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

, advocate of the parliament of Bourdeaux, was born in 1587, at Agenois. He undertook an edition of the “Corps du Droit,” the expence of which the chancellor had promised to defray, but in this our author was disappointed, and was exposed to the demands of his creditors, when he was relieved by the generosity of le Bret, a counsellor of state. Automne was a man of study, and wrote several works on professional subjects, which were much approved. The most celeb rated of these is his “Commentaire surla Coutume de Bourdeaux,” the best edition of which was published by Dupin, in 1728, fol. with notes. He wrote also a “Conference du Droit Romain avec le Droit Franois y” 1644, 2 vols. fol. and “Censura Gallica in Jus Civile Romanum,” Paris, 1625, 8vo, or according to Saxius, 1613. Some of these works are thought to be deficiennn judgment and in perspicuity of arrangement. He is said to have been the editor of Juvenal and Persius, with copious notes in Latin, 2 vols. 8vo, Paris, 1607, which we do not find mentioned in any of the lists of editions of those poets, yet it is noticed by Saxius. Moreri thinks he died about 162^, but in the Diet. Historique it is said he died in 1666 at the age of ninety-nine years, which does not correspond with the date of his birth, which we have given from Moreri.

, a painter from necessity and a poet by taste, died in indigence, in constant attachment to his two professions, at Paris, his birth-place, in the hospital of Incurables, in 1745. D'Autreau, although of a gloomy and melancholy character, wrote comedies that excited laughter, and continue to amuse upon the stage. He was almost sixty when he first turned his thoughts to the drama, an employment that demands all the vivacity and imagination of youth but his plots are too simple, the catastrophe is immediately perceived, and the pleasure of surprise is lost. His dialogue, however, is natural, his style easy, and some of his scenes are in the true comic taste. The Italian theatre has preserved his “Port a PAnglois,” in prose “Democrite pretendu fou,” in three acts, and in verse. The theatres of France have represented “Clorinda,” a tragedy in five acts the “Chevalier Bayard,” in five acts and the “Magie de l'Amour,” a pastoral in one act, in verse. He gave at the opera, “Platee, ou la Naissance de la Comedie,” the music by the celebrated Rameau. “Le Port a l'Anglois” is the first piece in which the Italian players spoke French. The works of d‘Autreau were collected in 1749, in 4 vols. 12mo, with a good preface by Pesselier. The most known of the pictures of this painter, is that of Diogenes, with the lanthern in his hand, in search of an honest man, and finding him in the cardinal de Fleury. D’Autreau lived very retired, de*. spising all that the generality of mankind esteem, and agreeing with the public in no one thing except in the little concern he took about himself.

, an eminent French musician and composer, was born at Clermont in Auvergne, Oct. 4, 1713. Instead of giving any extraordinary proofs of voluntary application, or early pregnancy of genius, he merely complied with the desire of his father, who was a musician, in turning his thoughts, or rather employing his time, in that pursuit. About his eighteenth year, however, an entire change appeared to have taken place in his mind, which became suddenly seized with the most violent enthusiasm, and such was his application night and day, that he soon became a capital performer on the violin, and was in 1739 thought worthy of the honour of being admitted into his majesty’s chamber band. With no other help in composition than the works of Rameau, he composed a trio for two violins and a bass, which he presented to that celebrated author, who, flattered by such a mark of respect, offered the young composer his advice and friendship. Auvergne began to compose a number of works for the court and the opera, which were much admired. In 1766, having the direction of the spiritual concert entrusted to him, and being unable to treat with Mondonville, who asked an exorbitant price for his Motets, Auvergne, undismayed by the vast reputation which the Orpheus of Languedoc (as Mondonville was called) had acquired in that species of composition, turned his own talents to it, and with such success, that his “Te Deum,” “De Profundis,” and his “Miserere,” were considered as first-rate works. In 1753, he composed the music of the first comic opera that was exhibited in France, and thus prepared the way for that style in which Monsigny, Gretry, and Daleyrac have since so ably distinguished themselves. Auvergne was director of the opera from 1767 to 1775, and from 1785 to 1790. Although in this time he had not Studied to accumulate a fortune, he lived in very easy circumstances until the revolution, when he lost all his places, and was thrown into a state approaching to indigence. Jn 1796, he went to Lyons, and was consoled in liis age and poverty by his sisters and his second wife, and here he died Feb. 12, 1797, justly regretted hy all who knew him. Besides the music already mentioned, he composed the following operas, “Canente,” “Enee et Lavinie,” and “Hercule mourant,” all in his younger days, but the dates not specified “Les Amours de Tempe,” 1752 “Les Fetes d'Euterpe,” 1758; “Polyxene,” 1763; “La Venitienne.” He also retouched some former operas, and composed the music of several ballets performed at Versailles and.Fontainbieau. It seems remarkable that so popular a composer, and one who had contributed so much to “gladden life” in the gay metropolis of France, should have been left to end his days in obscurity and poverty.

, born in the Hainaut, lived some time with the abbé des Fontaines, who formed his taste. He entered afterwards into the light -horse-guards, and was killed in the buttle of Dettingen, in 1743, at the age of 3 I He was a man of genius and imagination. His writings are 1. “Memoirs of madame de Barneveldt,” a romance, 2 vols. 12mo. 2. “An abridgment of the history of France and of the Roman history,” by question and answer, 2 vols. 12mo. which was recommended as useful to young persons. It used to be, and sometimes yet is, attributed to the abbe des Fontaines, who only revised it, but overlooked several inaccuracies in the dates and negligences in the style. 3. The three first volumes, and half of the fourth, of the “History of Paris,” in 5 vols. 12mo. 4. The eight first volumes of the “Lives of the illustrious men of France,” in 12mo. The ninth and the tenth were published in 1744, by his brother, canon of Prempntre. The work was continued by the abbe Pereau and M. Turpin. D'Auvigny’s part is written with spirit, and contains curious anecdotes and facts but little known. But the author prefers the ornaments of style to historical precision, and sometimes adopts the romantic tone. His cjiction is in general either laboriously inflated, or too negligent.

was a French astronomer, and a picmber of the old academy of France, into which he was received in 1666. He is principally known for having brought to perfection the micrometer, an instrument usually fitted to a telescope, in the focus of the objectglass, for measuring small angles or distances. This he published in 1666, but Mr. Townley, in the Philosophical Transactions, claims it for one of our countrymen, Mr. Gascoigne. He relates that from some scattered letters and papers of this gentlemen, who was killed in the grand rebellion, he had learned that before its breaking out, he had invented a micrometer, of as much effect as that made by M. Auzout, and had made use of it for some years not only in taking the diameters of the planets, and distances upon land, but in determining other matters of nice importance in the heavens, as the moon’s distance, &c. Mr. Gascoigne’s instrument also fell into the hands of Mr. Townley, who says farther, that by the help of it he could make above 40,000 divisions in a foot. The French writers endeavour to deny all this, and conclude with an assertion, as illiberal as it is false, that every nation has a zeal for its literary glory, but that in England alone this zeal is pushed to ardour and to injustice. Auzout, however, was an astronomer of acknowledged abilities. He died in 1691.

, a physician, of a Spanish family, studied at Antwerp, about the beginning of the sixteenth century, and took his doctor’s degree in medicine at Louvain in 1556. He practised chiefly at Brussels, and was appointed physician -pensionary to that city. He was also esteemed among his learned contemporaries, on account of his poetical talents, and taste in polite literature. His works are 1. “Populariaepigrammata medica.” 2. “Carmen pro vera Medicina.” 3. “De Lue pestilenti.” 4. “Elegiarum liber unus,” printed together, Antwerp, 1562, 4to.

, a patron of learning, was the second son of William Aylesbury by his wife Anne, daughter of John Poole, esq. and was born in London in 1576. He was educated at Westminster school, and, in 1598, became a student of Christ church, Oxford where he distinguished himself by his assiduous application to his studies, especially the mathematics. In June 1605, he took his degree of M. A. After he quitted the university, he was employed as secretary to Charles earl of Nottingham, then lord high admiral of England, in which post he had an opportunity of improving his mathematical knowledge, as well as of giving many proofs of it. On this account when George Villiers, duke of Buckingham, succeeded the earl of Nottingham as high admiral, Mr. Aylesbury not onlv kept his employment, but was also, by the favour of that‘powerful duke, created a baronet, April 19, 1627, having been before made master of requests, and master of the mint. These lucrative employments furnished him with the means of expressing his regard for learned men. He not only made all men of science welcome at his table, and afforded them all the countenance he could but likewise gave to such of them as were in narrow circumstances, regular pensions out of his own fortune, and entertained them at his house in Windsor-park, where he usually spent the summer. Walter Warner, who, at his request, wrote a treatise on coins and coinage, and the famous Mr. Thomas Harriot, were among the persons to whom he extended his patronage, and Harriot left him (in conjunction with Robert Sidney and viscount Lisle) all his writings and all the Mss. he had collected. Mr. Thomas Allen of Oxford, likewise, whom he had recommended to the duke of Buckingham, confided his manuscripts to sir Thomas, who is said to have been one of the most acute and candid critics ef his time. By this means he accumulated a valuable library of scarce books and Mss. which were either lost at home during the civil wars, or sold abroad to relieve his distresses; for in 1642 his adherence to the king, occasioned his being turned out of his places, and plundered of his estates. This he bore with some fortitude, but the murder of his sovereign gave him a distaste of his country, and retiring with his family to Flanders, he lived for some time at Brussels, and afterwards at Breda, where in 1657 he died. He left a son William, who, at the request of Charles I. undertook to translate D’Avila’s History of the Civil Wars of France, which appeared in 1647 but in the second edition, published in 1678, the merit of the whole translation is given to sir Charles Cotterel, except a few passages in the first four books. The calamities of his country affected this gentleman too, and in 1657, when Cromwell fitted out a fleet to go on an expedition to the West Indies, and to carry a supply to the island of Jamaica, Mr. Aylesbury, from pure necessity, engaged himself as secretary to the governor, and died on the island soon after. His surviving sister, the countess of Clarendon, became heiress of what could be recovered of the family estate.

, master in chancery, was educated in Trinity hall, Cambridge, where in 1614 he commenced LL. D. It was his usual practice to relax himself after his severer studies with poetry. Besides his “Divine and Moral Speculations” in verse, London, 1654, 8vo, he wrote “Susanna, or the Arraignment of the two Elders,” inverse, Lond. 1622, 8vo. Mr. Wood starts a question whether he was author of” Britannia Antiqua illustrata,“published under the name of Aylett Sammes, but said to be written by his uncle. Certain it is that the nominal author was unequal to it, though much learning and labour have been spent on it to very little purpose. The Censura Literaria attributes to Dr. Aylett four pastoral eclogues, entitled” A Wife not ready made, but bespoken" the dedication of which is signed R. A. and the second edition was published in 1653, 8vo.

, an eminent English prelate, descended from a very ancient and honourable family, seated at Aylmer-hall, in Norfolk, was born in 1521, and being a younger brother, was either recommended by his relations, or recommended himself by his pregnant parts, to the marquis of Dorset (Henry Grey), afterwards duke of Suffolk, who honoured him with the title of his Scholar, and gave him an exhibition at the university of Cambridge. When he had there attained competent learning, the marquis took him home, where he became tutor to his children, amongst whom was the lady Jane, who for some days was styled queen, and who, under Aylmer’s tuition, acquired the Latin and Greek tongues, reading and writing in the latter with ease and elegance, By his care also, she received right principles of religion, as he imbibed the opinions of the primitive reformers and having for his patrons the duke of Suffolk and the carl of Huntingdon, in the reign of Edward VI., was for some time the only preacherin Leicestershire; where he had great success in inculcating the, Protestant religion. When the celebrated Ascliam, in a visit to lady Jane in 1550, asked her how so young a lady (not then ahove fourteen) could have arrived at such perfection both in philosophy and the Greek language, she bore the following testimony to the merit of her tutor “1 will tell you,” said she, “and tell you truth, which, perchance, you will marvel at. One of the greatest benefits which ever God gave me, is that he sent so sharp and severe parents, and so gentle a schoolmaster. For when I am in presence either of father or mother, whether I speak, keep silence, sit, stand, or go eat, drink, be merry or sad be sewing, placing, dancing, or doing any thing else, I must do it, as it were, in such weight, measure, and number, and even so perfectly, as God made the world, or else, I am so sharply taunted, so cruelly threatened, yea, presently sometimes with pinches, nips, and bobs (or other ways, which I will not name, for the honour I bear them), so without measure misordereo”, that I think myself in hell, till time come that I must go to Mr. Elmer, who teachfeth me so gently, so pleasantly, with fair allurements to learning, that I think all the time nothing while I am with him and when I am called from him, 1 fall a weeping, because whatsoever I do else but learning, is full of grief, trouble, fear, and wholly misliking unto me and this my book hath been so much my pleasure, and bringeth daily to me more pleasure, and more yet, in respect to it, all other pleasures, in very deed, be but trifles and troubles unto me." Mr. Ascharn was so affected with this interview, that in a letter to lady Jane, dated the eighteenth of January, 1551, he speaks of it in rapture, and by a beautiful apostrophe, addressing himself to Mr. Ay liner, felicitates him on his having so ingenious a scholar, in a strain of compliment, which he says the great Sturmius made use of to him, speaking of his happiness, in having the lady Elizabeth for his pupil. In this letter it is, that he desires Mr. Aylmer, to whom be foresaw it would be shewn, to engage the lady Jane, to write a letter in Greek to himself, and another to Sturmius, and also desires they might continue to live in the same learned friendship and intercourse, which they had hitherto done.

The first preferment bestowed upon Aylmer, was the archdeaconry of Stow, in the diocese of Lincoln, which giving him a seat in the convocation, held in the first year of queen Mary, he boldly opposed that return to Popery, which he saw approaching. He was one of six$ who, in the midst of all the violence of that assembly, offered to dispute all the controverted points in religion, against the most learned champions, of the Papists. But when the supreme power began to employ force, archdeacon Aylmer withdrew^ and escaped abroad in almost a miraculous manner*. He resided first at Strasbourg, afterwards at Zurick in Switzerland, and there in peace followed his studies, employing all his time in acquiring knowledge, or in assist^ ing other men of study. His thoughts, though in a distant country, were continually employed in the service of England, and of Englishmen. He published (as Strype supposes) lady Jane Grey’s letter to Harding, who had been her father’s chaplain, and who apostatized. He assisted Fox in translating the History of English Martyrs into Latin, and also in the version of archbishop Cranmer’s Vindication of the book on the Sacrament, against Gardiner, bishop of Winchester, which, however, was never printed. During these employments he found leisure to visit most of the universities of Italy and Germany, and had an offer from the duke of Saxony, of the Hebrew professorship of Jena, which he refused, on the prospect of speedily returning home* It was during his exile likewise that he wrote the only work of consequence which he ever published, in answer to the famous Scotch reformer, John Knox. In 1556, John Knox printed, at Geneva, a treatise under this title “The first Blast against the monstrous regiment and empire of Women,” to shew that, by the laws of God, women could not exercise sovereign authority. The objects of this attack were the two queens, Mary of Lorrain, then regent of Scotland, and Mary queen of England. It was violent, but not unargumentative, and he could appeal with effect to the laws of France, and to the recent proposal of Edward VI. to adopt the same laWi He intended a second, and a third part; but finding it gave offence to many of his brethren, and being desirous to strengthen rather than invalidate the authority of Elizabeth, he relinquished his design. Still as this first tended to injure the Protestant religion in the minds of Princes, and those in authority, Mr. Aylmer resolved to employ his

* Fuller says that the ship in which and that Aylmer, who was a man of

he embarked was searched, and that he low stature, sat on one side of it, while

was concealed in a very large wine ves- the searchers drank wine out of th

sel, with a partition in the middle other. pen in the performance of a duty incumbent upon him, as a Christian divine, and a good subject. His piece was entitled, “An Harborowe for faithfull and trewe subjects, against the late blowne Blaste, concerning the government of Women. Wherein bee confuted al such reasons as a straunger of late made in that behalfe. With a briefe Exhortation to obedience.” Strasbourg, April 26, 1559, dedicated to the earl of Bedford, and lord Robert Dudley (afterwards earl of Leicester, then) master of the queen’s horse. This book is written with great vivacity, and at the same time discovers its author’s deep and general learning. It contains, however, some sentiments rather more in favour of the Puritan* than he afterwards held, a circumstance which was objected to him by some of that party, when in discharge of his episcopal duty he found it necessary to repress their endeavours to assimilate the church of England with that of Geneva.

After the accession of queen Elizabeth, Aylmer returned home, and was one of the eight divines appointed to dispute with as many popish bishops at Westminster, in the presence of a great assembly. In 1562, he obtained the archdeaconry of Lincoln, by the favour of Mr. secretary Cecil and in right of this dignity, sat in the famous synod held the same year, wherein the doctrine and discipline of the church, and its reformation from the abuses of popery, were carefully examined and settled. In this situation he continued for many years, and discharged the duty of a good subject to the government under which he lived, in church and state being one of the -queen’s justices of the peace, as also an ecclesiastical commissioner. In October, 1573, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor in divinity, in the university of Oxford. The next year the archbishop of Canterbury made choice of him, to answer a book written in Latin against the government of the church of England but after thoroughly considering it, Dr. Aylmer declined the task, which some in those days (perhaps unjustly) attributed to discontent, because he was not made a bishop. To this dignity he had been often named by Parker, then archbishop of Canterbury, but always prevented either by the interest of the archbishop’s enemies, or his own, the latter never failing to suggest, that in the same book where Aylmer had made his court to the queen, he had also shewn his spleen against episcopacy. At last, in the year 1576, on Dr. Edwin Sandys being promoted to the archbishopric of York/ Dr. Ayltner was made bishop of London, not without the furtherance of his predecessor, who was his intimate friend, and had beeii his fellow-exile. Yet, immediately after his promotion, bishop Aylmer found, or thought he found, cause to complain of the archbishop and although his grace assisted at his consecration, on the 24th of March, 3576, bishop Aylmer sued him for dilapidations, which after some years prosecution he recovered. In 1577, our bishop began his first visitation, wherein he urged subscriptions, which some ministers refused, and reviled such as complied, calling them dissemblers, and comparing them to Arians and Anabaptists, he was also extremely assiduous in public preaching, took much pains in examining such as came to him for ordination, and kept a strict eye over the Papists and Puritans in which he acted not only to the extent of episcopal authority, but wrote freely to the treasurer Burleigh, as to what he thought farther necessary. When the plague rageed in London, in the year 1578, our bishop shewed a paternal care of his clergy and people, and without exposing the former to needless perils, took care that these last should not be without spiritual comforts. In 1581 came out Campion’s book, shewing the reasons why he had deserted the reformed, and returned to the popish communion. It was written in very elegant Latin, and dedicated to the scholars of both universities and the treasurer Burleigh thought that it should be answered, and referred the care thereof to our bishop, who though he gave his opinion freely upon the subject, as to the mode in which it should be done, yet declined the task himself on account of the great business he had upon his hands, and it was undertaken and ably executed by Dr. Whitaker. Aylmer was indeed no great friend to controversy, which he thought turned the minds of the people too much from the essence of religion, made them quarrelsome and captious, indifferent subjects, and not very good Christians. On this account, he was more severe with the Puritans than the Papists, imprison ing one Woodcock, a stationer or bookseller, for vending a treatise, entitled “An Admonition to Parliament,” which tended to subvert the church as it was then constituted. He had likewise some disputes with one Mr. Welden, a person of a good estate and interest, in Berkshire, whom he procured to be committed by the ecclesiastical imssioners. These proceedings roused the Puritans, who treated him as a persecutor, and an enemy to true religion but this did not discourage the bishop, who thought the peace of the church was to be secured by the authority of its fathers, and therefore he executed his episcopal power, as far and as often as he thought necessary. Thus he suddenly summoned the clergy of London to his palace on Sunday, September 27, 1579, at one o'clock. On this summons forty appeared and the dean being likewise present, the bishop cautioned them of two things, one was, not to meddle with the Ubiquitarian controversy the other, to avoid meddling with the points treated in Stubb’s book, entitled “The Dfscovery of a gaping Gulph,” &c. written against the queen’s marriage with Monsieur, the French king’s brother, and in which it was suggested, that the queen wavered in her religion. This method being found very effectual, he summoned his clergy often, and made strict inquiries into their conduct, a practice as much approved by some, as censured by others and his unpopularity, perhaps, might occasion, in some measure, that violence with which he was prosecuted before the council, in May 1579, for cutting down his woods, when he was severely checked by the lord treasurer but notwithstanding his angry letters to that great nobleman, and his long and laboured defence of himself, he was, at length, by the queen’s command, forbidden to fell any more.

