jewel, touching upon the subject in a sermon before queen Elizabeth, could “pray God they might never practise farther than upon the subject,” exposed the author to every species of obloquy and persecution; and accordingly Voetius, a foreign divine, informs us in his “Disput. Theolog.” vol. III. p. 564, though Wood says nothing of it, that his book was actually burnt. It was also opposed, and, as it should seem, by great authority too: for, James I. in the preface to his “Demonologie,” printed first at Edinburgh in 1597, and afterwards at London in 1603, observes, that be “wrote that book chiefly against the damnable opinions of Wierus and Scott; the latter of whom is not ashamed,” the king says, “in public print to deny, that there can be such a thing as witchcraft, and so maintains the old error of the Sadducees in the denying of spirits,” an inference which by no means follows from Scot’s premises. Dr. John Raynolds, in his “Praslectiones upon the Apocrypha/' animadverts on several passages in Scot’s” Discovery;“Meric Casaubon treats him as an illiterate person; and Mr. Joseph Glanvil, one of the greatest advocates for witchcraft, affirms, that” Mr. Scot doth little but tell odd tales and silly legends, which he confutes and laughs at, and pretends this to be a confutation of the being of witches and apparitions: in all which his reasonings are trifling and childish; and, when he ventures at philosophy, he is little better than absurd." Scot did not live to see the full effects of his endeavours to abate the prejudices of the times, nor could this indeed be the work of a single hand, contending against the king on the thfone, many very learned men, almost the whole body of the people, and what was the last to yield, the statutelaw of the land. His work, however, was reprinted in 1651, 4to, and in 1665, folio, with additions, and was translated into German.

At Houghton Mr. Seeker applied himself with alacrity to all the duties of a country clergyman, omitting nothing which he thought could be of use to his Bock. He brought clown his conversation and his sermons to the level of their understandings; visited them in private, catechised the young and ignorant, received his country neighbours and tenants kindly and hospitably, and was of great service to the poorer sort by his skill in physic, which was the only use he ever made of it. Though this place was in a very remote part of the world, yet the solitude of it perfectly suited his studious disposition, and the income arising from it bounded his ambition. Here he would have been content to live and die here, as he has often been heard to declare, he spent some of the happiest hours of his life and it was no thought or choice of his own that removed "him to a higher and more public sphere. But Mrs. Seeker’s health, which was thought to have been injured by the dampness of the situation, obliged him to think of exchanging it for a more healthy one. On this account he procured an exchange of Houghton for a prebend of Durham, and the rectory of Ryton, in 1727; and for the two following years he lived chiefly at Durham, going over every week to officiate at Ryton, and spending there two or three months together in the summer. In July 1732, the duke of Grafton, then lord chamberlain, appointed him chaplain to the king. For this favour he was indebted to bishop Sherlock, who having heard him preach at Bath, thought his abilities worthy of being brought forward into public notice. From that time an intimacy commenced betwixt them, and he received from that prelate many solid proofs of esteem and friendship. This preferment produced him also the honour of a conversation with queen Caroline. Mr. Seeker’s character was now so well established, that on the resignation of Dr. Tyrwhit, he was instituted to the rectory of St. James’s, May 18, 1733, and in the beginning of July went to Oxford to take his degree of doctor of laws, not being of sufficient standing for that of divinity. On this occasion he preached his celebrated Act sermon, on the advantages and duties of academical education, which was printed at the desire of the heads of houses, and quickly passed through several editions. The queen, in a subsequent interview, expressed her high opinion of this sermon, which was also thought to have contributed not a little to his promotion to the bishopric of Bristol, to which he was consecrated Jan. 19, 1735.

, a nonconformist divine, was born at Marlborough in Wiltshire, in 1600, and educated first at Queen’s college, and then at Magdalen-hall, Oxford. After taking his degrees in arts, he was ordained, and became chaplain to lord Horatio Vere, whom he accompanied into the Netherlands. After his return, he went again to Oxford, and was admitted to the reading of the sentences in 1629. Going then to London he preached at St. Mildred’s, Bread-street, until interrupted by the bishop, and in 1639 became vicar of Coggeshall in Essex, where he continued three or four years. The commencement of the rebellion allowing men of his sentiments unconstrained liberty, he returned to London, and preached frequently before the parliament, inveighing with extreme violence against the church and state: to the overthrow of both, his biographers cannot deny that he contributed his full share, in the various characters of one of the assembly of divines, a chaplain in the army, one of the triers, and pne of the ejectors of those who were called “ignorant and scandalous ministers.” In 1646 he became preacher at St. Paul’s, Covent-garden, where he appears to have continued until the decay of his health, when he retired to Marl borough, and died there in January 1658. As a divine, he was much admired in his day, and his printed works had considerable popularity. The principal of them are, “The Fountain opened,” 1657; “An exposition of Psalm xxiii.” 1658, 4to; “The Anatomy of Secret Sins,” 1660; “The Parable of the Prodigal,” 1660; “Synopsis of Christianity,” &c. &c. He had a brother, John, an ad*, herent to the "parliamentary cause, and a preacher, but of less note; and another brother Joseph, who became batler in Magdalen college in 1634, and B.A. in 1637, and then went to Cambridge, where he took his master’s degree, and, was elected fellow of Christ’s college. After the restora-^ tion he conformed, and was beneficed in the church; in 1675 he was made prebendary of Lincoln, and was also rector of Fisherton, where he died Sept. 22, 1702, in the seventy-fourth year of his age, leaving a son John Sedgwick, who succeeded him in the prebend, and was vicar of Burton Pedvvardine in Lincolnshire, where he died in 1717.

After this affair, his mind took a more serious turn; and he began to apply himself to politics. He had been chosen to serve for Romney in Kent, in the parliament which begun May 8, 1661, and continued to sit for several parliaments after. He was extremely active for the revolution, which was at first thought extraordinary, as he had received favours from James II. but those were cancelled by that prince’s having taken his daughter into keeping, whom he created countess of Dorchester. This honour by no means satisfied sir Charles, who, libertine as he had been, considered his daughter’s disgrace as being thereby made more conspicuous. Still his wit prevailed over his resentment, at least in speaking on the subject; for, being asked, why he appeared so warm for the revolution, he is said to have answered, “From a principle of gratitude; for, since his majesty has made my daughter a countess, it is fit I should do all I can to make his daughter a queen.” He died Aug. 20, 1701.

, an English divine, who was born at Clifton, near Penrith, in Cumberland, of which place his father was rector, had his school-education at Lowther, and his academical at Queen’s college, in Oxford. Of this society he was chosen fellow in 1732. The greatest part of his life was spent at Twickenham, where he was assistant or curate to Dr. Waterland. In 1741, he was presented by his college to the living of Enham in Hampshire, at which place he died in 1747, without ever having obtained any higher preferment, which he amply deserved. He was exemplary in his morals, orthodox in his opinions, had an able head, and a most amiable heart. A late romantic writer against the Athanasian doctrines, whose testimony we choose to give, as it is truth extorted from an adversary, speaks of him in the following terms: “Notwithstanding this gentleman’s being a contender for the Trinity, yet he was a benevolent man, an upright Christian, and a beautiful writer; exclusive of his zeal for the Trinity, he was in every thing else an excellent clergyman, and an admirable scholar. 1 knew him well, and on account of his amiable qualities very highly honour his memory; though no two ever differed more in religious sentiments.” He published in his life-time, “Discourses on several important Subjects,” 2 vols. 8vo and his “Posthumous Works, consisting of sermons, letters, essays, &c.” in 2 vols. 8vo, were published from his original manuscripts by Jos. Hall, M. A. fellow of Queen’s college, Oxford, 1750. They are all very ingenious, and full of good matter, but abound too much in antithesis and point.

utter barristers of this House are to all standing-; and accordingly he was called intents and purposes, any former act to the beach Michaelmas following.“of parliament to the contrary notwithand his” lixor Hebraica,“on the marriages, divorces, &c. of the ancient Hebrews. In 1633 he was one of the committee appointed for preparing the mask exhibited by the gentlemen of the Inns of Court, before the king and queen on Candlemas night, in order to show their disapprobation, of Prynne’s book against stage-plays, called” Histriomastix:" so various were Selden’s pursuits, that he could even, superintend mummery of this kind, while apparently under the displeasure of the court. His next publication, however, effectually reconciled the court and ministers.

Mr. Seward was himself a poet, and a contributor to Dodsley’s collection; he was also an admirer of our ancient drama, and in 1750 published an edition of Beaumont and Fletcher’s plays. Thus accomplished himself, the talents of his daughter did not long escape his observation, and tinder his instructions she laid the foundation of a taste for poetry. The authors he recommended to her were those of queen Anne’s reign. She wasea.ly familiar with Pope, Young, Prior, and their predecessor Dry den, and in later life, used to make little allowance for poetry of an uider date, excepting only that of Sbakspeare and Milton. The desire of imitating the compositions which gave her pleasure, very early displayed itself. She attempted metrical versions of the Psalms, and even exercised herself in original composition, before she was ten years old. An “Address to the first fine day of a backward spring,” which has been preserved, intimates considerable command of numbers and language, though the ideas cannot be called original.

, duke of Somerset, and uncle to Edward VI. was eldest son of sir John Seymour of Wolfhall, in the county of Wilts, knt. by Elizabeth daughter of sir Henry Wentworth, of Nettlested in Suffolk. He was educated at the university of Oxford, whence returning to his father at court, when martial achievements were encouraged by Henry VIII. he joined the army, and accompanying the duke of Suffolk in his expedition to France in 1533, was knighted by him Nov. 1, of that year. Upon his sister’s marriage with the king in 1536, he had the tide of viscount Beauchamp bestowed upon him, in consequence of his descent from an heir female of that house; and in Oct. 1537 was created earl of Hertford. In 1540 he was sent to France to dispute the limits of the English borders, and on his return was elected knight of the garter. In 1542 he attended the duke of Norfolk in his expedition into Scotland, and the same year was made lord great chamberlain of England for life. In 154-4, being made lieutenant-general of the north, he embarked for Scotland with two hundred sail of ships, on account of the Scots refusing to marry their young queen to prince Edward; and landing in the Frith, took Leith and Edinburgh, and after plundering and burning them, marched by land into England. In August of the same year, he went to the assistance of the king at the siege of Boulogne, with several German and Flemish troops; and after taking it, defeated an army of 14,000 French, who lay encamped near it. By the will of Henry VIII. he was appointed one of the sixteen persons, who were to be his majesty’s executors, and governors of his son, till he should be eighteen years of age. Upon Edward’s accession to the crown, it was proposed in council, that one of the sixteen should be chosen, to whom the ambassadors should address themselves, and who should have the chief direction of affairs, though restrained from acting without the consent of the major part of the rest. The lord chancellor Wriothesly, who thought the precedence in secular affairs belonging to him by his office, opposed this strongly, and urged, that it was changing the king’s will, who had made them equal in power and dignity; and if any was raised above the rest in title, it would be impossible to keep him within just bounds, since greater titles made way for exorbitant power. But the earl of Hertford had so prepared his friends, that he was declared governor of the king’s person, and protector of the king*, dom, with this restriction, that he should not act without the advice and consent of the rest. In consequence of this measure, two distinct parties were formed; the one headed by the new protector, and the other by the chancellor; the favourers of the reformation declaring for the former, and the enemies of it for the latter. On Feb. 10, 1547-8, the protector was appointed lord treasurer, and the next day created duke of Somerset, and on the 17th of that month, had a grant of the office of earl marshal of England for life. On March 12th following, he had a patent for the office of protector and governor of the king and his realms. By this patent he had a negative in the council, but they had none on him; and he could either bring his own adherents into it, or select a cabinet-council out of it at pleasure; while the other executors,' having thus delivered up their authority to him, were only privy-counsellors like the rest, without retaining any authority peculiar to themselves, as was particularly provided by Hemy Vlllth’s will. In August 1548 the protector took a commission to be general, and to make war in Scotland, and accordingly entered that kingdom, and, on Sept. 10, gained a complete victory at Musselburgh, and on the 29th returned to England triumphantly, having, with the loss of but sixty men in the whole expedition, taken eighty pieces of cannon, bridled the two chief rivers of the kingdom by garrisons, and gained several strong places.

Somerset left three daughters, Anne, Margaret, and Jane, who were distinguished for their poetical talents. They composed a century of Latin distichs on the death of Margaret de Valois, queen of France, which were translated into the French, Greek, and Italian languages, and printed in Paris in 1551. Anne, the eldest of these ladies, married first the earl of Warwick, the son of the duke of Northumberland, already mentioned, and afterwards sir Edward Hunton. The other two died single. Jane was maid of honour to queen Elizabeth.

Besides his dramatic writings^ he was the author of several pieces of poetry, but none of any great merit: the chief are his congratulatory poem on the prince of Orange’s coming to England another on queen Mary; a translation of the tenth satire of Juvenal, &c. The best edition of his works was printed in 1720, 4 vols. 12mo.

Our author’s son, Dr. John Shadwell, was physician to queen Anne, George I. and George II. by the former of whom he was knighted. In August 1609, he attended the earl of Manchester, who then went to Paris as ambassador extraordinary to Louis XIV. and continued there with that nobleman till his return to England in Sept. 1701. He died Dec. 4, 1747.

Mr. Rowe regrets that he cannot inform us which was the first play he wrote. More skilful research has since found that Romeo and Juliet, and Richard II. and III. were printed in 1597, when he was thirty-three years old; there is also some reason to think that he commenced a dramatic writer in 1592, and Mr. Malone even places his first, play, “First part of Henry VI.” in 1589. His plays, however, must have been not only popular, but approved by persons of the higher order, as we are certain that he enjoyed the gracious favour of Queen Elizabeth, who was very fond of the stage, and the particular and affectionate patronage of the earl of Southampton, to whom he dedicated his poems of “Venus and Adonis,” and his “Rape of Lucrece.” On sir William Davenant’s authority, it has been asserted that this nobleman at one time gave him a thousand pounds to enable him to complete a purchase. At the conclusion of the advertisement prefixed to Lintot*s edition of Shakspeare’s Poems, it is said, “That most learned prince and great patron of learning, king James the first, was pleased with his own hand to write an amicable letter to Mr. Shakspeare: which letter, though now lost, remained long in the hands of sir William D'Avenant, as a credible person now living can testify.” Dr. Farmer with great probability supposes, that this letter was written by king James, in return for the compliment paid to him in Macbeth. The relator of the anecdote was Sheffield, duke of Buckingham. These brief notices, meagre as they are, may show that our author enjoyed high favour in his day. Whatever we may think of king James as a “learned prince,” his patronage, as well as that of his predecessor, was sufficient to give celebrhy to the founder of a new stage. It may be added, that Shakspeare’s uncommon merit, his candour, and good-nature, are supposed to have procured him the admiration and acquaintance of every person distinguished for such qualities. It is not difficult, indeed, to suppose that Shakspeare was a man of humour, and a social companion, and probably excelled in that species of minor wit, not ill adapted to conversation, of which it could have been wished he had been more sparing in his writings.

He retired, some years before his death, to a house in Stratford, of which it has been thought important to give the history. It was built by sir Hugh Clopton, a younger bro her of an ancient family in that neighbourhood. Sir Hugh was sheriff of London in the reign of Richard III. and lord mayor in the reign of Henry VII. By his will he bequeathed to his elder brother’s son his manor of Clopton, &c, and his house, by the name of the Great House) in Stratford. A good part of the estate was in possession of Edward Clopton, esq. and sir Hugh Clopton, knight, in 1733. The principal estate had been sold out of the Clopton family for above a century, at the time when Shakspeare became the purchaser, who having repaired and modelled it to his own mind, changed the name to New Place y which the mansion-house afterwards erected, in the room of the poet’s house, retained for many years. The house and lands belonging to it continued in the possession of Shakspeare’s descendants to the time of the Restoration, when they were re-purchased by the Clopton family. Here, in May 1742, when Mr. Garrick, Mr. Macklin, and Mr. Delane, visited Stratford, they were hospitably entertained under Shakspeare’s mulberry-tree, by sir Hugh Clopton. He was a barrister at law, was knighted by king George I. and died in the eightieth year of his age, in December 1751. His executor, about 1752, sold New Place to the Rev. Mr. Gastrell, a man of large fortune, who resided in it but a few years, in consequence of a disagreement with the inhabitants of Stratford. As he resided part of the year at Lichfield, he thought he was assessed too highly in the monthly rate towards the maintenance of the poor; but, being very properly compelled by the magistrates of Stratford to pay the whole of what was levied on him, on the principle that his house was occupied by his servants in his absence, he peevishly declared, that that house should never be assessed again: and soon afterwards pulled it down, sold the materials, and left the town. He had some time before cut down Shakspeare’s mulberry-tree , to save himself the trouble of showing it to those whose admiration of our great poet led them to visit the classic ground on which it stood. That Shakspeare planted this tree appears to be sufficiently authenticated. Where New Place stood is now a garden. Before concluding this history, it may be necessary to mention, that the poet’s house was once honoured by the temporary residence of Henrietta Maria, queen to Charles I. Theobald has given an inaccurate account of this, as if she had been obliged to take refuge in Stratford from the rebels, which was not the case. She marched from Newark, June 16, 1643, and entered Stratford triumphantly, about the 22nd of the same month, at the head of 3000 foot and 1500 horse, with 15o waggons, and a train of artillery. Here she was met by prince Rupert, accompanied by a large body of troops. She rested about three weeks at our poet’s house, which was then possessed by his grand-daughter Mrs. Nash, and her husband.

Shakspeare died in 1616, and seven years afterwards appeared the first edition of his plays, published at the charges of four booksellers, a circumstance from which Mr. Malone infers, “that no single publisher was at that time willing to risk his money on a complete collection of our author’s plays.” This edition was printed from the copies in the hands of his fellow-managers, Heminge and Condell, which had been in a series of years frequently altered through convenience, caprice, or ignorance. Heminge and Condell had now retired from the stage, and, we may suppose, were guilty of no injury to their successors, in printing what their own interest only had formerly withheld. Of this, although we have no documents amounting t^ demonstration, we may be convinced, by adverting to a circumstance which will, in our days, appear very extraordinary, namely, the declension of Shakspeare’s popularity. We have seen that the publication of his works was accounted a doubtful speculation, and it is yet more certain that so much had the public taste turned from him in quest of variety, that for several years after his death the plays of Fletcher were more frequently acted than his, and during the whole of the seventeenth century, they were made to give place to performances, the greater part of which cannot now be endured. During the same period only four editions of his works were published, all in folio; and perhaps this unwieldy size of volume may be an additional proof that they were not popular; nor is it thought that the impressions were numerous. These circumstances which attach to our author and to his works, must be allowed a plausible weight in accounting for onr deficiencies in his biography and literary career; but there were circumstances enough in the history of the times to suspend the progress of that more regular drama, of which he had set the example, and may be considered as the founder. If we wonder why we know so much less of Shakspeare than of his contemporaries, let us recollect that his genius, however highly and justly we now rate it, took a direction which was not calculated for permanent admiration, either in the age in which he lived, or in that which followed. Shakspeare was a writer of plays, a promoter of an amusement just emerging from barbarism; and an amusement which, although it has been classed among the schools of morality, has ever had such a strong tendency to deviate from moral purposes, that the force of law has in all ages been called in to preserve it within the bounds of common decency. The church has ever been unfriendly to the stage. A part of the injunctions of queen Elizabeth is particularly directed against the printing of plays; and, according to an entry in the books of the Stationers’ Company, in the 4 1 st year of her reign, it is ordered that no plays be printed, except allowed by persons in authority. Dr. Farmer also remarks, that in that age, poetry and novels were destroyed publicly by the bishops, and privately by the puritans. The main transactions, indeed, of that period could not admit of much attention to matters of amusement. The reformation required all the circumspection and policy of a long reign to render it so firmly established in popular favour as to brave the caprice of any succeeding sovereign. This was effected in a great measure by the diffusion of religious controversy, which was encouraged by the church, and especially by the puritans, who were the immediate teachers of the lower classes, were listened to with veneration, and usually inveighed against all public amusements, as inconsistent with the Christian profession. These controversies continued during the reign of James I. and were in a considerable degree promoted by him, although he, like Elizabeth, was a favourer of the stage as an appemiage to the grandeur and pleasures of the court. But the commotions which followed in the unhappy reign of Charles I. when the stage was totally abolished, are sufficient to account for the oblivion thrown on the history and works of our great bard. From this time no inquiry was made, until it was too late to obtain any information more satisfactory than the few hearsay scraps and contested traditions above detailed. “How little,” says Mr. Steevens, “Shakspeare was once read, may be understood from Tate, who, in his dedication to the altered play of king Lear, speaks of the original as an obscure piece, recommended to his notice by a friend; and the author of the Tatler having occasion to quote a few lines out of Macbeth, was con^ tent to receive them from D'Avenant’s alteration of that celebrated drama, in which almost every original beauty is either aukwardly disguised, or arbitrarily omitted.”

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

, a learned and accomplished prelate, was born about 1714. His education was liberal, and at a proper age he was entered of Christ Church, Oxford, where while bachelor of arts he exhibited a talent for poetry, which with cultivation might have risen to excellence. On the death of queen Caroline, he wrote some verses in the Oxford collection, which are said to have been the best that were produced on that occasion. In April 1738 he took his degree of M. A. and soon afterwards entered into holy orders, and obtained a living. May 27,

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

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

In 1736 Mr. Short was invited to London by queen Caroline, to instruct William duke of Cumberland in the mathematics; and on his appointment to this office, he was elected a member of the Royal Society, and patronized by the earls of Macclesfield and Morton. In the year 1739 he accompanied the former to the Orkney islands, where he was employed in making a survey of that part of Scotland. On his return to London he established himself as an optician, and in 1743, he was commissioned by lord Thomas Spencer to make a reflector of twelve- feet focus, for which he received 600 guineas. He afterwards made several other telescopes of the same focal distance, with improvements and higher magnifiers: and in 1752 he completed one for the king of Spain, for which, with the whole apparatus, he received 1200l. This was the noblest instrument of the kind that had ever been constructed, and has probably not been surpassed, unless by the grand telescopes manufactured by Dr. Herschel.

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

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

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

Having inured himself to habits of regularity, he put off his gown, and left the university with an intention to travel, in order to obtain a knowledge of the affairs, manners, laws, and learning of other nations, that he might become the more serviceable to his own. Having, in May 1572, obtained from the queen a license for travelling, for two years, he set out for Paris; and on his arrival there, the French king, Charles IX. appeared to be highly gratified with his ingenuous manners and conversation, and gave him an early proof of his royal favour, by advancing him to the office of gentleman ordinary of his chamber; but this promotion has been generally considered, not so much an indication of real regard, as an unworthy and insidious artifice to conceal the design which was then formed, of destroying the protestants. Accordingly he had not held this above a fortnight, when he became a spectator of that hideous and savage massacre of the Huguenots, which filled all Europe with indignation, amazement, and terror.

To his attainments in Greek and Latin, he had now added a fenowledm.' of the French, Spanish, and Italian languages. On his return he became the delight and admiration of the English court, by his dignified and majestical address, the urbanity of his manners, and the sweet complacency of his whole deportment. The queen treated him with peculiar kindness, calling him “her Philip,” in opposition, it; is said, to Philip of Spain, her sister’s husband. When she war, on a visit at Wanstead, Sidney composed a masque to amuse her majesty, called “The Lady of May,” which was performed before her. In this dramatic composition he betrayed some proficiency in the school of courtly adulation, by the frequent allusions he has made to Elizabeth’s beaut).

He had not been long at home before what may be termed his political life comnrienr.edj by his being appointed in 1576, ambassador to the couit of Vienna, to condole with the emperor Rodnlph, on the death of his father Maximilian II. The queen’s own penetration and discernment had promoted him to this appointment, but it was not intended to be confined to the mere ceremonial mentioned above. It had in view the union of all the protestant states in defence of their common cause against the ruin that menaced them from the popish powers, from the superstition of Rome, and the tyranny of Spain. Sidney succeeded in this attempt: and they were induced to conclude a religious league with England, with that country which was then justly acknowledged to be the firm support and the invincible bulwark of the reformation. He was directed at the same time to visit the court of John Casimir, count palatine of the Rhine, to whom he was earnestly and affectionately recommended by his uncle lord Leicester. His other transactions belong to history, but he managed them all with so much of the sagacity and discretion <of an able and experienced statesman, that it was justly said, that “from a child he started into a man, without ever being a youth.” When entrusted with these negociations of so much importance, he had scarcely reached his twenty^ fifth year.

Among other eminent persons with whom he formed an intimacy during this last embassy, were Don John of Austria, and the great William prince of Orange, with the latter of whom he afterwards carried on a correspondence. Notwithstanding his services on this occasion, he passed some years at home, admired indeed, but unrewarded by any higher promotion than that of cup-bearer to the queen. On some emergencies he betrayed a spirit too warmly indignant, but not uncommon in those days; and a letter of his is extant to Mr. Molineux, his father’s secretary, whom he suspected of divulging his father’s letters, in which he threatens him with his dagger, in language which his biographer allows is extremely indecorous, and admits no excuse.

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

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

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

About this time sir Philip formed, along with sir Fulke Greville, a design of accompanying sir Francis Drake in a voyage of discovery to America; and this he projected with the greatest secrecy, and with more of a romantic turn than his friends could have wished. The secret, however, transpired, and the queen issued peremptory orders to restrain him from his purpose, which in all probability would have ended in disappointment, or, if successful, would have left a stain on his hitherto spotless character. In 1585 a very remarkable honour seemed to be within his reach. He was named among the competitors for the elective kingdom of Poland, vacant by the death of Stephen Bathori, prince of Transylvania. Queen Elizabeth, however, was averse from the measure, “refusing,” says sir Robert Naunton, “to further his advancement, not only out of emulation, but out of fear to lose the jewel of her times.” According to Fuller he declined the dignity, preferring rather to be “a subject to queen Elizabeth than a sovereign beyond the seas.”

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

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

In his old age, perhaps from seeing the respect which money procured to such as had lost the charms of youth, and the power of attaching mankind by oiiier means, he became somewhat mercenary and avaricious. He was frequently employed by the victors at the games to write panegyrics and odes in their praise, before his pupil Pindar had exercised his talents in their behalf; but Simonides would never gratify their vanity in this particular, till he had first tied them down to a stipulated sum for his trouble: and, upon being upbraided for his meanness, he said that he had two coffers, in one of which he i <id, for many years, put his pecuniary rewards; the other was for honours, verbal thanks, and promises; that the first was pretty well filled, but the last remained always empty. Anu he made no scruple to confess, in his old age, that of all the enjoyments of life, the love of money was the only one of which time had not deprived him. He was of course frequently reproached with this vice, but always defended himself with good humour. Upon being asked by Hiero’s queen, whether it was most desirable to be learned or rich, he answered that it was far belter to be rich; for the learned were always dependent on the rich, and waiting at their doors; whereas he never saw rich men at the doors of the learned. When he was accused of being so sordid as to sell part of the provisions with which his table was furnished by Hiero, he said he had done it, in order, “to display to the world the magnificence of that prince, and his own frugality.” To others he said, that his reason for accumulating wealth was, that “he would rather leave money to his enemies, after death, than be troublesome to his friends when living.”

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

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

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

During this time, Smalridge did not neglect classical literature, in which he excelled, and afforded an excellent specimen of his talent for Latin poetry in his “Auctio Davisiana,” first printed in 1689, 4to, ancNifterwards added to the “Musae Anglicange.” In July of the same year (1689) he proceeded master of arts, entered into holy orders, and about 1692 was appointed by the dean and chapter of Westminster to be minister of Tothill-fields chapel. In 1693 he was collated to a prebend in the church of Lichfield. In 1700 he took his degree of D. D. and frequently supplied the place of Dr. Jane, then regius professor of divinity, with great approbation, in which office it being his duty to present persons of eminence for their degrees in that faculty, we find him, in 1706, presenting the celebrated Dr. Grabe (whose Mss. he afterwards possessed) in a very elegant speech. On Jane’s death he was strongly recommended by the university to the queen, as a proper person to succeed to the professorship; but his tory principles being particularly obnoxious to the Marlborough party, Dr. Potter, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, was preferred. The duchess of Marlborough, however, tells us, that this favour was not so easily obtained from her majesty as some others had been, and that it was not till after much solicitation that Dr. Potter was fixed in the professorship.