On the 6th of April, in the same year, there was a dreadful earthquake and in the dead of the night of the 1 st of May, it was felt again, which, as it exceedingly terrified the people, so the bishop, that he might turn their concern to a proper object, and at the same time exhibit to them reasonable grounds of comfort, composed certain prayers to be made use of in the public service. In 1581, the bishop had an angry contest with the lord Rich, who kept one Wright a puritan minister in his house, and would have compelled the bishop to license him to preach in his diocese but on a hearing before the ecclesiastical commissioners, Wright was committed to the Fleet, and others who had interfered in this affair, to other prisons. This increased the number of his enemies, of whom he had not a few before, who daily suggested that he was a violent man, and sought to vest too great a power in churchmen and these representations had such effect, that sometimes messages were sent to him, to abate somewhat of the rigour of his proceedings. His lordship, however, still supported the ecclesiastical commission, by his presence and authority; and though a milder course might have made him more popular, yet he thought it better to suffer himself, than that the church should. He began, however, to have many doubts concerning the treasurer, from whose hands his reproofs usually came but upqn the winding up of his cause before the council about felling of woods, he saw clearly, that he had no friend equal to the treasurer, who, though he endeavoured by his admonitions to prevent his falling into difficulties, yet generously exerted his utmost power to help him out of them, so far as was consistent with equity, and the good of the common weal. From this time forward, therefore, thebishop applied chiefly to the treasurer, for any favours he expected from court, particularly with regard to the business of his translation. He became exceedingly solicitous to be removed from London, either to Winchester or Ely; but, though he had many fair promises, his interest was insufficient, and in the mean time new informations, some with little, many with no cause at all, were exhibited against him, and gave him not a little uneasiness, although, on a thorough examination, his conduct escaped the censure of his superiors. In 1583 he performed his triennial visitation, and having discovered many scandalous corruptions in the ecclesiastical courts, especially in the business of commuting penances, he honestly represented what came to his knowledge to the privy council. About this time also he suspended certain ministers, accused of nonconformity and it appears, that upon a thorough examination of the matter, his lordship did impartial justice, in restoring one Mr. Giffard, whom he had twice suspended, when those who had charged him were able to make nothing out. In this year also he committed Mr. Thomas Cartwright, the celebrated Puritan minister, who had written against the hierarchy. Yet for this his lordship incurred the queen’s displeasure and a little after was informed that he stood accused to her majesty, for impairing the revenues of his bishopric, of which he purged himself, by exhibiting a state of the bishopric as it then stood, compared with the condition it was in when he became bishop. Other difficulties. he met with, on account of the share he had in executing her majesty’s ecclesiastical commission, from which there were Continual appeals to the privy council, where the lords who favoured the Puritans, did not fail to object to the bishop’s conduct, which contributed not a little to irritate his warm temper. In 1585 he composed a prayer to be used on account of the rainy unseasonable weather, which he recommended to private families, as well as directed to be read with the public prayers. He also used his interest to quiet the murmurs of the common people in London, against the crowds of strangers who fled hither, to avoid the persecutions raised against them, for embracing the Protestant religion. In the summer of the year 1586, the, bishop went his next triennial visitation, and at Maiden in Essex, narrowly escaped an outrageous insult, intended against him by some disaffected persons. In 1587, the bishop entered into a new scene of trouble, on account of one Mr. Robert Cawdry, schoolmaster, whom the lord Burleigh had presented to the living of South LufFenhara in Rutlandshire, where, after preaching sixteen years, he was convened before the ecclesiastical commission, and at length, the bishop sitting as judge, deprived. Cawdry would not submit to the sentence upon which the matter was re-examined by the ecclesiastical commission, at Lambeth, where to deprivation, degradation was added. Cawdry, however, still refusing to submit, made new and warm representations to the lord Burleigh, who favoured him as much as with justice he could but after near five years contest, the bishop’s and archbishop’s sentences were supported, both by the civil and common lawyers. In 1588, his lordship restored one Mr. Henry Smith, a very eloquent and much admired preacher, whom he had suspended for contemptuous expressions against the book of Common Prayer, which Smith denied. In 1589, he expressed his dislike of certain libels against the king of Spain, giving it as his reason, that on so glorious a victory, it was better to thank God, than insult men, especially princes. That year also he visited his diocese, though he was grown old and very infirm, and suspended one Dyke at St. Alban’s, though he had been recommended by the lord treasurer. In 1591 he caused the above-mentioned Mr. Cartwright to be brought before him out of the Fleet, and expostulated with him roundly, on the disturbance he had given the church. In 1592, he strongly solicited in favour of Dr. Bullingham, and Dr. Cole, that they might be preferred to bishoprics, but without success, which his lordship foresaw. For he observed when he applied for them, that he was not so happy as to do rmieh good for his friends yet he added, he would never be wanting in shewing his good will, both to them and to the church. About this time, casting his eye on Dr. Bancroft, a rising and very active man, he endeavoured to obtain leave to resign his bishopric to him, as a man every way fit for such a charge but in this also he was disappointed, which it seems lay heavy at his heart for even on his death-bed, he expressed his earnest desire that Bancroft might succeed him. In 1592, the bishop assisted at his son’s visitation, as archdeacon of London, and exerted himself with as much zeal and spirit as he had ever shewn in his life. His great age, and great labours, however, weighed him down by degrees, and he died June 3, 1594, and his body being brought from his palace at Fulham, was interred in St. Paul’s cathedral before St. George’s chapel, under a fair stone of grey marble, with an inscription which was demolished by the republicans in Cromwell’s time. Bishop Aylmer married Judith Bure&, or Buers, of a very good family in Suffolk, by whom he had a very numerous offspring, viz. seven sons, and two or three daughters. As to the personal qualities of the bishop, they were, as those of most men are, good and bad, the former, perhaps, too much magnified by his friends, as the latter were by his enemies. He was solidly and extensively learned in all things that became either a great churchman, or a polite man, to know. He was very well versed in the three learned languages, had read much history, was a good logician, and very well skilled in the civil law. As a divine, he had studied, and understood the scripture thoroughly could preach, not only rhetorically but pathetically and in the course of his life-time, never buried his talent . He was in his heart, from the conviction of his head, a Protestant, and opposed Popery warmly, from a just sense of its errors, which he had the courage to combat openly in the days of queen Mary, and the honesty to suppress in the reign of queen Elizabeth. With all this, and indeed with a temper occasionally soured and irritable, he was a good-natured, facetious man, one extremely diligent and painful in the several employments he went through of too generous a temper to be corrupted, and of much too stout a one to be brow-beaten. He was a magnificent man in his house, as appears by his household, which consisted of fourscore persons, to whom he was a liberal and kind master. After his fatigues he was wot to refresh himself, either with conversation or at bowls. As to his failings, his temper was without doubt warm, his expressions sometimes too blunt, and his zeal not guided by wisdom. His enemies charged him with an exorbitant love of power, which displayed itself in various extraordinary acts of severity, with covetousness, which prompted him to spoil his see, and injure a private man; with intemperate heat against Puritans, with a slight regard of the Lord’s day, and with indecencies in ordinary speech some of which charges must be allowed a foundation, while on the other hand they appear to have been greatly exaggerated. But upon the whole there must have been many errors in a conduct which his superiors so often reproved. At the time of his decease he left seven sons, and either two or three daughters. His sons were, first, Samuel, who was bred to the law. He was stiled, of Claydon-hall in the county of Suffolk, and was high-sheriff of that county in the reign of king Charles I. and by two wives left a numerous posterity. His second, Theophilus, a most worthy divine, archdeacon of London, rector of Much-Hadham in Hertfordshire, and doctor of divinity. He was chaplain to king James, an able and zealous preacher, and, like his father, zealous against the Puritans, but so charitable, that he left his own family in indifferent circumstances. He lived a true pattern of Christian piety, and died heroically, closing his own eyelids, and with these words in his mouth, “Let my people know that their pastor died undaunted, and not afraid of death I bless my God, I have no fear, no doubt, no reluctancy, but a sure confidence in the sin-overcoming itierits of Jesus Christ.” This happened January 1625. He was buried in his own parish church, and the excellent primate Usher preached his funeral sermon, no inconsiderable proof of his merit. His third, John, who for some eminent service was knighted, and styled sir John Aylmer, of Rigby in the county of Lincoln, knt. Fourth, fifth, and sixth, Zachary, Nathaniel, and Edmund, of whom we know nothing particularly, except that Zachary and Edmund were the warmest friends that age produced. When Edmund lay sick, Zachary continued with him night and day till his death, and when a person came to measure the body, in order to make a coffin, Zachary would be measured also, and in a very short space took possession of the coffin made for him at the same time with that of his deceased brother. These gentlemen seem to have been divines. His seventh, Tobel, i.e. God is good. Archbishop Whitgift was his godfather, and the reason he was thus named, was his mother’s being overturned in a coach, without receiving any hurt, when she was big with child. He wrote himself Tobel Aylmer, of Writtle, in the county of Essex, gentleman. He married a gentleman’s daughter in that county, and had by her several children. As to the bishop’s daughters, Judith, the eldest, married William Lynch, of the county of Kent, esq. the second, Elizabeth, married sir John Foliot of Perton, in the county of Worcester, knt. Either a third daughter, or else lady Foliot, took for her second husband Mr. Squire, a clergyman, a man of wit, but very debauched, and a great spendthrift, though he had large preferments. He made a very unkind husband to his wife, which her father, the bishop, so much resented, that, as Martin MarPrelate phrasss it, “He went to buffets with his son-inlaw, for a bloody-nose .” This Squire died poor, lerving a son named John, who was well educated, and provided for as a clergyman, at the ex pence, and by the procurement of his uncle, Dr. Theophilus Aylmer, which he repaid with the utmost gratitude. To all his children our bishop, by his will, bearing date the 22d of April, 1594, bequeathed large legacies, as also some to his grand-children, appointing his two sons, Samuel and Theophilus, his executors, with Dr. Richard Vaughan, who was also his relation.

, was of a good family in Hampshire, and educated at Winchester school. He then went to Oxford, and was admitted perpetual fellow of New college, after he had served two years of a probation this was in 1652. He took his degrees in civil law, and that of doctor in 1663. He was esteemed an excellent Greek scholar, and a good Greek and Latin poet, as appears by a book which he composed when a young man, entitled “Musse Sacrse sen Jonas, Jeremia? threni, et Daniel, Graeco redditi carmine,” Oxon. 1652. He also wrote many Greek and Latin verses, which are dispersed in various books. He died at Petersfield, April 6, 1672, and was buried in the church of Havant in Hampshire.

, bart. V.P.A.S. and F.R.S. of Framfield in Sussex, was descended from a Saxon family, anciently seated at Bocton Alof near Wye, in the county of Kent, in the reign of Henry III. who removed to Hornchurch, in the county of Essex, in that of Henry IV. and to Sudbury in that of Edward IV. Sir William Ayloffe of Great Braxtead, in the county of Essex, was knighted by James I. May 1, 1603, and created a baronet, Nov. 25, 1612; and from his eldest son by his third wife, the late baronet was the fourth in descent, and fifth in title. His father Joseph, a barrister, who married a daughter of Bryan Ayliffe, an eminent merchant of London, and died in 1717, and his grandfather, were both of Gray’s Inn. He was born about 1703, received the early part of his education at Westminster school, admitted of Lincoln’s Inn 1724, and in the same year was entered a gentleman-commoner at St. John’s college, Oxford, which college he quitted about 1728; elected F.A.S. Feb. 10, 1731-2, one of the first council under their charter, 1751 vice-president, 17; and F.R.S. June 3, 1731. He prevailed on Mr. Kirby, painter in Ipswich, to make drawings of a great number of monuments and buildings in Suffolk, of which twelve were engraved, with a description, 1748, and others remain unpublished. He had at that time an intention to write a history of the county, and had drawn up proposals for that purpose but, being disappointed of the materials which he had reason to expect for so laborious a work, they were never published. On the building of Westminsterbridge he was appointed secretary to the commissioners, 1737 and on the establishment of the Paper-office on the respectable footing it at present is, by the removal of the state-papers from the old gate at Whitehall to new apartments at the Treasury, he was nominated the first in the commission for the care and preservation of them. In 1747 he circulated “Proposals for printing by subscription, Encyclopaedia; or, a rational Dictionary of Arts, Sciences, and Trade. By several eminent hands. Methodized, digested, and now publishing at Paris, by M. Diderot, fellow of the Imperial and Royal Academies of Paris and St. Petersburgh and, as to the mathematical part, by M. d'Alembert, member of the Royal Academy of Sciences at Paris and Berlin, aud F. R. S. Translated from the French, with additions and improvements;” in which was to be included a great variety of new articles, tending to explain and illustrate the antiquities, history ecclesiastical, civil, and military, laws, customs, manufactures, commerce, curiosities, &c. of Great Britain and Ireland by sir Joseph Ayloffe, bart. F. R. S. and of the Society of Antiquaries of London, and author of “The Universal Librarian.” Of this work a prospectus was published, in one large sheet, dated Dec. 14, 1751 and the first number of the work itself, June 11, 1752. This nuftiber being badly received by the public, the further prosecution of the business seems to have been dropped. See some account of it in the Gentleman’s Mag. 1752, p. 46. It was proposed to have been finished by Christmas 1756, in ten quarto volumes, price nine guineas, the last two to contain upwards of six hundred plates. In 1772 he published, in 4to, “Calendars of the Ancient Charters, &c. and of the Welsh and Scottish Rolls now remaining in the Tower ofLondon, &c.” (which was begun to be printed by the late Rev. Mr. Morant), and in the introduction gives a most judicious and exact account-of our public records. He drew up the account of the ehapel of London-bridge, of which an engraving was published by Vertue, 1748, and again by the Society of Antiquaries, 1777. His historical description of the interview between Henry VIII. and Francis I. on the Champ de Drap d'Or, from an original painting at Windsor, and his account of the paintings of the same age at Cowdray, were inserted in the third volume of the Archaeologia, and printed separately, to accompany engravings of two of these pictures by the Society of Antiquaries, 1775. His account of the body of Edward I. as it appeared on opening his tomb, 1774, was printed in the same volume, p. 376. Having been educated, as has been observed, at Westminster, he acquired an early affection for that venerable cathedral and his intimate acquaintance witfi every part of it displayed itself in his accurate description of five monuments in the choir, engraved in 1779 by the same society; who must reckon, among the many obligations which they owe to his zeal and attention to their interests, the last exertions of his life to put their affairs on the most respectable and advantageous footing, on their removal to their new apartments in Somerset Place. He superintended the new edition of Leland’s Collectanea, in 9 vols. 8vo, 1770, and also of the Liber Niger Scaccarii, in 2 vols. 8vo, 1771, to each of which he added a valuable appendix to the latter the charters of Kingston-on-Thames, of which his father was recorder. He also revised through the press a new edition of Hearne’s “Curious Discourses,” 1771, 2 vols. 8vo and likewise the “Registrum Roffense,” published by Mr. Thorpe in 1769, folio. At the beginning of the seventh volume of Somers’s Tracts is advertised, “A Collection of Debates in Parliament before the Restoration, from Mss. by sir Joseph Ayloffe, bart.” which is supposed never to have appeared. In January 1734, he married Mrs. Margaret Railton (daughter and heiress of Thomas Railton, esq. of Carlisle, in the county of Cumberland, and relict of Thomas Railton, esq. who died in the commission of the peace for the city of Westminster, Sept. 4, 1732) and by this lady he had one son of his own name, who died of the small-pox, at Trinity hall, Cambridge, at the age of twentyone, Dec. 19, 1756. Sir Joseph died at his house at Kennington-lane, Lambeth, April 19, 1781, aged seventy-two; and was buried in a vault in Henclon church, with his father and his only son. His extensive knowledge of our national antiquities and municipal rights, and the agreeable manner in which he communicated it to his friends and tjie public, made him sincerely regretted hy all who had the pleasure of his acquaintance. Such of his Mss. as had not been claimed by his friends, were sold by auction, February 27, 1782.

, a Piedmontese author, accompanied the bishop of Maurienne into France in quality of chaplain. He afterwards retired to Holland, where he embraced the Calvinistic persuasion, but some years after he feigned a desire to re-enter the Romish communion. Clement, keeper of the king’s library, procured him a passport for returning to France. The cardinal de Noailles obtained a pension for him, and placed him in the seminary of foreign missions. In the mean time Clement gave him full liberty in the king’s library; but, so ungrateful was he for all the advantages he derived from it, that he purloined several of the books, and among others, the original of the synod of Jerusalem, held in 1672. He got this manuscript printed in Holland, with the letters of Cyril Lucar, and some other pieces, under the title of “Monumens authentiques de la religion des Grecs, et de la faussete de plusieurs confessions de foi,” 1715, in 4to. This work was answered in a spirited manner by the abbe Renaudot. We have likewise, byAymon, 1. “Les Synodes nationaux des Eglises reformees de France,” printed in 1710, 2 vols. 4to. 2. “Tableau de la Cour de Rome,” 1707, 12mo, a satirical work. 3. A bad translation of the “Letters and memoirs of the nuncio Visconti,” 1719, 2 vols. 12mo.