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

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

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

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

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

Dr. Smith married Mary eldest daughter of William Cooper, of Scarborough, esq. by whom he had a considerable fortune, and five sons. Besides his edition of Bede’s History, he published four occasional sermons, and had made some progress in a History of Durham, for which bishop Nicolson thought him well qualified. He likewise furnished Gibson with the additions to the bishopric of Durham, which he used in his edition of Camden’s “Britannia.” He also assisted Mr. Anderson in his “Historical Essay” to prove that the crown and kingdom of Scotland is imperial and independent. Dr. Smith’s eldest son, George, was born at Durham May 7, 1693, and educated at Westminster-school and at St. John’s-college, Cambridge, but in two years was removed to Queen’s-college, Oxford, where his uncle was provost, and the learned Edward Thwaites his tutor. He afterwards studied law in the Inner Temple, but being a nonjuror, quitted that profession, took orders among the nonjurors, and was made titular bishop of Durham. He died Nov. 4, 1756, at Burnhall in the county of Durham. He is represented as an universal scholar, and particularly an able antiquary. He is said to have written, anonymously, some controversial pieces, one of which was entitled “Britons and Saxons not converted to Popery, in answer to a popish book, bearing the title of ‘ England’s Conversion and Reformation compared’.” He also supplied Carte with some materials for his history; but he is chiefly known for his splendid edition of Bede’s works, which was prepared for the press by his father, and published by this son at Cambridge in 1722, folio, with a life, and some additions to what his father had left. p. 224.

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

During his being abroad, the university created him M. A. by diploma, March 1, 16'j6, a very high mi.rk of respect; and he was also elected to a fellowship, Oct. 31, 1698, though not in orders, the want of which qualification had been sometimes dispensed with in the case of men of eminence, as in that of sir Joseph Williamson himself, and Tickel the poet. While abroad, he visited some foreign courts along with his patron, and was no inattentive observer of the political state of each, as appears by some memoirs he left in ms. concerning the treaty of Ryswick; and he had also a s’hare in the publication of “The Acts and Negotiations, with the particular articles at large of that peace.” Those circumstances, with the talents he displayed both in conversation and correspondence, procured him very flattering offers of political employment!, both from the earl of Manchester and sir Philip Meadows, the one ambassador at the court of France, the other envoy to that of Vienna. But, although he had fully enjoyed the opportunities he had abroad of adding to his knowledge of the world, his original destination to the church remained unaltered, and to accomplish it he returned to Oxford in 1700, where he was gladly received. He was then ordained by Dr. Talbot, bishop of Oxford, and was heard to say, that when he laid aside his lay habit, he did it with the greatest pleasure, as looking upon holy orders to be the highest honour that could be conferred upon him. It was not long before be entered into the more active service of the church, Dr. Halton, then provost of Queen’s college, and archdeacon of the diocese, having presented him to the donative of Iffley near Oxford, and at the same time appointed him divinity-lecturer in the college. The lectures he read in this last character were long remembered to his praise.

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

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

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

On the accession of George I. he was again introduced at court by the earl of Grantham, lord chamberlain to the prince of Wales (Afterward George II.) and was made chaplain to the princess, in which office he continued, until her highness came to the throne, to give attendance in his turn; but at that period, although he was still her majesty’s chaplain, he had no farther promotion at court. For this two reasons have been assigned, the one that he was negligent in making use of his interest, and offered no solicitation; the other, that his Tory principles were not at that time very acceptable. He used to be called the Hanover Tory; but he was in all respects a man of moderation, and sincerely attached to the present establishment. As some compensation for the loss of court-favour, his old fellowstudent, Dr. Gibson, when bishop of Lincoln, promoted him to the prebend of Dunholm in that church, and upon his translation to London gave him the donative of Paddington, near London. In this place, Dr. Smith built a house for himself, the parsonage-house having been lost by his predecessor’s neglect, and afterwards retired here with his family for the benefit of his health. He also established an afternoon lecture, at the request of the inhabitants, and procured two acts of parliament, to which he contributed a considerable part of the expence, for twice enlarging the church-yard. The same patron also promoted him to the prebend of St. Mary, Newington, in the cathedral of St. Paul’s, which proved very advantageous to him; but, as he $ow held two benefices with cure of souls, namely, St. Dionisand Paddington, he gave the rectory of Newington, annexed to the prebend, to Dr. Ralph Thoresby, son to the celebrated antiquary. On the building of the new church of St. George’s, Hanover-square, he was chosen lecturer in March 1725, and was there, as every where else, much admired for his talents in the pulpit. He had before resigned the lectureship of Trinity chapel in Conduit-street, and in 1731 resigned also that of St. George’s, in consequence of having been, on Oct. 20, 1730, elected provost of Queen’s college, which owes much of its present splendor and prosperity to his zeal and liberality. We have already noticed that he had persuaded sir Joseph Williamson to alter his will in its favour, which had before been drawn up in favour of endowing a college in Dublin; and it was now to his interference that the college owed the valuable foundation of John Michel, esq. for eight master fellows, four bachelor scholars, and four undergraduate scholars or exhibitioners, besides livings, &c. Dr. Smith was also instrumental in, procuring queen Caroline’s donation of 1000l. lady Elizabeth Hastings’s exhibitions, and those of sir Francis Bridgman, which, without his perseverance, would have been entirely lost; and besides what he bequeathed himself, he procured a charter of mortmain, in May 1732, to secure these several benefactions to the college.

During his provostship, which lasted twenty-six years, he was sensible of the infirmities of age, and was a great sufferer by acute complaints, particularly the strangury, which he bore with great resignation, and was always cheerful, active, and liberal. He passed much of his time at a villa at Kidlington, where he had purchased a manor and estate, but went up to London for some part of the year, and officiated at St. Dionis church. He died in Queen’s college, Tuesday, Nov. 23, 1756, in the eighty-sixth year of his age, and was interred in the vault under the chapel. He published only two sermons, the one on the death of queen Anne, entitled “The duty of the living to the memory of the dead,” the other before the sons of the clergy; and in 1754, a pamphlet entitled “A clear and comprehensive view of the Being and Attributes of God, formed not only upon the divine authority of the holy Scriptures, but the solid reasonings and testimonies of the best authors, both Heathen and Christian, which have writ upon that subject.” He also contributed much to the publication of bishop Beveridge’s works, when the Mss. were entrusted to his care in 1707, and gave an excellent character of that pious author in the preface.

, a learned English divine, was born in 1618, at Achurch, near Oundle in Northamptonshire, where his father possessed a small farm. In April 1636, he was admitted of Emanuel college in Cambridge, where he had the happiness of having Dr. Whichcote, then fellow of that college, afterwards provost of King’s, for his tutor. He took a bachelor of arts’ degree in 1640, and a master’s in 1644; and, the same year, was chosen a fellow of Queen’s college, the fellowships appropriated to his county in his own college being none of them vacant. Here he became an eminent tutor, and read a mathematical lecture for some years in the public schools. He died Aug. 7, 1652, and was interred in the chapel of the same college; at which time a sermon was preached by Simon Patrick, then fellow of Queen’s, and afterwards bishop of Ely, giving a short account of his life and death. In this he is represented as a man of great abilities, vast learning, and possessing also every grace and virtue which can improve and adorn human nature. His moral and spiritual perfections could be only known to his contemporaries; but his uncommon abilities and erudition appear manifestly in those treatises of his, which were published by Dr. John Worth in gton at Cambridge, in 1660, 4to, under the title of “Select Discourses,” consisting, 1. “Of the true Way or Method of attaining to Divine Knowledge.” 2. “Of Superstition.” 3. “Of Atheism.” 4. “Of the Immortality of the Soul.” 5. Of the Existence and Nature of God.“6.” Of Prophesy.“7.” Of the Difference between the Legal and the Evangelical Righteousness, the old and new Covenant, &c. 8. “Of the Shortness and Vanity of a Pharisaical Righteousness.” 9. “Of the Excellency and Nobleness of true Religion.” 10. “Of a Christian’s conflict with, and conquests over, Satan.”

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

, a very learned writer and statesman, in the reigns of Edward VI. and Elizabeth, was born ^larch 28, 1514, at Saffron-Walden in Essex. He was the son of John Smith, a gentleman of that place, who was much inclined to the principles of the reformation, which had then made but a very small progress. After attending a grammar-school, Thomas was sent about 1528 to Queen’s college, Cambridge, where he greatly distinguished himself, and had a king’s scholarship at the same time with the celebrated John Cheke. Queen’s college was one of those which favoured the opinions of Erasmus and Luther, and many of the members used to confer privately together about religion, in which they learned to detect the abuses of the schools, and the superstitions of popery. In such conferences Mr. Smith probably took his share, when of sufficient standing to be admitted, which was very soon, for in 1531 he was chosen a fellow of the college. In the mean time he had formed a strict friendship with Cheke, and they pursued their classical studies together, reading Cicero, Plato, Demosthenes, and Aristotle: and such was Smith’s proficiency, that about 1533 he was appointed Greek professor in the university.

In 1551, sir Thomas was appointed one of the ambassadors to the court of France, to treat concerning a match for the king with the eldest daughter of the king of France; but the king’s life was now at a close, and on the accession of Mary, sir Thomas was deprived of all his places, and was charged not to depart the kingdom; yet enjoyed uncommon privileges. He was allowed a pension of 100l. per annum; he was highly favoured by Gardiner and Bonner on account of the opinion they had of his learning; and enjoyed a particular indulgence from the pope, which was occasioned by the following circumstance. In 1.555, William Smythwick of the diocese of Bath, esq. obtained an indulgence from Pius IV. by which he and any five of his friends, whom he should nominate, were to enjoy extraordinary dispensations. The indulgence exempted them from all ecclesiastical censures upon whatever occasion or cause inflicted; and “from all and singular their sins whereof they are contrite and confessed, although they were such for which the apostolic see were to be consulted.” Smythwick chose Smith, for one of his five friends specified in the bull, to be partaker of those privileges; and this undoubtedly was a great security to him in those perilous times. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, sir Thomas Smith was again received at court, and employed in affairs both of church and state. He was also sent on various embassies. In 1562 he was sent ambassador to France, where, in conjunction with sir Nicholas Throgmorton, he concluded a peace between England and France in the beginning of 156*, but was still continued ambassador in France. In March 1565 he finished his treatise of “the Commonwealth of England,” and in the beginning of the year following returned to England. In 1567 he was again sent ambassador to France to demand the restitution of Calais; and upon his return from thence in 1568, he solicited for the place of chancellor of the duchy of Lancaster, but without success, it being given to sir Ralph Sadleir. In 1570 he was admitted into the privy council, and in 1572, he was again appointed secretary of state, and chancellor of the order of the garter.

Another of his projects was the establishment of a colony in a land which he had purchased in Ireland, called The Ardes, a rich and pleasant country on the eastern coast of Ulster, and of considerable extent, lying well for trade by sea. Sir Thomas in 1571 had procured a patent from her majesty for it, the substance of which was, that he was to be lieutenant-general there for war, and for distribution of Jands, orders, and laws in the matters thereunto pertaining; in short, to obtain and govern the country to be won, following the instructions and orders to him to be directed from the queen and her council; and this for the first seven years. Afterwards the government of the country to return to such officers as the customs and laws of England did appoint, except the queen should think him worthy to be appointed the governor thereof, as being a frontier country, the right to remain only in him as to the inheritance; the authority to muster and call together his sol tiers throughout the same country, and to dispose of them upon the frontiers, as he should see cause for the better defence of the country. Sir Thomas sent his natural son, Thomas Smith, with a colony thither, who did good service there, but was at last intercepted and slain by a wild Irishman. The settlement of this colony cost sir Thomas ten thousand pounds; but after his death it seems to have been neglected for some time, and the Ardes were afterwards lost to his family, being given away by king James I. to some of the Scots nobility.

About 1576, sir Thomas fell into a declining state of health, which put an end to his life, Aug. 12, 1577, in the sixty-third year of his age. He died at his favourite seat of Mounthall, or Mounthaut in Essex, and was buried in the chancel of the parish church of Theydon Mount, where is a monument to his memory. He died rich, and in his will are instances of his liberality. He gave all his Greek and Latin books to Queen’s college, Cambridge, except a few left as presents to some friends. His estates descended to sir William Smith, son of his brother George.

His works are, 1. “De Republica Anglorum, or the Manner of government or police of the kingdom of England,” first printed in 4to, 1533 and 1584, and again with additions “Of the cheefe Courts in England,” 1589, 4to, and again in 1594. It was afterwards often reprinted both in English and Latin, and in the latter language forms one of the “Respublicae.” There is an English ms. of it in the Harleian collection. 2. “De recta et emendata lingua? Grcecie pronunciatione,” of which we have spoken already. 3. “A Treatise concerning the correct writing and true pronunciation of the English tongue,” which does sir Thomas less credit than the former. He even went so far in his whimsical reformation of our language, as to compose a new alphabet, consisting of twenty-nine letters, nineteen of which were Roman, four Greek, and six English or Saxon. An engraving of this novelty is given by Strype in his life of sir Thomas. 4. “Four Orations, for and against queen Elizabeth’s marriage,” also in Strype. 5. Several letters to lord Burleigh and sir Francis Walsingham, printed in the “Complete Ambassador,” and in other collections; and many in ms. are in the paper-office and other public repositories. 6. “Device for the alteration and reformation of Religion,” written in 155S, and printed among the records at the end of Burnet’s History of the Reformation," is attributed by Strype to sir Thomas Smith. Among the Harleian Mss. is a discourse written by our author to sir William Cecil, upon the value of the Roman foot soldiers 7 daily wages. It is comprised in 29 sections. Some of the tables are printed by Strype. Sir Thomas also left some English poetry. Warton informs us, that while a prisoner in the Tower (a circumstance, if we mistake not, overlooked by Strype, but which must have been the consequence of his attachment to the duke of Somerset) he translated eleven of the Psalms into English metre, and composed three English metrical prayers, with three English copies of verses besides. These are now in the British Museum Mss. Reg. 17 A. XVII.

, a learned English writer and divine, was born in the parish of Allhallows Barking, in London, June 3, 1638, and admitted of Queen’s college in Oxford at nineteen, where he took the degrees in arts. In 1663 he was made master of the free school joining to Magdalen college; and, in 1666, elected fellow of that college, being then famous for his skill in the oriental languages. In June 1668, he went as chaplain to sir Daniel Harvey, ambassador to Constantinople; and returned thence in 1671. In 1676, he travelled into France; and, returning after a short stay, became chaplain to sir Joseph Williamson, secretary of state. In 1679 he was designed to collate and publish the Alexandrian manuscript in St. James’s library, and to have for his reward (as Charles II. promised) a canonry of Windsor or Westminster; but that design was reserved for the industry and abilities of Mr. Woide, at a far distant period (1784). Mr. Smith published a great many works, and had an established reputation among the learned. So high an opinion was conceived of him, that he was solicited Ijr the bishops Pearson, Fell, and Lloyd, to return into the east, in order to collect ancient manuscripts of the Greek fathers. It was designed that be should visit the monasteries of Mount Athos, where there was said to be extant a great number of Mss. reposited there before the decline of the Greek empire. He was then to proceed to ^Smyrna, Nice, Nicornedia, Ancyra, and at last to Egypt; and to employ two or three years in this voyage; but he could not prevail on himself to undertake it, both on account of the dangers inevitably to be encountered, and of the just expectations he had from his patron Williamson of preferment in the church. These expectations, however, were disappointed; for Wood says, that, after living several years with him, and performing a great deal of drudgery for him, he was at length dismissed without any reward . In 1683, he took a doctor of divinity’s degree; and, the year after, was nominated by his college to the rectory of Stanlake in the diocese of Oxford, but upon some dislike resigned it in a month. In 1687, he was collated to a prebend in the church of Heytesbury in Wilts. In August 3688, he was deprived of his fellowship by Dr. GilTard, the Popish president of Magdalen college, because he refused to live among the new Popish fellows of that college. He had before resisted the intrusion of Antony Farmer into the office of president, and presented a petition to the earl of Sunderland, beseeching the king either to leave the college to a free election, or recommend a qualified person. This being refused, he was for presenting a second address, before they proceeded to the election, and at last he and Mr. Chernock were the only two fellows that submitted to the authority of the royal commissioners, yet this did not avail him when he refused to associate with the new popish fellows under GilTard. He was, however, restored in Octoher following; but, afterwards refusing to take the oaths to William and Mary, his fellowship was pronounced void, July 25, 1692. From this time he lived chiefly in sir John Cotton’s family. He died at London, May 11, 1710, and was buried in St. Anne’s church, Soho, privately, according to his desire.

It would be superfluous to dwell long on the merits of a work so well known, and undoubtedly entitled to high praise as a compilation, but beyond this his warmest admirers cannot judiciously extend their encomiums. Although it may be allowed to excel the histories of Carte or Guthrie, and on account of its brevity to be preferable to Rapin, and far more to his continuator Tindal, yet it is impossible to place it on a level with the histories of Hume, Robertson, Gibbon, or Henry. In the “Critical Review” it was highly praised, as might be expected, but with an affectation of candour and moderation which Smollett could not long preserve. In the Review for September 1758, we have a piece of querulous declamation which is, far more fully characteristic of the man and of the author. It is here extracted as a general specimen of the indignation which he felt against any serious attack, and it may serve to explain the relative position in which he stood with his contemporaries. The cause of the following effusion was a pamphlet published by the Rev. T. Comber, in which he censures the characters given by Smollett of king William and queen Mary, &c.

, an ingenious Spanish writer, was of an ancient and illustrious family, and born at Placenza in Old Castile, July 18, 1610. He was sent to Salamanca to study law; but, having a natural turn for poetry, gave it the preference, and cultivated it with a success which did him great honour. He was but seventeen, when he wrote an ingenious comedy, called “Amor y Obligacion:” and he afterwards composed others, which were received with the highest applause. Antonio affirms him to have been the best comic poet Spain has ever seen. At six and twenty, he applied himself to ethics and politics. His great merit procured him a patron in the count d'Oropesa, viceroy then of Navarre, and afterwards of the kingdom of Valence, who appointed him his secretary. In 1642, when he wrote his comedy of “Orpheus and Eurydice,” for representation at Pampeluna, upon the birth of the count’s son, Philip IV. of Spain made him one of his secretaries; and, after Philip’s death, the queen regent made him first historiographer of the Indies, a place of great profit as well as honour. His “History of the Conquest of Mexico” was thought to justify this honour, and was much praised. But it is evident that his object was to celebrate the glories of Ferdinand Cortez, his hero, to whom he has imputed many strokes of policy, many reflections, and many actions, of which he was not capable; and he has very wisely closed his account with the conquest of Mexico, that he might not have occasion to introduce the cruelties afterwards committed. Nevertheless, the history is reckoned upon the whole very interesting, and has been translated into several languages; and he is better known for it, out of his own country, than for his poetry and dramatic writings, although they are said to be excellent. After living many years in the busy and gay world, he resolved to dedicate himself to the service of God, by embracing the ecclesiastical state; and accordingly was ordained a priest at fifty- seven. He now renounced all profane compositions, and wrote nothing but some dramatic pieces upon subjects of devotion, which are represented in Spain on certain festivals. He died April 19, 1686. His comedies were printed at Madrid in 1681, 4to; his sacred and profane poems, at the same place, 1716, 4to; his “History of Mexico” often, but particularly at Brussels in 1704, folio; with his life prefixed by D. Juan de Goyeneche. There is also a collection of his “Letters” published at Madrid in 1737.

On the lyth of May following, the articles of impeachment against lord Somers were carried to the House of Peers, but a misunderstanding arising between the two Houses, he was acquitted by the Lords, without any farther prosecution of the Commons. King William dying not long after, lord Somers, not being a favourite at the new court, withdrew from public life, and spent much of his time at his seat near Cheshunt in Hertfordshire, in the study of history, antiquities, and polite literature. From 1698 to 1703 he had sat as president of the Royal Society, of which he had been elected a fellow in the first of these years. He still continued his attendance in the House of Peers, where he opposed the bill to prevent occasional nonconformity; and was one of the managers for the Lords, in the conference between the two Houses upon that bill in 1702. In 1706 he projected the plan for the union of England and Scotland, and was appointed by queen Anne one of the managers. The same year he introduced a bill for preventing delays and expences in proceedings at law: and also some regulations with regard to passing private acts of parliament.

Upon a change of measures in 1708, he was again called into office, and appointed president of the council. But the whig interest, of which he was the chief support, began now rapidly to decline. The same engine was played off against it, which has so often since been the last resource of party animosity. The empty splendours of conquest were derided; and the people warned that, while they joined in the huzza of victory, they were impoverishing themselves merely to enrich a few creatures of the minister. Swift had no small concern in this revolution of the public mind, by his pamphlet on “The Conduct of the Allies.” Another change of administration was effected in 1710, and lord Somers once more retired from public life. Towards the latter end of queen Anne’s reign he grew very infirm, and survived the powers of his understanding. Mr. Cooksey, one of his biographers, and a descendant, attributes this to a cause which every admirer of lord Somers must regret, and perhaps wish suppressed *. His lordship died of an apoplexy, April 26, 1716.

, a contemporary of the preceding, but more connected with this country, was born at Cordova, and educated among the Dominicans of Salamanca. Having distinguished himself in the duties of the cloister, and made an eqiujl progress in learning, especially divinity and the sacred languages, he was called to court, and was successively confessor to the king of Spain, and to Charles V. of Germany, who employed him to write against the Lutherans. When Philip of Spain married our queen Mary, Soto was one of those Spanish divines who attended him to England, and settled at Oxford, where he was professor of divinity, and sometimes read a Hebrew lecture, as Wood supposes, for Dr. Bruerne, the Hebrew professor. This occurred in 1556; and, the year before, Soto had been incorpora; ed D. D. in this university. After the death of queen Mary, he was called to the council of Trent, where be died in April 1563. He published “Institutiones Chris, tiana?,” 1548, and some other works of the controversial kind against John Brentius, or Brent. Dodd says he was a zealous assertor of church discipline, as appears by a letter which he wrote to pope Pius IV. in his last sickness, in which he insists that the residence of bishops should be declared dejure divino.

During the greatest part of queen Annie’s reign, South was in a state of inactivity; and, the infirmities of old age growing fast upon him, he performed very little of the duty of his ministerial function, otherwise than by attending divine service at Westminster abbey. Yet when there was any alarm about the church’s danger, none shewed greater activity; nor had Sacheverell in 1710 a more strenuous advocate. He had from time to time given his sermons to the public; and, in 1715, he published a fourth volume, which he dedicated to the right hon. William Bromley, esq. “some time speaker to the Hon. House of Commons, and after that principal Secretary of State to her Majesty Queen Anne, of ever blessed memory.” He died aged eightythree, July 8, 1716 and was interred with great solemnity, in Westminster abbey, where a monument is erected to him, with an inscription upon it. He was a man of very uncommon abilities and attainments; of judgment, wit, and learning equally great. There is as much wit in his sermons, as there is good sense and learning, well combined and strongly set forth: and there is yet more ill humour, spleen, and batire. His wit indeed was his bane, for he never could repress it on the most solemn occasions, and preaching may surely be reckoned one of those. Of this he seems to have been sensible himself; for when Sherlock accused him of employing wit in a controversy on the Trinity, South, in his reply, observed that, " had it pleased God to have made him (Dr. Sherlock) a wit, he wished to know what he would have done? However admirable, there was certainly nothing amiable in his nature: for it is doing him no injustice to say, that he was sour, morose, peevish, quarrelsome, intolerant, and unforgiving; and, had not his zeal for religion served for the time to cover a multitude of moral imperfections, all his parts and learning could not have screened him from the imputation of being but an indifferent kind of man.

The titles of his principal works, are, 1. “A consolation for Catholicks imprisoned on account of religion.” 2. “A supplication to queen Elizabeth,” Lond. 1593. 3. “St. Peter’s Complaint, with other poems,” Lond. 1593. 4. “Maeoniae, or certain excellent Poems and spiritual Hymns,” omitted in the preceding collection, ibid. 1595. 5. “The Triumphs over death,” ibid. 1595, 1596. 6. “Rules of a good life, with a letter to his father.” 7. “Marie Magdalen’s Funeral Teares,” ibid. 1609, reprinted in 1772 by the rev. W. Tooke, with some alterations to make it read easy.

, professor of divinity at Leyden, was born at Amberg in the Upper Palatinate, Jan. 1, 1600, of a good family. His father Wigand Spanheim, doctor of divinity, was a very learned man, and ecclesiastical counsellor to the elector-palatine; he died in 1620, holding in his hand a letter from his son, which had made him weep for joy. Frederic was educated with great care under the inspection of this affectionate parent; and, having studied in the college of Amberg till 1613, was sent the next year to the university of Heidelberg, which was then in a very flourishing condition. He there made such progress both in languages and philosophy, as to justify the most sanguine hopes of his future success. After paying a visit to his father in 1619, he went to Geneva to study divinity. In 1621, after his father’s death, he went into Dauphine, and lived three years with the governor of Ambrun, as tutor in his family. He then returned to Geneva, and went afterwards to Paris, where he met with a kind relation, Samuel Durant, who was minister of Charenton, and dissuaded Spanheim from accepting the professorship of philosophy at Lausanne, which the magistrates of Berne then offered him. In April 1625, he paid a visit of four months to England, and was at Oxford; but the plague having broke out there, he returned to Paris, and was present at the death of his relation Durant, who, having a great kindness for him, left him his whole library. He had learned Latin and Greek in his own country, French at Geneva, English at Oxford; and the time which he now spent at Paris, was employed in acquiring the oriental tongues. In 1627, he disputed at Geneva for a professorship of philosophy, and was successful; and about the same time married a lady, originally of Poitou, who reckoned among her ancestors the f;unous Budtrus. He was admitted a minister some time after; and, in 1631, succeeded to the chair of divinity, which Turretin had left vacant. He acquitted himself of liis functions with such ability, as to receive the most liberal offers from several universities: but that of Leyden prevailed, after the utmost endeavours had been used to keep him at Geneva. He left Geneva in 1642; and taking a doctor of divinity’s degree at Basil, that he might conform to the custom of the country to which he was going, he arrived at Leyden in October that year. He not only supported, but even increased the reputation he had brought with him but he lived to enjoy it only a short time, dying April 30, 1649. His great labours shortened his days. His academical lectures and disputations, his preaching (for he was minister of the Walloon church at Leyden), the books he wrote, and many domestic cares, did not hinder him from keeping up a great literary correspondence. Besides this, he was obliged to pay many visits he visited the queen of Bohemia, and the prince of Orange and was in great esteem at those two courts. Queen Christina did him the honour to write to him, assuring him of her esteem, and of the pleasure she took in reading his works. It was at her request that he wrote some memoirs of Louisa Juliana, electress palatine. He was also the author of some other historical as well as theological works the principal of which are his “Dubia evangelica discussa et vindicata,” Genev. 1634, 4to, but afterwards thrice printed in 2 vols. 4to, with large additions; “Exercitationes de Grafla universali,” Leyden, 1646, 8vo. This involved him in a controversy with Amyraut; and “Epistolae ad Davidem Bu chananum super controversies quibusdam, quse in ecclesiis Anglicanis agitantur,” ibid. 1645, 8vo. Some other of his works were published with those of his son, and his funeral oration on Henry prince of Orange, pronounced at Leyden in 1647 may be seen in Bates’s “Vitas selectorupi aliquot virorum.” He was a correspondent of, and highly esteemed by archbishop Usher.

In 1660, he published at Heidelberg a French translation of the emperor Julian’s “Caesars,” with notes and illustrations from medals and other monuments of antiquity. He had always an extraordinary turn for antiquities and medals; but had not yet seen Italy, where the study of them was much cultivated, and therefore was highly gratified in receiving a commission from the elector, to go to Rome, in order to watch the intrigues of the catholic electors at that court On his arrival he gained the esteem of that general patroness queen Christina, at whose palace was held an assembly of learned men every week; and in 1664, he complimented her with the dedication of his “Dissertationes de praestantia & usu numismatum antiquorum,” printed at Rome, in 4to. The same year he took a journey to Naples, Sicily, and Malta, and then returned to Rome, where he found the princess Sophia, mother of George I. of England. That princess, being highly pleased to meet with one whom she had already known as a man of learning, and corresponded with upon subjects of politics and literature, was desirous of enjoying his conversation at leisure, and, therefore, wish the leave of the elector her brother, carried him with her into Germany.