, in Latin Ærodius, lieutenant-criminal in the presidial of Angers, was born there in 1536. He studied Latin and philosophy at Paris, and law at Toulouse from thence he went to Bourges for the advantage of the public lectures of Duarenus, Cujas, and Doneau, three of the most excellent civilians of that age. Having taken the degree of bachelor at Bourges, he returned to his own country, where he read public lectures upon the civil law, and pleaded several causes. He returned to Paris some time after, and became one of the most famous advocates in the parliament. He published there, in 1563, “The Declamations of Quintilian,” which he corrected in a variety of places, and illustrated with notes. The year following he published, in the same city, a treatise “ coneerning the power of Redemption,” written by Francis Grimaudet, the king’s advocate at Angers, and wrote a preface to it concerning “the nature, variety, and change of Laws.” In 1567 he published “Decretorum Rerumve apud diversos populos et omni antiquitate judicatarum libri duo accedit tractatus de origine et auctoritate rerum judicatarum,” which he much enlarged in the subsequent editions. He left Paris the year following, in order to take upon him the office of lieutenant-criminal in his own country, and performed it in such a manner as to acquire the name of “the rock of the accused.” Some other writings came from his pen, political or controversial, but that which acquired most fame among foreigners was his treatise “De Patrio Jure,” on the power of fathers, written in French and Latin, and occasioned by his son having been seduced by the Jesuits. His father, for the purposes of education, had put him under their tuition, but perceiving that he had a lively genius, a strong memory, and other excellent qualifications, he very earnestly desired both the provincial of that order, and the rector of the college, not to solicit him to enter into their society, which they readily promised, but soon broke their word and, though he made the greatest interest, and even prevailed on the king of France and the pope to take his part, he could never recover him from their snares. The young man answered his father’s book, but his superiors were ashamed to publish it, and employed Richeome, the provincial of the Jesuits at Paris, to answer it, but even this they did not venture to publish. Peter Ayrault died July 21, 1601. His son not until 1644.

, an eminent English penman of the seventeenth century. It is difficult to fix the time and place of his birth we find him, early in life, in a menial capacity with sir William Ashurst, who was lord mayor in 1694, to whom, and in which year, he dedicated his “Arithmetic made easy,” a book which was well received by the public, and has passed through several editions the twelfth was printed in 1714, with an addition in book-keeping by Charles Snell. In 1695, he published his “Tutor to Penmanship,” engraved by John Sturt, in oblong folio. It is dedicated to king William III. and though a very pompous book, is valuable on many accounts; the writing being plain and practical, and much more useful than his “A-la-­mode Secretary,” another writing-book he published from the hand of the same engraver. In 1700 he published his “Paul’s school round hand.” It is no more than a set of copies, ornamented but is clear and bold, and was engraved by Sturt. He lived then at the Hand and Pen in St. Paul’s Church-yard, and is said to have gained 800l. per annum by teaching and the sale of his works. We have another of his performances under the title of the “Penman’s Daily Practice,” which he calls a cyphering book it contains examples of all the hands now in use, in thirtyfour plates done by the same engraver, but has no date. He died about 1705, of an apoplexy.

, esq. a lieutenant in the first regiment of foot-guards, only son of the rev. Dr. Francis Ayscough (who was tutor to lord Lyttelton at Oxford, and at length dean of Bristol) by Anne, fifth sister to his lordship, who addressed a poem to the doctor from Paris, in 1728, printed in Dodsley’s second volume. And there are some verses to captain Ayscough in the second lord Lyttelton’s poems, 1780. Captain Ayscough was also author of Semiramis, a tragedy, 1777, and the editor of the great lord Lyttelton' s works. In September, 1777, he went to the continent for the recovery of his health, and wrote an account of his journey, which, on his return, he published under the title of “Letters from an Officer in the Guards to his Friend in England, containing some accounts of France and Italy, 1778,” 8vo. He received, however, but a temporary relief from the air of the continent. After lingering for a short time, he died Oct. 14, 1779, a few weeks only before his cousin, the second lord Lyttelton, whose family owes little to his character, or that of the subject of this short article. Two young men of more profligate morals have seldom insulted public decency, by calling the public attention to their many licentious amours and adventures.

, a very useful contributor to the literary history of his country, was the son of George Ayscough of Nottingham, a respectable tradesman, who unfortunately launched into speculations which impaired his fortune. His son Samuel, after receiving a school education, assisted his father in the business of a farm for some time, and afterwards was reduced to work as a labouring miller for the maintenance of his father and sister. While at this humble occupation, which did not procure the very moderate advantage he expected, an old schoolfellow and friend, hearing of his distress, about 1770, sent for him to London, and obtained for him at first the office of an overlooker of some paviours in the street. Soon after, however, he assisted in the shop of Mr. Rivington, bookseller, of St. Paul’s Church-yard, and then obtained an employment in the British Museum, at a small weekly stipend. Here he discovered a degree of knowledge, which, if not profound, was highly useful, in arranging and cataloguing books and Mss. and his services soon recommended him to an increase of salary, and to some extra employment in regulating the libraries of private gentlemen, the profits of which he shared with his father, whom he sent for to town, and maintained comfortably until his death, Nov. 18, 1783.

About 1785 he was appointed assistant-librarian to the British Museum, on the establishment, and soon after went into orders, and was ordained to the curacy of Normantou upon Soar in Nottinghamshire. He was also appointed assistant-curate of St. Giles’s in the Fields; and in all these situations conducted himself in such a manner as to gain the friendship of many distinguished characters. In 1790 he was appointed to preach the Fairchild lecture on Whit-­Tuesday, at Snoreditch church, before the Royal Society, which he continued to do till 1804, when he completed the series of the discourses in fifteen sermons.

His labours in literature were of the most useful cast, and manifested a patience and assiduity seldom to be met with, and his laborious exertions in the vast and invaluable library of the British Museum form a striking instance of his zeal and indefatigable attention. He soon acquired that slight degree of knowledge in several languages, and that technical knowledge of old books and of their authors, and particularly that skill in decyphering difficult writing, which amply answered the most useful purposes of the librarian, as well as the visiting scholar. He assisted also in the adjustment of the records in the Tower, and in theformation of many useful indexes and catalogues, some of which will be noticed hereafter. By these means his situation became very comfortable, and about a year before his death it was rendered yet more so, by his being presented with the living of Cudham in Kent, by lord chancellor Eldon. He wrote a very accurate account of this parish irt the Gentleman’s Magazine a few weeks before he died, and by an affecting coincidence, it appeared in that excellent repository the same month in which his death was announced. This event happened on the 30th of October, 1804, at his apartments in the British Museum, in the fifty-ninth year of his age.

Mr. Ayscough was a man of a benevolent and charitable disposition, and frequently consulted how he might exereise these virtues, without reflecting that his means were circumscribed. Having experienced much distress himself with regard to pecuniary matters, he was ever ready to alleviate it in others, and became a patron almost before he ceased to be a dependant. In his office in the Museum he will long be remembered for the pleasure he seemed to take in assisting the researches of the curious, and imparting the knowledge he had acquired of the vast resources in that national repository. With somewhat of roughness, or bluntness, in his manner, he delighted in volunteering his services in all cases where the visitors wished for information and there was a preciseness and regularity in all the arrangements he had made, which enabled him to do this with a facility which often cannot be acquired by veteran bibliographers.

In 1783 Mr. Ayscough published a small political pamphlet, entitled “Remarks on the Letters of an American Farmer or, a detection of the errors of Mr. J. Hector St. John pointing out the pernicious tendency of those letters to Great Britain.” But among his more useful labours must be particularly distinguished his “Catalogue of the Manuscripts preserved in the British Museum, hitherto unclescribed, consisting of five thousand volumes, including the collections of sir Hans Sloane, bart. and the Rev. Thoraas Birch, D. D. and about five hundred volumes bequeathed, presented, or purchased at various times” 2 vqls 1782, 4to. This elaborate catalogue is upon a new plan, for the excellence of which an appeal may safely be made to every visitor of the Museum since the date of its publication. Mr. Ayscough assisted afterwards in the catalogue of printed books, 2 vols. folio, 1787, of which about twothirds were compiled by Dr. Maty and Mr. Harper, and the remainder by Mr. Ayscough. He was also, at the time of his death, employed in preparing* a new catalogue of the printed books, and had completed a catalogue of the ancient charters in the Museum, amounting to about sixteen thousand. As an index-maker his talents are well known by the indexes he made for the Monthly Review, the Gentleman’s Magazine, the British Critic, &c. and especially by a verbal index to Shakspeare, a work of prodigious labour. It remains to be* added, that his knowledge of topographical antiquities was very considerable, and that perhaps no man, in so short a space of time, emerging too from personal difficulties, and contending with many disadvantages, ever acquired so much general knowledge, or knew how to apply it to more useful purposes. The leading facts in this sketch are taken from the Gentleman’s Magazine for December 1804. To that miscellany, we believe, he was a very frequent contributor, and what he wrote was in a style which would not have discredited talents of which the world has a higher opinion.