His writings are extremely numerous. They were printed at Leyden, in 3 vols. folio; the first in 1701, and the two last in 1703. They are chiefly, if not altogether, upon subjects of theology. Among them is a treatise, entitled “Judicium expetitum super dissidio Anglicano, et capitibus, quce ad unionem seu comprehensionem faciunt.” This he bad originally sent in 1690 to queen Mary, who submitted it to Dr. Tillotson, who acknowledged its merit in a polite letter to the author, stating the difficulties that prevented that union between the church and the dissenters which the learned professor wished.

, a puritan divine of considerable note, was born at South-Somercote in Lincolnshire in 1548. Of his early education we have no account until he became a fellow of Magdalen college, Oxford, in 1570, in whicli year he was admitted bachelor of arts. Soon after he was presented, by Arthur lord Grey, to the parsonage of Bletchley in Buckinghamshire, where he was held in great esteem for his piety. He was also chaplain to Cooper, bishop of Lincoln, who, in 1575, bestowed on him the archdeaconry of Stow. In 1581 he proceeded in his divinity degrees, being then, Wood says, in great esteem for his learning. In 1582, h'ncling that he could not attend to his archdeaconry, from its distance from his cure, he resigned it, and retained Bletchley only; but in Sept. 1582 he was installed into the prebend of Sutton in Marisco in the church of Lincoln. In 1603 he was called to the conference at Hampton-court, as one of the representatives of the puritans, as he had been one of their champions in 1584 at the dispute at Lambeth; but the issue of the Hampton-court conference was, that he inclined to conformity, and afterwards expressed his sentiments in “A brotherly persuasion to unity and uniformity in judgment and practice, touching the received and present ecclesiastical government, and the authorized rites and ceremonies of the church of England,” Lond. 1607, 4to. This brought on a controversy, his book being answered by two anonymous writers. During queen Elizabeth’s reign he had written on the subject of the succession to the crown, the title of which we are not told. This brought him into some trouble, but in a conversation with king James he so satisfied him that his majesty ever after countenanced him. He died at Bletchley Oct. 8, 1616, and was buried in the chancel of that church, with a long epitaph on a plate of brass.

, a learned prelate, successively bishop of Exeter and Norwich, was born at Depden in Suffolk, and was educated in Queen’s college, Cambridge, of which he became scholar and fellow, but was ejected in 1643, with the rest of the society, for their loyalty and refusing the Covenant. Soon afterwards he accepted the rectory of Hawkedon in Suffolk, but before he had held it above five weeks, was again ejected for reading the Common Prayer. After the restoration he returned to his living, was elected one of the preachers at St. Edmund’s Bury, and was made archdeacon of Sudbury, and a prebendary of Ely. About 1577 he was elected master of Queen’s college, where he had been educated, and resigned his charge at St. Edmund’s Bury, and the rectory of Hawkedon, on which he had bestowed in repairs 200l. On Nov. 3, 1667, he was consecrated bishop of Exeter, and on the death of Dr. Reynolds in 1678 was translated to Norwich, where he died in May 1685. He is well known by a very useful book, and if we mistake not, the first of its kind, entitled the “Rationale of the Book of Common-prayer of the Church of England,” Lond. 1657, J2mo, often reprinted. The best edition is that of 1722, 8vo, with Downes’s Lives of the Compilers of the Liturgy, and bishop Sparrow’s sermon on “Confession of Sins and Absolution.” Bishop Sparrow also published another useful “Collection of Articles, Injunctions, Canons, Orders, Ordinances, &c.” 1671, 4to.

Such was his original design in this undertaking, and having prepared three books for the press, it is probable that he accompanied Raleigh to England, with a view to publish it. Raleigh afterwards introduced him to queen Elizabeth, whose favour is supposed by some to have extended to his being appointed poet laureate; but Elizabeth, as Mr. Malone has accurately proved, had no poet laureate. Inileed, in February 1590-1, she conferred on Spenser a pension of fifty pounds a year, the grant of which was discovered some years ago, in the chapel of the Rolls, and this pension he enjoyed till his death, but the title of laureate was not given in his patent, nor in that of his two immediate successors.

The discovery of this patent by Mr. Malone, is of farther importance, as tending to rescue the character of Lord Burleigh from the imputation of being hostile to our poet. The oldest date of this reproach is in “Fuller’s Worthies,” a book published at the distance of more than seventy years; and on this authority, which has been copied by almost all the biographers of Spenser, it has been said that Burleigh intercepted the pension, as too much to be given “to a ballad maker,” and that when the queen, upon Spenser’s presenting some poems to her, ordered him the gratuity of one hundred pounds, Burleigh asked, “What! all this for a song!” on which the queen replied, “Then give him what is reason.” The story concludes, that Spenser having long waited in vain for the fulfilment of the royal order, presented to her the following ridiculous memorial:

The same year, 1596, appears to have been the time when Spenser presented his political, and only prose work, “The View of the State of Ireland,” to the queen. Mr. Todd, having seen four copies of it in manuscript, concludes that he had presented it also to the great officers of state, and perhaps to others. Why it was allowed to remain in manuscript so long as until 1633, when sir James Ware published it from archbishop Usher’s copy, has not been explained. If, as Mr. Todd conjectures, it was written at the command of the queen, and in order to reconcile the Irish to her government, why did it not receive the publicity which so important an object required? It appears more probable from a perusal of this work as we now have it, that it was not considered by the court as of a healing tendency; and the extracts from some of the manuscript copies which Mr. Todd had an opportunity of procuring, seem to confirm th s conjecture. Viewed in another light, it displays much political knowledge, and traces the troubles of that country, in many instances, to their proper causes. It is valuable also on account of the Author’s skill in delineating the actual state of Ireland. “Civilization,” says Mr Ledwich, the learned Irish antiquary, “having almost obliterated every vestige of our ancient manners, the remembrance of them is only to be found in Spenser, so that he may be considered, at this day, as an Irish antiquary.” It ought not to be omitted that in a note on one of the manuscript copies of this work, Spenser is styled, “Clerke of the Counsell of the province of Mounster.”

In 1597, he is said to have returned to Ireland, and by a letter which Mr. Malone has discovered from queen Elizabeth to the Irish government, dated Sept. 30, 1598, it appears that he was recommended to be sheriff of Cork. The rebellion of Tyrone, however, took place in October, and with such fury as to compel Spenser and his family to leave Kilcolman. In the confusion of flight manuscripts would be forgotten, for even one of his children was left behind, and the rebels, after carrying off the goods, burnt the house and this infant in it. Spenser arrived in England with a heart broken by these misfortunes, and died January 7 following, 1598-9, in the forty-sixth year of his age.

There are some circumstances respecting Spenser’s death which have been variously represented. Mr. Todd, from unquestionable evidence, has fixed the day, January 16, 1598-9, and the place, an inn or lodging-house in King-­street, Westminster; the time therefore which elapsed from his arrival in England to his death, was very short. But it has been asserted that he died in extreme poverty, which, considering how recently he was in England, and how highly favoured by the queen only a month before he was compelled to leave Ireland, seems wholly incredible. The only foundation for the report appears to be an expression of Camden intimating that he returned to England poor, which surely might be true without affording any reason to suppose that he remained poor. His pension of fifty pounds, no inconsiderable sum in his days, continued to be paid; and why he should have lost his superior friends at a time when he was a sufferer in the cause of government, is a question which may be asked without the risk of a satisfactory answer. The whining of some contemporary poets affords no proof of the fact, and may be rejected as authority; but the reception Mr. YVarton has given to the report of Spenser’s poverty is entitled to higher regard. It might indeed be considered as decisive, if Mr. Todd’s more successful researches did not prove that he founds all his arguments upon the mistaken supposition that Spenser died in Ireland. Nor will Mr. Warton’s agree with the lamentations of the poets, for they represent Spenser as poor by the neglect of his friends and country; and Mr Warton, as dying amidst the desolations of rebellion.

It remains to be observed, almost in the words of Mr. Todd, that Spenser is the author of four Sonnets, which are admitted into the late editions of his works, of which three are prefixed to separate publications, and the fourth occurs in letters by his friend Harvey. He is conjectured to be the author of a sonnet signed E. S. addressed to Master Henry Peacham, and entitled “A Vision upon his Minerva,” and of some poor verses on Phiilis, in a publication called “Chorus Poetarum,” 1684. The verses on queen Elizabeth’s picture at Kensington have been likewise given to Spenser, hut lord Orford ascribes them to the queen herself. As “Britain’s Ida” iias been usually printed with the works of Spcenser, it is still retained, although the critics are agreed that it was not written by him. The lost pieces of Spenser are said to be, 1. His translation of Ecclesiasticus. 2. Translation of Canticum Canticorum. 3. The Dying Pelican. 4. The hours of our Lord. 5. The Sacrifice of a Sinner. 6. The Seven Psalms. 7. Dreams. 8. The English Poet. 9. Legends. 10. The Court of Cupid. 11. The Hell of Lovers. 12. His Purgatory. 13 A Se'nnight’s Slumber. 14. Pageants. 15. Nine Comedies. 16. Stemmata Dudleiana. 17. Epithalamion Thamesis. If his pen was thus prolific, there is very little reason to suppose that he might not have had leisure and industry to have nearly completed his “Faerie Queene,” before the fatal rebellion which terminated all his labours.

, a man of uncommon abilities and learning, was the sun of a counsellor and secretary to Jane d' Albert, queen of Navarre; and born at Maulcon de Soule in the country of Biscay in i He made a considerable progress in literature; and, when not more than twenty, began a commentary upon Homer’s Iliad and Odyssey, winch was printed at Basil in 1583, fblie, with a dedication to the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France. In this work, if there is not much noveky of critical discovery, there is more display of reading and learning than could have been expected in one so young. The same year, he printed an edition of Aristotle’s “Logic” at Basil, in Greek and Latin, with marginal notes. He abjured the reformed religion in 1593, and immediately published a declaration of his reasons, but does not appear to have enjoyed much comfort in his new communion. He left the court soon after his abjuration, and went to conceal himself in the mountains of Biscay; where he died March 18, 1595, and was buried at Bourdeaux. He is it-­presented as having spent this short life in much fatigue and misery.

Mr. Stanhope received the first rudiments of education at the school of Uppingham. in the county of Rutland, whence he was removed to that of Leicester, and again to that of Eton, from which he was elected on the foundation at King’s college in 1677. In his youth he had displayed the most promising abilities; and at the university he enriched his mind with that valuable stock of learning, which he afterwards so judiciously employed. Of the French, as well as of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, he acquired a critical knowledge. He took the degree of B. A. in 1681, and that of M. A. in 1685. He entered into holy orders, but did not immediately leave the university. He officiated first at the church of Quoi near Cambridge, and in 1688 was vice-proctor of the university. In the same year he was preferred to the rectory of Tewing in the county of Hertford; and in 1689 to the vicarage of Lewisham in Kent. The latter benefice he owed to the kindness of lord Dartmouth, to whom he was chaplain, and to whose son he had been tutor. He was soon after appointed chaplain in ordinary to king William and queen Mary; and he enjoyed the same honour under queen Anne.

strange,“says Dr. Warton in his notes Rocbefoucault.” him thither; which gave him an opportunity of gaining an accurate knowledge of the laws and customs of that country. He continued there some years, and thence made a tour to France, Italy, and other parts, where he made it his study to become acquainted with the laws and the constitutions, as well as the languages, of those places. He afterwards went into the confederate army in Flanders, where he served as a volunteer; and at the famous siege of Namur in 1695 distinguished himself to such advantage, that king William gave him a company of foot, and soon after a colonel’s commission. Though he was but young, being then about two and twenty years old, he had free access to that king, for whom he had always the highest reverence. In the first parliament of queen Anne he was chosen representative for the borough of Cockermouth in Cumberland, as he was likewise in the succeeding parliament, summoned to meet at Westminster June the 14th, 1705; in the beginning of which year he was promoted to the rank of brigadier- general, and gained great reputation in Spain under the earl of Peterborough at the siege of Barcelona, which surrendered to the allies October the 9tb, 1705. Immediately after the reduction of that place, the earl dispatched captain Norris express to England, on board the Canterbury man of war; in which ship brigadier Stanhope and the lord Shannon embarked likewise, and on the 22d of November 1705 arrived at St. Helen’s. Soon after brigadier Stanhope waited on her majesty, and delivered to her several letters, particularly one from the king of Spain, now emperor of Germany, which has this passage “I owe the same justice to your brigadier-general Stanhope upon account of his great zeal, attention, and most prudent conduct, of which he has given me proofs on all manner of occasions.” Towards the close of the first session of the new parliament he returned to Spain, and his presence was extremely acceptable to his catholic majesty. In the beginning of 1708, when a French invasion in favour of the Pretender was expected, brigadier Stanhope moved to bring in a bill to dissolve the clans in Scotland, and was seconded by sir David Dalrymple, and the bill was ordered to be brought in accordingly; but the enemy not landing at that time, the bill was laid aside. About this time he, with brigadier Cadogan and others, was advanced to the rank of major-general, and soon after appointed by her majesty envoy extraordinary and plenipotentiary to king Charles III. of Spain, and commander in chief of the British forces in that kingdom. He arrived at Barcelona May the 29th, 1708, and the same year reduced Port Mahon and the whole island of Minorca. In the first British parliament which met after the union of the kingdoms of England and Scotland, he was re-chosen member for Cockermouth. He was also advanced to the rank of lieutenant-general; and in 1710 was one of the managers of the House of Commons at the trial of Dr. Sacheverell, against whose doctrines he made an able speech. In the latter end of May that year he went to Spain, and on July 27, obtained a signal victory over the enemy near Almenara, as he did likewise on Aug. 20 near Saragossa; but Dec. 9 following he was taken prisoner at Brihuega.

On the accession of George II. in 1727, whom he had served with steadiness for thirteen years, lord Chesterfield seemed to have a right to expect particular favour. In this he was disappointed, owing to his having paid his court to the king’s mistress lady Suffolk, instead of applying to the queen, which her majesty, as well as the king, who always preserved a high respect for the queen, resented; but in 1728 he was appointed ambassador to Holland, in which station he was determined to distinguish himself, and his efforts were perfectly successful. Mr. Slingeland, then the grand pensionary of Holland, conceived a friendship for him, and much advanced his diplomatic education. Having by his address preserved Hanover from a war, he received high marks of his majesty’s favour in being made high steward of the household, and knight of the garter. He came over in the summer of 1730, to be installed at Windsor, and then returned to his embassy. He was recalled in 1732, on the plea of health; and when he recovered, began again to distinguish himself in the House of Lords; and in the same year, on the occasion of the excise-bill, went into strong opposition against sir Robert Walpole. He was immediately obliged to resign his office of high steward, and so ill received at court that he desisted from attending it; He continued in opposition, not only to the end of sir Robert’s ministry in 1742, but even against the men with whom he had acted in the minority. It was not till the coalition of parties in 1744, by what was called “the broad-bottomed treaty,” that he was admitted into the cabinet, and then very much against the will of the king, who now had long considered him as a personal enemy. In the course of this long opposition he had frequently distinguished himself by his speeches; but particularly on the occasion of the bill for putting the theatres under the authority of a licenser, which he opposed in a speech of great animation, still extant in his works. During the same period we find him engaging in marriage with Melosina de Schulenburg, countess of Walsingham, to whom he was united in September 1733; but still constantly attentive to the education of his natural son by a former connection at the Hague. By his wife he had no children. In 1741 and 1742 he was obliged to pay temporary visits to the continent on account of his health, at which time it appears that he wrote regularly to his son, then only ten years old.

All the steps of his political life were marked with honours. He was chosen one of the privy-council to Edward II. appointed lord treasurer, and employed in embassies, and other weighty affairs of state, in which his abilities and integrity would have been acknowledged, had he not lived in a period of remarkable turbulence and injustice. In 1325 he accompanied the queen to France in order to negociate a peace, but her intentions to depose her husband were no longer to be concealed, and the bishop, whose integrity her machinations could not corrupt, continued to attach himself to the cause of his unfortunate sovereign, and fell an early sacrifice to popular fury. In 1326 he was appointed guardian of the city of London during the king’s absence in the west, and while he was taking measures to preserve the loyalty of the metropolis, the populace attacked him, Oct. 15, as he was walking the streets, and beheaded him near the north door of St. Paul’s, together with sir Richard Stapledon, his brother. Godwin informs us that they buried the bishop in a heap of sand at the back of his house, without Temple-l>ar. Walsingham says they threw it into the river; but the former account seems most consistent with popular malevolence and contempt. Exeter house was founded by him as a town residence for the bishops of the diocese, and is said to have been very magnificent. It was afterwards alienated from the see, and by a change of owners, became first Leicester, and then Essex house, a name which the scite still retains. It appears that the queen soon after ordered the body of the murdered bishop to be removed and interred, with that of his brother, in Exeter cathedral. In the 3d Edward III. 1330, a synod was held at London before Simon, archbishop of Canterbury, to make inquiry into bishop Stapledon’s death; and his murderers, and all who were any way privy or consenting to the crime, were executed. His monument, in the north aile of Exeter cathedral, was erected by the rector and fellows of Exeter college. Among the mu,niments of the dean and chapter of Exeter, there is an account of the administration of his goods, by Richard Braylegh, dean of Exeter, and one of his executors; by which it appears that he left a great many legacies to poor scholars, and several sums of money, from twenty to sixty shillings, for the repairing of bridges in the county, and towards building Pilton churc.i, &c.

, an eminent lawyer in the sixteenth century, was the son of William Staunford, of London, mercer, and the grandson of Richard Staunford of Rowley in Staffordshire. He was born in 1509, at Hadley in Middlesex, where his father had purchased some property, and had married a London lady of the name of Gedney. After studying for some time at Oxford, he applied to municipal law in Gray’s Inn, and soon acquired reputation for knowledge of his profession. In 1545, he was chosen autumn-reader to this society, but did not read until Lent following, owing, as Wood says, to the plague: the year after he was appointed attorney-general. In 1551 he was double Lent reader at Gray’s-inn, made serjeant at law the next year, and queen’s serjeant in 1553, when Mary came to the throne, as he was a zealous adherent to her religion. In 1554 he became a judge of the common-pleas, and the same year received the honour of knighthood. He died Aug. 28, 1553, and was buried in Hadley church. While both at the bar and on the bench, he was much esteemed, and obtained no small fame by his writings, which still perpetuate his name. They are 1. “Placita coronac,” in French, 4to, 1557, and often reprinted from that time to 1607. 2. “Exposition of the King’s prerogative,” printed with the former. He left also many Mss. His “Placita corona;” were published in an epitomized form, by Walter Young, Lond. 1660, 8vo. and 1663.

, the first of a class of writers called the British Essayists, which is peculiar to this country, was born at Dublin in 1671. Mis family, of English extraction, was genteel. His father, who was a counsellor at law, and private secretary to James, the first duke of Ormond, sent his son, then very young, to London, where he was placed in the Charter-house by the duke, who was one of the governors of that seminary. From thence he was removed to Merton college, Oxford, and admitted a postmaster in 1691. In 1695 he wrote a poem on the funeral of queen Mary, entitled the “Procession.” His inclination leading him to the army, he rode for some time privately in the guards. He became an author first, as he tells us himself, when an ensign of the guards, a way of life exposed to much irregularity; and, emg thoroughly convinced of many things, of which he often repented, and which he more often repeated, he wrote for his own private use a little book called “The Christian Hero,” with a design principally to fix upon his own mind a strong impression of virtue and religion, in opposition to a stronger propensity towards unwarrantable pleasures. This secret admonition was too weak; and therefore, in 1701, he printed the book with his name, in hopes that a standing testimony against himself, and the eyes of the world upon him in a new light, might curb his desires, and make him ashamed of understanding and seeming to feel what was virtuous, and yet of living so contrary a life. This, he tells us, had no other effect, but that, from being thought a good companion, he was soou reckoned a disagreeable fellow. One or two of his acquaintance thought fit to misuse him, and try their valour upon him; and every body, he knew, measured the least levity in his words or actions with the character of “The Christian Hero.” Thus he found himself slighted, instead of being encouraged, for his declarations as to religion; so that he thought it incumbent upon him to enliven his character. For this purpose he wrote the comedy, called u The Funeral, or Grief a- la- Mode,“which was acted in 1702; and as nothing at that time made a man more a favourite with the public than a successful play, this, with some other particulars enlarged upon to -advantage, obtained the notice of the king; and his name, to be proTided for, was, he says, in the last table-book ever worn by the glorious and immortal William the Third. He had before this obtained a captain’s commission in lord Lucas’s regiment of fusileers, by the interest of lord Cutts, to whom he had dedicated his” Christian Hero,“and who likewise appointed him his secretary. His next appearance as a writer, as he himself informs us, was in the office of Gazetteer; where he worked faithfully, according to order, without ever erring, he says, against the rule observed by all ministries, to keep that paper very innocent and very insipid. He received this appointment in consequence of being introduced by Addison to the acquaintance of the earls of Halifax and Sunderland. With Addison he had become acquainted at the Charter-house. His next productions were comedies;” The Tender Husband“being acted in 1703, and” The Lying Lover“in 1704. In 1709 he began” The Taller;“the first number of which was published April 12, 1709, and the last Jan. 2, 1711. This paper greatly increased his reputation and interest; and he was soon after made one of the commissioners of the Stamp-office. Upon laying down” The Tatler,“he b'egan, in concert with Addison,” The Spectator,“which began to be published March 1, 1711 after that,” The Guardian,“the first paper of which came out March 12, 1713; and then,” The Englishman,“the first number of which appeared Oct. 6, the same year. Besides these works, he wrote several political pieces, which were afterwards collected, and published under the title of” Political Writings," 1715, 12mo. Oneofthes6 will require to be mentioned particularly, because it was attended with remarkable consequences relating to himself.

Having a design to serve in the last parliament of queen Anne, he resigned his place of commissioner of the Stampoffice, in June 1713; and was chosen member for the borough of Stockbridge in Hampshire; but he did not sit long in the House of Commons, before he was expelled for writing “The Englishman,” being the close of a paper so called, and “The Crisis.” This last is one of his political writings, and the title at full length runs thus "The Crisis, or a Discourse representing, from the most authentic records, the just causes of the late happy Revolution, and the several settlements of the crown of England and Scotland on her majesty; and, on the demise of her majesty without issue, upon the most illustrious princess Sophia, electress and duchess-dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body being Protestants, by previous acts

Vol. XXVIII. A A of both parliaments of the late kingdoms of England and Scotland, and confirmed by the parliament of Great-Britain. With some seasonable remarks on the danger of a popish successor.“He explains in his” Apology for himself,“the occasion of his writing this piece. He happened one day to visit Mr. William Moore of the Inner-Temple; where the discourse turning upon politics, Moore took notice of the insinuations daily thrown out, of the danger the Protestant succession was in; and concluded with saying-, that he thought Steele, from the kind reception the world gave to what he published, might be more instrumental towards curing that evil, than any private man in England. After much solicitation, Moore observed, that the evil seemed only to flow from mere inattention to the real obligations under which we lie towards the house of Hanover: if, therefore, continued he, the laws to that purpose were reprinted, together with a warm preface, and a well-urged peroration, it is not to be imagined what good effects it would have. Steele was much struck with the thought and prevailing with Moore to put the law- part of it together, he executed the rest; yet did not venture to publish it, till it had been corrected by Addison, Hoadly, afterwards bishop of Winchester, and others. It was immediately attacked with great severity by Swift, in a pamphlet published in 1712, under the title of,” The Public Spirit of the Whigs set forth in their generous encouragement of the author of the Crisis:“but it was not till March 12, 1715, that it fell under the cognizance of the House of Commons. Then Mr. John Hungerford complained to the House of divers scandalous papers, published under the name of Mr. Steele; in which complaint he was seconded by Mr. Auditor Foley, cousin to the earl of Oxford, and Mr. Auditor Harley, the earl’s brother. Sir William Wyndham also added, that” some of Mr. Steele’s writings contained insolent, injurious reflections on the queen herself, and were dictated by the spirit of rebellion.“The next clay Mr. Auditor Harley specified some printed pamphlets published by Mr. Steele,” containing several paragraphs tending to sedition, highly reflecting upon her majesty, and arraigning her administration and government.“Some proceedings followed between this and the 18th, which was the day appointed for the hearing of Mr. Steele; and this being come, Mr. Auditor Folejr moved, that before they proceed farther, Mr. Steele should declare, whether he acknowledged the writings that bore his name? Steele declared, that he” did frankly and ingenuously own those papers to he part of his writings; that he wrote them in behalf of the house of Hanover, and owned them with the same unreservedness with which he abjured the Pretender.“Then Mr. Foley proposed, that Mr. Steele should withdraw; but it was carried, without dividing, that he should stay and make his defence. He desired, that he might be allowed to answer what was urged against him paragraph by paragraph; but his accusers insisted, and it was carried, that he should proceed to make his defence generally upon the charge against him. Steele proceeded accordingly, being assisted by his friend Addison, member for Malmsbury, who sat near him to prompt him upon occasion; and spoke for near three hours on the several heads extracted from his pamphlets. After he had withdrawn, Mr. Foley said, that,” without amusing the House with long speeches, it is evident the writings complained of were seditious and scandalous, injurious to her majesty’s government, the church and the universities;“and then called for the question. This occasioned a very warm debate, which lasted till eleven o'clock at night. The first who spoke for Steele, was Robert Walpole, esq. who was seconded by his brother Horatio Walpole, lord Finch, lord Lumley, and lord Hinchinbrook: it was resolved, however, by a majority of 245 against 152, that” a printed pamphlet, entitled l The Englishman, being the close of a paper so called,‘ and one other pamphlet, entitled * The Crisis,’ written by Richard Steele, esq. a member of this House, are scandalous and seditious libels, containing many expressions highly reflecting upon her majesty, and upon the nobility, gentry, clergy, and universities of this kingdom; maliciously insinuating, that the Protestant succession in the house of Hanover is in danger under her majesty’s administration; and tending to alienate the good affections of her majesty’s good subjects, and to create jealousies and divisions among them:“it was resolved likewise, that Mr. Steele,” for his offence in writing and publishing the said scandalous and seditious libels, be expelled this House.“He afterwards wrote” An Apology for himself and his writings, occasioned by his expulsion,“which he dedicated to Robert Walpole, esq. This is printed among his” Political Writings/' 1715, I2i“. He had no'v nothing to do till the death of the queen, but to indulge himself svith his pen; and accordingly, in 1714, he published a treatise, entitled” The Romish Ecclesiastical History of late years.“This is nothing more than a description of some monstrous and gross popish rites, designed to hurt the cause of the Pretender, which was supposed to be gaining ground in England: and there is an appendix subjoined, consisting of particulars very well calculated for this purpose. In No. I. of the appendix, we have a list of the colleges, monasteries, and convents of men and women of several orders in the Low Countries; with the revenues which they draw from England. No. II. contains an extract of the” Taxa Cameroe,“or” Cancellariat Apostolicse,“the fees of the pope’s chancery; a book, printed by the pope’s authority, and setting forth a list of the fees paid him for absolutions, dispensations, indulgencies, faculties, and exemptions. No. 111. is a bull of the pope in 1357, given to the then king of France; by which the princes of that nation received an hereditary right to cheat the rest of mankind. No. IV. is a translation of the speech of pope Sixtus V. as it was uttered in the consistory at Rome, Sept. 2, 1589; setting forth the execrable fact of James Clement, a Jacohine friar, upon the person of Henry III. of France, to be commendable, admirable, and meritorious. No. V. is a collection of some popish tracts and positions, destructive of society and all the ends of good government. The same year, 1714, he published two papers: the first of which, called” The Lover;“appeared Feb. 25; the second,” The Reader," April 22. In the sixth number for May 3, we have an account of his design to write the history of the duke of Marlborough, from the date of the duke’s commission of captain general and plenipotentiary, to the expiration of those commissions: the materials, as he tells us, were in his custody, but the work was never executed.