, an eminent English admiral in the last century, descended from a very good family in Lincolnshire, and entered early into the sea-service, where he obtained the character of an able and experienced officer, and the honour of knighthood from king Charles I. This, however, did not hinder him from adhering to the parliament, when by a very singular intrigue he got possession of the fleet, and so zealous he was in the service of his masters, that when in 1648, the greatest part of the navy went over to the prince of Wales, he, who then commanded the Lion, secured that ship for the parliament, which was by them esteemed an action of great importance. As this was a sufficient proof of his fidelity, he had the command given him in a squadron, that was employed to watch the motions of the prince of Wales and accordingly sailed to the coast of Ireland, where he prevented his highness from landing, and drew many of the seamen to that service from which they had deserted. The parliament next year sent him with a considerable number of ships, and the title of admiral, to the coast of Ireland, which commission he discharged with such vigour, that the parliament continued him in his command for another year, and ordered an immediate provision to be made for the payment of his arrears, and presented him with one hundred pounds. After the war was finished in Ireland, sir George Ayscue had orders to sail with a small squadron, to reduce the island of Barbadoes but his orders were countermanded, as the parliament received information, that the Dutch were treating with sir John Grenville, in order to have the isles of Scilly put into their hands, and therefore it was thought necessary to reduce these islands first. Blake and Ayscue were employed in this expedition, in the spring of 1651, and performed it with honour and success, sir John Grenville entering into a treaty with them, who used him very honourably, and gave him fair conditions, after which Blake returned to England, and Ayscue proceeded on his voyage to Barbadoes. The parliament were at first pleased, but when the conditions were known, Blake and Ayscue were accused of being too liberal. Blake resented this, and threatened to lay down his commission, which he said he was sure Ayscue would also do. Upon this, the articles were honourably complied with, and sir George received orders to sail immediately to the West Indies. Sir George continued his voyage, and arrived at Barbadoes October 26, 1651. He then found his enterprize would be attended with great difficulties, and such as had not been foreseen at home. The lord Willoughby, of Parham, commanded there for the king, and had assembled a body of 5,Ooo men for the defence of the island. He was a nobleman of great parts and greater probity, one who had been extremely reverenced by the parliament, before he quitted their party, and was Dow extremely popular on the island. Sir George, however, shewed no signs of concern, but boldly forced his passage into the harbour, and made himself master of twelve sail of Dutch merchantmen that lay there, and next morning he sent a summons to the lord Willoughby, requiring him to submit to the authority of the parliament of England, to which his lordship answered, that he knew no such authority, that he had a commission from king Charles II. to be governor of that island, and that he would keep it for his majesty’s service at the hazard of his life. On this, sir George thought it not prudent to land the few troops he had, and thereby discover his weakness to so cautious an enemy. In the mean time, he receivect a letter by an advice-boat from England, with the news of the king’s being defeated at Worcester, and one intercepted from lady Willoughby, containing a very particular account of that unhappy affair. He now summoned lord Willoughby a second time, and accompanied his summons with lady Willoughby’s letter, but his lordship continued firm in his resolution. All this time, sir George anchored in Speights bay, and stayed there till December, when the Virginia merchant fleet arriving, he made as if they were a reinforcement that had been sent him, but in fact, he had not above 2000 men, and the sight of the little army on shore made him cautious of venturing his men, till he thought the inhabitants had conceived a great idea of his strength. The Virginia ships were welcomed at their coming in, as a supply of men of war, and he presently ordered his men on shore: 159 Scotch servants aboard that fleet, were added to a regiment of 700 men, and some seamen, to make their number look more formidable. One colonel Allen landed with them on the 17th of December, and found lord Willoughby’s forces well entrenched, near a fort they had upon the sea- coast. They attacked him, however, and, in a sharp dispute, wherein about sixty men were killed on both sides, had so much the advantage, that they drove them to the fort, notwithstanding that colonel Allen, their commander, was killed by a musket shot, as he attempted to land. After other attempts, sir George procured colonel Moddiford, who was one of the most leading men on the place, to enter into a treaty with him, and this negociation succeeded so well, that Moddiford declared publicly for a peace, and joined with sir George to bring lord Willoughby, the. governor, to reason, as they phrased it but lord Willoughby never would have consented if an accident had not happened, which put most of the gentlemen about him into such confusion, that he could no longer depend upon their advice or assistance. He had called together his officers, and while they were sitting in council, a cannon-ball beat open the door of the room, and took off the head of the centinel posted before it, which so frighted all the gentlemen of the island, that they not only compelled their governor to lay aside his former design, but to retire to a. place two miles farther from the harbour. Sir George Ayscue, taking advantage of this unexpected good fortune, immediately ordered all his forces on shore, as if he intended to have attacked them in their entrenchments, which struck such a terror into some of the principal persons about the governor, that, after rhature deliberation on his own circumstances, and their disposition, he began to alter his mind, and thereupon, to avoid the effusion of blood, both parties appointed commissaries to treat. Sir George named captain Peck, Mr. Searl, colonel Thomas Moddiforcl, and James Colliton, esq. the lord Willoughby, sir Richard Peers, Charles Pirn, esq. colonel Ellice, and major Byham, who on the 17th of January agreed on articles of rendition, which were alike comprehensive and honourable. The lord Willoughby had what he most desired, indemnity, and freedom of estate and person, upon which, soon after, he returned to England. The islands of Nevis, Antigua, and St. Christopher, were, by the same capitulation, surrendered to the parliament. After this, sir George, considering that he had fully executed his commission, returned with the squadron under his command to England, and arriving at Plymouth on the 25th of May, 1652, was received with all imaginable testimonies of joy and satisfaction by the people there, to whom he was well known before, as his late success also served not a little to raise and heighten his reputation. It was not long after his arrival, before he found himself again obliged to enter upon action for the Dutch war which broke out in his absence, was then become extremely warm, and he was forced to take a share in it, though his ships were so extremely foul, that they were much fitter to be laid up, than to be employed in any farther service. On the 21st of June, 1652, he came to Dover, with his squadron of eleven sail, and there joined his old friend admiral Blake, but Blake having received orders to sail northward, and destroy the Dutch herring fishery, sir George Ayscue was left to command the fleet in the Downs. Within a few days after Blake’s departure he took five sail of Dutch merchantmen, and had scarcely brought them in before he received advice that a fleet of forty sail had been seen not far from the coast, upon which he gave chace, fell in amongst them, took seven, sunk four, and ran twenty-four upon the French shore, all the rest being separated from their convoy. The Dutch admiral, Van Tromp, who was at sea- with a great fleet, having information of sir George Ayscue’s situation, resolved to take advantage of him, and with no“less than one hundred sail, clapped iji between him and the river, and resolved to surprize such ships as should attempt to go out or, if that design failed, to go in and sink sir George and his squadron. The English admiral soon discovered their intention, and causing a signal to be made from Dover castle, for all ships to keep to sea, he thereby defeated the first part of their project. However, Van Tromp attempted the second part of his scheme, in hopes of better success, and on the 8th of July, when it was ebb, be began to sail towards the English fleet but, the wind dying away, he was obliged to come to an anchor about a league off, in order to expect the next ebb. Sir George, in the mean time, caused a strong platform to be raised between Deal and Sandown castles, well furnished with artillery, so pointed, as to bear directly upon the Dutch as they came in the militia of the county of Kent were also ordered down to the sea-shore notwithstanding which preparation, the Dutch admiral did not recede from his point, but at the next ebb weighed anchor, and would have stood intothe port but the wind coming about south-west, and blowing directly in his teeth, constrained him to keep out, and being straightened for time, he was obliged to sail away, and leave sir George safe in the harbour, with the small squadron he commanded. He was soon after ordered to Plymouth, to bring in under his convoy five East- India ships, which he did in the latter end of July and in the first week of August, brought in four French and Dutch prizes, for which activity and vigilance in his command he was universally commended. In a few days after this, intelligence was received, that Van Tromp’s fleet was seen off the back of the isle of Wight, and it was thereupon resolved, that sir George with his fleet of forty men of war, most of them hired merchantmen, except flag ships, should stretch over to the coast of France to meet them. Accordingly, on the 16th of August, between one and two o'clock at noon, they got sight of the enemy, who quitted their merchantmen, being fifty in number. About four the fight began, the English Admiral with nine others charging through their fleet; his ships received most damage in the shrouds, masts, sails, and rigging, which was repaid the Dutch in their hulls. Sir George having thus passed through them, got the weather-gage, and charged them again, but all his fleet not coming up, and the night already entered, they parted with a drawn battle. Captain Peck, the rear-admiral, lost his leg, of which, soon after, he died. Several captains were wounded, but no ship lost. Of the Dutch, not one was said to be lost, though many were shot through and through, but so that they were able to proceed on their voyage, and anchored the next day after, being followed by the English to the isle of Bassa; but no farther attempt was made by our fleet, on account, as it was pretended, of the danger of the French coasts, from whence they returned to Plymouth- Sound to repair. The truth of the matter was, some of sir George’s captains were a little bashful in this affair, and the fleet was in so indifferent a condition, that it was absolutely necessary to refit before they proceeded again to action. He proceeded next to join Blake in the northern seas, where he continued during the best part of the month of September, and took several prizes and towards the latter end of that month he returned with general Blake into the Downs, with one hundred and twenty sail of men of war. On the 27th of that mojith a great Dutch fleet appeared, after which, Blake with his fleet sailed, and sir George Ayscue, pursuant to the orders he had received, returned to Chatham with his own ship, and sent the rest of his squadron into several ports to be careened. Towards the end of November, 1652, general Blake lying at the mouth of our river, began to think that the season of the year left no room to expect farther action, for which reason he detached twenty of his ships to bring up a fleet of colliers from Newcastle, twelve more he had sent to Plymouth, and our admiral, as before observed, with fifteen sail, had proceeded up the river in order to their being careened. Such was the situation of things, when Van Tromp appeared with a fleet of eighty- five sail. Upon this Blake sent for the most experienced officers on board his own ship, where, after a long consultation, it was agreed, that he should wait for, and fight the enemy, though he had but thirtyseven sail of men of war, and a few small ships. Accordingly, on the 29th of November, a general engagement ensued, which lasted with great fury from one in the afternoon till it was dark. Blake in the Triumph, with his seconds the Victory and the Vanguard, engaged for a considerable time near twenty sail of Dutch men of war, and they were in the utmost danger of being oppressed and destrdyed by so unequal a force. This, however, did not hinder Blake from forcing his way into a throng of enemies, to relieve the Garland and Bonadventure, in doing which he was attacked by many of their stoutest ships, which likewise boarded him, but after several times beating them off, he at last found an opportunity to rejoin his fleet. The loss sustained by the English consisted in five ships, either taken or sunk, and several others disabled. The Dutch confess, that one of their men of war was burnt towards the end of the fight, and the captain and most of his men drowned, and also that the ships of Tromp and Evertson were much disabled. At last, night having parted the two fleets, Blake supposing he had sufficiently secured the nation’s honour and his own, by waiting the attack of an enemy, so much superior, and seeing no prospect of advantage by renewing the fight, retired up the river but sir George Ayscue, who inclined to the bolder but less prudent counsel, was so disgusted at this retreat, that he laid down his commission. The services this great man had rendered his country, were none of them more acceptable to the parliament, than this act of laying down his command. They had long wished and waited for an opportunity of dismissing him from their service, and were therefore extremely pleased that he had saved them this trouble however, to shew their gratitude for past services, and to prevent his falling into absolute discontent, they voted him a present of three hundred pounds in money, and likewise bestowed upon him three hundred pounds per annum in Ireland. There is good reason to believe, that Cromwell and his faction were as well pleased with this gentleman’s quitting the sea-service for as they were then meditating, what they soon afterwards put in execution, the turning the parliament out of doors, it could not but be agreeable to them, to see an officer who had so great credit in the navy, and who was so generally esteemed by the nation, laid aside in such a manner, both as it gave them an opportunity of insinuating the ingratitude of that assembly to so worthy a person, and as it freed them from the apprehension of his disturbing their measures, in case he had continued in the fleet; which it is highly probable might have come to pass, considering that Blake was far enough from being of their party, and only submitted to serve the protector, because he saw no other way left to serve his country, and did not think he had interest enough to preserve the fleet, after the defection of the army, which perhaps might not have been the case, if sir George Ayscue had continued in his command. This is so much the more probable, as it is very certain that he never entered into the protector’s service, or shewed himself at all willing to concur in his measures though there is no doubt that Cromwell would have been extremely glad of so experienced an officer in his Spanish war. He retired after this to his country-seat in the county of Surrey, and lived there in great honour and splendor, visiting, and being visited by persons of the greatest distinction, both natives and foreigners, and passing in the general opinion of both, for one of the ablest sea-captains of that age. Yet there is some reason to believe that he had a particular correspondence with the protector’s second son, Henry; since there is still a letter in being from him to secretary Thurloe, which shews that he had very just notions of the worth of this gentleman, and of the expediency of consulting him in all such matters as had a relation to maritime power. The protector, towards the latter end of his life, began to grow dissatisfied with the Dutch, and resolved to destroy their system without entering immediately into a war with them. It was with this view, that he encouraged the Swedes to cultivate, with the utmost diligence, a maritime force, promising in due time to assist them with a sufficient number of able and experienced officers, and with an admiral to command them, who, in point of reputation, was not inferior to any then living. For this reason, he prevailed on sir George, by the intervention of the Swedish ambassador and of Whitelock, and sir George from that time began to entertain favourable thoughts of the design, and brought himself by degrees to think of accepting the offer made him, and of going over for that purpose to Sweden and although he had not absolutely complied during the life of the protector, he closed at last with the proposals made him from Sweden, and putting every thing in order for his journey, towards the latter end of the year 1658, and as soon as he had seen the officers embarked, and had dispatched some private business of his own, he prosecuted his voyage, though in the very depth of winter. This exposed him to great hardships, but on his arrival in Sweden, he was received with all imaginable demonstrations of civility and respect by the king, who might very probably have made good his promise, of promoting him to the rank of high-admiral of Sweden, if he had not been taken off by an unexpected death. This put an end to his hopes in that country, and disposed sir George Ayscue to return home, where a great change had been working in his absence, which was that of restoring king CharJes It. It does not at all appear, that sir George had any concern in this great affair but the contrary may be rather presumed, from his former attachment to the parliament, and his making it his choice to have remained in Sweden, if the death of the monarch, who invited him thither, had not prevented him. On his return, however, he not only submitted to the government then established, but gave the strongest assurances to the administration, that he should be at all times ready to serve the public, if ever there should be occasion, which was very kindly taken, and he had the honour to be” introduced to his majesty, and to kiss his hand. It was not long before he was called to the performance of his promise for the Dutch war breaking out in 1664, he was immediately put into commission by the direction of the duke of York, who then commanded the English fleet. In the spring of the year 1665, he hoisted his flag as rear-admiral of the blue, under the earl of Sandwich, and in the great battle that was fought the third of June in the same year, that squadron had the honour to break through the centre of the Dutch fleet, and thereby made way for one of the most glorious victories ever obtained by this nation at sea. For in this battle, the Dutch had ten of their largest ships sunk or burned, besides their admiral Opdam’s, that blew up in the midst of the engagement, by which the admiral himself, and upwards of five hundred men perished. Eighteen men of war were taken, four fire-ships destroyed, thirteen captains, and two thousand and fifty private men made prisoners and this with so inconsiderable loss, as that of one ship only, nnd three hundred private men. The fleet being again in a condition to put to sea, was ordered to rendezvous in Southwold-bay, from whence, to the number of sixty sail, they weighed on the fifth of July, and stood over for the coast of Holland. The standard was borne by the gallant earl of Sandwich, to whom was viceadmiral sir George Ayscue, and sir Thomas Tyddiman rear-admiral, sir William Perm was admiral of the white, sir William Berkley vice-admiral, and sir Joseph Jordan rear-admiral. The blue flag was carried by sir Thomas ^Vllen, whose vice and rear, were sir Christopher Minims, and sir John Harman. The design was, to intercept de Ruyter in his return, or, at least, to take and burn the Turkey and East-India fleets, of which they had certain intelligence, but they succeeded in neither of these schemes; de Ruyter arrived safely in Holland, and the Turkey and India fleets took shelter in the port of Bergen in Norway. The earl of Sandwich having detached sir Thomas Tyddiman to attack them there, returned home, and in his passage took eight Dutch men of war, which served as convoys to their East and West India fleets, and several merchantmen richly laden, which finished the triumphs of that year. ^The plain superiority of the English over the Dutch at sea, engaged the French, in order to keep up the war between the maritime powers, and make them do their business by destroying each other, to declare on the side of theweakest, as did the king of Denmark also, which, nevertheless, had no effect upon the English, who determined to carry on the war against the allies, with the same spirit they had done against the Dutch alone. In the spring, therefore, of the year 1666, the fleet was very early at sea, under the command of the joint admirals for a resolution having been taken at Court, not to expose the person of the duke of York any more, and the earl of Sandwich being then in Spain, with the character of ambassador-extraordinary, prince Rupert, and old general Monk, now duke of Albemarle, were appointed to command the fleet; having under them as gallant and prudent officers as ever distinguished themselves in the English navy, and, amongst these, sir William Berkley commanded the blue, and sir George Ayscue the white squadron. Prince Rupert, and the duke of Albemarle, went on board the fleet, the twenty-third of April, 1666, and sailed in the beginning of May. Towards the latter end of that month, the court was informed, that the French fleet, under the command of the duke of Beaufort, were coming out to the assistance of the Dutch, and upon receiving this news, the court sent orders to prince Rupert to sail with the white squadron, the admirals excepted, to look out and fight the French, which command that brave prince obeyed, but found it a mere bravado, intended to raise the courage of their new allies, and thereby bring them into the greater danger. At the same time prince Rupert sailed from the Downs, fthe Dutch put out to sea, the wind at north-east, and a fresh gale. This brought the Dutch fleet on the coast of Dunkirk, and carried his highness towards the Isle of Wight but the wind suddenly shifting to the south-west, and blowing hard, brought both the Dutch and the duke to an anchor. Captain Bacon, in the Bristol, first discovered the enemy, and by firing his guns, gave notice of it to the English fleet. Upon this a council of war was called, wherein it was resolved to fight the enemy, notwithstanding their great superiority. After the departure of prince Rupert, the duke had with him only the red and blue squadrons, making about sixty sail, whereas the Dutch fleet consisted of ninety-one men of war, carrying 4716 guns, and 22,460 men. It was the first of June when they were discerned, and the duke was so warm for engaging, that he attacked the enemy before they had time to weigh anchor, and, as de Ruyter himself says in his letter, they were obliged to cut their cables and in the same letter he owns, that to the last the English were the aggressors, notwithstanding their inferiority and other disadvantages. This day’s fight was very fierce and bloody for the Dutch, confiding in their numbers, pressed furiously upon the English fleet, while the English officers, being men of determined resolution, fought with such courage and constancy, that they not only repulsed the Dutch, but renewed the attack, and forced the enemy to maintain the fight longer than they were inclined to do, so that it was ten in the evening before their cannon were silent. The following night was spent in repairing the damages suffered on both sides, and next morning the fight was renewed by the English with fresh vigour. Admiral Van Tromp, with vice-admiral Vander Hulst, being on board one ship, rashly engaged among the English, and were in the utmost danger, either of being taken or burnt. The Dutch affairs, according to their own account, were now in a desperate condition but admiral de Ruyter at last disengaged them, though not till his ship was disabled, and vice-admiral Vander Hulst killed. This only changed the scene for de Ruyter was now as hard pushed as Tromp had been before; but a reinforcement arriving, preserved him also, and so the second day’s fight ended earlier than the first. The duke finding that the Dutch had received a reinforcement, and that his small fleet, on the contrary, was much weakened, through the damages sustained by some, and the Joss and absence of others of his ships, took, towards the evening, the resolution to retire, and endeavour to join prince Rupert, who was coming to his assistance. The retreat was performed in good order, twenty- six or twentyeight men of war that had suffered least, brought up the rear, interposing between the enemy and the disabled ships, three of which, being very much shattered, were burnt by the English themselves, and the men taken on board the other ships. The Dutch fleet followed, but at a distance. As they thus sailed on, it happened on the third day that sir George Ayscue, admiral of the white, who commanded the Royal Prince (being the largest and heaviest ship of the whole fleet) unfortunately struck upon the sand called the Galloper, where being threatened by the enemy’s fire-ships, and hopeless of assistance from his friends (whose timely return, the near approach of the enemy, and the contrary tide, had absolutely rendered impossible), he was forced to surrender. The Dutch admiral de Ruyter, in his letter to the States-general, says, in few words, that sir George Ayscue, admiral of the white, having run upon a sand -bank, fell into their hands, and that after taking out the commanders, and the men that were left, they set the s’mp on fire. But the large relation, collected by order of the States out of all the letters written to them upon that occasion, informs us, that sir George Ayscue, in the Royal Prince, ran upon the Galloper, an unhappy accident, says that relation, for an officer who had behaved very gallantly during the whole engagement, and who only retired in obedience to his admiral’s orders. The unfortunate admiral made signals for assistance but the English fleet continued their route so that he was left quite alone, and without hope of succour in which situation he was attacked by two Dutch fire-ships, by which, without doubt, he had been burnt, if lieutenant-admiral Tromp, who was on board the ship of rear-admiral Sweers, had not made a signal to call off the fire-ships, perceiving that his flag was already struck, and a signal made for quarter, upon which rear-admiral Sweers, by order of Tromp, went on board the English ship, and brought off sir George Ayscue, his officers, and some of his men, on board his own vessel, and the next morning sir George was sent to the Dutch coast, in order to go to the Hague in a galliot, by order of general de Ruyter. The English ship was afterwards got off the sands, notwithstanding which, general de Ruyter ordered the rest of the crew to be taken out, and the vessel set on fire, that his fleet might he the less embarrassed, which was accordingly done. But in the French relation, published by order of that court, we have another circumstance, which the Dutch have thought fit to omit, and it is this, that the crew gave np the ship against the admiral’s will, who had given orders /or setting her on fire. There were some circumstances which made the loss of this ship, in this manner, very disagreeable to the English court, and perhaps this may be the reason that so little is said of it in our own relations. In all probability general de Ruyter took the opportunity of sending sir George Ayscue to the Dutch coast the next morning, from an apprehension that he might be retaken in. the next day’s fight. On his arrival at the Hague he was very civilly treated but to raise the spirits of their people, and to make the most of this dubious kind of victory, the states ordered sir George to be carried as it were in triumph, through the several towns of Holland, and then confined him in the castle of Louvestein, so famous in the Dutch histories for having been the prison of some of their most eminent patriots, and from whence the party which opposed the prince of Orange were styled the Louvestein faction. As soon as sir George Ayscue came to this castle, he wrote a letter to king Charles II. to acquaint him with the condition he was in, which letter is still preserved in the life of the Dutch admiral, de Ruyter. How long he remained there, or whether he continued a prisoner to the end of the war, is uncertain, but it is said that he afterwards returned to England, and spent the remainder of his days in peace. Granger observes very justly, that it is scarcely possible to give a higher character of the courage of this brave admiral, than to say that he was a match for Van Tromp or de Ruyter.

, a Spanish statesman and writer, was born in 1731, at Barbanales, near Balbastro in Aragon. An early enthusiasm for the fine arts procured him the friendship of the celebrated artist Mengs, who was first painter to the king of Spain. After the death of Charles III. A zara constructed, in honour of his memory, a temple, in an antique form, in the church of St. James, which, although not faultless, discovered very considerable talents and taste in architecture. He was, however, soon employed in political concerns, and was sent to Rome, under the pontificate of Clement XIII. as ecclesiastical agent at the chancery of Rome. He was afterwards attached to the Spanish embassy, and took a very active part in various important negociations between the courts of Spain and Rome. In 1796 he was employed in a more difficult undertaking, to solicit the clemency of the conqueror of Italy in behalf of Rome, where the French nation had been insulted, and he at least acquired the esteem of general Buonaparte. About the same time he became acquainted with Joseph Bonaparte, then French ambassador at Rome. Being afterwards sent to Paris, in a diplomatic character, he was favourably received, and found some relief from the recollection that he had left behind him his valued friends, his fine library, and museum of paintings and antiques. During this mission he experienced alternate favour and disgrace, being recalled by his court, exiled to Barcelona, and sent again to Paris with the rank of ambassador. His health, however, was now much impaired, and when he was indulging the hope of being able to return to Italy, and pass the rest of his time in the enjoyment of his friends and favourite pursuits, his constitution suddenly gave way, and he expired January 26, 1797. He left a very considerable fortune in furniture, pictures, busts, &c. but appears to have lost his other property. He translated, 1. Middleton’s life of Cicero, and some fragments of Pliny and Seneca, under the title of “Historia della Vida di M. T. Ciceroni,” Madrid, 1790, 4 vols. 4to and also published, 2. “Introduzione alia storia naturale e alia Geografia fisica di Spagna,” Parma, 1784, 2 vols. 8vo. 3. “Opere di Antonio-Raffaele Mengs,” Parma, by Bodoni, 1780, 2 vols. 4to, of which a copious account may be seen in the Monthly Review, vol. LXV. 1781. This was afterwards translated into English, and published 1796, 2 vols. 8vo.

, or Azo Portius, a celebrated lawyer of the twelfth century, distinguished himself first at Bologna, about 1193. He had studied under John Bosiani of Cremona, and acquired such reputation, that he was called “Master of the Law,” and “the Source of Law.” The envy, however, which such merit attracted, made him leave Italy, and go to Montpellier, where he succeeded Placentinus. He was afterwards recalled to Bologna, and became yet more celebrated. It is said that he had a thousand auditors. In the warmth of dispute he threw a candlestick at the head of his antagonist, who died in consequence. Azon was then taken up, and tried, although the accident happened without any evil intent The action, however, might be pardoned according to the intent of the law ad bestias de pœnis, which moderates the punishment to any person who excels in any science or art. Azon, whether from the length of his imprisonment, or from his mind being occupied or abstracted, cried out, ad bestias, ad bestias, meaning that his acquittal would be found in that law. But this being reported to the judges, who were ignorant of it, they imagined that he insulted them, and treated them like beasts, and not only condemned him to death, but deprived him of the honour of burial. This sentence was executed in 1200, or according to some, in 1225. Others deny that this was the end of Azon, and treat the story as what it very much resembles, a fiction. Contius published his Law Commentaries" in 1577.

, a learned Jesuit of the sixteenth century, was a native of Lucca, in the diocese of Carthagena, in Spain. His merit preferred him to eminence in his society, where he was rector of several colleges. He professed humanity with reputation in many other places, particularly at Alcala, and at Rome, where he died in 1603. He published “Institutionum Moralium, tomi tres,” Rome, 1600, fol. often reprinted at Leyden, Venice. Cologne, &c. He wrote also “In Cantica Canticorum commentaria juxta historicum et allegoricum sensum,” which does not appear to have been printed.

, commonly called Navarre (doctor Navarrus), was born of a noble family, Dec. 13, 1491, at Varasayn, near Pampeluna in Navarre. He was first educated, and took the habit, in the monastery of regular canons at Roncevaux, and afterwards studied at Alcala and at Ferrara, where he made such progress in law, as to be employed in teaching that science at Toulouse and Cahors. Some time after, he returned to Spain, and was appointed first professor of canon law at Salamanca, an office he filled with high reputation for fourteen years, at the end of which John III. king of Portugal, chose him law-professor of his new-founded university at Coimbra, and gave him a larger salary than had ever been enjoyed by any French or Spanish professor. After filling this chair also, with increasing reputation, for sixteen years, he was permitted to resign, and went first into Castile, and afterwards to Rome, on purpose, although in his eightieth year, to plead the cause of Bartholomew de Caranza, archbishop of Toledo, who was accused of heresy before the inquisition, and whose cause, first argued in Spain, was by the pope’s order removed to Rome. Azpilcueta exerted himself to the utmost, but without success, which we cannot be surprised at when we consider that the inquisitors were his opponents and although they could prove nothing against Caranza, they contrived that he should die in prison. Azpilcueta, however, was honourably received at Rome pope Pius V. appointed him assistant to cardinal Francis Alciat, his vice-penitentiary, and Gregory XIII. never passed his door without a visit, or met him in the street, without enjoying some conversation with him. He was much consulted, and universally esteemed for learning, probity, piety, and chanty. Antonio informs us that he used to ride on a mule through the city, and relieve every poor person he met, and that the creature of itself would stop at the sight of a poor person until its master relieved him. He died June 21, 1586, then in his ninetyfourth year. His works, which are either on morals or common law, were published, Rome, 1590, 3 vols. Lyons, 1591, Venice, 1602.

, an eminent Dutch painter, was born at Haerlem, Feb. 20, 1633, and at a very early age placed under the care of his uncle Piemans, who painted in the manner of Velvet Bruegfcel, and soon inspired his nephew with a taste for the art. Baan afterwards studied under Bakker at Amsterdam, with whom he practised assiduously every particular from which he could receive improvement, spending the whole day at the pencil, and the evenings in designing. At that time the works of Vandyck and Rembrandt were in great vogue, and after much consideration he appears td have leaned towards an imitation of Vandyck, whom, some thought, he equalled. Houbraken says he xvas invited by Charles II. to come to England, where he made portraits of the king, queen,- and principal nobility at court, and was much admired for the elegance of his attitudes, and for his clear, natural, and lively tone of colouring. After continuing some time in England, he went to the Hague, and there painted a noble portrait of the duke of Zell, for which he received a thousand Hungarian ducats, amounting to near 500l. He then painted for the, duke of Tuscany, who placed his portrait among those of other famous painters in the Florence gallery. When Louis XIV. was at Utrecht, he sent for him, but Baan declined the invitation for political reasons. This did not lessen him, however, in the opinion of that monarch, who frequently consulted him on the purchase of pictures. These, marks of distinction, and his fame as a painter, created him. many enemies, one of whom, an artist of Friesland, formed the execrable design of assassinating him, and came to Amsterdam for that purpose. After being long disappointed in an opportunity in the streets, he asked permission to see Baan’s paintings, and while the latter was showing them, drew a poignard to stab him, but a friend of Baan’s, who happened to enter the room at the instant, laid hold of his arm the villain, however, escaped, and could not afterwards be found. Baan was of an amiable disposition, Son­cial and obliging. He died at Amsterdam in 1702.

, son of the above, was born at the Hague in 1673, learned the art of painting from his father, and became very early an artist of distinction. In 1693 he came to England, and painted several excellent portraits for the nobility, particularly one of the duke of Gloucester. He was much solicited to remain in England, but had predetermined to visit Rome, where, and at Florence, his talents procured him great fame, and much money, the latter of which he had not the prudence to keep. His pictures are excellently handled, and he approached near to the merit of his father in portraits, and in other branches of the art he probably would have far surpassed him, if he had appropriated more of his time to his studies, and had not died at so early a period of life. He only reached his twenty- seventh year.

, a native of Angers, born in 1651, was canon, grand vicar, and dean, of the faculty of theology in that city, and much noted for his learning and virtues. He arranged and transcribed, into 18 vols. the “Conferences” of the diocese of Angers, a work much esteemed in France. His style is clear, neat, and methodical, without any of the jargon of the schools. La Blandiniere, who continued this work by adding ten volumes, does not deserve so much praise. Babin published also, in 1679, but without his name, “An account of the proceedings of the university of Angers, respecting Jansenism and Cartesianism,” 4to. He died Dec. 19, 1734, in his eightythird year.

, a learned English prelate in the end of the sixteenth and beginning of the seventeenth century, was born in Nottinghamshire, according to Fuller, but in Devonshire, according to Izacke and Prince. After having received the first rudiments of learning, he was sent to Trinity college, Cambridge, of which he became fellow. On the 15th of July, 1578, he was incorporated M.A. at Oxford, as he stood in his own university. After studying other branches of learning, he applied to divinity, and became a favourite preacher in Cambridge, the place of his residence. When he was D. D. he was made domestic chaplain to Henry earl of Pembroke, president of the council in the marches of Wales, and is supposed to have assisted lady Mary Sidney, countess of Pembroke, in her version of the psalms into English metre. By his lordship’s interest, however, he was constituted treasurer of the church of Landaff, and in 1588 was installed into the prebend of Wellington, in the cathedral of Hereford. Through his patron’s further interest, he was advanced to the bishopric of Landaff, and was consecrated Aug. 29, 1591. In Feb. 1594, he was translated to the see of Exeter, to which he did an irreparable injury by alienating from it the rich manor of Crediton in Devonshire. In 1597 he was translated to Worcester, and was likewise made one of the queen’s council for the marches of Wales. To the library of Worcester cathedral he was a very great benefactor, for he not only fitted and repaired the edifice, but also bequeathed to it all his books. After having continued bishop of Worcester near thirteen years, he died of the jaundice, May 17, 1610, and was buried in the cathedral of Worcester, without any monument.

As to his character, it is agreed, that in the midst of all his preferments he was neither tainted with idleness, pride, nor covetousness, and was not only diligent in preaching but in writing books, for the understanding of the holy scriptures. He was an excellent and animating preacher. His works were printed first in 4to then, with additions, in folio, in 1615; and again in 1637, under this title: “The works of Gervase Babington, &c. containing comfortable notes upon the five books of Moses. As also an exposition upon the Creed, the Commandments, the Lord’s Prayer. With a conference betwixt Man’s frailty and faith and three Sermons.” His style is good, although not without the quaintnesses peculiar to the times. Miles Smith, afterwards bishop of Gloucester, wrote a preface to this volume.

, or Babrius, was a Greek poet who turned Esop’s fables into choliambics, that is, verses with an iambic foot in the fifth place, and a spondee in the sixth or last. Suidas frequently quotes him, but the age and country in which he lived are unknown. Avienus the fabulist, in Prsef. Fab. seems to intimate, that Babrius was prior to Phaedrus, who wrote under the reign of Augustus or Tiberius. Mr. Tynvhitt, the learned author of the “Dissertatio de Babrio,” published at London in 1776, produces a passage from the Homeric lexicon of Apollonius, which appears to be a quotation from Babrius, and as Apollonius is supposed to have lived about the time of Augustus, or some what earlier, Babrius must have written before that period. From the fragments published in the above-mentioned work, Babrius appears to have been a valuable writer his representations are natural, his expressions lively, and his versification harmonious.

, a Christian bishop and martyr, of the third century, became bishop of Antioch in the year 238, and governed that see thirteen years. It is said he died for maintaining the Christian faith, but authors are not agreed about the time or manner of his martyrdom. Eusebius and St. Jerom say, that upon his professing himself a Christian, in the reign of Decius, he was put in prison and died there. St. Chrysostom, who wrote a panegyric upon Baby las, relates that he was brought out of prison and publicly executed. This is supposed to have taken place in the year 250. His relics were highly respected at Antioch, where two churches were built in honour of his memory, and it is said, that when his relics were brought thither, the oracle of Apollo was struck dumb.

, marquis of St. Philippe, was born in Sardinia, of an ancient family, originally Spanish, and rendered his name known, not only by his learning, but by his important employments under Charles II. and Philip V. After the death of Charles II. he served under the dukeof Anjou his successor, and during the revolt in Sardinia conducted himself with wisdom and loyalty. Philip V. rewarded his services by creating him a marquis. He died at Madrid in 1726, much esteemed. His learned “History of the Monarchy of the Hebrews” was translated into French, and published in 2 vols. 4to, and 4 vols. 8vo. He wrote also “Memoirs of the history of Philip V. from 1699 to 1725,” which abound rather too much in military relations, but the whole is said to be scrupulously exact in point of fact.

, a very learned Italian scholar of the seventeenth century, was born Aug. 31, 1651, at Borgo-san-Donino, in the duchy of Parma. In 1653 his father went to reside at Parma, where he spared no expence in the education of this son, although his fortune was considerably reduced by family imprudence. For five years he studied the classics, under the tuition of the Jesuits, and in his sixteenth year entered the order of St. Benedict, on which occasion he adopted the name of that saint, in lieu of Bernardine, his baptismal name. Soon after, his father died, leaving his widow and three children with very little provision. Bacchini, however, pursued his studies, and took lesson in scholastic philosophy from Maurice Zapata; but by the advice of Chrysogonus Fabius, master of the novices of his convent, he studied mathematics, as the foundation of a more useful species of knowledge than the physics and metaphysics of the ancients. He afterwards applied to divinity with equal judgment, confining his researches to the fathers, councils, and ecclesiastical history. When he had completed his course, his abbé wished him to teach philosophy, but he had no inclination to teach that scholastic philosophy which he did not think worth learning and having obtained leave, on account of his health, to retire to a monastery in the country, he remained there two years, during which he studied the science of music, and on his recovery began to preach, agreeably to the desire of his superiors. In 1677, Arcioni, abbe of St. Benedict at Ferrara, having appointed him. his secretary, he was obliged to follow him to Arezzo, Venice, Placentia, Padua, and Parma. While at Piacentia, in 1679, he pronounced a funeral oration on Margaret de Medicis, mother of the duke of Parma, which was printed there. In 1681 he formed an acquaintance with Magliabecchi, the cardinal Noris, and many other eminent men of the age. In 1683, on account of his health, he solicited permission to resign his office as secretary to the abbe“, and as public preacher, which was granted; and having his time again in his own hands, he began to arrange the library belonging to his monastery, and to consult the fathers and sacred critics, and studied with assiduity and success the Greek and Hebrew languages. In 1635 he was appointed counsellor of the inquisition at Parma, and ne^t year had a visit of three days from father Mabillon and father Germain, and about the same time began to conduct the” Giornale de Letterati." In this he was encouraged and assisted by Gaudentio Roberti, who was eminent in polite literature. Bacchini accordingly began the Parma journal, in imitation of that published at Rome, and continued it monthly, but without his name, until 1690. But afterwards, when at Modena, he resumed it for 1692 and 1693, after which, the death of Roberti, who defrayed all the expence, obliged him again to discontinue it. In 1695, however, Capponi engaged to furnish the books and all necessary expences, and he edited itfor 1696 and 1697, when it was concluded. The whole make nine small volumes 4to, the first five printed at Parma, and the rest at Modena.

In the mean time, in 1688, the duke of Parma appointed him his theologian, at the request of Roberti; and the same year, at the solicitation of Leo Strozza, he wrote his dissertation on the ancient sistrum, a musical instrument, which was published under the title, “De Sistrorum figuris ac differentia ad illustriss. D. D. Leonem Strozza, ob Sistri Romani effigiem communicatum, ctissertatio,” Bononia, 1691, 4to. The death of the abbe Arcioni, and some disputes with his brethren at Parma, rendering it necessary for him to leave that city, the duke of Modena invited him thither in 1690, and soon after he was appointed first examiner, and then one of the counsellors of the inquisition. He had also the appointment of professor of sacred literature at Bologna, but on account of the distance he gave but few lectures, although he retained the title of professor. On the death of the duke of Modena, Sept. 1694, his uncle the cardinal d'Est succeeded him, and became a yet more liberal patron to Bacchini.

In 1696 he published his monastic history, under the title of “DelP Istoria del Monasterio di S. Benedetto di Polirone nella Stato di Mantoua Libri cinque,” Modena, 1696, 4to. This was to have been succeeded by a second volume, but some unwelcome truths in the first having given offence, what he had prepared remained in manuscript The same year he travelled over various parts of Italy, visiting chiefly the libraries and the learned, who received him with the respect due to his talents. At Florence he passed some days with his friend Magliabecchi at Mount Cassin, and at St. Severin, the libraries were laid open, with permission to copy what he pleased and the cardinal d'Aguirre wished much to have procured him a place in the Vatican library, but being unsuccessful, Bacchini returned to Modena, where the duke made him his librarian. While putting the books in order here, he found the lives of the bishops of Ravenna by Agnelli (see Agnelli), which he committed to the press, with chronological dissertations and remarks, and the whole was ready for publication in 1702, but the censors at Rome hesitated so long in granting their permission, that it was not published before 1708. In the course of preparing this work, he wrote a dissertation on ecclesiastical hierarchy, entitled “De Ecclesiasticae Hierarchise origine dissertatio,” Mutina (i.e. Modena), 1703, 4to. In 1704 he was elected prior of the monastery of Modena, and in 1705 he published, under the name of the abbe and monks of the monastery of Parma, “Isidori Clarii ex Monacho Episcopi Fulginatis Epistolse ad amicos, hactenus ineditac,” Modena, 1705. Two years after, he was made chancellor of his order, and in 1708 was elected, in the general chapter, abbé of the monastery of St. Mary at Ragusa. In 1711 and 1719, other promotions of a similar kind were conferred upon him, but he was obliged to remove from place to place on account of his health, injured by a complication of disorders, which at last proved fatal, at Bologna, Sept. 1, 1721. Bacchini, according to the report of all his biographers, was one of the most learned men of his time few equalled and none surpassed him in Italy. His learning was universal, and his taste exquisite. "When young he was much admired for his pulpit eloquence, and it was thought would have proved one of the first preachers of his time, if his delicate temperament could have permitted that exertion. He was critically skilled in Greek and Hebrew, ancient and modern philosophy, and mathematics, but was perhaps most deeply conversant in sacred and profane history and chronology, and he was remarkably expert in decyphering ancient manuscripts. Few men, it may be added, were more admired in their time, or could enumerate among their friends so many men of high rank and learning; of the latter, Bacchini lived in habits of intimacy with Ciampini, Magliabecchi, Muratori, Gimma, Fontanini, Mabillon, Montfaucon, and the marquis Scipio Maffei, and in all his intercourse with the great or the learned, he preserves the character of a modest and humble man.

, the Greek lyric poet, was born at Julis, a town in the isle of Ceos. He was the nephew of Simonides, and the contemporary and rival of Pindar. Both sung the victories of Hiero at the public games. Besides odes to athletic victors, he was author of love verses, prosodies, dithyrambics, hymns, &c. The emperor Julian was a great admirer of his writings, and Hiero preferred him to Pindar. He flourished 452 B. C. and was the last of the nine lyric poets so famous in Greece. There are some fragments of his still in being, printed along with those of Alcceus, at the end of an edition of Pindar, Antwerp, 1567, 16 mo.

, an eminent Italian physician, was born at St. Elpidio, in the march of Ancona. He became professor of medicine at Rome, and first physician to pope Sixtus V. and was celebrated for great skill and his works prove that he had great learning. The time of his death is uncertain, but he was alive in 1596. His works are, 1. “DeThermis, libri septem,” Venice, 1571, 1588, fol. and at Padua, 1711. The first is a rare book, and the last has the addition of an eighth book. That printed in 1622 iis mutilated. 2. “De Naturali Vinorum Historia,” Rome, 1596, fol. a very scarce book, of which, however, there is a copy in the British Museum. 3. “De Venenis et Antidotis Prolegomena,” Rome, 1586, 4to. 4. “De Gemmis ac lapidibus pretiosis in S. Scriptura relatis,” Rome, 1577, 4to, and Franc. 1643, 8vo, by Gabelchoverus. 5. “Tabula simplicium Medicamentorum,” Rome, 1577, 4to. 6. “De Conviviis Antiquorum.”

, an eminent German musician, was born at Eisenach in 1685, and made such proficiency in his art that at the age of eighteen, he was appointed organist of the new church of Arnstadt. In 1708, he settled at Weimar, where he was appointed court musician and director of the duke’s concert, and in a trial of skill, he obtained a victory over the celebrated French organist, who had previously challenged and conquered all the organists of France and Italy. This happened at Dresden, to which Bach went on purpose to contend with this musical Goliath. He afterwards became master of the chapel to the prince of Anhalt Cotben, and to the duke of Weissenfels. As a performer on the organ, as well as a composer for that instrument, he long stood unrivalled. He died at Leipsic in 1754, and left four sons all eminent musicians, of whom some account is given by Dr. Burney in his History of Music, vol. IV. and in his Musical Tour in Germany.

, a French miscellaneous writer, was a native of Paris, and a man of general knowledge. In 1762, he commenced a journal “Historique et Litteraire,” and after his death in 1771, one of his friends collected his manuscript notes, and published them in 1777, in 9 vols. 12mo, under the title of “Memoires Secrets,” which have been continued since as far as thirty volumes. There is much political history in these memoirs, with many private anecdotes of the principal personages concerned they contain also criticisms, poetry, temporary history, and such materials as generally ii!l our magazines and reviews, but with a good deal of truth, they contain a certain proportion of scandal. Bachaumont also published “Lettre Critique sur le Louvre, L' Opera, la Place Louis XV. et les Salles de Spectacle,” 1752, 8vo; “Essai sur la peinture, la sculpture, et Parchitecture,” 1752, 8vo and an edition of Quintilian, with a translation by Gedoyn, and a life of the translator, 1752, 4 vols. 12 mo.

, of Tholonse, but originally of Lucca, studied sculpture and architecture at Rome under Michael Angelo. On returning to his native country, he introduced a true taste in those arts, instead of the barbarous manner which had till then prevailed. His works in sculpture that still subsist in several churches of that city, always excite admiration, though some of them have since been gilt, which has deprived them of that grace and delicacy which Bachelier had given them. He was still exercising his art in 1553.

, an eminent lawyer and critic, was born in 1721 at Hohendorp, and sent in his twelfth year to Leipsic, where he was educated under Gesner and Ernest, who was particularly fond of him, and encouraged his studies with a fatherly care. Having gone through a course of classical learning, philosophy, and mathematics, he applied to the study of law, and in 1750, he was created doctor in that faculty and professor of law, to which in 1753, was added the place of ecclesiastical assessor at Leipsic. All these offices he discharged with the highest public reputation and personal esteem, but was cut off by a premature death in 1756. He was a man of extensive learning, critically acquainted with Greek and Latin, and well versed in history and antiquities. His principal publications were, 1. “Dissertatio de Mysteriis Eleusinis,” Leipsic, 1745, 4to. 2. “Divus Trajanus, sive de legibus Trajani cornmentarius,” 1747, 8vo. 3. “Historia jurisprudent! Romany, 1754, 8vo. 4.” Xenophontis Oeconomicum,“1749, 8vo. 5.” JBrissonius de formulis,“1754, fol. 6.” Bergeri qeconomia Juris,“1755, 4tq. 7.” Opuscula ad historian! etjurisprudentiam spectantia," collected and published by Christ. Adolph. Klotz, Halle, 1767, 8vo.

, was born at Cologne in 1554, and brought up to business. He went to Leipsic, where he married but his tranquillity was soon disturbed, owing to his having exchanged the opinions of Luther for those of Calvin. At first there were nothing but suspicions against him, and his enemies were satisfied with removing him from his public employments but the times changing, he obtained the office of senator, and afterwards in the year 1585 that of Echevin, and about three years after that of consul. The Elector Christian I. dying in 1591, Bachovius was importuned to profess Lutheranism, and on refusing, they obliged him to quit his posts. He had np regard to the advice which was given him to retire, though they represented to him the danger of a prison he thought that this flight would give occasion to his enemies to tell the world, that he was not conscious of his innocence but in the year 1593 he was forced to give way to the popular commotions, and to depart from Leipsic. He went first to Serveste, and the year following to the Palatinate, not without the loss of almost all his effects. He found a kind protector in the elector Palatine, and he executed several offices of profit and honour at Heidelberg till his death, which happened the 27th of February, 1614. He published a commentary on the catechism of the Palatinate.

, a very able lawyer of the seventeenth century, was the son of the preceding, and was born at Heidelberg, and probably educated there. He was, however, celebrated for his knowledge of the civil law, when Heidelberg was taken by count Tilly in 1622, and the university dissolved. This obliged him to leave the place, but he appears to have returned soon after, and to have endeavoured to support himself for some time by giving private lessons to the few pupils whom the siege had not driven away. In 1624, he published his " Exercitationes ad partem posteriorem Chiliados Antonii Fabri, de erroribus interpretum, et de interpretibus juris,' 7 fol. The same year he entered into a correspondence with the learned Cuueus of Leyden, to whom he communicated his intention of leaving Heidelberg, as the university, then about to be restored, was to be composed of catholics, while he was disposed towards the principles of the reformed religion. He intimated also to Cuneus that he had no higher ambition, should he come to Leyden, than to give private lessons. During this correspondence an offer was made to Cuneus of a professorship in the academy of Franeker, and as he could not accept it, he took this opportunity of recommending Bachovius, but the latter had rendered himself obnoxious there by writing against Mark Lycklama, formerly one of the professors, and still one of the curators of the academy.