, an eminent musical composer, was born in 1655, as the German authorities say, at Leipsic, but Handel and the Italians make him a native of Castello Franco, in the Venetian state. In his youth he was a chorister of St. Mark’s, where his voice was so much admired by a German nobleman, that, obtaining his dismission, he took him to Munich in Bavaria, and had him educated, not only in music under the celebrated Bernabei, but in literature and theology sufficient, as was there thought, for priest’s orders; in consequence of which, after ordination, he was distinguished by the title of abate, or abbot, which he retained until late in life, when he was elected bishop of Spiga. In 1671, at the age of nineteen, he published his “Psalms,” in ei^ht parts. He likewise published “Sonate a quattroStromenti,” but his chamber duets are the most celebrated of his works, and indeed, of that species of writing. In his little tract, “Delia certezza Dei principii della Musica,” he has treated the subject of musical imitation and expression, according to Martini, like a philosopher, and agreeable to mathematical principles. This work was so admired in Germany, that it was translated into the language of that country, and reprinted eight times. He composed several operas likewise between the years 1695 and 1699, for the court of Hanover, where he resided many years as maestro di capella, and these were afterwards translated into German, and performed to his music at Hamburgh. About 1724, after he had quitted the court of Hanover, where he is s;dd to have resigned his office in favour of Handel, he was elected president of the academy of ancient music at London. In 1729, he went into Italy to see his native country and relations, but returned next year to Hanover; and soon after having occasion to go to Francfort, he was seized with an indisposition, of which he died there in a few days, aged near eighty. There are, perhaps, no compositions more correct, or fugues in which the subjects are more pleasing, or answers and imitations more artful, than are to be found in the duets of StefFani, which, in a collection made for queen Caroline, and now in the possession of his majesty, amount to near one hundred.

The original motive to the undertaking of Sternhold and his coadjutors was not solely the introduction of Psai insinging into the English protestant churches; it had also for its object the correction of public morals, as appears from the declaration contained in the title-page of our common version, and which has been continued in all the printed copies from the time of its first publication to this day, “Set forth and allowed to be sung in churches of the people together, before and after evening prayer, as also before and after sermon; and, moreover, in private houses, for their godly solace and comfort, laying apart all ungodly songs and ballads,which tend only to the nourishment of vice, and the corrupting of youth.” About the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth these Psalms were printed along with the book of Common Prayer, so that Heylm’s nice distinctions between an allowance, which he calls a connivance, and an -approbation, seem to be unnecessary, and certainly are inconclusive. Sternhold and Hopkins’s version, be its merit what it may, had all the sanction it co-aid have, that of undisturbed use, in all churches and chapels, for above a century and a half, and it has not yet entirely;.o that of Tate and Brady. On its poetical merits it would be unnecessary to enter. It is valuable chiefly as a monument of literary antiquity, and as fixing the sera of an important addition to public worship, a subject which we regret to observe, both Mr. War ton and Dr. Burney have treated with unbecoming levity.

Mr. Stevens died Feb. 6, 1807, at his house in Broadstreet,;nd was interred in Oiharn church-yard in the county of Kent. Otham wa* not the place of his nativity, yet, from being the parish of his maternal relations, he had always regarded it as his home; and in that church-yard he expressed his desire to be buried. Indeed to the church of Otham he had, during his life-time, been a great benefactor, having laid out about 600l. in repairing and adorning it. An epitaph has since been placed on a marble tablet, containing a just summary of his excellent character. For a more minute detail of it, and particularly of his extensive -charities, both as ari individual, and as treasurer of queen Anne’s bounty, which office he held many years, and it afforded to him a wide scope for benevolent exertion for many admirable traits of temper and proofs of talent, and for an example of integrity, private virtues, and public usefulness, rarely to be met with, we must refer to the “Memoirs of William Stevens, esq.” printed for private distribution in 1812, 8vo, and in 1815 for sale. 7'his very interesting and instructive work is the well-known, although not avowed, production of a learned judge, who bus ably proved “how much every man has it in his power, even under very discouraging circumstances, by diligence, fidelity, and attention, to advance himself, not only in worldly prosperity, but in learning and wisdom, in purity of life, and in moral and religious knowledge,” and that “a life of the strictest piety and devotion to God, and of the warmest and most extensive benevolence to our fellow men, is strictly compatible with the utmost cheerfulness of disposition, with all rational pleasures, and with all the gaiety, which young persons naturally feel.”

His writings were all collected, and reprinted in 1710, in 6 vols. folio. The first contains, 1. “Fifty Sermons, preached on several occasions,” with the author’s life. The second, 2. “Origines Sacræ” 3 “Letter to a Deist,” written, as he tells us in the preface, for the satisfaction of a particular person, who owned the Being and Providence of God, but expressed a mean esteem of the scriptures and the Christian religion. 4. “Irenicum: the Unreasonableness of Separation, or an impartial account of the history, nature, and pleas of the present Separation from the Communion of the Church of England.” The third volume contains, 5. “Origines Britannicæ, or the Antiquities of the British Churches;” 6. “Two Discourses concerning the Doctrine of Christ’s Satisfaction, against the Socinians.” 7. “Vindication of the Doctrine of the Trinity,” in which he animadverts upon some passages in Mr. Locke’s Essay. 8. “Answers to two Letters,” published by Mr. Locke. 9. “Ecclesiastical cases relating to the duties and rights of the Parochial Clergy,” a charge. 10. “Concerning Bonds of resignation of Benefices.” 11. “The Foundation of Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, and as it regards the legal supremacy.” 12. “The grand question concerning the Bishops’ right to vote in Parliament in cases capital.” 13. “Two speeches in Parliament.” 14. “Of the true Antiquity of London.” 15. “Concerning the Unreasonableness of a new Separation, on account of the oaths to King William and Queen Mary.” 16. “A Vindication of their Majesties authorities to fill the sees of deprived Bishops.” 17. “An Answer to the Paper delivered by Mr. Ashton, at his execution, to sir Francis Child, Sheriff of London, with the Paper itself.” The fourth, fifth, and sixth volumes contain, 18. Pieces written against the Church of Rome, in controversy with Cressy, Sargeant, and other Popish advocates.

In this year came out the laborious and voluminous collections of Reiner Wolfe, printer to the queen, and of others, being a chronicle of Britain, printed and reprinted by Raphael Holinshed, and commonly going under his name. In the last and largest edition of that work, there are inserted many considerable additions communicated byStow, and which form the main part of it from 1573 to 1583, and afford eminent proofs of his pains and diligene.

By his skill, also, in antiquity, he was enabled to settle the true bounds and limits of many contested properties, and to throw gceat light upon some obsolete authors, toward the useful editions of which he contributed largely. We are likewise indebted to him for some of the additions and enlargements of our most ancient poet, Chaucer; whose works were first collected and published by Caxton; and again published with additions by William Thinne, esq. in the reign of Henry VIII. after which they were “corrected and twice increased (to use his own words) through Mr. Stow’s painful labours in the reign of queen Elizabeth, to wit, in the year 1561; and again beautified with notes by him collected out of divers records and monuments: which he delivered to his loving friend Thomas Speight.”

Whether Mr. Stow was a hearty protestant is rather dubious; there is one expression of his somewhere in the reign of queen Elizabeth, which is an indication of the affirmative, viz. “That doctrine is more pure now than it was in the monkish world.” But it is not certain whether he wrote this in earnest or ironically, nor is it matter of much consequence. Although he was not able to surmount the religious prejudices of his time, his moral practice was unblamable. He hated vice in all orders, and exposed it no less in the elergy than in laymen. He abhorred injustice, and spared not to rebuke all who were guilty of it. He was a lover of hospitality, and a great friend to public benefactions, while he had any thing to bestow. He was of an honest and generous disposition, and unspotted in his life.

In 1790, a severe asthmatic complaint rendered a country residence necessary, and he therefore settled for five years at Bacon’s-farm in Hertfordshire, where he employed some part of his time in engraving a series of plates for the “Pilgrim’s Progress,” which are said to be as fair a specimen of his talents as an artist, as any that can be produced but it is not mentioned for what edition they were engraved, or whether sold separately. Here likewise his benevolent regard for the welfare of the young induced him, at his own expence, to establish a Sunday school at Tewin, not far from his residence, which he superintended with great care, and had the satisfaction to find it attended with the most beneficial consequences to the morals of the villagers. In 1795, he returned to London, and began to collect materials for his work entitled “A complete view of the Dresses and Habits of the People of England, from the establishment of the Saxons in Britain to the present time.” The first volume of this appeared in 1796, and the second in 1799, 4to, illustrated by 143 plates. It was about the same time published in French. In 1801, he published the last work he lived to complete, namely, EligEamena XnjelTpeob; or, The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England,“a performance which, from the novelty of the subject, attracted the notice and admiration of readers of almost every class. In the beginning of October 1802, Mr. Strutt, then residing in Charles-street, Hatton-garden, was confined to his chamber with his last illness, of which he died on the 16th of that month, in the fifty-third year of his age. His biographer sums up his character in these words:” The calamities incident to man were indeed his portion on this earth; and these greatly augmented by unkindnesses where he least deserved to have met with them. He was charitable without ostentation a sincere friend, without intentional guile; a dutiful son a faithful and affectionate husband a good father: a worthy man and, above all, it is humbly hoped, a sincere Christian. His natural talents were great, but little cultivated by early education. The numerous works which he gave to the world as an author, and as an artist, prove that he employed his time to the best advantage.“Mr. Strutt engraved many plates, in dots, in imitation of chalk, a manner which he learned from his master Ryland, and in which softness and harmony are blended. He also left some Mss. in the possession of his son, from which have since been published, 1.” Queen Hoo Hall, a Romance and Ancient Times, a Drama,“4 vols. 12mo. both which have many characteristics of a lively and well-regulated imagination; and, 2.” The Test of Guilt; or Traits of Ancient Superstition, a dramatic tale, &c." in poetry, but not much calculated to raise our ideas of his merit in that branch.

The other works of Dr. Gilbert Stuart were, 3. An anonymous pamphlet against Dr. Adam, who had published a Latin grammar, 1772. 4. “Observations concerning the public Law and Constitutional History of Scotland,” Edinburgh, 1779, 8vo. In this work he critically examined the preliminary book to Dr. Robertson’s History of Scotland. 5. “The History of the Establishment of the Reformation of Religion in Scotland,” London, 1780, 4to, a work commended for the easy dignity of the narrative, and for the more extraordinary virtue of strict impartiality. 6. “The History of Scotland,” from the establishment of the reformation to the death of queen Mary, London, 1782, 2 vols. His chief purpose in this book was to vindicate the character of that queen; but the whole is well written, and has been very generally read and admired. 7. He also revised and published “Sullivan’s Lectures on the Constitution of England,” This was about 1774. Dr. Stuart was about the iRnicldle size and justly proportioned. His countenance was modest and expressive, sometimes announcing sentiments of glowing friendship, of which he is said to have been truly susceptible; at others, displaying strong indignation, against folly and vice, which he had also shewn in his writings. With all his ardour for study, he yielded to the love of intemperance, to which, notwithstanding a strong constitution, he fell an early sacrifice. His talents were great, and his writings useful; yet in his character altogether there appears to have been little that is worthy of imitation. He is painted in the most unfavourable colours by Mr. Chalmers, in his Life of Ruddiman, who says, “Such was Gilbert Stuart’s laxity of principle as a man, that he considered ingratitude as one of the most venial of sins. Such was his conceit as a writer, that he regarded no one’s merits but his own. Such were his disappointments, both as a writer and a man, that he allowed his peevishness to sour into malice; and indulged his malevolence till it settled in corruption.” If this character be not too harshly drawn, it is impossible that much should be alleged in its defence.

As his years increased, knowledge attended their progress: he acquired a great proficiency in the Greek language; and his unparalleled strength of mind carried him into a familiar association with most of the sciences, and principally that of architecture. His stature was of the middle size, but athletic. He possessed a robust constitution, invincible courage, and inflexible perseverance. Of this the following fact is a proof: a wen, in his forehead, had grown to an inconvenient size; and, one day, being in conversation with a surgeon, he asked him how it could be removed. The surgeon acquainted him with the length of the process; to which Mr. Stuart objected, on account of the interruption of his pursuits, and asked whether he could not cut it out, and then it would be only necessary to heal the part. The surgeon replied in the affirmative, but mentioned the very excruciating pain and danger of such an operation. Mr. Stuart, after a minute’s reflection, threw himself back in his chair, and said, “I will sit stil! do it now.” The operation was performed with success. With such qualifications, although yet almost in penury, he conceived the design of visiting Rome and Athens; but the ties of filial and fraternal affection induced him to postpone his journey, till he could insure a certain provision for his mother, and his brother and second sister. His mother died: he was soon after enabled to place his brother and sister in a situation that was likely to produce them a comfortable support; and then, with a very scanty pittance in his pocket, he set out on foot for Rome; and thus he performed the greatest part of his journey travelling through Holland, France, &c. and stopping through necessity at Paris, and several other places in his way, where, by his ingenuity as an artist, he procured some moderate supplies, towards prosecuting the rest of his journey. When arrived at Rome, he soon formed an intimate acquaintance with Mr. Nicholas Revett, an eminent painter and architect. From this gentleman Mr. Stuart first caught his ideas of that science, in which (quitting the profession of a painter) he afterward made such a conspicuous figure. During his residence at Rome, he studied architecture and fortification; and in 1748 they jointly circulated “Proposals for publishing an authentic description of Athens, &c.” For that purpose, they quitted Rome in March 1750, but did not reach Athens till March 1751, where, in about two months, they were met by Mr. Wood and Mr. Dawkins, whose admiration of his great qualities and wonderful perseverance secured to him their patronage. Dawkins was glad to encourage a brother in scientific investigation, who possessed equal ardour with himself, but very unequal resources for prosecuting those inquiries in which they were both engaged; having at the same time so much similarity of disposition, and ardour of pursuit. During his residence at Athens Mr. Stuart became a master of architecture and fortification; and having no limits to which his mind would be restricted, he engaged in the army of the queen of Hungary, where he served a campaign voluntarily, as chief engineer. On his return to Athens, he applied himself more closely to make drawings, and take the exact measurements of the Athenian architecture. He left Athens in 1755, still accompanied by his friend Revett; and after visiting Thessalonica, Smyrna, and the islands of the Archipelago, arrived in England in the beginning of 1755. The result of their classical labours was the appearance, in 1762, of the first volume in folio of “The Antiquities of Athens measured and delineated, by James Stuart, F. R. S. and S.A. and Nicholas Revett, painters and architects.” This work is a very valuable acquisition to the lovers of antiquities and the fine arts, and is a proper companion to the noble descriptions of Palmyra and Balhec, by Mr. Dawkins and Mr. Wood, by whom the two artists were early encouraged in the prosecution of a design so worthy of the most distinguished patronage. To this work, and the long walk which the author performed to compose it, he has been indebted for the name of the Athenian Stuart, universally decreed to him by the learned of this country.

, a learned lawyer in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was born about 1541, and is said by Mr. Strype to have been a member of Corpus Christi college, Cambridge. He removed thence to Lincoln’s-inn for the study of the law, and contracted an acquaintance with the most learned and ingenious men of that society. He became a puritan in consequence, as some suppose, of his connection with the celebrated Thomas Cartu right, who had married his sister. About 1579, when the report of the queen’s intended marriage with the duke of Anjou, brother to the king of France, had created an extraordinary alarm, lest such a match should eventually be injurious to the Protestant establishment, Mr. Stubbs published a satirical work against it, entitled “The Discovery of a gaping gulph wherein England is like to be swallowed up by another French marriage,” &c. This highly incensed the queen, whose passions ha -I always much -way over her actions, and too much over htr ministers, and she immediately issued out a proclamation against it; and the autuor and printer, or bookseller, being discovered, they were soon apprehended, and sentence given against them, that their right hands should be cut off, according to an act of Philip and Mary, “against the authors and publishers of seditious writings.” When Stubbs came to receive his punishment, which was inflicted with great barbarity, with a butcher’s knife and mallet, he immediately took off his hat with his left hand, and cried “God save the queen!”

, an antiquary of much celebrity, descended from an antient family in Lincolnshire, was born at Holbech in that county, November 7, 1687. After having had the first part of his education at the free-school of that place, under the care of Mr. Edward Kelsal, he was admitted into Bene't-college in Cambridge, Nov. 7, 1703, under the tuition of Mr. Thomas Favvcett, and chosen a scholar there in April following. While an under-graduate, he often indulged a strong propensity for drawing and designing; and began to form a collection of antiquarian books. He made physic, however, his principal study, and with that view took frequent perambulations through the neighbouring country, with the famous Dr. Hales, Dr. John Gray of Canterbury, and others, in search of plants; and made great additions to Ray’s “Catalogus Plantarum circa Cantabrigiam;” which, with a map of the county, he was solicited to print; but his father’s death, and various domestic avocations, prevented it. He studied anatomy under Mr. Rolfe the surgeon attended the chemical lectures of signor Vigani and taking the degree of M. B. in 1709, made himself acquainted with the practical part of medicine under the great Dr. Mead at St. Thomas’s hospital. He first began to practise at Boston in his native county, where he strongly recommended the chalybeate waters of Stanfield near Folkingham. In 1717 he removed to London, where, on the recommendation of his friend Dr. Mead, he was soon after elected F. R. S. and was one of the first who revived that of the Antiquaries in 1718, to which last he was secretary for many years during his residence in town. He was also one of the earliest members of the Spalding society. He took the degree of M. D. at Cambridge in 1719, and was admitted a fellow of the College of Physicians in the year following, about which time (1720) he published an account of “Arthur’s Oon” in Scotland, and of “Graham’s dyke,” with plates, 4to. In the year 1722, he was appointed to read the Gulstonian Lecture, in which he gave a description and history of the spleen, and printed it in folio, 1723, together with some anatomical observations on the dissection of an elephant, and many plates coloured in imitation of nature. Conceiving that there were some remains of the Eleusinian mysteries in free-masonry, he gratified his curiosity, and was constituted master of a lodge (1723), to which he presented an account of a Roman amphitheatre at Dorchester, in 4to. After having been one of the censors of the College of Physicians, of the council of the Royal Society, and of the committee to examine into the condition of the astronomical instruments of the Royal Observatory of Greenwich, he left London in 1726, and retired to Grantham in Lincolnshire, where he soon came into great request. The dukes of Ancaster and Rutland, the families of Tyrconnel, Gust, &c. &c. and most of the principal families in the country, were glad to take his advice. During his residence here, he declined an invitation from Algernon earl of Hertford, to settle as a physician at Marlborough, and another to succeed Dr. Hunter at Newark. In 1728 he married Frances daughter of Robert Williamson, esq. of Allington, near Grantham, a lady of good family and fortune. He was greatly afflicted with the gout, which used generally to confine him during the winter months. On this account, for the recovery of his health, it was customary with him to take several journeys in the spring, in which he indulged his innate love of antiquities, by tracing out the footsteps of Caesar’s expedition in this island, his camps, stations, &c. The fruit of his more distant travels was his “Itinerarium Curiosum; or, an Account of the Antiquities and Curiosities in his Travels through Great Britain, Centuria I.” adorned with one hundred copper-plates, and published in folio, London, 1724. This was reprinted after his death, in 1776, with two additional plates; as was also published the second volume, (consisting of his description of the Brill, or Caesar’s camp at Pancras,“IterBoreale,” 1725, and his edition of Richard of Cirencester , with his own notes, and those of Mr. Bertram of Copenhagen, with whom he corresponded, illustrated with 103 copper-plates engraved in the doctor’s lifetime. Overpowered with the fatigue of his profession, and repeated attacks of the gout, he turned his thoughts to the church; and, being encouraged in that pursuit hy archbishop Wake, was ordained at Croydon, July 20, 1720; and in October following was presented by lord-chancellor King to the living of All-Saints in Stamford . At the time of his entering on his parochial cure (1730), Dr. Rogers of that place had just invented his Oleum Artbriticum; which Dr. Stukeley seeing oihers use with admirable success, he was induced to do the like, and with equal advantage for it not only saved his joints, but, with the addition of a proper regimen, and leaving off the use of fermented liquors, he recovered his health and limbs to a surprising degree, ind ever after enjoyed a firm and active state of body, beyond any example in the like circumstances, to a good old age. This occasioned him to publish an account of the success of the external application of this oil in innumerable instances, in a letter to sir Hans Sloane, 1733; and the year after he published also, “A Treatise on the Cause and Cure of the Gout, from a new Rationale;” which, with an abstract of it, has passed through several editions. He collected some remarkable particulars at Stamford in relation to his predecessor bishop Cumberland; and, in 1736, printed an explanation, with an engraving, of a curious silver plate of Roman workmanship in basso relievo, found underground at Risley Park in Derbyshire; wherein he traces its journey thither, from the church of Bourges, to which it had been given by Exsuperius, called St. Swithin, bishop of Toulouse, about the year 205. He published also the same yea.- his “Palæographia Sacra, No. I. or, Discourses on the Monuments of Antiquity that relate to Sacred History,” in 4to, which he dedicated to sir Richard Kllys, bart. “from whom he had received many favours.” In this work (uhich was to have been continued in succeeding numbers) he undertakes to shew, how Heathen Mythology is derived from Sacred History, and that the Bacchus in the Poets is no other than the Jehovah in the Scripture, the conductor of the Israelites through the wilderness. In his country retirement he disposed his collection of Greek and Roman coins according to the order of the Scripture History; and cut out a machine in wood (on the plan of an Orrery), which shews the motion of the heavenly bodies, the course of the tide, &c. In 1737 he lost his wife and in 1738, married Elizabeth, the only daughter of Dr. Gale, dean of York, and sister to his intimate friends Roger and Samuel Gale, esquires; and from this time he often spent his winters in London. In 1740, he published an account of Stonehenge, dedicated to the duke of Ancaster, who had made him one of his chaplains, and given him the living of Somerby near Grantham the year before. In 1741, he preached the Thirtieth of January Sermon before the House of Commons; and in that year became one of the founders of the Egyptian society, composed of gentlemen who had visited Egypt. In 1743 he printed an account of lady Roisia’s sepulchral cell, lately discovered at Royston, in a tract, entitled “Palseographia Britannica, No. I.” to which an answer was published by Mr. Charles Parkin, in 1744. The doctor replied in “Palasographia Britannica, No. II.” 1746, giving an account of the origin of the universities of Cambridge and Stamford, both from Croylandabbey; of the Roman city Granta, on the north-side of the river, of the beginning of Cardike near Waterbeach, &c. To this Mr. Parkin again replied in 1748; but it does not appear that the doctor took any further notice of him. In 1747, the benevolent duke of Montagu (with whom he had become acquainted at the Egyptian society) prevailed on him to vacate his preferments in the country, by giving him the rectory of St. George, Queen-square, whence he frequently retired to Kentish-town, where the following inscription was placed over his door:

, an engraver of some note, was born in London in 1658. At the age of seventeen he became the pupil of Robert White. His prints are exceedingly numerous, and prove him to have been a very industrious man, but of no great genius. Indeed, the chief of his excellence lay in the engraving of letters, and the minuteness with which they were executed. His best work is the “Book of Common Prayer,” which he engraved on silver plates. The top of every page is ornamented with a small historical vignette. Prefixed is the bust of George 1. in a circle, and facing it the prince and princess of Wales. The peculiarity of this work is, that the lines of the king’s face are expressed by writing, so small that few persons can read it without a magnifying glass, and that this writing consists of the Lord’s prayer, the Ten Commandments, prayers for the royal family, and the 21st Psalm. Tins Common Prayer Book was published by subscription in London in 1717, 8vo, and was followed by a “Companion to the Altar” of the same size, and executed in the same manner. Sturt also engraved the Lord’s Prayer within the area of a circle of the dimensions of a silver penny, and an elegy on queen Mary on so small a size that it might be set in a ring or locket. This last wonderful feat, which was announced in the Gazette, was performed m 1694. He was, however, a faithful copyist, as may be seen by the English translation of Pozzo’s Perspective, published by James, in folio. When old and poor, for it does not appear that he had great success, he had a placa offered him in the Charter-house, which he refused. He died in 1730, aged seventy-two. Lord Orford says, he received near 500l. of Mr. Anderson of Edinburgh, to engrave plates for his “Diplomata,” but did not live to complete them.

, one of the most able and honest ministers that France ever had, was descended from an ancient and illustrious house, and born in 1559 at Rosni, descended from a younger branch of the ancient counts of Flanders. His father was the baron de Rosni. He was bred in the opinions and doctrine of the reformed religion, and continued to the end of his life constant in the profession of it, which seems to have fitted him for the important services to which Providence had designed him. The queen of Navarre, after the death of her husband Antony de Bourbon, returned to Beam, where she openly professed Calvinism. She sent for her son Henry from the court of France to Pau in 1556, and put him under a preceptor, who trained him up in the Protestant religion. She declared herself the protectress of the Protestants in 1566; and went to Rochelle, where she devoted her son to the defence of the Reformed religion. In that quality Henry, then prince of Beam, was declared chief of the party; and followed the army from that time to the peace, which was signed at St. Germains, August 11, 1570. He then returned to Beam, and made use of the quiet that was given him, to visit his estates and his government of Guyenne, after which he went and settled in Rochelle, with his mother.

The advantages granted to the Protestants by the peace of St. Germains, raised a suspicion in the breasts of their leaders, that the court of France was acting treacherously, and that in reality nothing else was intended by the peace, than to prepare for the most dismal tragedy that ever was acted and the truth was, that the queen dowager Catharine de Medicis, and her son Charles IX. being now convinced that the Protestants were too powerful to be subdued by force, were determined to extirpate them by stratagem. They, however, dissembled their intentions; and, during the whole year 1571, talked of nothing but faithfully observing the treaties of entering into a closer correspondence with the Protestants, and carefully preventing all occasions of rekindling the war. To remove all possible suspicion, the court of France proposed a marriage between Charles the IXth’s sister, and Henry prince of Beam; and feigned, at the same time, as if they would prepare a war against Spain, than which nothing could be more agreeable to Henry. These things, enforced with the appearance of great frankness and sincerity, entirely gained the queen of Navarre; who, though she continued irresolute for some months, yet yielded about the end of 1571, and prepared for the journey to Paris, as was proposed, in May 1572.

Sully’s father was one of those who doubted the sincerity of the court, and conceived such strong apprehensions, that when the report of the court of Navarre’s journey to Paris first reached him, he could not give credit to it. Firmly persuaded that the present calm won Id be of short continuance, he made haste to take advantage of it, and prepared to shut himself up with his effects in Rochelle, when every one else thought of leaving it. But the queen of Navarre having informed him of her design, and requested him to join her in her way to Vendome, he went, and took Sully, now in his twelfth year, along with him. He found a general security at Vendome, and an air of satisfaction on every face; to which, though he durst not object in public, yet he made remonstrances to some of the chiefs in private. These were considered as the effects of weakness and timidity; and therefore, not caring to seem wiser than persons of greater understandings, he seemed to incline to the general opinion. He went to Rosni, to put himself into a condition to appear at the magnificent court of France; but, before he went, presented his son to the prince of Beam, in the presence of the queen his mother, with great solemnity, and assurances of the most inviolable attachment. Sully did not return with his father to Rosni, but went to Paris in the queen of Navarre’s train. He applied himself closely to his studies, without neglecting to pay a proper court to the prince his master; and lived with a governor and a valet de chambre in a part of Paris where almost all the colleges stood, and continued there till the bloody catastrophe which happened soon after.

Nothing could be more kind than the reception which the queen of Navarre, her children, and principal servants, met with from the king and queen; nor more obliging, than their treatment of them. The queen of Navarre died, and some historians make no doubt but she was poisoned; yet the whole court appeared sensibly affected, and went into deep mourning. Still many of the Protestants, among whom was Sully’s father, suspected the designs of the court; and had such convincing proofs, that they quitted the court, and Paris itself, or at least lodged in the suburbs. They warned prince Henry to be cautious; but he listened to nothing; and some of his chiefs were as incredulous, and the admiral de Coligni in particular, though one of the wisest and most sagacious men in the world. The fact to be perpetrated was fixed for the 24th of August, 1572, and is well known by the name of the massacre of St. Bartholomew. The feast of St. Bartholomew fell this year upon a Sunday; and the massacre was perpetrated in the evening.

At the end of three days, however, a prohibition against murdering and pillaging any more of the Protestants was published at Paris; and then Sully was suffered to quit his cell in the college of Btirgundy. He immediately saw two soldiers of the guard, agents to his father, entering the college, who gave his father a relation of what had happened to him; and, eight days after, he received a letter from him, advising him to continue in Paris, since the prince he served was not at liberty to leave it and adding, that he should follow the prince’s example in going to mass. Though the king of Navarre had saved his life by this submission, yet in other things he was treated very indifferently, and suffered a thousand capricious insults. He was obliged, against his will, to stay some years at the court of France; he knew very well how to dissemble his chagrin 5 and he often diverted it by gallantries, and the lady de Sauves, wife to one of the secretaries of state, became one of his chief mistresses. But still he did not neglect such political measures as seemed practicable, and he had a hand in those that were formed to take away the government from Catharine de Medicis, and to expel the Guises from court which that queen discovering, caused him and the duke of Alengon to be arrested, set guards upon them, and ordered them to be examined upon many heinous allegations. They were set at liberty by Henry III. for Charles IX. died, 1574, in the most exquisite torments and horrors, the massacre of St. Bartholomew’s -day having been always in his mind. Sully employed his leisure in the most advantageous manner he was able. He found it impracticable in a court to pursue the study of the learned languages, or of any thing called learning; but the king of Navarre ordered him to be taught mathematics and history, and all those exercises which give ease and gracefulness to the person; that method of educating youth, with a particular attention to the formation of the manners, being peculiar to Henry, who was himself educated in the same way.

This change of religion in Henry IV. though it seemed to create a present satisfaction, did not secure him from continual plots and troubles and being made upon political motives, it was natural to suppose it not sincere. Thus, Dec. 26, 1594, a scholar, named John Chastel, attempted to assassinate the king, but only wounded him in the mouth; and when he was interrogated concerning the crime, readily answered, “That he came from the college of the Jesuits,” and then accused those fathers of having instigated him to it. The king, who was present at his examination, said with much gaiety, that “he had heard, from the mouths of many persons, that the society never loved him, and he was now convinced of it by his own.” Some writers have related, that this assassination was at* tempted when he was with the fair Gabrieile, his mistress, at the hotel d'Estrees; but Sully, who was with him, says that it was at Paris, in his apartments in the Louvre. This Gabriel le was the favourite mistress of Henry IV. and it is said that the king intended to marry her; but she died in 1599, the year that his marriage with Margaret of Valois, sister of Charles IX. was declared null and void by the pope’s commissioners, with consent of both parties. He married Mary of Medicis, at Lyons, the year after, and appointed madame de Guercheville, to whom he had made love without success, to be one of her ladies of honour; saying, that “since she was a lady of real honour, she should be in that post with the queen his wife.” Henry, though he was a great monarch, was not always successful in his addresses to the fair; and a noble saying is recorded by many writers of Catharine, sister to the viscount de Rohan, who replied to a declaration of gallantry from this prince, that “she was too poor to be his wife, and of too good a fau.ily to be his mistress.”

Henry was murdered the 17th of May, 1610; and, it appears, had many presages of his cruel destiny, which, bully tells us, “were indeed dreadful and surprising to the Ja>t degree.” The queen was to be crowned purely to gratify her, for Henry was vehemently against the coronation; and, the nearer the moment approached, the more his terrors increased. “In this state of overwhelming horror, which,” says Sully, “at first I thought an unpardonable weakness, he opened his whole heart to me: his own words will be more affecting than all I can say. ` Oh my friend,‘ said he, `this coronation does not please me I know not what is the meaning of it, but my heart tells me some fatal accident will happen.’ He sat down, as he spoke these words, upon a chair in my closet; and, resigning himself some time to all the horror of his melancholy apprehensions, he suddenly started up, and cried out, Par Dieu, I shall die in this city; they will murder me here; I see plainly they have made my death their only resource!” for he had then great designs on foot against Spain and the house of Austria. He repeated these forebodings several times, which Sully as often treated as chimeras; but they proved realities.

, founder of the Charter-bouse school and hospital, was descended of the ancient family of the Buttons of Lincolnshire, and was born at Knaith, in that county, in 1532. He received the first part of his education at Eton school, whence it is supposed he was sent to Cambridge, and matriculated of St. John’s college, Nov. 27, 1551, but this seems very doubtful, at least there is no direct proof, and his being afterwards a benefactor to Magdalen and Jesus colleges svould incline us to give them the preference, but his name does not occur in the registers of either. He is said to have removed afterwards to Lincolu’s-inn, for the study of the law; but this not suiting his disposition, or what we think extremely probable, his father, and perhaps himself, inclining to the reformation, he evaded the miseries of queen Mary’s reign, by employing almost the whole of that disastrous period in travelling on the continent.

His father Richard Sutton, steward of the courts in Lincoln, died in that city in 1558, and his son, on his return home in 1562, found himself in possession of considerable property. He was now about thirty years of age, and reckoned an accomplished gentleman. He was first retained by the duke of Norfolk, whose favours he acknowledges in his will by a legacy of 400l.; and afterwards became secretary to the earl of Warwick, and occasionally also to his brother the earl of Leicester. In 1569, the earl of Warwick being master-general of the ordnance, appointed Mr. Sutton master of the ordnance -at Berwick, a post of great trust at that time, Berwick being a frontier garrison to Scotland. In this situation he distinguished himself much on the breaking out of the rebellion in the north by the earls of Northumberland and Westmoreland; and by the recommendation of his two patrons, he obtained a patent the same year for the office of master-general of the ordnance in the north, for life; and in 1573, he commanded one of the five batteries, which obliged the strong castle of Edinburgh to surrender to the English. It is probable, that, as master-tyeneral of the ordnance, he attended the earl of Sussex, president of the North, into Scotland, with an army in 1570, though he is not expressly named in Camden’s annals for that year. But in 1573, he is named as one of the chief of those 1500 men who marched into Scotland to the assistance of the regent, the earl of Morton, by order of queen Elizabeth, and laid siege to Edinburgh castle.

, a Swedish enthusiast, and the founder of a well-known, although, we trust, declining sect, was born at Stockholm J.n. 29, 1689. His father was bishop of West Gothia, and it may be supposed that his education was good, since he published a volume of Latin poetry when he was only twenty years old. The title was, “Ludus Heliconius, sive Carmina Miscellanea, quie variis in locis cecinit.” The same year he began his travels; and having visited England, Holland, France, and Germany, returned in 1714 to Stockholm, where two years after, he was appointed by Charles XII. assessor of the metallic college. His studies during this part of his life, were chiefly devoted to mathematics and natural philosophy; and he was essentially useful to his king by enabling him to convey his heavy artillery by water, where they could not go by land. He published about this period, many scientih'cal and philosophical works; and succeeding to the favour of queen Ulrica Kleanora, after the death of Charles XI I. was by her ennobled in 171I>. In pursuance of his duty, as belonging to the metallic college, he travelled to view the mines, and then inspected aiso the manufactures of his country. In consequence of this, he published several tracts on subjects relating to the philosophy of the arts. He returned to Stockholm in 1722,;.nd divided his time between the duties of his ofiice and his private studies. In 1733, he had completed his great work, entitled “Opera Philosophica et Mineralia,” which was printed under his direction in 1734, partly at Dresden, and partly at Leipsic. It forms 3 vols. folio, is illustrated hy plates, and is written with great strength of judgment. In 1720, he had been admitted into the society of sciences at Upsal; and between that and 1724, had received a similar honour from the royal academy at Stockholm, and that of Petersburgh. He corresponded also with many learned foreigners. But the time was now approaching when all the desire of baron Swedenborg, for literary or other worldly distinction, was to be absorbed in feelings of a sublimer nature. Whether too intense an application to study had disordered, or a natural tendency to enthusiasm had inflamed his mind, he conceived himself miraculously called to the office of revealing the most hidden arcana. “In the year 1743,” he says, in one of his works, “the Lord was graciously pleased to manifest himself to me, in a personal appearance; to open in me a sight of the spiritual world, and to enable me to converse with spirits and angels; and this privilege has continued with me to this day.” From this time, he devoted his very able pen to such subjects as this most extraordinary state of mind suggested. He published, “De cultu et Amore Dei,” Lond. 1745, 4to; “De telluribus in mundo nostro solari,” 1758 “De Equo albo in Apocalypsi,” 1758 “De nova Hierosolyma” “De Ccelo et Inferno” “Sapientia angelica de Divina Providentia,” Amsterdam, 1764 “Vera Christiana religio,” Amst. 1771 and many other books. He particularly visited Amsterdam and London, where these extravagant works were published, and where they have since been translated by his admirers. One of his fancies about the spiritual world is, that it admits not of space: yet he tells us, that a man is so little changed after death, that he does not even know that he is not living in the present world; that he eats and drinks, and even enjoys conjugal delights, as in the present world; that the resemblance between the two worlds is so great, that in the spiritual there are cities, palaces, houses, books, merchandise, &c. &c. Universal Theology, vol. J. p. 734. This extraordinary man died in London, March 29, 1772; his remains lay in state, and were afterwards deposited in a vault in the Swedish church near Radcliff-highway.

In 1701, Swift took his doctor’s degree, and in 1702, soon after the death of king William, he went into England for the first time after his settling at Laracor; a journey which he frequently repeated during the reign of queen Anne. Miss Johnson was once in England in 1705, but returned in a few months, and never crossed the channel afterwards. He soon became eminent as a writer, and in that character was known to both whigs and tories. He had been educated among the former, but at length attached himself to the latter; because the whigs, as he said, bad renounced their old principles, and received others, which their forefathers abhorred. He published, in 1701, “A discourse of the contests and dissentions between the nobles and commons in Athens and Home, with the consequences they had upon both those states” this was in behalf of king William and his ministers, against the violent proceedings of the House of Commons; but from that year to 1708, he did not write any political pamphlet.

In 1710, being then in England, he was empowered by the primate of Ireland, to solicit the queen to release the clergy from paying the twentieth part and first-fruits; and upon this occasion his acquaintance with Mr. Hariey commenced. As soon as he had received the primate’s instructions, he resolved to apply to Mr. Hariey; and, before he waited on him, got himself represented as a person who had been ill used by the last ministry, because he would not go such lengths as they would have had him. Mr. Hariey received him with the utmost kindness and respect; kept him with him two hours alone; engaged in, and soon after accomplished his business bid him come often to see him privately and toldhim, that he must bring him to the knowledge of Mr. St. John. Swift presently became acquainted with the rest of the ministers, who appear to have courted and caressed him with uncommon assiduity. He dined every Saturday at Mr. Harley’s, with the lord keeper, Mr. secretary St. John, and lord Rivers: on that day no other person was for some time admitted; but this select company was at length enlarged to sixteen, all men of the first class, Swift included. From this time he supported the interest of his new friends with all his power, in pamphlets, poems, and periodical papers: his intimacy with them was so remarkable, that he thought not only to defend, but in some degree to direct their measures; and such was his importance in the opinion of the opposite party, that many speeches were made against him in both houses of parliament: a reward was also offered, for discovering the author of " The Public Spirit of the Whigs/*

Amidst all the business and honours that crowded upon him, he wrote every day an account of what occurred, to Stella; and sent her a journal regularly, dated every fort* night, during the whole time of his connection with queen Anne’s ministry. From these unrestrained effusions of -his heart many particulars are known, which would otherwise have lain hid; and by these it appears, that he was not only employed, but trusted, even by Hariey himself, who to all others was reserved and mysterious. In the mean time, Swift had no expectations of advantage from his con* nection with these persons; he knew they could not long preserve their power: and he did not honour it while it lasted, on account of the violent measures which were pursued by both sides. “I use the ministry,' 1 says he,” like dogs, because I expect they will use me so. I never knew a ministry do anything for those whom they made companions of their pleasures; but I care not.“In the summer of 1711, he foresaw the ruin of the ministry by those misunderstandings among themselves, which at last effected it; and it was not only his opinion, but their own, that if they could not carry a peace, they must soon be sent to the Tower, even though they should agree. In order therefore to facilitate this great event, Swift wrote the” Conduct of the Allies;“a piece, which he confesses cost him much pains, and which succeeded even beyond his expectations. It was published Nov. 27, 1711; and in two months time above 11,000 were sold off, seven editions having been printed in England, and three in Ireland. The tory members in both houses, who spoke, drew their arguments from it; and the resolutions, which were printed in the votes, and would never have passed but for this pamphlet, were little more than quotations from it. From this time to 1713, he exerted himself with unwearied diligence in the service of the ministry; and while he was at Windsor, just at the conclusion of the peace of Utrecht, he drew the first sketch of” An history of the four last years of queen Anne." This he afterwards finished, and came into England to publish it, but was dissuaded from it by lord Bolingbroke, who told him, the whole was so much in the spirit of party-writing, that though it might have made a seasonable pamphlet in the time of their administration, it. would be a dishonour to just history. Swift seems to have been extremely fond of this work, by declaring that it was the best thing he had ever written; but, since his friend did not approve it, he would cast it into the fire. It did not, however, undergo this fate, but was published by Dr. Lucas, to the disappointment of all those who expected any thing great from it.

During all this time he received no gratuity or reward till 1713; and then he accepted the deanery of St. Patrick’s, Dublin. A bishopric had been some “time before intended for him by the queen; but archbishop Sharpe having represented him to her majesty as a man whose Christianity was very questionable, and being supported in this by a certain very great lady, it was given to another. He immediately crossed the channel, to take possession of his new dignity but did not stay in Ireland more than a fortnight, being urged by an hundred letters to hasten back, and reconcile the lords Oxford and Bolingbroke. When he returned, he found their animosity increased; and, having predicted their ruin from this very cause, he laboured to bring about a reconciliation, as that upon which the whole interest of their party depended. Havin<* attempted this by various methods in vain, he went to a friend’s house in Berkshire, where he continued till the queen’s death; and, while he was at this place, wrote a discourse called” Free thoughts on the present state of affairs," which, however, was not published till some time after.

Upon his arrival to take possession of his deanery, he had been received with great kindness and honour; but now, upon his return after the queen’s death, he experienced every possible mark of contempt and indignation. The tables were turned; the power of the tories and the dean’s credit were at an end; and as a design to bring in the pretender had been imputed to the queen’s ministry, so Swift lay now under much odium, as being supposed to have been a well-wisher in that cause. As soon as he was settled at Dublin, Miss, or Mrs. Johnson, removed from the country to be near him, but they still lived in separate houses; his residence being at the deanery, and hers in lodgings on the other side of the river Liffy. The dean kept two public days every week, on which the dignity of his station was sustained with the utmost elegance and decorum, under the direction of Mrs. Johnson. As to his employment at home, he seems to have had no heart to apply himself to study of any kind, but to have resigned himself wholly to such amusements and such company as offered, that he might not think of his situation, the misfortunes of his friends, and his disappointments. “I was three years,” says he to Gay, “reconciling myself to the scene and business to which fortune had condemned me; and stupidity was what 1 had recourse to.”

This brought Mr. Synge to Dublin, though without any addition of income, or relaxation from labour, for the chancellor of St. Patrick’s, as such, has the care of the parish of St. Werburgh, one of the most populous in Dublin. This great cure Mr. Synge served for eight years, preaching almost constantly to a crowded audience. During this period he took his degree of D. D. and a new convocation being summoned in 1713, he was chosen proctor for the chapter of St. Patrick’s. On Dr. Sterne’s promotion to the see of Dromore, the archbishop of Dublin appointed Dr. Synge his vicar-general, in which office he continued until he was made bishop of Raphoe, in 17 14. His distinguished zeal for the revolution, and the Hanover succession, which had effectually obstructed his preferment in the latter years of queen Anne’s reign, now as effectually promoted it, for, in 1716, he was made archbishop of Tuam, over which see he presided about twentyfive years. He died at Tuam, July 24, 1741, aged eightytwo, and was buried in the church-yard of his own cathedral.

, professor of medicine and anatomy in the university of Bologna, was born in that city in 1546, and died there Nov. 7, 1599, in the fifty-third year of his age. There is little recorded of his life; his fame depends on his having practised the art of restoring lost parts of the body by insition, particularly the nose, which has been a topic of ridicule ever since it was mentioned by Butler in his Hudibras^ “So learned Taliacotius from, &c.” Addison has also a humorous paper on the same subject in the Tatler (No. 260), and Dr. Grey some remarks in his notes on Hudibras. Taliacotius, however, was not the inventor of this art, for he allows that Alexander Benedictus and Vesalius had given some account of the same art before him, and Ambrose Pare mentions a surgeon who practised it much and successfully. Charles Bernard, serjeant-surgeon to queen Anne, asserts, that though those who have not examined the history may be sceptics, there are incontestable proofs that this art was actually practised with dexterity and success. Other writers have doubted whether Taliacotius did more than write on the theory, but there seems no foundation for depriving him of the honours of success in practice also. Our readers may, indeed, satisfy themselves as to the practicability of the art, as far as the nose is concerned, by perusing a very recent treatise, “An account of two successful operations for restoring a lost Nose, from the integuments of the forehead, in the cases of two officers of his majesty’s army,” by J. C. Carpue, surgeon, 1815, 4to. The lips and ears were the other parts which Taiiacotius professed to restore; and his writings on the subject are, 1. “Epistola ad Hieronymum Merculiarem de naribus, multo ante abscissis> reficiendis,” Francf. 1587, 8vo. 2. “De Curtorum Chirurgia per insitionem libri duo/ 7 Venice, 1597, fol. and reprinted at Francfort, 1598, 8vo, under the title” Chirurgia nova de narium, aurium, labiorumque defectu, per insitionem cutis ex humero, arte hactenus omnibus ignota, sarciendo." The magistrates of Bologna had such a high opinion of Taliacotius’s success, that they erected a statue of him, holding a nose in his hand.

, an admired general, and mareschal of France, was born Feb. 14, 1652, the son of Roger d'Hostun, marquis of la Beaume. Like other young nobles of France, he chose the army for his profession, and at the age of sixteen had the royal regiment of Cravates, in which command he signalized himself for ten years. In 1672 he attended Louis XIV. into Holland, obtained soon after the confidence of Turenne, and distinguished himself on several occasions. He was raised to the rank of lieutenant-general in 1693, and in 1697 was employed in an embassy to England. On the renewal of war, he commanded on the Rhine in 1702, and soon after was created mareschal of France. He distinguished himself in the ensuing year against the Imperialists, and gained a brilliant advantage, which, however, he rather disgraced by his pompous manner of announcing it. He was less fortunate in 1704, when being engaged against the English in the plains of Hochstedt, near Blenheim, he was defeated and brought a prisoner to England, where he remained for seven years. Soon after this battle, he said, in a kind of peevish compliment to the duke of Marlborough, “Your grace has defeated the finest troops in Europe” “You will except, 1 hope,” said the duke, “the troops who beat them.” His residence in England, say the French historians, was not without its use to France; as he very much assisted in detaching queen Anne from tha party of the allies, and causing the recall of the duke of Marlborough. He returned to Paris in 1712, and was created a duke. In 1726 he was named secretary of state, which honour he did not long retain, but died March 3, 1723, at the age of seventy-six. He was a man of good talents and character; his chief fault being that he was rather inclined to boasting.

, one of the greatest musicians of this country, or of Europe, in his time, flourished about the middle of the sixteenth century. He is said to have been organist of the royal chapel to king Henry VIII. king, Edward VI. queen Mary, and queen Elizabeth; but the inscription on his grave-stone warrants no such assertion. In the two reigns of Edward VI. and queen Mary, he was simply a gentleman of the chapel, and served for sevenpence halfpenny a day; but under Elizabeth, he and Bird were gentlemen of the chapel and organists. The studies of Tall is seem to have been wholly devoted to the service of the church, for his name is not to be found to any musical compositions of songs, ballads, madrigals, or any of those lighter kigds of music framed with a view to private recreation. Of the many disciples who had profited by his instruction, Bird seems to have possessed the greatest share of his affection, one proof of which was a joint publication by them of one of the noblest collections of hymns and other compositions for the service of the church that ever appeared in any age or country. This was printed by Vautrollier in 1575, with the title of “Cantiones qua? ab argumento sacrae vocantur quinque et sex partium, Autoribus Thomas T-allisio et Gulielmo Birdo, Anglis, sefenissimse reginee majestati a privato sacello generosis et organistis,” and was published under the protection of a patent of queen Elizabeth, the first of the kind that had ever been granted.

Though it has been commonly said that Tallis was organist to Henry VIII. and the three succeeding princes his descendants, it may well be doubted whether any \-ayman were employed in that office till the beginning of the reign of queen Elizabeth, when Tallis and Bird were severally appointed organists of the royal chapel. Notwithstanding he was a diligent collector of musical antiquities, and a careful peruser of the works of other men, the compositions of Tallis, learned and elegant as they are, are so truly original, that he may justly be said to be the father of the cathedral style; and, though a like appellation is given by the Italians to Palestrina, it is much to be questioned, considering the time when Tallis flourished, whether he could derive the least advantage from the improvements of that great man. Perhaps he laid the foundation of his studies in the works of the old cathedralists of this kingdom, and probably in those of the German musicians, who in his time had the pre-eminence of the Italians; and that he had an emulation to excel even these, may be presumed from the following particular. John Okenheim, a native of the Low Countries, and a disciple of Iodocus Pratensis, had made a composition for no fewer than thirty-six voices, which, Glareanus says, was greatly admired. Tallis composed a motet in forty parts, the history of which stupendous composition, as far as it can now be traced, i< ^iven by sir John Hawkins. Notwithstanding his supposed attachment to the Romish religion, it seems that Tallis accommodated himself and his studies to the alterations introduced at the reformation. With this view, he set to music those several parts of the English liturgy, which at that time were deemed the mojt proper to be sung, namely, the two morning services, the one comprehending the “Veriite Exultemus,” “Te Deum,” and “Benedictus” and the other, which is part of the communion-office, consisting of the “Kyrie Eleison,” “Nicene Creed,” and “Sanctus:” as also the evening service, containing the “Magnificat,” and “Nunc dimittis.” All these are comprehended in that which is called Tallis’s first service, as being the first of two composed by htm. He also set musical notes to the Preces ftnd Responses, and composed that Litany which for its excellence is sung on solemn occasions in all places where the choral service is performed. As to the Preces of Tallis in his first service, they are no other than those of Marbeck in his book of Common-prayer noted: the Responses are somewhat different in the tenor part, which is supposed to contain the melody; but Tallis has improved them by the addition of three parts, and has thus formed a judicious contrast between the supplications of the priest and the suffrages of the people as represented by the choir. The services of Tallis contain also chants for the “Venite Kxultemus,' 1 and the” Creed of St. Athanasius:" these are tunes that divide each verse of the psalm or hymn according to the pointing, to the end that the whole may be sung alternately by the choir, as distinguished by the two sides of the dean and thfe chanter. Two of these chants are published in Dr. Boyce’s Cathedral Music, vol. I. The care of selecting from the Common-prayer the offices most proper to be sung was a matter of some importance, especially as the rubric contains no directions about it; for this reason it is supposed that the musical part of queen Elizabeth’s liturgy was settled by Parker, archbishop of Canterbury, who was not only a great divine, an excellent canonlawyer and ritualist, and a general scholar, but also a skilful musician. Besides the offices above-mentioned, constituting what are now termed the Morning, Communion, and Evening Services, in four parts, with the Preces, Responses, and Litany, Tailis composed many anthems. He died Nov. 23, 1585, and was buried in the parishchurch of Greenwich in Kent; where there is a brass plate for him in the chancel; the inscription on which was repaired by dean Aldrich, and may be seen in Strype’s Stow, but no memorial now remains,

, an excellent antiquary, was the son of a father of both his names, vicar of Market Lavington in Wilts, and was born in 1674. He became a student in Queen’s-college, Oxford, in Michaelmas-term, 1689; admitted clerk in that house, 1690; B. A. 1693; entered into holy orders at Christmas, 1694; and became chaplain of All-souls-college in January following; chosen fellow of the same, 1697; chancellor of Norfolk, and rector of Thorpe near Norwich in 1701. He was installed prebendary of Ely, Sept. 10, 1713, (which he quitted in 1723); made archdeacon of Norfolk, Dec. 7, 1721 canon of Christ-church, Feb. 3, 1723-4; and prolocutor of the lower house of convocation, which was convened anno 1727. To this honour he was unanimously elected on account of his great abilities, however contrary to his own inclinations; and was consecrated bishop of St. Asaph, Jan. 23, 1732. Bishop Tanner died at Christ-church, Oxford, Dec. 14, 1735; and was buried in the nave of that cathedral, near the pulpit; without any funeral pomp, according to his own direction. He ordered his body to be wrapped up in the coarsest crape, and his coffin to be covered with serge, not cloth: the pall-bearers to have each of them one of Baskett’s folio bibles; the underbearers a Sherlock upon Death; to the dean of Christchurch, he left five pounds; to the eight canons five shillings each; eighty pounds to buy coats for eighty poor men; and one hundred pounds to the college, towards their library then building. A monument to his memory is affixed to one of the pillars, with an inscription. Another in>cription, and a translation of it, may be seen in the “Anecdotes of Bowyer.” He was thrice married, first, to Rose, eldest daughter of Dr. Moore, bishop of Ely, and by <her, who died March 15, 1706, aged twenty-five, he had a daughter who died in her infancy; secondly, to Frances, daughter of Mr. Jacob Preston, citizen of London. She died June 11, 1718, aged forty, and left two daughters, who both died young, and his son and heir, the rev. Thomas Tanner, who died in 1760, at that time precentor of St. Asaph, rector of Kessingland, and vicar of Lowestoff. The bishop married, thirdly, in 1733, Miss Elizabeth Scottow, of Thorpe, near Norwich, with a fortune of 15,000l. She survived him, and married Robert Britiffe, esq. recorder of Norwich, and M. P. She died in 1771.

, an English lawyer and antiquary, the son of Bartholomew Tate, of Delapre, in Northamptonshire, was born in that county in 1560, and entered of Magdalen college, Oxford, in 1577. After some application to study he left the university without taking a degree, went to the Middle Temple, and after his admission to the bar, acquired great reputation as a counsellor, not only learned in the law, but as a good antiquary, and Saxon scholar. He had a seat in parliament about the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, and in the 5th James I. was Lent-reader of the Middle Temple, and about that time became one of the justices itinerant for Wales. He died Nov. 16, 1616, leaving various manuscripts on legal antiquities, the fate of which seems unknown, but the following have been printed in Gutch’s “Collectanea Curiosa:” 1. “The antiquity, use, and privileges of Cities, Boroughs, and Towns.” 2. “The antiquity, use, and ceremonies of lawful Combats in England.” And in Hearne’s “Curious Discourses” are, 3. “Of Knights made by Abbots. 4.” Questions about the ancient Britons.“5.” Of the antiquity of Arms in England.“6.” Of the antiquity, variety and ceremonies of Funerals in England“and 7.” The antiquity, authority, and succession of the High Steward of England."

His son, Nahum, at the age of sixteen, was admitted of Dublin college, but does not appear to have followed any profession. It is observed by Warburton, in the notes to the Dunciad, that he was a cold writer, of no invention, but translated tolerably when befriended by Dryden, with whom he sometimes wrote in conjunction. He succeeded Shad well as poet-laureat, and continued in that office till his death, which happened Aug. 12, 1715, in the Mint, where he then resided as a place of refuge from the debts which he had contracted, and was buried in St. George’s church. The earl of Dorset was his patron; but the chief use he made of him was to screen himself from the persecutions of his creditors. Gildon speaks of him as a man of great honesty and modesty; but he seems to have been ill qualified to advance himself in the world, A person who died in 1763, at the age of ninety, remembered him well, and said he was remarkable for a down-cast look, and had seldom much to say for himself. Oidys also describes him as a free, good-natured, but intemperate companion. With these qualities it will not appear surprising that he was poor and despised. He was the author of nine dramatic performances, and a great number of poems; but is at present better known for his version of the Psalms, in which he joined with Dr. Brady, than any other of his works. His miscellaneous poems are enumerated in Gibber’s <c Lives,“and by Jacob, who says Tate’s poem on the Death of queen Anne, which was one of the last, is” one of the best poems he ever wrote.“His share in the” Second Part of Absalom and Achitophel“is far from inconsiderable; and may be seen in the English Poets. He published also” Memorials for the Learned, collected out of eminent authors in history,“&c. 1686, 8vo and his” Proposal for regulating of the Stage and Stage Plays," Feb. 6, 1698, is among bishop Gibson’s Mss. in the Lambeth library.