In 1627, Bachovius published his treatise “De Pignoribus et Hypothecis” and about the same time, Otto Tabor, a young Lutheran, and a student at Strasburgh, sent him a treatise on law which he had written, and requested his advice concerning it. Bachovius, on reading the manuscript, conceived a very high opinion of the author, and imparted to him his wish to come to Strasburgh, provided he could gain a subsistence by private teaching, and at the same time assj^red him that although he was of the reformed religion, he should give no person any reason to complain on that head, as his opinions were rather of the Lutheran than the Calvinistic system. The academy having heard of his intentions, desired Tabor to assure him that he should meet with a kind reception, but they afterwards so entirely changed their sentiments, that when he arrived, the law professors forbid his private teaching, much to the disappointment of many of the students. He then returned to Spires, and afterwards to Heidelberg, where he professed his return to the Catholic religion, and the university being restored, was again appointed to a professor’s chair. What became of him afterwards is not known. Besides the works already mentioned, he published “DisputationUm Miscellanearum de variis Juris Givilis materiis, Jiber unus,” Heid. 1604, 8vo “Notae in Paratitla Wesembecii super Pandectas,” Cologne, 1611, 4to “Examen rationalium Antonii Fabri,” 1612, 8vo; “Notre et animadversioncs ad disputationes Hieronymi Trentleni,” Francfort, 1617, 4to the fourth edition of this work, printed at Cologne in 1688, was enlarged to 3 vols. 4to “Observationes ad Joannis Papon is arresta” Francf. 1628, fol. “In Institutionum Justiniani jus Libros IV. Commentarii Theorici et Practici,” Francf. 1628, 4to. Four of his letters to Cuneus are in Barman’s edition of Cuneus’s Letters, published at Leyden in 1725, 8vo.

, surnamed the Painter, born at Genoa in 1639, went to Rome about his fourteenth year, where he placed himself with a dealer in pictures, at whose house he had frequent opportunities of seeing Bernini, of whom he received good advice in his art and assistance in his fortune. His first essays were the strokes of a masterly pencil, and he was thenceforward employed in capital works among others the cupola of Jesus at Rome, a grand and complicated performance, which it is impossible sufficiently to admire. But Bacici’s chief excellence lay in portrait-painting. He drew that of a man who had been dead twenty years. He began by chalking out a head from his own imagination then, retouching his work by little and little, according to the suggestions of those who had seen the person while alive, he at length succeeded in finishing a portrait acknowledged to be a Complete resemblance. Bacici painted with so much ease, that his hand in a considerable degree kept pace with the impetuosity Df his genius. His ideas were great and bold, sometimes fantastical his figures have an astonishing relief. He was a good colourist, and excellent in foreshortening, but he is reproached with incorrectness in his drawing, and a bad taste in his draperies. Nevertheless his works are much esteemed. He died in 1709.

, an eminent portrait and historical painter, was born at Harlingen, in 1609, but spent the greatest part of his life at Amsterdam and by all the writers on this subject, he is mentioned as an extraordinary painter, particularly of portraits, which he executed with strength, spirit, and a graceful resemblance. He was remarkable for an uncommon readiness of hand, and freedom of pencil and his incredible expedition in his manner of painting appeared in the portrait of a lady from Haerlem, that he painted at half-length, which was begun and finished in one day, though he adorned the figure with rich drapery, and several ornamental jewels. He also painted historical subjects with good success and in that style there is a fine picture of Cimon and Iphigenia, which is accounted by the connoisseurs an excellent performance. In designing academy figures, his expression was so just, and his outline so correct, that he obtained the prize from all his competitors and his works are still bought up at very high prices in the Low Countries. In the collection of the elector Palatine, there is an excellent head of Brouwer, painted by this master and in the Carmelites’ church at Antwerp is preserved a capital picture of the Last Judgment, which is well designed and coloured. Backer died at the age of 42, in 1651, but according to Descarnps, in 1641, at the age of 33.

, a painter, born at Antwerp in 1530, learned the principles of painting from his father, who was a much inferior artist. After his father’s death, he lived in the house of Jacomo Palermo, a dealer in pictures, who avariciously took care to keep him incessantly employed, and sent his paintings to Paris to be disposed of, where they were much admired. He had a clean light manner of pencilling, and a tint of colour that was extremely agreeable. The judicious were very eager to purchase them at high prices, of which, however, the poor artist was not suffered to avail himself; and although his merit was universally allowed, Palermo took care that his name and his circumstances should not be known. He died in this obscure and depressed condition in 1560, only 30 years old.

, a younger son of Samuel Backhouse of Swallowfield in Berkshire, esq. (who died in 1626), was born in that county in 1593, became a commoner of Christ church, Oxford, in 1610, in his seventeenth year, left it without a degree, and attached himself to the study of chemistry and astrology then so much in vogue. He adopted the celebrated Ash mole as his son, and imparted to him those absurd secrets which were to produce wonders. Mr, Backhouse died May 30, 1662, and was buried in Swallowfield church. He published a translation from the French of “The pleasant Fountain of Knowledge,” 1644-, 8vo this was written by John de la Fountainein 1413; “The Complaint of Nature,” and “The Golden Fleece,” a translation from Solomon Trismosin, master to Paracelsus. Mr. Aubrey speaks of this gentleman in his Collection of Hermetic Philosophy, chap. XII.

, a very celebrated Dutch painter, was born in 1631, in the city of Embden his father was secretary of state, and his grandfather had held a post in administration. The first sixteen years of his life were employed in studies suitable to the intentions of his family, which were to breed him up to commerce, and for that purpose he was sent to Amsterdam, where it would appear he first caught an inclination for painting. The earliest instructions he received in this art were from Albert Van Everdingen, but he acquired his principal know r Jedge by frequenting the painting-rooms of different great masters, and observing their various methods of touching and colouring. One of these masters was IJenry Dubbels, whose knowledge of his art was very extensive, and who was very communicative of what he knew. From him Backhuysen obtained more real benefit, than from all the painters of his time, and he had not availed himself long of such an instructor before he became the subject of general admiration, so that even his drawings were sought after, and one of his earliest performances was sold for one hundred florins. It was observed of him, that while he was painting, he would not suffer even his most intimate friends to have access to him, lest his fancy might be disturbed, and the ideas he had formed in his mind might be interrupted. He studied nature attentively in all her forms in gales, calms, storms, clouds, rocks, skies, lights and shadows and he expressed every subject with so sweet a pencil, and such transparence and lustre, as placed him above all the artists of his time in that style, except the younger Vandervelde. It was a frequent custom with Backhuysen whenever he could procure resolute mariners, to go out to sea in a storm, in order to store his mind with grand images, directly copied from nature, of such scenes as would have filled any other head and heart with terror and dismay and the moment he landed, he always impatiently ran to his palette, to secure those incidents of which the traces might, by delay, be obliterated. He perfectly understood ttie management of the chiaro-scuro, and strictly observed the truth of perspective. His works may be easily distinguished by an observant eye, from the freedom and neatness of his touch, from the clearness and natural agitation or quiescence of the water, from a peculiar tint in his clouds and skies, and also from the exact proportions of his ships, and the gracefulness of their positions.

For the burgomasters of Amsterdam he painted a picture, with a multitude of large vessels, and a view of the city at n distance, for which they gave him thirteen hundred guilders, and a considerable present. This picture they afterwards presented to the king of France, who placed it in the Louvre. No painter was ever more honoured by the visits of kings and princes than Backhuysen the king of Prussia was one of the number; and the czar Peter took delight to see him paint, and often endeavoured to draw, after vessels which he had designed. Backhuysen was remarkably assiduous and yet it seems astonishing to consider the number of pictures which he finished, and the exquisite manner in which they are painted. He is said to have had some taste for poetry, and such was his industry that at his leisure hours he taught writing in the families of the principal merchants. He was the greater part of his life much afflicted with the stone and gravel, yet reached a very advanced age, as his death did not happen till 1709. Strutt places him among his engravers, as having published some etchings of the Y, a small arm of the sea near Amsterdam.

, the second daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, was born about the year 1528. She was liberally educated by her father, and having added much acquired knowledge to her natural endowments, she became highly distinguished among the learned personages of the time, and, it is even said, was constituted governess to king Edward VI. She was, however, eminent for piety, virtue, and learning, and well versed in the Greek, Latin, and Italian tongues. She gave an early specimen of her industry, piety, and learning, by translating out of Italian into English twenty-five sermons, written by Barnardine Ochine, concerning “The Predestination and Election of God;” this was published about the year 1550 in 8vo. When the learned bishop Jewel wrote his “Apology for the Church of England,” which had a considerable effect in quieting the clamours of the Roman Catholic writers against the reformed religion, this lady undertook to translate it from the Latin into English, that it might be accessible to the common people, and considering the style of the age, her translation is both faithful and elegant. Mr. Strype informs us that after she had finished the translation she sent the copy to the author, accompanied with an epistle to him in Greek, which he answered in the same language, and was so satisfied with her transjation that he did not alter a single word. The archbishop Parker, to whom she had likewise submitted her work, bestowed the highest praise on it, which he confirmed by a compliment of much elegance. Pie returned it to her printed, Ci knowing,“as he said in his letter to her,” that he had thereby done for the best, and in this point used a reasonable policy that is, to prevent such excuses as her modesty would have made in stay of publishing it.“It was printed in 1564, 4 to, and in 1600, 12mo. That her literary reputation extended beyond her own country is evident from Beza’s dedication to her of his Meditations. In Birch’s” Memoirs of the reign of queen Elizabeth," her name frequently occurs, and he has given some of her letters at full length, and extracts from others, which confirm her character for learning. Her temper in her latter years Appears to have been affected by ill health. At what time she was married to sir Nicholas Bacon cannot be ascertained. It is a more important record, however, that sbe was mother of the illustrious sir Francis Bacon, lord-Verulam. The time of her death, too, has escaped the researches of her biographers. She appears to have been living in 1596, and Ballard conjectures that she died about the beginning of the reign of James I. at Gorhambury, near St. Alban’s, and, according to Dr. Rawley, was buried at St. Michael’s church in that town, but neither monument nor inscription have been discovered.

, Viscount St. Alban'S, and highchancellor of England in the reign of James I. justly styled the glory and ornament of his age and nation, was the son of sir Nicholas Bacon, and Anne, the subject of the preceding article, and was born at York House, in the Strand, on the 22d of January 1560-1. He gave early proofs of a surprizing strength and pregnancy of genius, and when a mere boy, was distinguished by persons of worth and dignity for something far beyond his years. Queen Elizabeth, a very acute discerner of merit, was so charmed with the solidity of his sense and the gravity of fais behaviour, that she would often call him “her young lord keeper,” an office which he eventually reached, although not in her reign. When qualified for academicalstudies, he was sent to the university of Cambridge, where,. June 10, 1573, he was entered of Trinity college, under Dr. John Whitgift, afterwards archbishop of Canterbury, Such was his progress under this able tutor, and such the vigour of his intellect, that before he had completed his sixteenth year, he had not only run through the whole circle of the liberal arts, as they were then taught, but began, to perceive the imperfections of the reigning philosophy, and meditated that change of system which has since immortalized his name, and has placed knowledge upon its most firm foundation. Extraordinary as this may -appear, he was heard even at that early age, to object to the Aristotelian system, the only one then in repute, and to say, that his “exceptions against that great philosopher were not founded upon the worthlessness of the author, to whom he would ever ascribe all high attributes, but for the unfruitfulness of the way being a philosophy only for disputations and contentions, but barren in the production of works for the benefit of the life of man.”

Such early judgment determined his father to send him to France, that he might improve himself under that able and honest statesman, sir Amias Powlet, then the queen’s ambassador at Paris, and his behaviour while tinder the roof of that minister, was so prudent as to induce sir Amias to intrust him with a commission of importance to the queen, which required both secrecy and dispatch and this he executed so as to gain much credit both to the ambassador and to himself. He afterwards returned to Paris, but made occasional excursions into the provinces, where his attention appears to have been principally directed towards men and manners. He applied also with great assiduity to such studies as he conceived came within his father’s intention, and when he was but nineteen, wrote a very ingenious work, entitled, “A succinct view of the state of Europe,” which, it is plain, he had surveyed not only with the eye of a politician, but also of a philosopher. This work, it is probable, he improved on his return, when he was settled in Gray’s Inn. While thus employed abroad, the death of his father obliged him to return, and apply to some profession for his maintenance, as the money he inherited formed a very narrow provision. Accordingly, on his return, he resolved on the study of the common law, and for that purpose entered himself of the honourable society of Gray’s Inn, where his superior talents rendered him the ornament of the house, and the gentleness and affability of his deportment procured him the affection of all its members. The place itself was so agreeable to him, that he erected there a very elegant structure, which many years after was known by the name of “Lord Bacon’s Lodgings,” which he inhabited occasionally through the greatest part of his life. During the first years of his residence here, he did not confine his studies entirely to law, but indulged his excursive genius in a survey of the whole circle of science. It was here, and at that early age, where he formed, at least, if he did not mature, the plan of that great philosophical work, which has distinguished his name with such superior honour. Whether this first plan, or outlines, have descended to us, is a point upon which his biographers are not agreed. It was probably, however, the “Temporis Partus Masculus,” some part of which is preserved by Gruter in the Latin works of Bacon, which he published. The curious reader may receive much satisfaction on this subject from note D. of the Life of Bacon in the “Biographia Britannica.”

His progress in his professional studies, however, was rterer interrupted, and his practice became considerable. In 1588, he discharged the office of reader at Gray’s Inn, and such was his fame, that the queen honoured him by appointing him her counsel learned in the law extraordinary, but whatever reputation he derived from this appointment, and to a young man of only twenty-eight years of age, it must have been of great importance, it is said he derived from her majesty very little accession of fortune. As a candidate for court-preferment, and a lawyer already distinguished by acknowledged talents, it might be expected that the road to advancement would have been easy, especially if we consider his family interest, as the son of a lordkeeper, and nephew to William lord Burleigh, and first cousin to sir Robert Cecil, principal secretary of state. But it appears that his merit rendered his court-patrons somewhat jealous, and that his interest, clashing with that of the two 'Cecils, and the earls of Leicester and Essex, who formed the two principal parties in queen Elizabeth’s reign, was rather an obstruction to him, as he forsook its natural channel in the Cecils, and attached himself and his brother Anthony to the earl of Essex. Sir Robert Cecil is consequently represented as preventing his attaining any very high appointment, although, that he might not seem to slight so near a relation, he procured him the reversion of the place of register of the court of Star-chamber, which, however, he did not enjoy until the next reign, nearly twenty years after. This made him say, with some pleasantry, that “it was like another man’s ground buttalling upon his house, which might mend his prospect, but did not fill his barn.” It was in gratitude for obtaining for him thb reversion that, in 1592, he published “Certain observations upon a libel entitled A Declaration of the true causes of the great Troubles,” in which he warmly vindicates the lord treasurer particularly, and his own father; and the rest of queen Elizabeth’s ministers occasionally. This is thought to have been his first political production.

His other patron, Robert earl of Essex, proved a warm, steady, and indefatigable friend, and earnestly strove to make him queen’s solicitor, in 1594, although unsuccessfully, from the superior influence of the Cecils. He endeavoured, however, to make him amends for his disappointment out of his own fortune. This, it might be supposed, demanded on the part of Mr. Bacon, a high sense of obligation, and. such he probably felt at the time but it is much to be lamented, that he afterwards sullied his character by taking a most forward and active part in bringing that unfortunate nobleman to the block for he not only appeared against him as a lawyer for the crown, but after his death, endeavoured to perpetuate the shame of it, by drawing a declaration of the treasons of the earl of Essex, which was calculated to justify the government in a very unpopular measure, and to turn the public censure from those who had ruined the earl of Essex, and had never done Mr. Bacon any good. It is but fair, however, that we should give the outline of the apology which he found it necessary to make for his conduct. It amounts to this, that he had given the earl good advice, which he did not follow that upon this a coldness ensued, which kept them at a greater distance than formerly that, however, he continued to give his advice to the earl, and laboured all he could to serve him with the queen that in respect to his last unfortunate act, which was, in truth, no better than an act of madness, he had no knowledge or notice whatever that he did no more than he was in duty bound to do for the service of the queen, in the way of his profession and that the declaration was put upon him altered, after he had drawn it, both by Uie ministers and the queen herself. Such an apology, however, did not satisfy the public at that time, and the utmost investigation of the affair since has only tended to soften some parts of his conduct, without amounting to a complete justification.

Enemies he certainly had, whether from this cause, or from a jealousy of his high talents; and among other accusations, they represented him as a man, who, by applying too much of his time to other branches of knowledge, could not but neglect that of his profession but this appears to have been a foolish calumny. Most of his works on law were written, although not published, in this reign. About the year 1596, he finished his “Maxims of the Law.” As these are now published, they make only the first part of what are styled “The Elements of the Common Law of England.” The second treatise was entitled “The Use of the Law for preservation of our persons, goods, and good name, according to the laws and customs of this land,” a work of great value to students. His “Maxims of Law” he dedicated to queen Elizabeth, but, for whatever reason, the work was not published in his lifetime. The next year he published a work of another kind, entitled “Essays, or Counsels Civil and Moral.” This work is well known, and has been often reprinted. The author appears to have had a high opinion of its utility and of the excellent morality and wisdom it inculcates there probably never has been but one opinion. Some of these essays had been handed about in manuscript, which he assigns as the reason why he collected and published them in a correct form. About the close of the succeeding year, 1598, he composed his “History of the Aliena tion Office,” which was not published till many years after his decease, indeed not until the publication of his works in 1740, when it was copied from a ms. in the Inner Temple library. It is needless to mention some smaller instances of his abilities in the law, which, nevertheless, were received by the learned society of which he was a member, with all possible marks of veneration and esteem, and which they have preserved with the reverence due to so eminent an ornament of their house. As a farther proof of their respect, they chose him double reader in the year 1600, which office he discharged with his usual ability. He distinguished himself likewise, during the latter part of the queen’s reign, in the house of commons, where he spoke often, and with so much impartiality as to give occasional umbrage to the ministers. To the queen, however, he preserved a steady loyalty, and after her decease, composed a memorial of the happiness of her reign, which did equal honour to her administration, and to the capacity of its author. He transmitted a copy of this to Thuanus, who made use of it in his history, but Mr. Bacon contented himself with enjoining that it should be printed after his’ decease. It is a work of much elegance and ability.

On the accession of king James I. Mr. Bacon appears to have paid court to him, by the intervention of some of his English and some of his Scotch friends, and by drawing up the form of a proclamation, which, though it was not used, was considered as an instance of his duty and attachment. Accordingly, on July 23, 1603, he was introduced to the king at Whitehall, and received the honour of knighthood. He was also continued in the same office he held under the queen, but a representation respecting the grievous exactions of purveyors, which the house of commons employed him to draw up, attracted the king’s more particular attention, and on Aug. 25, 1604, his majesty constituted him, by patent, one of his counsel learned in the law, with a fee of forty pounds a year, which is said to have been the first act of royal power of that nature. He granted him the same day, by another patent, a pension of sixty pounds a year, for special services received from his brother Anthony Bacon and himself. His farther promotion, however, was still retarded by his old antagonist, sir Robert Cecil, now created earl of Salisbury, and by sir Edward Coke, the attorney-general, who affected to undervalue his talents, and who certainly had reason to fear his reputation. To these, however, he contrived to carry himself with decent respect, although not without occasional expostulations with both,

In the mean time he gave evidence of the steady prosecution of his studies by publishing, in 1605, the first specimen of his great work, in his book “Of the Advancement of Learning,” a performance of much value even in its detached state. He continued, however, his diligence in parliament, and among other topics, endeavoured to second the views the king had entertained of an union between England and Scotland but his efforts for the crown were more successful in Westminster-hall than in that assembly. About this time he married Alice, daughter of Benedict Barnham, esq. alderman of London, a lady who brought him an ample fortune, but by whom he never had any children. In 1607, he succeeded in his application for the solicitorship, on a vacancy, and with that his practice encreased most extensively, there being few causes of importance in which he was not concerned. He assured the king, before he obtained this employment, that it would give him such an increase of capacity, though not of zeal, to serve his majesty, that what he had done in times past should seem as nothing, in comparison with the services he should render for the future and in this respect he is said to have kept his word, for in the session of parliament hold in the year in which he was made solicitor, he ran through a great variety of business, and that of a nature which required a man not only of great abilities but of great policy, and of equal reputation. He was, in the first place, employed by the house of commons to represent to the king the grievances under which the nation laboured and though the paper relating to them was couched in terms not very agreeable to the king’s temper, sir Francis, by his accompanying address, so abated their harshness as to perform this difficult commission with universal applause. He was likewise employed by the house at a conference with the lords, to persuade them to join in an application to the crown, for the taking away the ancient tenures, and allowing a certain and competent revenue in lieu of them and in his speech on this occasion, sir Francis Bacon set the affair in so clear a light, as excited that spirit, which at length procured the dissolution of the court of Wards, a point of the highest consequence to the Jiberties of this kingdom. He likewise satisfied the house at a time when they were much out of temper at the manner in which the king’s messages were conveyed to them and procured their acquiescence in the supplies by a well-timed speech, which must have convinced the king of what importance his services were likely to prove. Amidst all these political and professional engagements, he found leisure to digest the plan of the second part of his great work, which he transmitted to some judicious friends for their opinion. This piece was entitled “Cogitata et Visa,” and contained the ground-work or plan of his “Novum Organum,” so essential a part of his “Instauration,” that it sometimes bears that title. Bishop Andrews and sir Thomas Bodley w r ere two of the persons whose advice he solicited on this occasion, and their answers are printed in his works, where we have likewise a small discourse in English, under the Latin title of “Filum Labyrinthi,” which was the original draught of the “Cogitata et Visa.” While availing himself of the opinions of his learned contemporaries, he published in 1610, his celebrated treatise “Of the Wisdom of the Ancients,” a work which received and has ever retained the justest applause. It is not easy to say which is most conspicuous in this, his diligence in procuring the materials, or his judgment in disposing of them.

At this time his favour with the king, and his general popularity were very high, yet we do not find that he availed himself much of either, in the advancement of his personal fortune, excepting that in 1611 he procured the office of judge of the marshal’s court, jointly with sir Thomas Vavasor, then knight- marshal. In this character he presided, though for a very short time, in the court newly erected, under the title of the Palace-court for the verge of the king’s house, in which station he has left us a very learned and methodical charge to the jury there upon a commission of oyer and terminer, printed in his works. If his biographers may be credited, he enjoyed at this time an income of nearly five thousand pounds a-year, arising partly from his personal estates, and partly from his official emoluments; and although he was liberal and even profuse in his mode of living, yet as his public stations required no great display of magnificence, his circumstances must have been such as to remove him from the ambition of availing himself of the many opportunities of aggrandizement which his favour with the king afforded. It was not till 1613, that he succeeded to the office of attorneygeneral, of which he had had a promise, when sir Henry Hobart was made chief justice of the common-pleas. In this office he was, contrary to the usual practice, and in consideration of his eminent services, allowed to take his seat in the house of commons. He appears indeed to have received favours of distinction on all occasions, that were before unknown. Even in the court of star-chamber, when a solemn decree was made against duelling, his speech, which gave occasion to the decree, was, contrary to custom, printed with it.

Such, indeed, was the weight of his character, that he stood in no need of support from the king’s ministers the earl of Salisbury was now dead, and it does not appear that he had any dependance on the earl of Somerset, the reigning favourite, but kept at a distance from him when he was in his highest power. Matters, however, were so mismanaged by Somerset, that the attorney-general had much difficulty and less success in preserving the king’s interest in the house of commons, where an opposition arose to his majesty’s measures so violent, that the parliament was dissolved, and not called again for a considerable time. Voluntary subscriptions were set on foot to supply the wants of government; and this being in some instances; resisted, the attorney-general had to prosecute a Mr. Oliver St. John, who was among the most refractory. But these are circumstances which properly belong to the history of this reign.

In the mean time, Somerset was falling in the king’s estimation, and his place was supplied by Mr. George Villiers, afterwards the duke of Buckingham. The rise of this favourite was rapid and surprizing and sir Francis Bacon is said to have conceived a good opinion of him, became his friend, and certainly gave him very salutary advice. His promotion was followed % by the trial of the earl and countess of Somerset, for being accessary to the murder of sir Thomas Overbury. In this affair, sir Francis appears to have acted an impartial part in the discharge of his duty as attorney-general. The king who appeared deeply interested in bringing these offenders to justice, was as eager afterwards to grant them a pardon but sir Francis interfered in neither case farther than the duties of his office required.

He became now of so much importance in the state, that it was necessary he should be sworn of the privycouncil, which, like his other distinguishing honours, had not been usual for a man in his station. It was accomplished, however, by the interposition of his friend, sir George Villiers, a circumstance which seems to imply that the king’s consent only was wanting but why so useful a servant as sir Francis should be in any measure dependant on this young favourite for that, is not very clearly explained. Certain it is that his majesty’s chief dependance was on his integrity and abilities, and he experienced the advantage of both, in the affair of a contest between the two courts of chancery and king’s bench, as to the point of jurisdiction. Sir Francis appears to have given the opinion upon which the king acted when he pronounced a kind of judgment in the court of star-chamber, in favour of the lord-chancellor Egerton, and against his antagonist sir Edward Coke.

Sir Francis held the office of attorney-general for three years, during which he behaved himself with such prudence and moderation, and went through so many difficult and perplexed affairs, with such evenness and integrity, that it does not appear his conduct was ever called in question, nor has malice itself dared to utter any thing to his reproach. On the 7th of March, 1616-17, on the resignation of the lord-chancellor, he was promoted to that high office, which, indeed, he had solicited on a former occasion, when there was a prospect of a vacancy. It is said that when his majesty delivered the seals to him, he gave him three cautions, first, that he should not seal any thing but after mature deliberation secondly, that he should give righteous judgments between parties and lastly, that he should not extend the royal prerogative too far. These precepts he made the ground- work of a long and learned speech which he delivered in court, on the 7th of May following, the day on which he took possession of his high office. He now hegan to experience the truth of the observation that the highest seats are the most exposed for within a little time after the king’s setting out for Scotland, which took place a few days after his appointment to the seals, the Spanish match was, by direction of his majesty, brought upon the carpet, and cost sir Francis very great trouble. The conduct of the favourite Buckingham also occasioned him much perplexity, although the cause was of no more importance than a projected marriage between sir John Villiers, brother to the favourite, and a daughter of sir Edward Coke, which the lord keeper opposed, and of which opposition Buckingham himself afterwards entertained a more favourable opinion.

In the mean time the chancellor continued to supreintend the king’s affairs in general, and particularly the concerns of the civil list. There are many of his letters extant, both to the king and to Buckingham, upon this subject, which demonstrate an independence of mind, and an intrepidity in the discharge of his duty, very remote from the servile temper of which his enemies have accused him. In the beginning of January 1618, he had the title given him of lord high chancellor of England and in July of the same year, he was created baron of Verulam in the county of Hertford. This new honour excited his lordship to new services, and it appears from his own writings, that he was very attentive to every thing that might conduce, either to the immediate benefit of the king, or to the general good of his subjects. Some of his particulartransactions are detailed in the history of the times, and in his life in the Biographia but it would swell this article beyond all useful bounds were we to enter upon these. With regard to his more personal history, it may, however, be necessary to subjoin that while high chancellor, he procured from the king the farm of the alienation-office, which was of considerable benefit, and proved a great part of his subsistence, after he lost his office. He likewise procured York-house for his residence, for which he seems to have had an affection, as being the place of his birth, and where his father had lived all the time he possessed the high office of lord keeper of the great seal.

With his colleagues in administration, or in the law departments, he appears to have endeavoured to live upon good terms. Buckingham he contrived to keep in apparent humour, although he frequently refused to put the seal to what he thought improper grants and he even agreed better with sir Edward Coke than was expected, always representing that judge to the king in the most favourable light. About this time, however, an attempt was made to the prejudice of the chancellor, which might have given him some warning of his fall. One Wrenbam, against whom he had made a decree, surmising he had wrong done him, the general case with clients who lose their cause, presented a libellous petition to the king against him, the suggestions of which were thoroughly examined, and it clearly appeared that the chancellor had acted as became him, and that he had in truth been very much injured by this Wrenham the suggestions, however, appear to have produced those effects on some minds which afterwards were displayed more conspicuously.

In the midst of these important occupations, he was so far from neglecting his philosophical studies, that in the month of October 1620, he sent to the king his great work, the “Novum Organum,” the design of which was, to execute the second part of the “Instauration,” by advancing a more perfect method of using the rational faculty than men were before acquainted with, in order to raise and improve the understanding, as far as its present imperfect state admits, and enable it to conquer and interpret the difficulties and obscurities of nature. This work his majesty received as graciously as he/could wish, and wrote him a letter upon it, which certainly does honour to both their memories. He received also the compliments of many learned men on the same subject, and had every reason to be satisfied with the general reception of a work, which cost him so much time and pains. Such is said to have been his anxiety for its perfection, that he revised and altered twelve copies before he brought it to the state in which it was published.

The end of his political life, however, was now approaching, and was precipitated by means in which he had a considerable share, by advising his majesty to call a parliament, and grant redress of public abuses. In the course of investigating these, on the loth of March 1620-1, the committee appointed to inquire into the abuses in the courts of justice, reported that two charges of corruption had been brought against the lord chancellor; a farther inquiry was ordered by the house of commons, which produced stronger circumstances, and the complaint was sent up to the house of lords. When it came to be debated there, Buckingham presented a letter from the lord chancellor, who was then sick, in which he desired four things of their lordships first, that they would maintain him in their good opinion till his cause was heard secondly, that they would give him a convenient time, as well in regard of his ill state of health, as of the importance of the charge, to make his defence; thirdly, that they would allow him to except against the credit of the witnesses against him, to cross-examine them, and to produce evidence in his own defence and fourthly, that in case there came any more petitions of the like nature, that their lordships would not take any prejudice at their number, considering they were against a judge that made two thousand orders, and decrees in a year. Their lordships returned a respectful answer to this letter but within a few days, their own committee reported above twenty instances, in which he had taken bribes to the amount of several thousands of pounds. Of all this, the proof was so clear, as to determine the chancellor to relinquish his intended defence, and to throw himself upon the mercy of the house. This not being explicit, he sent a second full and particular confession and submission to the house, in which he acknowledged most, but extenuated some, of the many instances of corruption with which he had been charged, and once more threw himself entirely on the mercy of his peers. The lords having heard this paper read, a committee of lords were sent to him, who told him that the lords do conceive it to be an ingenuous and full confession, and demanded of him, whether it be his own hand that is subscribed to the same and whether he will stand to it or not To which the lord chancellor answered, “My lords, it is my act, my hand, my heart. I beseech your lordships to be merciful to a broken reed.”

In consequence of these proceedings, his lordship delivered up the great seal to his majesty, and the house of peers adjudged, that lord viscdunt St. Albans, lord chancellor of England, shall undergo fine and ransom of fortythousand pounds, that he shall be imprisoned in the Tower during the king’s pleasure, that he shall for ever be incapable of any office or employment in the state or commonwealth, and that he shall never sit in parliament, or come within the verge of the court. After a short confinement in the Tower, however, he was discharged, and in some measure regained his favour with the king, who, on the prorogation of parliament, was pleased to consult him, as to the proper methods of reforming the courts of justice, and taking away other grievances which that parliament had inquired into and his lordship accordingly drew up a memorial, which is extant in his works. Other marks of favour and indulgence were shewn him, which, amidst the anguish of a blasted character, so far appeased his troubled mind, that he resumed his studies with his accustomed vigour. In the spring of the succeeding year, 1622, he published his history of, Henry VII. which has not added so much to his reputation as his other works. When the new parliament was called, in which the house of commons shewed great zeal for his majesty’s service, he composed “Considerations of a war with Spain,” and likewise “Heads of a Speech” for his friend sir Edward Sackville, upon the same subject and these services were so well received, that upon an application to the king for a full pardon, he easily obtained it. In the warrant directed for this purpose to the attorney-general, his majesty took notice of his lordship’s having already satisfied justice by his sufferings, and. that himself being always inclined to temper justice with mercy, and likewise calling to remembrance his former good services, and how well and profitably he had spent his time since his troubles, he was graciously pleased to remove from him that blot of ignominy which yet remained upon him, of incapacity and disablement, and to remit to him all penalties whatsoever, inflicted by that sentence.

In consequence of this pardon, his lordship was summoned to the second parliament in the succeeding reign of Charles I. but his infirmities did not allow him to take his seat. He foresaw that his end was drawing near, although he escaped the great plague, in the spring of 1625. Having sufficiently established the fame of his learning and abilities, by his writings published by himself, he committed, by his will, several of his Latin and philosophical compositions, to the care of sir William Bos well, his majesty’s agent in Holland, where they were afterwards published by Gruter. His orations and letters he commended to sir Humphrey May, chancellor of the Duchy, and the bishop of Lincoln (Williams), who succeeded him as lord keeper, and acknowledged the honour of that trust, which letters he enjoined to be preserved, but not to be divulged, as touching too much on persons and matters of state. By this judicious care of his, most of his papers were preserved, and the greatest part of them at different times have been printed and published. The severe winter which followed the infectious summer of 1625, brought him very low; but the spring reviving his spirits, he made a little excursion into the country, in order to try some experiments in natural philosophy; in which journey he was taken so ill, that he was obliged to stop at the earl of Arundel’s house at Highgate, about a week, and there he expired, April y, 1626, and was privately buried in the chapel of St. Michael’s church, within the precincts of Old Verulam where a monument was erected to his memory by sir Thomas Meautys, his faithful friend and indefatigable servant in all his troubles.

The political character of lord Bacon is sufficiently determined by those events in his life, about which there can now be no dispute. However we may lament the fall of such a man, it appears too plain that it was owing entirely to his own misconduct, and neither to the intrigues of his enemies, or the temper of the times. He remains an awful example of the brightest character upon record, sullied by the vices of ambition and ostentation; for the latter betrayed him into expences which he was glad to defray without consideration of the means, nor is it much palliation of his great offence, that he was neither covetous nor avaricious.

, an eminent English sculptor, descended of an ancient family in Somersetshire, was the son of Thomas Bacon, a cloth-worker in South wark, and born Nov. 24, 1740. At the age of fourteen, he was bound apprentice to Mr. Crispe of Bow church-yard, where he was employed in painting on porcelain, and forming the models of shepherds, shepherdesses, and other ornamental pieces for his master’s china manufactory at Lambeth, and such was his skill and industry in this humble employment, that he was at this early age enabled to gratify his filial piety, by supporting his parents from the produce of his labours, although at the expence of 'those enjoyments which children of less affection and thought cannot easily resign. While employed at this manufactory, he had an opportunity of seeing the models of different sculptors which were sent there to be burnt, and from them he improved his own skill in so high a degree, that at no distant period he became a candidate for public premiums, and it appears from the books published annually by the Society for the encouragement of the arts, that, between the years 1763 and 1766 inclusive, the first premiums in those classes, for which he contended, were no less than nine times adjudged to him. The first of these attempts was made in the year 1758, in a small figure of Peace, after the manner of the antique. During his apprenticeship also, he formed a design of making statues in artificial stone, which he afterwards so perfected as to recover the manufactory at Lambeth, now carried on by Mrs. Coade, and which before Mr. Bacon undertook the management of it, had fallen into very low circumstances.

About the year 1763, he first attempted working in marble, and having never seen that operation performed, he was led to invent an instrument for transferring the form of the model to the marble (technically called, getting out the points), which instrument, from its superior effect, has since been adopted by many other sculptors in England and France. His first regular instructions, however, in his favourite pursuit, were received at the lloyal Academy in 1768, the year of its institution, and such were their effect on a mind already so well prepared by nature, that the first gold medal for sculpture given by the academy, was decreed to him and two years after, he was elected an associate. His fame was at this time well known by his statue of Mars, which induced the late archbishop of York, Dr. Markham, to employ him to execute a bust of his Majesty for the hall of Christ Church college, Oxford. His majesty not only condescended to sit to him upon this occasion, but honoured him with his patronage, and ordered another bust, intended as a present to the university of Got tin gen. He was -soon after employed by the dean and scholars of Christ Church to form several busts for them, particularly those of general Guise, the bishop of Durham, and the primate of Ireland.

In 1773, he presented to the Society forthe encouragement of arts, two statues in plaster, which by a vote of that society, were directed to be placed in their great room, and he received on the same occasion their gold medal. His first work in sculpture is in Christ Church college, already mentioned the first figures he executed in marble, are at the duke of Richmond’s at Goodwood and his first monument was that of Mrs. Withers, in St. Mary’s, Worcester. In 1777, he was employed to prepare a model of a monument to be erected in Guy’s hospital, South wark, to the memory of the founder. It was this work that chiefly recommended him to the execution of lord Chatham’s monument in Guildhall. His other works, about this period, were the monument of Mrs. Draper; a marble statue of Mars, for lord Yarborough two groupes for the top of Somerset-house the monument of lord Halifax in Westminster abbey the statue of judge Blackstone for All Souls college, Oxford, and that of Henry VI. for the Anti-chapel at Eton. It is not our intention, however, nor would our limits permit, to enumerate all the works executed by this artist, within twenty years after he attained his just and high fame. There are few of our cathedrals or puhlic edifices without some specimen of his skill, but it would be unpardonable to omit one of his grandest efforts, the monument of lord Chatham, in Westminster abbey, which was begun in 1778, and finished in 1783. It is alone a proof of the excellence he had attained, without the aid of foreign travel and observation and how various that excellence was, may be further proved from the bronze gfoupe in the square in Somersetplace the monuments of lady Miller at Bath of lord Rodney at Jamaica of lord Heathfield at Buckland of the earl and countess of Effingham at Jamaica of Howard and Johnson in St. Paul’s, &c. c.

In almost the vigour of life, and when his fame was at its height, this artist was suddenly attacked with an inflammation in his bowels, so violent and remediless, as to occasion his death, Aug. 7, 1799, in the 59th year of his age. He left two sons and three daughters by his first wife, and three sons by his last. His second son, John, became the inheritor of a considerable part of his property, and has already fully proved himself the legitimate successor to his talents.