, a pious layman of the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth, descended from an ancient family in Norfolk, and was the eldest son of John Taverner of Brisley, where he was born in 1505. He is said to have studied logic for some time in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge, and, if so, must have been contemporary with archbishop Parker. He afterwards removed to Oxford, and was one of the learned scholars invited by cardinal Wolsey to his new college there. Wood informs us that he took the degree of A. B. on May 21, 1527, and that of A.M. in 1530, having been made one of the junior canons the year before. Having thus acquired a competent knowledge in the sciences and learned languages, he studied law in the Inner Temple. In 1534 he was introduced to court, and being taken into the service of sir Thomas Cromwell, principal secretary of state, he was recommended by him to the king for one of the clerks of the signet in 1537, which place he held until the reign of queen Mary, notwithstanding his commitment to the Tower about four years after for “slandering the ladie Anne of Cleve,” or rather on account of his being deemed one of the gospellers, as they were termed, of his college. He certainly was a friend to the reformation, and in order to promote it undertook a new translation or edition of the English bible, “recognized with great diligence after most faithful examples,” Lond. 1539, fol. It was dedicated to the king, and allowed to be read in churches. But in 1545, his patron, lord Cromwell, being then dead, the popish bishops caused the printers to be imprisoned and punished; and the editor himself also was committed to the Tower. Here however he acquitted himself so well, that he was not only soon after released, but restored again to the king’s favour, and chosen a member of parliament in 1545. Bale calls Taverner’s edition of the Bible, “Sacrortim Bibliorum recognitio, seu potius versio nova;” but it is neither a bare revisal of the preceding editions, nor a new version, but between both. It is a correction of what is called Matthewe’s Bible; many of whose marginal notes are adopted, and many omitted, and others inserted by the editor. Archbishop Newcome thinks it probable that Taverner’s patron, Cromwell, encouraged him to undertake this work, on account of his skill in the Greek tongue; but it is more probable that he was principally induced to it by the printers, as we learn from a passage in the dedication, in which, after telling the king that a correct or faultless translation of the Bible must be the production of many learned men, and of much time and leisure, he adds; “but forasmuch as the printers were very desirous to have the Bible come forth as faultless and emendately as the shortness of the time for the recognising of the same would require, they desired him, for default of a better learned, diligently to overlook and peruse the whole copy, and, in case he should find any notable default that needed correction, to amend the same, &c.”

On the accession of king Edward, Taverner, although a layman, had a special licence in 1552 to preach throughout the king’s dominions. Good preaching was at that time so very scarce, that not only the king’s chaplains were obliged to make circuits round the country to instruct the people, and to fortify them against popery, but even laymen, who were scholars, were employed for that purpose. From this however he was obliged to desist when queen Mary came to the throne, and therefore retired to Norbiton hall, near Kingston in Surry, where he lived quietly during the whole of her reign. As soon as Elizabeth became queen, to whom he presented a congratulatory epistle in Latin upon that happy occasion, he resumed his preaching in Oxford and elsewhere. Her majesty had a high respect for him, and besides offering him knighthood (which Tanner thinks he accepted), put him into the commission of the peace for the county of Oxford. Here numerous concerns were intrusted to him, and in 1569, he was made high sheriff of the county. His zeal was still warm against popery, probably owing to the frightful effects of popish bigotry which he had witnessed in Mary’s reign, and notwithstanding his new office, he continued his preaching. Even while high sheriff, he appeared in St. Mary’s pulpit, with his gold chain about his neck, and his sword by his side, and is said to have begun one of his sermons in the following words “Arriving at the mount of St. Mary’s, in the stony stage where I now stand, I have brought you some fine biskets, baked in the oven of charity, and carefully conserved for the chickens of the church, the sparrows of the spirit, and the sweet swallows of salvation.” This style was much admired in his days even by the generality of the scholars, and indeed such alliteration was long afterwards a favourite both with speakers and hearers. He also endeavoured to promote the reformation by his writings and translations; of which, besides his Bible, we have the following list: 1. “The sum and pith of CL Psalms of David, reduced into a form of prayers and meditations, with certain other godly orisons,” Lond. 1539, 8vo. 2. “The Epistles and Gospels, with a brief postill upon the same, from Advent to Low Sunday; and from Easter to Advent,” Lond. 1540, two parts, 4to. 3. “Fruit of Faith, contain* ing all the prayers of the patriarchs, &c. in the Old and New Testament,” ibid, 1582, 12mo. 4. “The Garden of Wysdome, &c. containing the sayings of princes, philosophers, &c.” 1539, 2 books. 5. “Flores aliquot sententiarum ex variis scriptoribus,” translated from Erasmus. 6. “Catonis Disticha Moralia,” Lond. 1553, 8vo, 1555, 4to. 7. “In Mimum Publianum lib. 1,” 1562. 8. “Catednsmus fidei.” 9. “Proverbs or adagies gathered out of the Chiliades of Erasmus,” 1515. His translations were, “Grostete’s Prayers on the Psalms” “Confession of the Germans, with the apology of Melancthon,” and some tracts from Erasmus.

In the latter part of his life, Taverner lived at a seat he had built at Woodeaton in Oxfordshire, whence he dates a letter to archbishop Parker in 1562, excusing himself from lending the queen 100l., from inability at that time. He died at this place, July 14, 1575, in the seventieth year of his age, and was buried in the chancel of the church with great solemnity. He married two wives, Margaret the daughter of Walter Lambert, esq. and after her decease, Mary, the daughter of sir John Harcourt, and had issue by both. Ward gives some account of his family and descendants in his “Lives of the Gresham Professors.”

, usually called the Water- Poet, from his being a waterman as well as a poet, and certainly more of the former than the latter, was born in Gloucestershire about 1580. Wood says he was born in the city of Gloucester, and went to school there, but he does not appear to have learned more than his accidence, as appears by some lines of his own. From this school he was brought to London, and bound apprentice to a waterman, whence he“was either pressed or went voluntarily into the naval service, for he was at the taking of Cadiz un;ler the earl of Essex, in 1596, when only sixteen years old, and was afterward* in Germany, Bohemia, Scotland, as may be collected from various passages in his works. At home he was many years collector, for the lieutenant of the Tower, of the wines which were his fee from all ships which brought them up the Thames; but was at last discharged because he would not purchase the place at more than it was worth. He calls himself the” King’s Water Poet,“and the” Queen’s Waterman," and wore the badge of the royal arms. While * waterman, he very naturally had a great hatred to coaches, and besides writing a satire against them, he fancied that the watermen were starving for want of employment, and presented a petition to James I. which was referred to certain commissioners, of whom sir Francis Bacon was one, to obtain a prohibition of all play-houses except those on the Bank-side, that the greater part of the inhabitants of London, who were desirous of seeing plays, might be compelled to go by water. Taylor himself is said to have undertaken to support this singular petition, and was prepared to oppose before the commissioners the arguments of the players, but the commission was dissolved before it came to a hearing.

, one of the most eminent and learned of the puritan divines, was born at Richmond in Yorkshire, in 1576, and was educated at Christ’s-college, Cambridge, of which he became a fellow, and acquired great fame for his literary accomplishments. He was chosen Hebrew lecturer of his college. At what time he took holy orders is not mentioned, but he appears to have incurred censure for non-conformity in one or two instances. On leaving the university, he settled first at Watford in Hertfordshire, then at Reading in Berkshire, and afterwards, in 1625, he obtained the living of St. Mary Alderm anbury, London, which he retained for the remainder of his life, lu his early days he had preached at Paul’s cross before queen Elizabeth, and afterwards before king James, and was every where admired and followed for the plainness, perspicuity, and soundness of his doctrines, and the great zeal and earnestness with which he laboured in the pastoral office for the space of thirty years. While he partook of the zeal, common to all his brethren, against popery, he was also an avowed enemy to Arminianism and Antinomianism. He died in the beginning of 1632, in the fifty-fifth year of his^ge, and was interred in St. Mary’s church. Leigh, Fuller, Wood, and all his contemporaries unite in giving him a high character for learning, piety, and usefulness. He was likewise a voluminous writer; his works, most of them printed separately, were collected in 3 vols. fol. 1659. They consist of commentaries, which were generally the substance of what he had preached on particular parts of scripture; and single sermons, or treatises. He and Dr. Thomas Beard of Huntingdon, were joint compilers of that singular and once very popular collection of stories, entitled “The Theatre of God’s Judgments,” 1648, &c. fol.

, a very eminent statesman and writer, was the son of sir William Temple, of Sheen, in Surrey, master of the rolls and privy-counsellor in Ireland, 1 in the reign of Charles II. by a sister of the learned Dr.' Henry Hammond. His grandfather, sir William Temple, the founder of the family, was the younger son of the Temples, of Temple-hall, in Leicestershire. He was fellow of King’s college, in Cambridge, afterwards master of the free-school at Lincoln, then secretary successively to sir Philip Sidney, to William Davison, esq. one of queen Elizabeth’s secretaries, and to the celebrated earl of Essex, whom he served while he was lord-deputy of Ireland. In 1609, upon the importunate solicitation of Dr. James Usher, he accepted the provostship of Trinity college, in Dublin; after which he was knighted, and made one of the masters in chancery of Ireland. He died about 1626, aged sevetity-two, after having given proof of his abilities and learning, by several publications in Latin.

In the succeeding reign, Dr. Tenison is said to have acquired favour at court, on account of his moderation towards the dissenters. He was one of those who dwelt fondly on the hopes of a comprehension, as it was called, to be effected partly by a review of the Liturgy. Immediately after the revolution, he was promoted to be archdeacon of London, and was appointed one of the commissioners to prepare matters towards reconciling the dissenters for the convocation. He even wrote a defence of it, entitled “A Discourse on the Ecclesiastical commission, proving it agreeable to the word of God, useful to the convocation, &c.” 1689, 4to, but he soon found the main object to be unattainable, neither party being satisfied with the proposed alterations in the liturgy. It was this endeavour to conciliate the dissenters which is said to have induced queen Mary to solicit that he might have the bishopric of Lincoln, to which he was accordingly nominated Nov. 25, 1691, and consecrated at Lambeth, Jan. 10 following. The writer of his life, in 8vo, tells us that the earl of Jersey, then master of the horse to her majesty, endeavoured as much as possible to prejudice Dr. Tenison in her majesty’s opinion, in order to gain her interest for his friend Dr. John Scott, rector of St. Giles’s in the fields; and represente*d to her majesty, who was speaking of Dr. Tenison in terms of respect, that he had preached a funeral sermon, in which he had spoken favourably of Mrs. Eleanor Gwyn, one of king Charles lid’s mistresses. “What then” said the queen, “I have heard as much. This is a sign, that that poor unfortunate woman died penitent; for if I can read a man’s heart through his looks, had she not made a truly pious and Christian end, the doctor could never have been induced to speak well of her.”

Soon after his promotion to the archbishopric, queen Mary was seized with the small pox, which proved fatal, and at her desire archbishop Tenison attended her during her illness, was present at her death, and preached a fr.nrral sermon, which is said to have given seme offence, and was severely censured in a letter to his grace by Dr. Ken, the deprived bishop of Bath and Wells, who maintained that the archbishop was guilty of neglect of duty in not having represented to her majesty when on her death-bed “the great guilt she lay under by her conduct at the revolution.” Of this letter, Dr. Tenison took no notice, for which few will now blame him. A “Defence of his Sermon” was afterwards published by his friend Dr. John Williams. But if Dr. Tenison failed in bringing the queen to repentance for “the revolution,” he is said to have produced some good effects on the king’s disposition. When the queen died, William was deeply affected, and impressed with very serious notions, which, we are told, Dr. Tenison encouraged, and in one instance (the king’s illicit connection with lady Villiers) urged the heinousness of that crime with such power, that, if we may believe Whiston, his majesty promised never to see that lady more. The archbishop is also said to have been instrumental in healing some differences in the royal family, especially respecting the settlement of the princess Anne of Denmark.

In 1700, his grace obtained a commission, authorizing him, jointly with the archbishop of York, and four other prelates, viz. Burnet of Salisbury, Lloyd of Worcester, Patrick of Ely, and Moor of Norwich, to recommend to his majesty, proper persons for all the ecclesiastical preferments in his gift, above the value of 20l. per aim. in the book of first fruits and tenths. He continued in the same favour at court until the death of king William, whom he constantly attended in his illness, and prevailed with him to put the last hand to a bill for the better security of the protestant succession. In consequence of his station, he had the honour of crowning queen Anne, but did not enjoy much favour at her court. During the first three years of her reign he steadily opposed the bill to prevent occasional conformity. At the same time he was not neglectful of what concerned the welfare of the established church, and engaged Dr. White Kennet, afterwards bishop of Peterborough, to write “The case of Impropriations, &c.” in consequence of the queen’s having given the first fruits for augmenting the maintenance of the poorer clergy. In 1705, he wrote a letter to the princess Sophia, acquainting her with his own zeal in particular, and that of her friends, for the security of the Hanover succession, to which he received an answer, in which her highness gave some intimation of her desire to come to England at that juncture. This letter of hers was published some time after, together with one from sir Rowland Gwynn to the earl of Stamford, upon the same subject of the princess’s coming over; which last being voted by both houses to be a scandalous libel, tending to create misunderstandings between her majesty and the princess Sophia, the publisher, Charles Gildon, was fined \00l. by the court of queen’s bench. But notwithstanding that our archbishop’s zeal in this matter could not be very agreeable to her majesty, who was always averse to the notion of a visit from the electress, yet in April 1706 he was nominated first commissioner in the treaty of union between England and Scotland. The same year, he concurred with the majority of the lords in their resolution against those who insinuated that “the church was in danger.”

On the death of queen Anne he was appointed one of the three officers of state in whose hands were lodged, by authority of parliament, one of those instruments empowering her successor, if abroad at the time of her demise, to appoint such regents as he should think proper, to continue the administration in his name till his arrival. He bad afterwards the honour of crowning George I. and of being admitted to a private conference with him. This was, however, his last attendance on that prince, as his infirmities, and particularly frequent attacks of the gout, rendered it necessary for him to live as retired as possible at his palace at Lambeth, where he died Dec. 14, 1715, in the seventyninth year of his age. He was interred privately in the chancel of the church of Lambeth, and in the same vault 'with his wife, who died the preceding year, leaving him without issue. By his will he bequeathed very large sums to charitable purposes, and proved a liberal benefactor to Bene't college, Cambridge, the library of St. Paul’s cathedral, the society for the propagation of the gospel, queen Anne’s bounty, Bromley college, &c. The residue of his fortune, which was very considerable, he ordered to be equally divided among the children of his kinsmen, Dr. Edward Tenison (afterwards bishop of Ossory), Mr. Richard Tubby, and Mr. George Fage.

, a writer of some note in the 16th century, was horn at Angflulesme, and entered the Franciscan order, and afterwards visited Italy, the Holy Land, Egypt, Greece, and Brasil. At his return to France in 1556, he quitted the cordelier’s habit, took that of an ecclesiastic, and was appointed almoner to queen Catherine de Medicis. He had the titles of historiographer of France, and cosmographer to the king, and received the profits of those offices. He died Nov. 23, 1590, aged eighty-tight, leaving “Cosmographie de Levant,” Lyons, 1554, 4to; “A History of illustrious Men/' 1671, 8 vols. 12mo, or 1684, 2 vols. fol. a work of very little merit; but the folio edition is esteemed of some price on account of the portraits. He wrote also” Singularity’s de la France Aniarctique," Paris, 1558, 4to, and several other books, from which the author appears to have been a great reader, but at the same time, to have possessed great credulity, and little judgment.

, LL. D. a very ingenious and learned English critic, was the son of Mr. Thirlby, vicar of St. Margaret’s in Leicester, and born about 1692. He received his education first at the free-school of Leicester, under the rev. Mr. Kiiby, then head usher, from which school he was sent in three years to Jesus college, Cambridge, and shewed early in life great promise of excellence. From his mental abilities no small degree of future eminence was presaged: but the fond hopes of his friends were unfortunately defeated by a temper which was naturally indolent and quarrelsome, and by an unhappy addiction to drinking. Among his early productions of ingenuity was a Greek copy of verses on the queen of Sheba’s visit to Solomon. In 1710 he published “The university of Cambridge vindicated from the imputation of disloyalty it lies under on account of not addressing; as also from the malicious and foul aspersions of Dr. Bentley, late master of Trinity college, and of a certain officer and pretended reformer in. the said university,” Lond. 1710. This was followed in 1712 by “An answer to Mr. Whiston’s seventeen suspicions concerning Athanasius, in his Historical Preface ,” and by two other pamphlets on the same subject. He obtained a fellowship of his college by the express desire of Dr. Charles Ashton, who said“he had had the honour of studying with him when young;” though he afterwards spoke very contemptuously of him as the editor of “Justin Martyr,” which appeared in 1723, in folio; and the dedication to which has always been consid-‘M’ed as a masterly production, in style particularly. After Thirlby’s publication of Justin, Dr. Ashton, perhaps to shew him that he had not done all that might have been done, published, in one of the foreign journals, “Some emendations of faulty passages,” which when Thirlby he said, slightingly, that “any man who would, might have made them, and a hundred more.” Thus far MI. Thirlby went on in the study of divinity; hut his versatility led him to try the round of the other learned professions. His next pursuit was physic, and for a while he was called “Doctor.” While he was a nominal physician, he lived some time with the duke of Chandos, as librarian, and is reported to have affected a perverse and indolent independence, so as capriciously to refuse his company when) it was desired. It may be supposed they were soon weary of each other.

, bishop of Rochester, the eldest of three sons of the rev. John Tnomas, many years vicar of Brampton in Cumberland, was born at Carlisle Oct. 14, 1712. Many of his ancestors, both on the paternal and maternal side, were remarkable for their longevity; so that he might be considered as “born with somewhat like an hereditary claim to length of days.” Being designed for the church, at a proper age he was placed in the grammar-school at Carlisle, whence he was sent to Oxford, in 1730, and, on the 23d of November, was admitted a commoner of Queen’s-college. Soon after his admission he had a clerkship given him by Dr. Smith, then provost. Having discharged this office, and completed his terms, he put on a civilian’s gown, and, leaving Oxford, became an assistant at the classical academy in Soho-square. In this situation he acquitted himself so well, as to be recommended to be private tutor to the younger son of sir William Clayton, bart. a charge which led to his future elevation. How long he remained in it, is not precisely known, but probably till he had completed his pupil’s education. His conduct, however, was so well approved, that shortly after, with the consent of sir William Clayton, the sister of his pupil, on the death of her first husband, sir Charles Blackwell, of Sprowston-hall, Norfolk, became his wife. Mr. Thomas lived in habits of the closest friendship with his brother-in-law, until about 1784, when that gentleman met a premature death, occasioned by a fall from his horse.

, a learned writer of the sixteenth century, was born in Wales, and was at least of Welsh extraction, and educated at Oxford. Wood says that one of both his names was, in 1529, admitted bachelor of canon law, but does not say that it was this person. In 1544, being obliged to quit the kingdom on account of some misfortune, he went to Italy, and in 1546 was at Bologne, and afterwards ai Padua. In 151-9, he was again in London, and on account of his knowledge of modern languages, was made clerk of the council to king Edward VI. who soon after gave him a prebend of St. Paul’s, and the living of Presthend in South Wales. According to Strype, he acted very unfairly in procuring the prebend, not being a spiritual person; and the same objection undoubtedly rests against his other promotion. On the accession of queen Mary, he was deprived of his employment at court, and is said to have meditated the death of the queen; but Bale says it was Gardiner whom he formed a design of murderiug. Others think that he was concerned in Wyat’s rebellion. It is certain that for some of these charges, he was committed to the Tower in 1553, together with William Winter and sir Nicholas Throgmorton. Wood says, “He was a man of a hot fiery spirit, had sucked in damnable principles by his frequent conversations with Christopher Goodman, that violent enemy to the rule of women.” It appears that he had no rule over himself, for about a week after his commitment, he attempted suicide, but the wound not proving mortal, he was arraigned at Guildhall, May 9, 1553, and hanged at Tyburn, on the 18th.

, bishop of Worcester, was son of Mr. John Thomas, a linen-draper in the city of Bristol, who lived in a house of his own on the bridge in that town, where the bishop was born on Thursday, February 2, 1613, and baptized there in St. Nicholas’s church, on the Friday following. He was of a very ancient and noble family, as appears by a pedigree taken out of the Heralds’ -office by William Thomas lord bishop of Worcester in 1688, to prove his right to the Herbert arms. His mother was Elizabeth Blount, descended from the Blounts of Eldersfield, in the county of Worcester. His grandfather, William Thomas, was recorder of Carmarthen, where he and his family had for a long time lived in great credit; and the earl of Northampton, then lord president of Wales, gave him this character, “that he was the wisest and most prudent person he ever knew member of a corporation:” this gentleman, after the death of their son, undertook the care of his grandson; which trust he executed with the greatest care and attention, placing him under the tuition of Mr. Morgan Owen, master of the public school at Caermarthen, afterwards bishop of Landaff: here he continued till he went to St. John’s college, Oxford, in the sixteenth year of his age, in Michaelmas term, 1629; from hence he removed to Jesus college, where he tqok his degree of B, A. 1632, and soon after was chosen fellow of the college, and appointed tutor by the principal. Here, according to the fashion of the times, he studied much school philosophy and divinity, epitomizing with his own hand all the works of Aristotle: he took his degree of M.A. Feb. 12, 1634, was ordained deacon by John Bancroft, bishop of Oxford, at Christ Church, June 4, 1637, and priest in the year following at the same place, and by the same bishop. Soon, after he was appointed vicar of Penbryn, in Cardiganshire, and chaplain to the earl of Northumberland, who presen ed him to the vicarage of Laugharn, with the rectory of Lansedurnen annexed. This presentation being disputed, he determined to give it up; but the earl encouraged him to persevere, assuring him that he would be at all the expence and trouble: in consequence of which, the dispute was soon ended, and Mr. Thomas instituted: here he determined to reside, having no other thought but how best to perform his duty; and that he might be more fixed, and avoid the inconveniences of a solitary single life, he resolved to marry. The person he chose was Blanch Samyne, daughter of Mr. Peter Samyne, a Dutch merchant in Lime-street, London, of an ancient and good family, by whom he had eight children; William, who died young, Peter, John, Blanch, Bridget, William, Sarah, and Elizabeth. Here he religiously performed every duty of a parish priest, esteeming his employment not a trade, but a trust, till about 1644, a party of the parliament horse came to Langharn, and inquired whether that popish priest Mr. Thomas was still there, and whether he continued reading the liturgy, and praying for the queen; and one of them adding, that he should go to church next Sunday, and it' Mr. Thomas persevered in praying for that drab or the whore of Babylon, he would certainly pistol him. Upon this, Mr. Thomas’s friends earnestly pressed him to absent himself; but he refused, thinking it would be a neglect of duty. He no sooner began the service, than the soldiers came and placed themselves in the next pew to him, and when he prayed for the queen, one of them snatched the book out of his hand, and threw it at his head, saying, “What do you mean by praying for a whore and a rogue?” The preacher bore it with patience and composure; but the soldier who had committed the affront was instantly seized with such anxiety and compunction, that his companions were forced to carry him away. Mr. Thomas continued the service, and delivered the sermon with his usual emphasis and 'propriety; and when he returned to his house, he there found the soldiers ready to beg his pardon, and desiring his prayers to God for them. When this happened, he was about thirty-three years old. Soon after, the parliament committee deprived him of the living of Laugharn; and though a principal member of that body had been his pupil and particular friend, yet he refused to shew him any favour, saying, “If he was his father, he would do him no service unless he would take the covenant.” From this time till the restoration, Mr. Thomas endured great hardships, being a sufferer to the amount of above fifteen hundred pounds, and, for the support of his family, obliged to teach a private school in the country; and though his friends often made him liberal presents, yet his wiie and numerous family were frequently in want of common necessaries.

While the king was at Worcester, the neighbouring dissenters of all denominations sent their addresses to hira^ which the earl of Plymouth, being lord-lieutenant, was to receive, and to deliver to the king. When he brought the two first the king asked him what religion the men who brought them were of. “Indeed, sir,” replied the lordlieutenant, “I did not ask them; but I know by their looks they are neither of your religion, nor mine.” But now the good bishop’s troubles drew on apace: the penal laws against nonconformists were suspended; and May 4, 1688, the king ordered the bishops to take care that his declaration should be read in the neighbourhood of London, on the 20th and 27th of the said month, and in all other churches and chapels the 3d and 10th of June. The archbishop and six bishops presented a petition against it; the consequence of which was, that they were sent to the Tower; this was a great grief to the bishop, not that he was concerned for any fault or misbehaviour of his brethren, or for the calamity that had befallen them, for he often wished that he had been with them, to bear his testimony in so good a cause, and to have a share with them in their honourable sufferings, but he was troubled to think on that impending storm which he foresaw might fall on the church: however, both he and the dean (Dr. Hickes) resolved not to disperse the declaration, and signified to all the clergy his utter dislike of it. Soon after he received a letter from court, containing a reprimand for not obeying the king’s orders; the answer to which was, as he himself says, without any tincture of collusion, but declaratory of his firm resolution not to comply. Upon king William’s accession, his ill health would not allow him to attend the convention; and indeed he never approved of the prince of Orange’s being declared king, and much less of that act which obliged all persons to take oaths of allegiance to king William and queen Mary, or to forfeit their offices, their livings, and their temporal subsistence. For his own part, he was resolved to forsake all, rather than act con* trary to his former oaths, and homage, which he had paid to king James; and although he writes to Kettlewell, and says, “If my heart do not deceive me, and God’s grace do not fail me, I think I could suffer at a stake rather than take this oath,” yet it does not appear that he used any persuasions to prevent others from taking it, only freely gave his opinion, and advised them sincerely to consult their own consciences. This was what he said to the clergy; and when a grandson of his, Dr. William Thomas, of whom we shall speak hereafter, then a student in Trinity college, Camhridge, consulted him on this critical point, he left him to his own liberty, and the feelings of his own conscience. In one of his sermons he says, “An humble man submits, suspects his own judgment, hath a venerable esteem for his superiors; if startled by any constitutions in church and state, he frequently prays, seriously discourses, modestly counsels with others; if after all expedients he remains dissatisfied, if he cannot swim with the stream, he will not trouble the waters.”

Queen Anne was well disposed to him, and made many inquiries after him, his grandfather the bishop having been formerly her preceptor; but he declined preferment or attendance at court. He married Elizabeth Carter, only daughter of George Carter, esq. of Brill, in the county of Bucks, with whom he had a considerable fortune. By her he had a numerous family, nine daughters and five sons; of the latter one only survived him about eight years, and died unmarried. For the education of this numerous family, Dr. Thomas wished to go to Worcester, which he accordingly did in 1721, and in 1723 was presented to the rectory of St. Nicholas in that city by bishop Hough, to whom he dedicated “Antiquitates Prioratus majoris Malverne,” printed in 1725; his edition of “Dugdale’s Warwickshire in 1730;” and likewise his “Survey of the Cathedral Church of Worcester,” printed in 1736: to Dugdale he made many large and valuable additions, and it is now deservedly a book of great price.

, a scholar and poet of considerable merit, is said to have been the second son of the rev. Francis Thompson, B. D. of Queen’s college, Oxford, and vicar of Brough in Westmoreland, who died August 31, 1735, aged seventy. His mother, who died two years after, in the sixty-fifth year of her age, was the widow of the rev. Joseph Fisher, M. A. fellow of Queen’s college, Ox* ford, vicar of Brough, and archdeacon of Carlisle, by whom she had no children. Our author was born probably in the early part of the last century, but the year cannot be ascertained. He was young, when in 1734 and 1736, he wrote “Stella, Sive Amores, Tres Libri,” and “Six Pastorals,” none of which he thought it proper to include in his published works. In his poem, entitled “Sickness,” he laments the want of a mother’s tenderness, and a father’s care; but, as they died in advanced age, he could not have lost them before he had attained at least his twentieth year.

It was on the banks of the Eden, which runs near Brough, that “his prattling muse was first provoked to numbers,” and where, we may suppose, he wrote most of those smaller pieces which he thought worthy of preservation. In these he frequently addresses an lanthe, who was probably a real mistress. At the usual age he went to Queen’s college, Oxford, and on February 26, 1738, took the degree of master of arts. He afterwards became a fellow of his college, and succeeded to the livings of South Weston and Hampton Poyle, in Oxfordshire. It was probably during his residence on his living that he published “Sickness,” in 1746. The origin of this poem may be found in a note subjoined to the fifth book, but much of it must have been written just before publication, as he pays tribute to the memory of Pope and Swift, who died about that time.

Mr. Thoresby’s widow survived him near fifteen years. By her he had ten children, of whom three only, a daughter and two sons survived him. The eldest son, Ralph, was of Queen’s college, Cambridge, vicar of Rickmansworth in Hertfordshire, and rector of Stoke Newington in Middlesex, where he died in 1763. The younger, Richard, was of Catherine-hall, and rector of St. Catherine Colman, London, and died about 1774.

, an eminent English painter, was born in 1676. He was the son of a gentleman of an ancient family ‘and estate in Dorsetshire but the father’s imprudent conduct having reduced him to sell his estate, the son was uno’er the necessity of seeking for a profession which might support him. He came to London, where the famous physician, Sydenham, who was his uncle, supplied him with the necessary assistances for studying under a middling painter. Such a master, however, doing but little for him, he was driven to trust to his own judgment and application; and having naturally genius and taste, he made, by the strength of these, a surprising progress in the art of painting. He travelled through Holland and Flanders, whence he went into France, and there bought several good pictures; among others, a Virgin, of Annibal Carrache, and the history of Tancred, by Poussin. If he had seen Italy, his works would have had more delicacy and correctness. His only view in travelling seemed to be acquiring a knowledge of the tastes of different nations, and buying up good pictures, in which he was very curious. Thornhill’s merit soon spread his character, and raised his reputation to the greatest height. Queen Anne appointed him to paint, in the dome of St. Paul’s church, the history of that saint, which he executed in a grand and beautiful manner, on eight pannels, in two colours, relieved with told her majesty also nominated him her first historypainter. He afterwards executed several public works, particularly at Hampton-court, where he painted an apartment, in which the queen and prince George of Denmark her husband are represented allegorically; as also another piece painted entirely on the wall, where the same subject is treated in a different manner. The other parts of the paintings there are done by Antonio Verrio, a Neapolitan. He painted also in the chapel at All Souls, Oxford, the portrait of the founder over the altar, and the cieling and figures between the windows; an altar-piece for Weyuriouth church, which was engraved by a young man, his scnolar, whom he set up in business: the hall at Blenheim, tke chapel at lord Oxford’s, at Wimple, in Cambridgeshire, the saloon and other things for Mr. Styles, the then owner of More-park, in Hertfordshire.

These great works, having established his reputation, procured him much employment among people of quality and fortune. His master-piece is the refectory and saloon of the sailors hospital at Greenwich. The passage to this refectory is through a vestibule, where sir James has represented, in two colours, the winds in the cupola; and, on the walls, boys who sustain pannels to receive the inscription of the names of the benefactors. The refectory is a fine gallery, very lofty, in the middle of which king William and queen Mary are allegorically represented sitting, and attended by the virtues and love, who support the sceptre; the monarch appears giving peace to Europe. The twelve signs of the zodiac surround the great oval in which he is painted; the four seasons are seen above: lastly, Apollo drawn by his four horses, making his tour through the zodiac. The painter has represented in the angles the four elements, and between the colossal figures that support the balustrade, the portraits of those able mathematicians, that have perfected the art of navigation, are painted, such as Tycho Brahe, Copernicus, and Newton. The cieling is all by his own hand; but he emploj'ed a Polander to assist him in painting the walls, which he has adorned with allegorical figures suitable to the intention of the fabric, such as Liberality, Hospitality, and Charity. The saloon above is not so beautiful as the refectory; the cieling represents queen Anne and prince George of Denmark, surrounded by heroic virtues; Neptune and his train bringing their marine presents, and the four quarters of the world presenting themselves, in various attitudes, to admire them. George I. is painted on the wall facing the entry, sitting with all his family around him. On the left hand is the landing of king William, on the right that of king George I. at Greenwich. These great works would have been certainly more esteemed if they had all been done by sir James ThornhilPs own hand; they are entirely from his designs; but one cannot help, in looking at them, criticizing their incorrectness; it may even be wished that there were fewer figures. They display, however, great judgment and knowledge in treating the allegory, talents which must necessarily produce great and rich compositions.

During the holding of the states at Blois, he returned to Paris, where he was in danger of losing his life; fur the news of the duke of Guise’s death arriving, all who were of known attachment to the king were obliged to hide themselves. Thuanus was among them, hut happily escaped under the disguise of a soldier. He repaired to the king, who, being removed to Tours, resolved to establish a parliament there, to oppose that of the league; and De Thou would have been made the first president of it, if he had not been fixed against accepting that office; He afterwards accompanied Mr. de Schomberg into Germany, to assist in raising forces for the king, and drawing succours from the German princes he passed by Italy, and was at Venice, when the news of Henry Illd’s death made him immediately return to France. Henry IV. received him very kindly, to whom he gave an exact account of all that had been done, and continued very faithfully in his service; while the king placed the greatest confidence in him, and employed him in many important negotiations. After the battle of Yvry, which Henry IV. gained in 159O, De Thou obtained leave to visit his wife at Senlis, whom he had not seen above a year; and arrived there, after having been detained some time upon the road by a fever. His purpose was to settle at Tours and he was one evening upon the road thither, when a party of the enemy carried off his wife and equipage, while he escaped by the swiftness of his horse, and found ipeaus soon after to recover his lady. In 1592, he had the plague, and despaired of life, but was happily cured by the infusion of bezoarstone into strong waters. The year after, the king made him his first librarian, which place became vacant by the death of the learned James Amyot, famous for his translation of Plutarch and other ancient Greek authors. In 1592, the duke of Guise having made his peace with the king, Thuanus was one of the persons appointed to regulate the conditions of the treaty he became the same year president à mortier by the death of his uucle Augustin de Thou, which honour had long been promised him. He was afterwards concerned in many negotiations with the Protestant party, and was greatly instrumental in bringing forward the edict of Nantes, which was signed in April 1598, and afterwards revoked, as is well known, by Louig XIV. in 1685. In 1601, he lost his wife, whom he immortalized by elegies; but soon after recovered so far from his grief, great as it was, as to take another. During the regency of queen Mary of Medicis, Thuanus was one of the general directors of the finances; and was, to the end of his life, engaged more or less in the service of the state. He died the 17th of May, 1617, and was interred with his fami-ly in the chapel of St. Andrew of the Arches,

, a learned Saxonist, and the descendant of some learned Oxonians, was born in 1667, but where, or where educated, has not been discovered. That he was well grounded in classical learning is evident. He was admitted battler of Queen’s college, Oxford, on Sept. 14, 1689, took his degree of B. A. jn Jan. 1694, and that of M.A. in 1697, and either then or in the following year, was admitted fellow of the college. Queen’s was at this time remarkable for the number of its Saxon scholars, one of the principal of whom was Mr. Thwaites, who so early as 1698 became a preceptor in the Saxon tongue there. The industry of his pupils was great, but they had few helps. In a letter to Wanley, dated March 24, 1698-9, he says, “We want Saxon Lexicons. I have fifteen young students in that language, and but one Somner for them all.” This was undoubtedly a sufficient reason for the patronage he bestowed on Mr. Thomas Benson’s Vocabulary, an epitome of Somner, begun to be printed in small quarto, but which was afterwards printed in 8vo, under the title of“Vocabularium Anglo-Saxonicum Lexico Gul. Somneri magna parte auctius,” Oxon. 1701. Mr. Thwaites, according to a memorandum in Hearne’s ms diary, had a considerable hand in this. In 1697, he edited “Dionysii Orbis Descriptio, cum veterum scholiis et Eustathii commentariis. Accedit Periegesis Prisciani, cum notis Andrea Papii,” Oxon. 8vo. This was followed in 1698, by “Heptateuchus, Liber Job, et Evangelium Nicodemi, Anglo-Saxonice. Historic Judith fragmentum, Dano-Saxonice*. Edidit nunc primum ex Mss. codicibus Edwardus Thwaites, e collegio Reginse,” Oxon. which being dedicated to Dr. Hickes, the celebrated non-juror, gave some offence in those days of party-spirit. The same year Mr. Thwaites had some concern in the edition of king Alfred’s Saxon version of “Boethius cle Consolatione Philosophize,” the professed editor of which was Mr. Christopher Rawlinson. Mr. Thvvaites also rendered much assistance to Dr. Hickes in his “Thesaurus,” which is amply acknowledged in the epistolary preface. In 17 Os, he was elected by the university, reader in moral philosophy, and the next year appointed regius professor of Greek. His last work, “Grammatica Anglo-Saxonica ex Hickesiano linguarum Septentrionalium Thesauro excerpta,” appeared at Oxford in 1711, on the 12th of December, 8vo, in which year he died, and was buried at Iffley church near Oxford. He was only forty-four years of age, and his death is supposed to have been hastened by the amputation of his leg. Of this affair, the accounts in our authorities differ; the one imputing the necessity for amputation to his having broke his leg by a fall from his horse, the other to a growing on one of his knees, perhaps what is called a white swelling, which is a very frequent cause for amputation. Both, however, agree in the extraordinary calmness with which he bore the operation, and in his having stopped the bleeding in the night when it broke out afresh, without help, It is said that when his surgeon, Mr. Charles Bernard, related his behaviour to queen Anne, she ordered him a pension, and to be made Greek professor; but in these circumstances likewise our accounts differ. A consumption ensued, and deprived the university of “the best Septentrionalist,” next to Dr. Hickes, a man, too, “beautiful in his personage, pleasant in conversation, of great vivacity, and of a most agreeable natural behaviour. 7 '” Besides these excellencies, he wrote,“says Mr. Browne,” the finest hand I ever saw."

, son of the rev. Richard Tickell, was born in 1686 at Bridekirk in Cumberland; and in April 1701 became a member of Queen’s college, in Oxford; in 1708 he was made M. A. and two years afterwards was chosen fellow; for which, as he did not comply with the statutes by taking orders, he obtained a dispensation from, the crown. He held his fellowship till 1726, and then vacated it by marrying in that year, at Dublin. Tickell was not one of those scholars who wear away their lives in closets; he entered early into the world, and was long busy in public affairs, in which he was initiated under the patronage of Addison, whose notice he is said to have gained by his verses in praise of “Rosamond.” He produced another piece of the same kind at the appearance of “Cato,” with equal skill, but not equal happiness. When the ministers of queen Anne were negociating with France, Tickell published “The Prospect of Peace,” a poem, of which the tendency was to reclaim the nation from the pride of conquest to the pleasures of tranquillity. Mr. Addison, however he hated the men then in power, suffered his friendship to prevail over the public spirit, and gave in the “Spectator” such praises of Tickell’s poem, that when, after having long wished to peruse it, Dr. Johnson laid hold on it at last, he thought it unequal to the honours which it had received, and found it a piece to be approved rather than admired. But the hope excited by a work of genius, being general and indefinite, is rarely gratified. It was read at that time with so much favour that six editions were sold. At the arrival of king George he sung “The Royal Progress;” which, being inserted in the *' Spectator,“is well known. The poetical incident of most importance in Tickell’s life was his publication of the first book of the” Iliad,“as translated by himself, in apparent opposition to Pope’s” Homer,“of which the first part made its entrance into the world at the same time. Addison declared that the rival versions were both good; but that Tickell’s was the best that ever was made; and with Addison those wits who were his adherents and followers, were certain to concur. Pope does not appear to have been much dismayed;” for,“says he,” I have the town, that is, the mob, on my side.“But he remarks, that it is common for the smaller party to make up in diligence what they want in numbers;” he “appeals to the people as his proper judges; and if they are not inclined to condemn him, he is in little care about the high-flyers at Button’s.” Pope did not long think Addison an impartial judge; for he considered him as the writer of TickelPs version. The reasons for his suspicion we shall literally transcribe from Mr. Spence’s collection. “There had been a coldness between Mr. Addison and me for some time; and we had not been in company together for a good while, any where but at Button’s coffee-house, where I used to see him almost every day. On his meeting me there, one day in particular, he took me aside, and said he should be glad to dine with me at such a tavern, if 1 stayed till those people were gone (Budgell and Philips). We went accordingly; and after dinner Mr. Addison said * that he had wanted for some time to talk with me; that his friend Tickell had formerly, whilst at Oxford, translated the first book of the Iliad; that he designed to print it, and had desired him to look it over; that he must therefore beg that I would not desire him to look over my first book, because, if he did, it would have the air of doubledealing.‘ I assured him that < I did not at all take it ill of Mr. Tickell that he was going to publish his translation; that he certainly had as much right to translate any author as myself; and that publishing both was entering on a fair stage. I then added, that I would not desire him to look over my first book of the ’ Iliad,' because he had looked over Mr. Tickeli’s; but could wish to have the benefit of his observations on my second, which I had then finished, and which Mr. Tickell had not touched upon.‘ Accordingly I sent him the second book the next morning; and Mr. Addison a few days after returned it, with very high commendations. Soon after it was generally known that Mr. Tickell was publishing the first book of the ’ Iliad,‘ I met Dr. Young in the street; and, upon our falling into that subject, the doctor expressed a great deal of surprise at Tickell’ s having had such a translation so long by him. He said, that c it was inconceivable to him, and that there must be some mistake in the matter; that each used to communicate to the other whatever verses they wrote, even to the least things; that Tickell could not have been busied in so long a work there without his knowing something of the matter; and that he had never heard a single word of it till on this occasion.' This surprise of Dr. Young, together with what Steele had said against Tickell in relation to this affair, makes it highly probable that there was some underhand dealing in that business; and indeed Tickelt himself, who is a very fair worthy man, has since in a manner as good as owned it to me. [When it was introduced into a conversation between Mr. Tickell and Mr. Pope by a third person, Tickell did not deny it; which, considering his honour and zeal for his departed friend, was the same as owning it.]” Upon these suspicions, with which Dr. Warburton hints that other circumstances concurred, Pope always, in his “Art of Sinking,” quotes this book as the work of Addison. (See Pope, vol. XXV. p. 168.) When the Hanover succession was disputed, Tickeli gave what assistance his pen would supply. His “Letter to Avignon” stands high among party-poems; it expresses contempt without coarseness, and superiority without insolence. It had the success which it deserved, being five times printed. He was now intimately united to Mr. Addison, who, when he went into Ireland as secretary to the lord Sunderland, took him thither, and employed him in public business; and, when (1717) afterwards he rose to be secretary of state, made him under-secretary. ' Their friendship seems to have continued without abatement; for when Addison died, he left him the charge of publishing his works, with a solemn recommendation to the patronage of Craggs. To these works he prefixed an elegy on the author, which could owe none of its beauties to the assistance which might be suspected to have strengthened or embellished his earlier compositions; but neither he not Addison ever produced nobler lines than are contained in the third and fourth paragraphs, nor is a more sublime or more elegant funeral poem to be found in the whole compass of English literature. He was afterwards (in June 1724) made secretary to the lords justices of Ireland, a place of great honour; in which he continued till 1740, when he died April 23, at Bath. To Tickell cannot be refused a high place among the minor poets; nor should it be forgotten that he was one of the contributors to the “Spectator.” With respect to his personal character, he is said to have been a man of gay conversation, at least a temperate lover of wine and company, and in his domestic relations without censure.

His first education and impressions were among Puritans; from whose principles he gradually seceded, and is said to have felt a great repugnance to read the works usually put into the hands of youth. Mr. Chillingworth’s works are said to have first given his mind a new bias, and dire. -ted Dim to a new method of study, and about the same time he entered into friendship with some great men, which contributed not a little to give him new views of theological matters. Cambridge then could boast of the celebrated names of Dr Cudworth, master of Christ’s-colle^e; Dr. More, and Dr. Rust, afterwards bishop of Dromore in Ireland, fellows of the same Dr. Whichcot, provost of King’s; Dr. Worthington, master of Jesus and Mr. John Smith, author of the “Select Discourses,” fellow of Queen’s. Tillotson enjoyed also a close and intimate friendship with Dr. Wilkins, afterwards bishop of Chester; he adopted all the best studies of this great man, but so as to perfect every one of them; for, though Wilkins had more general knowledge, yet Tillotson was the greater divine.

During the cUbate in parliament concerning the settlement of the crown on king William for life, the dean was consulted upon that point by the princess Anne of Denmark; who was pressed by the Jacobites to form an opposition; and who, till lady Russel and Dr. Tillotson had discoursed with her, had refused to give her consent to it, as prejudicial to her own right. He was, afterwards admitted into an high degree of confidence with king William and queen Mary; and their majesties had the greatest reason to confide in him, for he was a true friend to their establishment on the throne of England. The vacancies of some bishoprics soon turned the thoughts of his majesty and his ministers upon the dean; but a bishopric was so far from being agreeable to him, that he used all possible solicitations to avoid it. He had been appointed clerk of the closet to the king, the 27th of March, 1689; in August he was appointed by the chapter of his cathedral, to exercise the archiepiscopal jurisdiction of the province of Canterbury, devolved to himself and that body, on the 1st of that month, by the suspension of Sancroft, for refusing the new oaths; and the king soon fixed upon him to succeed him. Til lotson’s desires and ambition had never extended further than to the exchange of his deanery of Canterbury for that of St. Paul’s, which was granted him in September, upon the promotion of Stillingtieet to the bishopric of Worcester: but, at the very time that he kissed the king’s hand for this, his majesty named the archbishopric to him. There is a letter of his to lady Ilussel, dated April 19, 1689, which shews how he stood affected to this proposal, and also clears bishop Burnet from many a grievous censure, as if he himself had had a view to the archbishopric. After acquainting her ladyship with the disposal of several church preferments, he proceeds: “but now begins my trouble. After I had kissed the king’s hand for the deanery of St. Paul’s, I gave his majesty my most humble thanks, and told him, that now he had set me at ease for the remainder of my life. He replied, No such matter, I assure you, and spoke plainly about a great place, which I dread to think of; and said, it was necessary for his service, and he must charge it upon my conscience. Just as he had said this, he was called to supper, and I had only time to say, that when his majesty was at leisure, I did believe I could satisfy him, that it would be most for his service that I should continue in the station in which he had now placed me. This hath brought me into a real difficulty; for, on the one hand, it is hard to decline his majesty’s commands, and much harder yet to stand out against so much goodness as his majesty is pleased to use towards me: on the other, I can neither bring my inclination nor my judgment to it. This I owe to the bishop of Salisbury, one or the best and worst friends I know; best for his singular good opinion of me, and the worst for directing the king to this method, which I know he did; as if his lordship and I had concerted the matter, how to finish this foolish piece of dissimulation, in running away from a bishopric to catch an archbishopric. This fine device hath thrown me so far into the briars, that, without his majesty’s great goodness, I shall never get off without a scratched face. And now I will tell your ladyship the bottom of my heart. I have of a long time, I thank God for it, devoted myself to the public service, without any regard for myself, and to that end have done the best I could, in the best manner I was able; of late God hath been pleased, by very severe ways, but in great goodness to me, to wean me perfectly from the love of this world;” (he alludes here, not only to the death of his friend lord Russel, but to the loss of two daughters, which were all his children;) “so that worldly greatness is now not only undesirable, but distasteful to me. And I do verily believe, that I shall be able to do as much or more good in my present station, than in a higher, and shall not have one jot less interest or influence upon any others to any good purpose: for the people na r turally love a man that will take great pains and little preferment. But, on the other hand, if I could force my inclination to take this great place, I foresee that I should sink under it, grow melancholy and good for nothing, and, after a little while, die as a fool dies.”

The king’s nomination of him to the archbishopric was agreed between them, as it appears, to be postponed till after the breaking up of the session of parliament, which was prorogued the 5th of January 1691; and then it was thought proper to defer it stiil longer, till the king should return from Holland, whither he was then going. He arrived at Whitehall the 13th of April, and nominated Tiilotson to the council on the 23d, who was consecrated the 31st of May, being Whitsunday, in Bow-church, by Mews, bishop of Winchester, Lioyd, bishop of St. Asaph. Burnet, bishop of Sarurn, Stillingrleet, bishop of Worcester, Iron* side, bishop of Bristol, and Hough, bishop of Oxford, in the presence of the duke of Norfolk, the marquis of Carmarthen, lord-president of the council, the earl of Devonshire, the earl of Dorset, the earl of Macclesfield, the carl of Fauconberg, and other persons of rank; and four days after his consecration was sworn of the privycouncil. His promotion was attended with the usual compliments of congratulation, out of respect either to himself or his station, which, however, were soon followed by a very opposite treatment froai the nonjuring party; the greatest part of whom, from the moment of his acceptance of the archbishopric, pursued him with an unrelenting rage, which lasted during his life, and was by no means appeased after his death. Before his consecration, the learned Mr. Dndwell, who was afterwards deprived of Camden’s historical lecture at Oxford, wrote him a letter, dated the 12th of May, to dissuade him from being, says he, “the aggressor in the new-designed schism, in erecting another altar against the hitherto acknowledged altar of your deprived fathers and brethren. If their places be not vacant, the new consecration must, by the nature of the spiritual monarchy, he null and invalid, and schisnuitical.” This letter of Mr. Dodwell was written with much greater mildness and moderation than another which was sent to the archbishop’s lady for him, and a copy of it to the countess of Derby, for the queen; and printed soon after. It called upon him to reconcile his acting since the Revolution with the principles either of natural or revealed religion, or with those of his own letter to lord iiussel, which was reprinted upon this occasion. The writer of it is said, by Dr. Hickes, to be a person of great candour and judgment, and once a great admirer of the archbishop, though he became so much prejudiced against him as to declare after his death to Dr. Hickes, that he thought him “an atheist, as much as a man could be, though the gravest certainly,” said he, “that ever was.” But these and other libels were so far from exasperating the archbishop against those who wt re concerned in dispersing them, that wht n some were seized on that account, he used all his interest with the government to screen them from punishment.

Dr. Tiilotsun, from his first advancement to the archiepiscopal see, had begun to form several designs for the good of the church and religion in general; and in these he was encouraged by their majesties. With this view he joined with the queen it) engaging the bishop of Salisbury to draw ii:> his “Discourse of the Pastoral Care,” in order to prepare the way for perfecting some parts of our ecclesiastical constitution. This was bishop Burnet’s favourite tract, anJ it was published in 1692. In the lew moments ofh s i.-i“;?'<*, Tiliotson revised his own sermons; and, in 1693, published four of them, concerning the divinity and incarnation of our blessed Saviour His chief design in this was to remove the imputation of Socinianism, which had long been, and was then more than ever, fixed upon him by those who did not love his principles, and thought that his defending religion upon what were called rational grounds, and his holding friendship and correspondence with Locke, Limborch, Le Clerc, and others who did the same, were circumstances liable to suspicion. Of this he indirectly complains in one of his sermons:” 1 know not how it comes to pass, but so it is, that every one that offers to give a reasonable account of his faith, and to establish religion upon rational principles, is presently branded for a Socinian; of which we have a sad instance in that incomparable person, Mr. Chillingworth, the glory of this age and nation, who for no other cause that 1 know of, but his worthy and successful attempts to make Christian religion reasonable, and to discover those firm and solid foundations upon which our faith is built, hath been requited with this black and odious character. But if this be Socinianism, for a man to inquire into the grounds and reasons of the Christian religion, and to endeavour to give a satisfactory account why he believes it, I know no way but that all considerate inquisitive men, that are above fancy and enthusiasm, must be either Socinians or Atheists.

He concurred again with the queen, in engaging the bishop of Salisbury to undertake his “Exposition of the thirty-nine Articles of the Church of England 5” which that indefatigable prelate performed in less than a year, though it was not published till 169y. He sent the manuscript to the archbishop, who, having revised and altered it in several pi-aces, returned it, with his judgment, in the following letter:

The lower house of convocation, in queen Anne’s reign, thought that such a character of “The Rights of the Christian Church,” &c. from a man of Le Clerc’s reputation for parts and learning, must have no small influence in recommending the book, and in suggesting favourable notions of the principles advanced in it; and therefore, in their representation of the present state of religion, they judged it expedient to give it this turn, namely, “that those infidels” (meaning Tindal and others) “have procured abstracts and commendations of their own profane writings, and probably drawn up by themselves, to be inserted in foreign journals, and that they have translated them into the English tongue, and published them here at home, in order to add the greater weight to their wicked opinions.” Hence a notion prevailed in England, that Le Clerc had been paid for the favourable account he gave of Tindal’s book; upon which he took occasion to declare, in a subsequent journal, that there never was a greater falsehood, and protests as an honest man before God, “that, for making mention of that or any other hook, he had never had either promise or reward.*' It will easily be imagined that, in the course of this controversy, Dr. Tindal’s antagonists would object to him his variableness and mutability in matters of religion, and insult him not a little upon his Hrst apostatizing to the chjirch of Rome, upon the prospect of a national conversion to Popery, and then, at the revolution, reverting to Protestantism. To <his he replied, that” Coming, as most boys do, a rasa tabula to the university, and believing (his country education teaching him no better) that all human and divine knowledge was to be had there, he quickly fell into the then prevailing notions of the high and independent powers of the clergy; and meeting with none, during his long stay there, who questioned the truth of them, they by degrees became so fixed and riveted in him, that he no more doubted of them than of his own being: and he perceived not the consequence of them, till the Roman emissaries (who were busy in making proselytes in the university in king James*s time, and knew how to turn the weapons of high church against them) caused him to see, that, upon these notions, a separation from the church of Rome could not be justified; and that they who pretended to answer them as to those points, did only shuffle, or talk backward and forward. This made him, fur some small time, go to the Popish mass-house; till meeting, upon his going into the world, with people who treated that notion of the independent power as it deserved, and finding the absurdities of Popery to be much greater at hand than they appeared at a distance, he began to examine the whole matter with all the attention he was capable of; and then he quickly found, and was surprised at the discovery, that all his till then undoubted maxims were so far from having any solid foundation, that they were built on as great a contradiction as can be, that of two independent powers in the same society. Upon this he returned, as he had good reason, to the church of England, which he found, by examining into her constitution, disclaimed all that independent power he had been bred up in the belief of; Candlemas 1687-8 being the last time he saw any of the Popish tricks, the very next opportunity (namely, Easter) he publicly received the sacrament (the warden giving it him first) in his college chapel, &c. And thus having made his escape from errors which prejudice of education had drawn him into, he resolved to take nothing on trust for the future; and, consequently, his notions concerning our civil, as well as religious liberties, became very different from those in which he was educated.“What Dr. Tindal says here may be true; yet it is observable, that his conversion to Popery, and re-conversion to Protestantism, lay between February 1685, and February 1688, that is, between the twenty-seventh and thirtieth, year of his age; and many will be ready to suspect, that a man of his reasoning and inquiring turn must, before then, have been too much fixed and settled in his principles, either to be a dupe of Popish missionaries, or then to discover first the absurdity and falsehood of fundamental principles. In the mean time he endeavoured to defend his work, in a” Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church against a late visitation sermon, entitled The Rights of the Clergy in the Christian Church asserted, preached at Newport- Pagnell in the county of Bucks by W. Wotton, B. D. and made public at the command and desire of the bishop of Lincoln, and the clergy of the deaneries of Buckingham and Newport,“London, 1707, in 8vo, and in his” Second Defence of the Rights of the Christian Church, occasioned by two late indictments against a bookseller and his servant for selling one of thf said books. In a Letter from a- gentleman in London to a clergyman in the country. To which are added two tracts of Hugo Grotius on these questions; I. Whether the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper may be administered where there are no pastors? II. Whether it be necessary at all times to communicate with the Symbols? As also some tracts of Mr. John Hales of Eaton, viz. Of the Lord’s Supper, the Power of the Keys, of Schism, &c.“London, 1707, in 8vo. In 1709 he published at London in 8vo, a pamphlet entitled,” New High Church turned old Presbyterian“and in 1710 several pamphlets, viz.” An High Church Catechism;“” The jacobitism, perjury, and popery of High Church Priests;“”The merciful judgments of 'High Church-triumphant on offending clergymen and others in the reign of Charles I.“In 1711 and 1712 he published at London in 8vo,” The Nation vindicated from the aspersions cast on it in a late pamphlet entitled, A representation of the present State of Religion, with regard to the late excessive growth of infidelity, heresy, and profaneness, as it passed the Lower House of convocation,“in two parts. In 1713, and some following years he published several other pamphlets, mostly political, which attracted more or less attention, but are now forgotten. He had hitherto passed for an enemy to the church of England, but was soon determined to show himself equally hostile to revealed religion, and in 1730, published in 4to, his” Christianity as old as the Creation, or the Gospel a Republication of the Religion of Nature.“It might have been expected from the title of this book, that his purpose was to prove the Gospel perfectly agreeable to the law of nature; to prove, that it has set the principles of natural religion in the clearest light, and was intended to publish and confirm it anew, after it had been very much obscured and defaced through the corruption ct mankind. We should be further confirmed in this supposition from his acknowledging, that” Christianity itself, stripped of the additions which policy, mistake, and the circumstances of time, have made to it, is a most holy religion, and that all its doctrines plainly speak themselves to be the will of an infinitely wise and good God:“for this, and several declarations of a similar nature, he makes in his work; and accordingly distinguishes himself and his friends with the title of” Christian Deists.“Yet whoever examines his book attentively will find, that this is only plausible appearance, intended to cover his real design; which was to set aside all revealed religion, by showing, that there neither is, nor can be, any external revelation at all, distinct from what he calls” the external revelation of the law of nature in the hearts of all mankind;“and accordingly his refuters, the most considerable of whom was Dr. Conybeare, afterwards bishop of Bristol, Foster, and Leland, have very justly treated him as a Deist. It appears from a letter written by the rev. Mr. Jonas Proast to Dr. Hickes, and printed in Hickes’s” Preliminary Discourse“cited above, that Tindal espoused this principle very early in life; and that he was known to espouse it long before even his” Rights of the Christian Church" was published. The letter bears date the 2d of July, 1708, and is in the following terms:

In 1724, he published in monthly numbers, “Antiquities sacred and profane, being a Dissertation on the excellency of the history of the Hebrews above that of any other nation,” &c. a translation from Calmet. He also began a history of Essex, of which he published a small part, in two quarto numbers, proposing to complete it in three quarto volumes, at one guinea each; but left this undertaking, in 1726, for the translation of Rapin’s “History of England,” which has served to perpetuate his name, and was indeed a work of great utility, and success. This translation, originally published in 1726, 8vo, and dedicated to Thomas lord Howard baron of Effingham, was reprinted in weekly numbers, in 1732 and 1733, 2 vols. folio; the first of which was inscribed, in a manly dedication, to Frederick prince of Wales, who rewarded Mr. Tindal with a gold medal worth forty guineas. The second volume of the 8vo edition had been inscribed to sir Charles Wager, when the translator was chaplain on board the Torbay in the Bay of Revel in the Gulph of Finland. Vol. IV. is dedicated to the same, from the same place, 1727. Vol. VI. from Great Waltham, 1728, to the English factors at Lisbon, where the translator officiated as chaplain five months in the absence of Mr. Sims. The “Continuation” was likewise published in weekly numbers, which began in 1744, and was completed March 25, 1747, which is the date of the dedication to the late duke of Cumberland. When the “History” was published, Mr. Tindal was “Vicar of Great Waltham.” In the “Continuation” he is called “Rector of Alverstoke, and chaplain to the royal hospital at Greenwich.” This last was printed in two volumes, but is accompanied with a recommendation to bind it in three; vol. III. to contain the reign and medals of king William; vol. IV. the reign of queen Anne; and vol. V the i\ ign of king George I. with the medals of queen Anne and king George; a summary of the History of England, and the index. A second edition of the “Continuation” appeared in 1751; and anew edition of the whole, in 1757, 21 vols. 8vo. Both in the Translation and Continuation he was materially assisted by Mr. Morant; and the sale of both so far exceeded the expectations of Messrs. Knapton, the booksellers, that they complimented Tindal with a present of 200l. In 1727, he translated the text printed uith Mr. Morant’s translation of the notes of Mess, de Beausobre and L'Enftmt on St. Matthew’s Gospel. On the discovery of the imposition practised on his uncle, he entered into a controversy with Budgell who had cheated him; and published, among other things, a pamphlet entitled “A Copy of the Will of Dr. Matthew Tindal, with an account of what passed concerning the same between Mrs. Lucy Price, Eustace Budgell, esq. and Mr. Nicholas Tindal,” 1733, 8vo. By this will 2000 guineas, and the ms. of a second volume of “Christianity as old as the Creation,” were bequeathed to Mr. Budgell; and only a small residue to his nephew, whom, by a regular will, he had riot long before appointed his sole heir. The transaction is alluded to in the well-known lines of Pope:

, D.D. a learned English divine, was born in 1658, at Blencow in Cumberland, became a poor scholar of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1672, and when B. A. taberdar of that house. He was elected fellow of University college, Dec. 23, 1678; and proceeding M. A. July 2, 1679, became chaplain to Dr. Smith, bishop of Carlisle. He was appointed one of the four canon residentiaries of Carlisle, in 1635; and the same year obtained the vicarage of Stanwix, which he resigned in 1688. He accumulated the degrees of B. and D. D. Dec. 12, 1692. By a petition presented to the House of Commons by Dr. Todd, requesting to be heard by counsel before the bill “to dvoid doubts and questions touching statutes, &c.” should pass, it appears that “the bishop of Carlisle (Dr. Nicolson) had cited the dean and chapter before him in his visitation held at Carlisle in September 1707, and exhibited articles tof inquiry against them; and the petitioner appeared, and entered his protest against the bishop’s power, being informed, the right of local visitor was in the crown; but the said bishop, in an illegal manner, suspended the petitioner ab officio et beneficio, and afterwards excommunicated him.” The apprehensions of Dr. Todd were, that, if the bill should pass, it would “subject him to further inquiries and arbitrary censures of the bishop in his visitations.” The bill passed the Commons, with some amendments, March 17, and received the royal assent March 20, 1708. He resigned his residentiaryship in 1720, which was then given to Dr. Tullie, and died vicar of Penrith in 1728. He was also rector of Arthuret at the time of his death. His publications are, “The description of Sweden,” 1680, folio; “An Account of a Salt-spring and another medicinal spring on the banks of the river Weare, or Ware, in the bishopric of Durham,” 1684, Phil. Trans. No. 163; and “The Life of Phocion,” 1684. He left also in ms “Notitia EcclesiiE Cathedralis Carliolensis una cum Catalogo Priorum, dum Conventualis erat, & Decanorum & Canonicorum quum Collegiata. Notitia Prioratus de Wedderhall cum Catalogo omnium Benefactorum qui ad ambas has sacras Ædes stfuendas, dotandas, & ornandas, pecuniam, terras & ornamenta, vel aliqua alia beneficia, pie & munifice contulerunt.” These two were written in 1688, and dedicated by the author to the dean and chapter of Carlisle. They are now in the Lambeth library. He left also in ms. “A History of the Diocese of Carlisle, containing an. account of the Parishes, Abbeys, Nunneries, Churches, Monuments, Epitaphs, Coats of Arms, Founders, Benefactors, &c. with a perfect catalogue of the Bishops, Priors, Deans, Chancellors, Arch-deacons, Prebendaries, and of all Rectors and Vicars of the several Parishes in the said Diocese,” 1689. He was also one of the translators of Plutarch’s Morals, and of Cornelius Nepos. By Ballard’s ms letters in the Bodleian library it appears, that Dr. Todd sent achartulary of Fountains Abbey to the University college library and that he was solicited by Dr. Hickes to assist in publishing some Saxon books .

Upon the passing of an act of parliament, in June 1701, for settling the crown, after the decease of king William and the princess Anne, and in default of their issue, upon the princess Sophia, electress dowager of Hanover, and the heirs of her body, being Protestants, Toland published his “Anglia libera, or, the limitation and succession of the crown of England explained and asserted, c.” 8vo; and when the earl of Macclesfield was sent to Haribver with this act, Toland attended him. He presented his “Anglia libera' 7 to her electoral highness, and was the first who had the honour of kissing her hand upon the act of succession. The earl recommended him particularly to her highness, and he stayed there five or six weeks; and on his departure he was presented with gold medals and pictures of the electress dowager, the elector, the young prince, and the queen of Prussia. He then made an excursion to the court of Berlin, where he had a remarkable conversation with M. Beausobre, upon the subject of religion, in the presence of the queen of Prussia. Beausobre communicated an account of it to the authors of the” Bibliotheque Germanique,“who printed it in that journal; and from thence we learn, that it was concerning the authority of the books of the New Testament, which Mr. Toland, with his usual self-sufficiency, undertook to question and invalidate. On the llth of November, 1701, a proclamation was issued out, for dissolving the parliament, and calling another to meet in December. While the candidates were making interest in their respective countries, Toland published the following advertisement in the Post-man:” There having been a public report, as if Mr. Toland stood for Blechingly in Surrey, it is thought fit to advertise, that sir Robert Clayton has given his interest in that borough to an eminent citizen, and that Mr. Toland hath no thoughts of standing there or any where else.“This advertisement afforded matter of pleasantry to an anonymous writer, who published a little pamphlet, entitled” Modesty mistaken: or, a Letter to Mr. Toland, upon his declining to appear in the ensuing parliament."

In 1702 he published three pieces: “Paradoxes of state, &c.” in 4to; “Reasons for addressing his majesty to invite into England the electress dowager and elector of Hanover; 7 ' and his” Vindicius liberius,“already mentioned. After the publication of this book, he went to the courts of Hanover and Berlin, where he was received very graciously by the princess Sophia, and by the queen of Prussia, both ladies who delighted in conversing with men of learning and penetration, whose notions were new or uncommon. He had the honour to be often aumitted to their conversation; and, as he made a longer stay at Berlin than at Hanover, so he had frequent opportunities of waiting upon the queen, who took a pleasure in asking him questions, and hearing his paradoxical opinions. After his return therefore into England, he published in 1704? some philosophical letters; three of which were inscribed td Serena, meaning the queen of Prussia, who, he assures us> was pleased to ask his opinion concerning the subject of them. The title rr.ns thus:” Letters to Serena, containing, 1. The origin and force of prejudices. 2. The history of the soul’s immortality among the heathens. 3. The origin of idolatry, and reasons of heathenism; as also, 4. A letter to a gentleman in Holland, shewing Spinoza’s system of philosophy to be without any principle or foundation. 5. Motion essential to matter, in answer to some remarks by a noble friendon the confutation of Spinoza. To which is prefixed a preface, declaring the several occasions of writing them,“8vo. About the same time he published an” English translation of the Life of Æsop, by M. de Meziriac,“and dedicated it to Anthony Collins, esq. It was prefixed to” The fables of;sop," with the moral reflections of M. Baudoin.

In 1705 he published several pamphlets’. “Socinianism truly stated, &c.” to which is prefixed, “Indifference in disputes recommended by a Pantheist to an orthodox friend,” in 4to; “An account of the courts of Prussia and Hanover,” in 8vo; “The ordinances, statutes, and privileges of the* academy erected by the king of Prussia in the city of Berlin,” translated from the original, in 8vo; “The memorial of the state of England, in vindication of the queen, the church, and the administration, &c.” This last was published, without the name of the author, by the direction of Mr. Harley, secretary of state; and afterwards a defence of it was written, by order of the same person, but for some reasons suppressed, after six or seven sheets Of it were printed. Mr. Harley was one of Toland’s chief patrons and benefactors, and used to employ him as a spy, Harley having accidentally found, among other manuscripts, a Latin oration, to excite the English to war against the French, communicated it to Toland, who published it in 1707, with notes and a preface, under this title, “Oratio Philippica ad excitandos contra Galliam. Britannos; maxime vero, ne de pace cum victis pra; matur& agatur: sanctiori Anglorum concilio exhibita, anno Christi 1514.” Soon after he published, at the request of the elector’s minister, “The elector Palatine’s declaration in favour of his Protestant subjects.”

He continued in Holland till 1710; and, while he was there, had the good fortune to get acquainted with prince Eugene, who gave him several marks of his generosity. Upon his return to England, he was for some time sup* ported by the liberality of Mr. Harley, and by his means was enabled to keep a country-house at Epsom in Surrey. He published, in 1711, “A Description of Epsom, with the Humours and Politics of that Place.” He afterwards lost the favour of this minister, and then wrote pamphlets against him. He published in 1710, without his name, a French piece relating to Dr. Sacheverell, “Lettre d'urt Anglois a un Hollandois an sujet du docteur Sacheverell:” and the three following in 1712: “A Letter against Popery, particularly against admitting the authority of fathers or councils in controversies of religion, by Sophia Charlotte, the late queen of Prussia;” “Queen Anne’s reasons for creating the electoral prince of Hanover a peer of this realm, by the title of duke of Cambridge;” and, “The grand Mystery laid open, viz. by dividing the Protestants to weaken the Hanover succession, and, by defeating the succession, to extirpate the Protestant religion.” At that time he also undertook to publish a new edition of Cicero’s works by subscription, and gave an account of his plan in a “Latin dissertation,” which has been printed among his posthumous pieces.

In 1713 he published “An Appeal to honest People, against wicked Priests,” relating to Sachevereirs affair; aixi another pamphlet called “Dunkirk or Dover, or, the queen’s honour, the nation’s safety, the liberties of Europe, and the peace of the world, all at stake, till that fort and port be totally demolished by the French.” In 1714- he published a piece which shewed that he was very attentive to times and seasons, for it ran through ten editions within a quarter of a year: the title is, “The art of Restoring, or, the piety and probity of general Monk in bringing about the last restoration, evidenced from his own authentic letters; with a just account of sir Roger, who runs the parallel as far as he can.” This sir Roger was intended for the earl of Oxford, who was supposed to be then projecting schemes for the restoration of the Pretender. The same year, 1714, he produced “A collection of Letters by general Monk, relating to the restoration of the royal family;” “The Funeral Elegy of the princess Sophia,” translated from the Latin; and “Reasons for naturalizing the Jews in Great Britain and Ireland, on the same foot with all other nations; with a defence of the Jews against all vulgar prejudices in all countries. He prefixed to this an ingenious, but ironical dedication to the superior clergy. In 1717 he published” The State Anatomy of Great Britain," &c. which being answered by Dr. Fiddes, chaplain to the earl of Oxford, and by )aniel De Foe, he produced 9 second part, by way of vindication of the former.

, an ingenious English poetess, was the daughter of George Toilet, esq. commissioner of the navy in the reigns of king William and queen Anne. She was born in 161H, and her father, observing her extraordinary genius, gave her so excellent an education that, besides great skill in music and drawing, she spoke fluently and correctly the Latin, Italian, and French languages; and well understood history, poetry, and the mathematics. These qualifications were dignified by an unfeigned piety, and the moral virtues, which she possessed and practised in an eminent degree. The former part of her life was spent in the Tower of London, where her father had a house; the latter at Stratford and Westham. She died on the 1st of February, 1754, aged sixty years, and was buried at the latter place. In 1755, a volume of her poems was printed, some of the best of which may be seen in Mr. Nichols’s Collection.

Daniel, the subject of this article, after some education in his native place, was sent to Basil in 1555, where he studied for two years, and was admitted to the first academic degree, probably that of bachelor of arts. He then went to Tubingen, where he continued his studies for two more years, under the patronage and at the expence of Christopher duke of Wirtemberg, who thus wished to reward his father’s services to the infant-church of Montbeillard. Here he applied himself to belles lettres and philosophy, and took the degree of master of arts. He had also gone through a course of divinity; for we find that when his father recalled him to his native place, he preached there, both in French and German; but finding himself indifferently acquainted with the former of those languages, he went in 1559 to Paris, where he might acquire a greater facility in speaking and writing, and at the same time carry on his other studies. The following year he left Paris for Orleans, where he taught Hebrew for some time, and being admitted into the ministry, officiated in the church there, which was one of the most numerous and flourishing of the protestant congregations in France. There in 1565 he married the daughter of an advocate of parliament, who had been counsellor to queen Catherine de Medici before the troubles.

His merit as a botanist now began to be known at Paris, whither he went in 1683, and was introduced to M. Fagon, first physician to the queen, who was so struck with the ingenuity and vast knowledge of Tournefort, that he procured him to be made botanic professor in the king’s garden. Tournefort immediately set himself to furnish it wi.th every thing that was curious and valuable; and, by order of the king, travelled into Spain and Portugal, and afterwards into Holland and England, where he made a prodigious collection of plants. His name was become celebrated abroad as well as at home; and he had the botanic professorship at Leyden offered him, which he did not think proper to accept, though his present salary was but small. He had, however, the profits of his profession, and of a great number of pupils in botany, which, with his own private fortune, supported him very handsomely. In 1692 he was admitted a member of the academy of sciences: he was afterwards made doctor in physic of the faculty of Paris, and maintained a thesis for it, which he dedicated to his friend and patron M. Fagon.

, a learned English divine, of the seventeenth century, was a native of Middlesex, and became a commoner of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1650, where he completed his degree of master of arts in 1657. In 1660, he was elected fellow of All Souls, about which time he entered into holy orders. His first preferment was to the rectory of Welwyn in Hertfordshire. He took his degree of D. D. in 1677, and in April 16i)2 was inducted into the living of St'. Andrew Undershaft, London, where he became a very distinguished preacher. He was presented to this rectory by king William, on the promotion of Dr. Grove to the bishopric of Chichester, and in consequence of the recommendation of archbishop Tillotson. This he acknowledges in the epistle dedicatory to his Latin “Tractatus in Epist. ad Philippenses,” and in the same place gratefully acknowledges his obligations to Dr. Tudor, rector of Tewing in Hertfordshire, to whom probably he was indebted for the living of Welwyn. He died in Oct. 1697, and was interred at Welwyn. Dr. Stanhope preached his funeral sermon at St. Andrew Undershaft, and gave him a very high character for piety, humility, and learning. His works are, 1. a pamphlet, entitled “A brief account of some expressions in St. Athanasius’s creed,” Oxon, 1663, '. 2. “An Explication of the Decalogue, or Ten Cornmandments,” and “Explication of the Catechism of the church of England,” in three parts or volumes, London, 1676—1680, fol. 3. “Of the sacraments in general, in pursuance of an explication of the catechism of the church of England,” Lond. 1686, 8vo. 4. “Of the sacrament of Baptism in particular; of the right of baptism among the heathen and Jews and of the institution of Christian baptism,” &c. ibid. 1687, 8vo.

, a contributor to the study of natural history in this country in the seventeenth century, was by birth a Dutchman, as we are informed by Anthony Wood. On what occasion, and at what period he came into England, is not precisely ascertained, but it may be supposed to have been about the end of queen Elizabeth’s reign, or the beginning of that of James I. as Hollar’s print of him, engraved in 1656, represents him as a person very far advanced in years. He is said to have been for a considerable time in the service of lord treasurer Salisbury and lord Wooton. He travelled several years, and into various parts of Europe; as far eastward as into Russia. In 1620 he was in a fleet that was sent against the Algerines; and mention is made of his collecting plants in Barbary, and in the isles of the Mediterranean. He is said to have brought the trifolium stellatum of Linnseus from the isle of Fermentera; and his name frequently occurs in the second edition of Gerard, by Johnson in Parkinson’s “Theatre of Plants,” and in his “Garden of Flowers,” printed in 1656. But Dr. Pulteney conjectures that Tradescant was not resident in England in the time of Gerard himself, or known to him.

He appears, however, to have been established in England, and his garden founded at Lambeth; and about 1629 he obtained the title of gardener to Charles I. Tradescant was a man of extraordinary curiosity, and the first in this country who made any considerable collection of the subjects of natural history. He had a son of the same name, who took a voyage to Virginia, whence he returned with many new plants, They were the means of introducing a variety of curious species into this kingdom, several of which bore their name. Tradescant’s spiderwort, Tradescant’s aster, are well known to this day; and Linnæus has immortalized them among the botanists by making a new genus, under their name, of the spidcrworfa which had been before called ephemeron. His museum, called “Tradescant’s Ark,” attracted the curiosity of the age, and was much frequented by the great, by whose means it was also considerably enlarged, as appears by the list of his benefactors, printed at the end of his “Museum Tradescantianum;” among whom, after the names of the king and queen, are found those of many of the first nobility, the duke and duchess of Buckingham, archbishop Laud, the earls of Salisbury and Carlisle, &c. &c.

, a learned divine at the period of the reformation, was supposed by Wood to have been born in Cornwall, or originally descended from an ancient family of his name in that county. This supposition seems to have been suggested to Wood by Fuller, who in his “Worthies” of Cornwall says, “The first syllable of his name, and what is added thereto by my author (Bale) parentum stemmatc clarus, and the sameness of his name with an ancient family in this country, are a three-fold cable to draw my belief that he was this countryman.” He was educated at Oxford, either in Exeter college, or Hart hall, where he attained some eminence in the Latin and Greek tongues. He afterwards, as was usual with scholars desirous of extensive improvement, travelled into Germany and Italy, and heard the lectures of the eminent men of that time. On his return to England he entered into holy orders, and was made keeper of the king’s library, which Leland’s researches had greatly enriched in the time of Henry VIII. King Edward VI. who gave Traheron this appointment with a salary of twenty marks, finding him otherwise a man of great merit, conferred on him the deanery of Chichester in 1551, as Wood says, but according to Le Neve, in 1553. This, on the accession of queen Mary in the same year, he lost, as well as his other preferments, and joined the other English exiles in Germany, where, at Francfort, he became their divinity-reader, particularly on the beginning of the Gospel of St. John, against the Arians, or, as Strype says, “against the wicked enterprises of the new start-up Arians in England.” While here he appears to have written all his works; 1. “Paraeresis, lib. 1.” addressed to his brother Thomas, persuading him to embrace the reformed religion. 2. “Carmina in mortem Henrici Dudlaei.” 3. “Analysis Scoparum Johannis Cochlaei.” 4. “Exposition of a part of St. John’s Gospel made in sundry readings in the English congregation against the Arians,” 1558, 8vo, 2d edition. 5. “Exposition on the fourth chapter of St. John’s Revelations, which treateth of the providence of God, made before his countrymen in Germany,” 1557, 8vo, reprinted 1577 and 1583. 6. “An answer made by Bar. Traheron to a private Papist,” &c. 1558, 8vo. 7. “Treatise of Repentance,” &c. Wood says he also published a translation of Vigo’s “Surgery,” and Vigo’s “Little practice.” When he died is uncertain. Wood, in his first edition, says he returned after queen Mary’s death, and was restored to all he had lost, and was living in 1662; but in his second edition he omits this, and quotes Holinshed, who gives it as a report that he died abroad in the latter end of Mary’s reign.

As his numerous publications form a sort of diary of his employments, we shall give a chronological list of them, which seems to have been drawn up with great care, omitting only some of his occasional sermons, as we believe they were afterwards collected. His earliest production was, 1. “Fraus nummi Anglicani,” in the “Musae Anglicanse,” 1699; 2. “A poem on Badminton -house, Gloucestershire.” 1700; 3. “Verses on the death of the duke of Gloucester,” Oxon. 1700; 4. “On the deaths of king William, prince George, and queen Anne,” 1702, &c. 5. “Verses on baron Spanheim,” 1706; 6. “Miscellany verses,” in vol. VI. of Dry den’s Miscellany, 1709; 7. “Odes on the Oxford Act,” 1713; 8.“Preservative against unsettled notions,” vol. I. 1715, vol.11. 1722; 9. A controversial “Sermon” against bishop Hoadly, from John xviii. 36, 1717; 10. “Virgil translated into blank verse,” 1717, 2 vols. 4to 11. “Prelectiones Poeticae, 1718, 3 vols. 8vo 12.” Treatise on Popery truly stated and briefly confuted,“1727; 13.” Answer to England’s conversion,“1727; 14.” Sermons on Righteousness overmuch, four in one,“Ecclesiastes vii. 16, ‘Be not righteous over-much, neither m.-.’ke thyself over-wise; why shouldst thou destroy thyself;' 15.” Sermon at Oxford Assizes,“‘ But it is good to be zealously affected always. in a good thing,’ 1739; 16.” Answer to the Seven Pamphlets against the said Sermon,“1740; 17.” Reply to Mr. Law’s answer to Righteousness over-much,“1740; 18.” Miltoni Paradisus Amissus, 2 vols.; 19. “Concio ad Clerum Londinensem Sion Coll. Matt. x. Coram. 16,” 1743; 20. “Sermons, No. III. from Matt. xvi. 22, 23, ‘Now all this was done,’ &c. Malachi iii. 1, ‘ Behold I will send my messenger/ &c. and from Matt. xvi. 27, 28, * For the Son of Man shall come in the glory of the Father,’ &c. prefixed to Explanatory Notes on the first of the Four Gospels,” 1747 21. “Continuation of Explanatory Notes on the Four Gospels,” finished and published by Mr. Trapp, his son, 1752 22. “Sermons on Moral and Practical subjects,” 2 vols. 8vo, published by Mr. Trapp, and printed at Reading, in 1752, His Sermons at Lady Moyer’s Lecture were published in 1731, 8vo. Besides the above he published, without his name, 23. “A Prologue to the University of Oxford,” 1703; 24. “Abramule,” a Tragedy, 1703; 25. “An ordinary Journey no Progress,” in defence of Dr. Sacheverell, 1710; 26. “The true genuine Whig and Tory Address,” in answer to a Libel of Dr. B. Hoadly, 1710; 27. < Examiners“in Vol. I. Nos. 8, 9, 26, 33, 45, 46, 48, 50, 1711; Vol. II. Nos. 6, 12, 26, 27, 37,45, 5O, 1712; Vol. III. Nos. 1, 2, 5, 13, 20, 21, 26, 29, 34, 1713; 28. The Age of Riddles,” 1710; 29. “Character and principles of the present set of Whigs,” 1711; 30. “Most Faults^on one Side,” against a sly Whig pamphlet, entitled, * Faults on both Sides,' 1710; 31. “Verses on Garth’s Verses to Godolphin,” 1710; 32. “Votes without Doors, occasioned by Votes within Doors,” 1710; 33. “Preface to an Answer to Priestcraft,” 1710; 34. “Verses on Harley’s being stabbed by Guiscard,” 1711—35. “Poem to the duke of Ormond,” 1711—36. “Character of a certain Whig,” 1711—37. “Her Majesty’s prerogative in Ireland,” 1711; 38. “Peace,” a poem, 1713 39. “A short answer to the bishop of Bangor’s great book against the Committee,” 1717 40. “The Case of the Rector of St. Andrew, Holborn,” 1722; 41. “Several Pieces in the Grub-street Journal,” viz. upon Impudence, upon Henley’s Grammars, Answering, and not answering, Books, 1726; 42. “On Budgel’s Philosopher’s Prayer,” 1726 43. “Prologue and Epilogue for Mr.Hemmings’s Scholars at Thistleworth,” 1728 44. “Grubstreet verses, Bowman,” 1731; 45. “Anacreon translated into Elegiacs,” 1732 46. “Four last Things,” a poem, 1734 47. “Bribery and Perjury;” 48. “Letter about the Quakers Tithe Bill,” 1736.

About this time he was made chaplain in ordinary to queen Anne. In 1703 he was invited to appear as a candidate for the wardenship of New college in Oxford, by a great number of the fellows, who looked upon him as the fittest person to keep up that spirit of discipline and learning, which had been exerted, with the greatest credit and advantage to the college, under their late excellent warden Dr. Traffics. But, contrary to the hopes and expectations of his friends, the election was determined in favour of Mr. Brathwait. On this occasion, thirty - one voted for Mr. Brathwait, and twenty - nine for Dr. Trimnell on which the scrutators declared Mr. Brathwait duly elected. But, according to the canon law, no mail can vote for himself in an election per scrutinium; and it being found, that Mr. Brathwait’s own vote had been given for himself, it was insisted upon, that Mr. Brathwait could not be duly elected, because he had but thirty good votes, which was not the major pars pr&sentium required by the statutes, thereb eing sixty electors- present. Upon this ground an appeal v>*as made to the visitor, Dr. Mews, bishop of Winchester, against the validity of the election. One of the bishop’s assessors gave no opinion; and the other, sir John Cooke (dean of the Arches), was clearly of opinion, that the election was void, and thereby a devolution made to the bishop, who, in consequence of such devolution, might nominate whom he pleased; but he chose rather to pronounce the election valid, and Mr. Brathwait duly elected.