Mr. Bacon’s private characfer is entitled to much praise. He vyas a man of unfeigned piety and extensive benevolence. Prosperity had not corrupted him, although it appeared to superficial observers that he was cautious in matters of expence, which they were apt to impute to motives which never entered into his mind. The want of education, he supplied by useful reading, and without the more ostensible attainments of a scholar, his conversation as far as it regarded common life and common topics, had none of those deficiencies which academical education is supposed to supply. In his temper, the irritability of the artist was corrected by much meekness and forbearance, and he had that noble candour which never denies just praise to a rival or contemporary. With respect to his attainments in his profession, they might be said to be all his own. Having arrived at the highest rank of English artists in sculpture, he lias amply proved that foreign travel confers a merit which is rather useful than necessarv a distinction which will not be misunderstood by those who know to what caprices the success of modern artists is often indebted.

, knight of the bath, and an excellent painter, was one of the sons of the lord-keeper sir Nicholas Bacon, and half-brother to the viscount St. Alban’s. He travelled into Italy, and studied painting there; but his manner and colouring approach nearer to the style of the Flemish school. Mr. Walpole observes, that at Culford, where he lived, are preserved some of his works and at Gorhambury, his father’s seat, is a large picture in oil by him, of a cook maid with dead fowls, admirably painted, with great nature, neatness, and lustre of colouring. In the same house is a whole length of him by himself, drawing on a paper his sword and pallet hung up, and a half length of his mother by him. At Redgrave-hall, in Suffolk, were two more pieces by the same hand, which afterwards passed into the possession of Mr. Rowland Holt the one, Ceres with fruit and flowers; the other, Hercules and the Hydra. In Tradescant’s museum was a small landscape, painted and given to him by sir Nathaniel Bacon. In the chancel of Culford, in Suffolk, are a monument and bust of him, with his pallet and pencils. Another monument was erected to his memory at Stiffkey in Norfolk, the inscription upon which is published by Mr. Masters. The same writer informs us, that sir Nathaniel was famed for painting plants, and well skilled in their virtues. He married first, Anne, the daughter of sir Thomas Greshant, and secondly, Dorothy, daughter of sir Arthur Hopton. By the former he had three daughters, the eldest of whom married John Townsend of llainham, ancestor of the present marquis Townsend. The monument above-mentioned was erected by himself in 1615, the 69th year of his age, but has not the date of his death.

, lord keeper of the great seal in the reign of queen Elizabeth, descended from an ancient and honourable family in Suffolk. His rather was Robert Bacon of Drinkstxm in that county, esq. and his mother was Isabel, the daughter of John Gage of Pakenhain in the said county, esq. Nicholas, their second son, was born in 1510, at Chislehurst in Kent. After having received the first rudiments of learning, probably at home, or in the neighbourhood, he was sent when very young to Corpus Christi college in Cambridge, where having improved in all branches of useful knowledge, he went to France, in order to give the last polish to his education. On his return he settled in Gray VInn, and applied himself with such assiduity to the study of the law, that on the dissolution of the monastery of St. Edmund’s-Bury in Suffolk, he had a grant from king Henry VIII. in the thirty-­sixth year of his reign, of the manors of Redgrave, Botesdale, and Gillingham, with the park of Redgrave, and six acres of land in Worthanf, as also the tithes of Redgrave to hold in capite by knight’s service, a proof of the estimation in which he was held by his majesty. In the thirtyeighth of the same king, he was promoted to the office of attorney in the court of wards, a place both of honour and profit, and his patent was renewed in the first year of Edward VI. and in 1552, which was the last year of his reign, Mr. Bacon was elected treasurer of Gray’s-Inn. His great moderation and consummate prudence, preserved him through the dangerous reign of queen Mary. In the very dawn of that of Elizabeth he was knighted, and the great seal of England being taken from Nicholas Heath, archbishop of York, was delivered to sir Nicholas Bacon, on the 22d of December 1558, with the title of lord keeper. He was also of the privy council to her majesty, who had much regard to his advice. The parliament met Jan. 23, but was prorogued on account of the queen’s indisposition to the 25th, when the lord keeper opened the session with a most eloquent and solid speech. Some of the queen’s counsellors thought it necessary that the attainder of the queen’s mother should be taken off; but the lord keeper thought the crown purged all defects, and in compliance with his advice, two laws were made, one for recognizing the queen’s title, the other for restoring her in blood as heir to her mother. The principal business of this session was the settlement of religion, in which no man had a greater share than the keeper, and he acted with such prudence as never to incur the hatred of any party. On this account he was, together with the archbishop of York, appointed moderator in a dispute between eight Protestant divines, and eight Popish bishops and the latter behaving very unfairly in the opinion of both the moderators, and desiring, to avoid a fair disputation, to go away, the lord keeper put that question to each of them, and when all except one insisted on going, his lordship dismissed them with this memorandum, “For that ye would not that we should hear you, perhaps you may shortly hear of us” and accordingly for this contempt, the bishops of Winchester and Lincoln were committed to the tower, and the rest were bound to appear before the council, and not to quit the cities of London and Westminster without leave. The whole business of the session, than which there was none of greater importance during that reign, was chiefly managed by his lordship, according to his wise maxim, “Let us stay a little, that we may have done the sooner.” From this time he stood as high in the favour of the queen as any of her ministers, and maintained a cordial interest with other great men, particularly with those eminent persons, who had married into the same family with himself, viz. Cecil, Hobby, Rowlet, and Killigrew. By their assistance he preserved his credit at court, though he sometimes differed in opinion from the mighty favourite Leicester, who yet once bad fair his ruin, when certain intrigues were carried on respecting the succession. Some statesmen, and particularly the earl of Leicester, pretended to favour the title of the queen of Scots, but others were more inclined to the house of Suffolk. The queen sometimes affected a neutrality, and sometimes shewed a tenderness for the title of the Scottish queen. In 1564, when these disputes were at the height, Mr. John Hales, clerk of the Hanaper, published a treatise which seems to have been written a considerable time before, in favour of the Suffolk line, and against the title of the queen of Scots. This book was complained of by the bishop of Ross, ambassador from the queen of Scots, and Ross being warmly supported by the earl of Leicester, Hales was committed to prison, and so strict an inquiry made after all who had expressed any favour for this piece, that at last the lord-keeper came to be suspected, which drew upon him the queen’s displeasure, and he was forbidden the court, removed from his seat at council, and prohibited from meddling with any affairs but those of the chancery nay, Camden says he was confined . At last, however, Cecil, who is suspected to have had some share in the above treatise, with much difficulty restored him to the queen’s good opinion, as appears by her setting him at the head of that commission, granted in the year 1568, for hearing the difference between the queen of Scots, and her rebellious subjects; and in 1571, we find him again acting in the like capacity, though very little was done before the commissioners at either time, which was what queen Elizabeth chiefly desired, and the covering her inclination with a decent appearance of justice, was perhaps not a little owing to the address of the lord-keeper. Afterwards he continued at the head of her majesty’s councils, and had a great hand in preventing, by his moderation, some violent measures afterwards proposed. The share, however, that he had in the business of the duke of Norfolk, and his great care for promoting the Protestant religion, created him many bitter enemies among the Papists both at home and abroad, who though they were able to do him no great hurt, yet published some libels, particularly “A Detection of certain practices, &c.” printed in Scotland, about 1570, and “A treatise of Treason,” both which gave him considerable uneasiness, although the queen expressed her opinion, by a proclamation, ordering them to be burnt. As a statesman, he was remarkable for a clear head, and acute understanding; and while it was thought of some other great men that they seemed wiser than they were, yet the common voice of the nation pronounced, that sir Nicholas Bacon was wiser than he seemed. His great skill lay in balancing factions, and it is thought he taught the queen that secret, the more necessary to her because the last of her family, and consequently without many of the usual supports of princes. In the chancery he distinguished himself by a very moderate use of power, and the respect he shewed to the common law. At his own request, an act of parliament was made, to settle and establish the power of a lord -keeper, though he might probably have taken away all need of this, by procuring the title of lord chancellor: but according to his motto, which was Mediocra firma, he he was content to be safe, and did not desire to be great*. In that court, and in the star-chamber, he made use, on proper occasions, of set speeches, in which he was peculiarly happy, and gained the reputation of a witty and a weighty speaker. His great parts and great preferment were far from raising him in his own opinion, as appears from the modest answer he gave* queen Elizabeth, when she told him his house at Redgrave was too little for him, “Not so, madam,” returned he, “but your majesty has made me too great for my house.” Yet to shew his respect for her majesty’s judgment, he afterwards added wings to this house. His modesty in this respect was so much the greater, since he had a great passion for building, and a very fine taste, as appeared by his house and gardens at Gorhambury near St. Alban’s, now the seat of lord viscount Grimston. Towards the latter end of his life, he became very corpulent, which made queen Elizabeth say merrily, that “sir Nicholas’s soul lodged well. To himself, however, his bulk was very inconvenient after walking from Westminster-hall to the star-chamber, which was but a very little way, he was usually so much out of breath, that the lawyers forbore speaking at the bar till he recocovered himself, and gave them notice by knocking” with his staff. After having held the great seal more than twenty years, this able statesman and faithful counsellor was suddenly removed from this life, as Mallett informs us, by the following accident “He was under the hands of his barber, and the weather being sultry, had ordered a window before him to be thrown open. As he was become very corpulent, he presently fell asleep, in the cur­* After he had been some monthsact of parliament, which declares, in office, as keeper of the great seal,” That the common law always was, he began to doubt to what degree his that the keeper of the great seal always authority extended, which seems to had, as of right belonging to his office, have been owing to the general terms the same authority, jurisdiction, excused upon the delivery of the great cution of laws, and all other customs, Heal, of which we have various in- as the lord chancellor of England lawstances in Rymer’s Foedera. Upon fully used.“What the true reason this, he first applied himself to the was that made his lordship so uneasy, queen, from whom he procured a pa- is not perhaps known to posterity. tent, bearing date at Westminster, the But sir Henry Spelman has observed, 14th of April, in the first year of her that for the benefit of that wise counreign, whereby she declares him te seller sir Nicholas Bacon, the authobare as full powers as if he were rity of the keeper of the great seal hancellor of England, and ratifies all was by this law declared to be in all that he had already done. This, how- respects the same with that of th ever, did not fully satisfy him but chancellor, four years afterwards he procured an rent of fresh air that was blowing in upon him, and awaked after some time distempered all over. c Why,‘ said he to the servant, < did you suffer me to sleep thus exposed’ The fellow replied, ‘ That he durst not presume to disturb him.’ * Then,‘ said the lord keeper, * by your civility I lose my life,’ and so removed into his bed-chamber, where he died a few days after.” But this story seems doubtful, for all writers agree, that sir Nicholas Bacon died Feb. 20, 1579, when the weather could not be very sultry. On the 9th of March following he was buried with great solemnity, under a sumptuous monument erected by himself in St. Paul’s church, with an inscription written by the celebrated Buchanan. Camden’s character of him is just and plain “Vir praepinguis, ingenio acerrimo, singulari prudentia, summa eloquentia, tenaci memoria, et sacris conciliis alterum columen” i. e. A man of a gross body, but most quick wit, singular prudence, supreme eloquence, happy memory, and for judgment the other pillar of the state. His son’s pharacter of him is more striking. He was “a plain man, direct and constant, without all finesse and doubleness and one that was of a mind that a man, in his private proceedings and estate, and in the proceedings of state, should rest upon the soundness and strength of his own courses, and not upon practice to circumvent others, according to the sentence of Solomon, * Vir prudens advertit ad gressus suos stultus autem divertit ad dolos’ insomuch that the bishop of Ross, a subtle and observing man, said of him, that he could fasten no words upon him, and that it was impossible to come within him, because he offered no play; and the queen mother of France, a very politic princess, said of him, that he should have been of the council of Spain, because he despised the occurrents, and rested upon the first plot.” Nor is Puttenham’s short account to be overlooked “I have come to the lord keeper, and found him sitting in his gallery alone, with the works of Quintilian before him. Indeed he was a most eloquent man, of rare wisdom and learning, as ever I knew England to breed, and one that joyed as much in learned men and 0'.;d wits, from whose lippes Ihave seen to proceed more i;rave and natural eloquence than from all the orators of Oxford and Cambridge.”

He was not happier in his fortune than in his family. His first wife was Jane, daughter of William Fernley, of Meting in the county of Suffolk, esrj. by whom he had issue three sons and three daughters. The sons were, 1. Sir Nicholas. 2. Nathaniel Bacon, of whom we have just given some account. 3. Edward Bacon, of Shrubland-hall in Suffolk, esq. in right of his wife Helen, daughter and heir of Thomas Littel of the same place, esq. and of Bray, in the county of Berks, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter and coheir to sir Robert Litton, of Knebworth in the county of Hertford, knt. from whom is lineally descended Nicholas Bacon of Shrubland-hall, esq. and from younger sons of the said Edward are the Bacons of Ipswich in Suffolk, and Earlham in Norfolk, descended. The daughters were, 1. Anne, already noticed. 2. Jane, married first to sir Francis Windham, knt. one of the justices of the common pleas;‘ second, to sir Robert Mansfield, knt. And 3. Elizabeth, married first to sir Robert d’Oyly of Chislehampton in Oxfordshire, knt. secondly, to sir Henry Nevil, knt and thirdly, to sir William Periam, knt. lord chief baron of the exchequer. After her decease he married Anne, daughter of sir Anthony Cooke, of Giddy-hall in the county of Essex, knt. by whom he had two sons, Anthony and Francis, the illustrious lord Bacon. Of Anthony there is a long, but imperfect and not very interesting account, in the “Biographia Britannica.”

Sir Nicholas ranks among the liberal benefactors to the university of Cambridge, and particularly to Corpus college, in which he was educated. He presented to the public library one hundred and three Greek and Latin books, and on the college he bestowed two hundred pounds towards erecting a new chapel, and engaged other friends to contribute to the same purpose. He settled, likewise, upon the college, an annuity of twenty pounds, for the maintenance of six scholars, who are to be chosen out of the grammar school at Redgrave, near Botesdale in Suffolk. This school was founded by himself, and he allotted thirty pounds per annum for the support of it; he founded also Cursitor’s or Bacon’s Inn in Chancery-lane and for the furtherance of religion, he appointed two annual sermons in St. Paul’s cathedral-, allotting four marks per annum for the payment of the preachers. Nor must we omit some notice of his intention, in Henry VIII.'s time, to found a seminary of ministers of state out of the revenues of the dissolved monasteries.His majesty had intended to found a house for the study of the civil law, and the purity of the Latin and French tongues. He ordered, therefore, sir Nicholas Bacon, and two others, Thomas Denton, and Robert Gary, to draw out the plan and statutes of such a house, which they accordingly brought to the king in writing. The intention of it was, that there should be frequent pleadings and other exercises in the Latin and French languages, and that when the students had attained to some degree of ripeness, they should be sent out with our ambassadors, and trained up in the knowledge of foreign affairs, by which means the institution would become a nursery for public ministers. Others of the students were to be employed in writing the history of the national transactions both at home and abroad, including, particularly, embassies, treaties, arraign rnents, and state trials. But before they were to be permitted to write on these subjects, they were to take an oath before the lord chancellor, that they would do it truly, without respect of persons, and without any corrupt views. This design, however, miscarried, probably owing to Henry’s extravagant dissipation of the revenues of the dissolved monasteries.

Bishop Tanner has enrolled sir Nicholas Bacon among the writers of this country, on account of the following pieces, preserved in different manuscript collections. “An oration to the queen, exhorting her to Marriage;” “a speech to the lord mayor of London” “a speech to the serjeant called to a judge” “an oration touching the queen’s Marriage and Succession to the Crown” “his speech to the queen, when she made him lord keeper” “his speech in the star-chamber, 1568” “his speech to sir Thomas Gargrave, elected speaker for the commons house of parliament;” “his speech at the council table, concerning aid required by the Scots to expel the French out of Scotland” “his speech concerning an Interview between queen Elizabeth and the Scottish queen, 1572;” “his speech to the lords and commons in parliament, in the beginning” “his speech to Mr. Bell when he was called to be judge.” All these are in the Norwich manuscripts of More, 228 and are, we suppose, at present, in the public library of Cambridge. “Several speeches of lord keeper sir Nicholas Bacon, from 1558 to 1571 inclusive,” in Mr. Ralph Thoresby’s collection “a discourse upon certain points touching the Inheritance of the Crown, conceived by sir Anthony Brown, and answered by sir Nicholas Bacon,” published in 1723. “Three letters to Dr. Parker,” in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge mentioned by Strype, in his life of the archbishop. One of these, entitled “a letter of Mr. Nicholas Bacon, counsellor at law, to Parker, dean of Stoke college, in answer to certain cases put to him relating to the said college,” Mr. Strype has published at length. Holinshed, at the end of his second volume, p. 1589, ranks sir Nicholas Bacon in the catalogue of those who have written something concerning the history of England. Mr. Masters refers to a comment of sir Nicholas’s on the twelve minor prophets, dedicated to his son Anthony. And Mr. Strype has printed an excellent letter of advice, which was written by the lord keeper, a little before his death, to the queen, on the situation of her affairs. Many of his apophthegms are among those of lord Verulam, and many of his speeches are in the Parliamentary History.

, rector of Balden in Oxfordshire, and vicar of Bramber in Sussex, was of Magdalen college, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. April 17, 1722; B. D. April 29, 1731 D.D. December 7, 1735. He possessed an exquisite fund of humour, was a famous punster, and wrote ai) admirable poem called the “Artificial Kite,” first printed in 1719, and preservedin the Gentleman’s Magazine for 1758. In 1757 he published five dramatic performances, viz. J. “The Taxes.” 2. “The Insignificants.” 3. “The trial of the Time-killers.” 4. “The moral Q,uack.” 5. “The Oculist.” None of these, however, were intended for the theatre. He was also the author of a very humorous ballad, entitled “The Snipe,” in which the friar is himself, and Peter is his fellow-collegian, Peter Zinzam, M.D. who died Nov. 9, 1781. This ballad is preserved in the “Oxford Sausage.” Dr. Bacon died at Balden, Jan. 10, 1783, in the eighty-third year of his age.

, an eminent English divine of the thirteenth century, was born, according to the most probable conjectures, about 1168, but where is not known. He studied, however, at Oxford, where he distinguished himself by the quickness of his parts and his assiduous application. Thence according to the custom of that age, tie removed to Paris, and acquired such learning as the age afforded. After his return, of which we have no date, he settled at Oxford, and read divinity lectures. His colleague in this office was Dr. Edmund Rich, in our histories commonly styled Edmund Abingdon a man famous for literature, and yet, in the opinion of Leland, inferior to our Bacon. This Dr. Rich had been chosen by the canons of Salisbury, treasurer of their church, and in 1233, becoming archbishop of Canterbury, his friend Robert Bacon succeeded him as treasurer of the cathedral church of Salisbury. The same year he gained great reputation by a sermon preached before his royal master, king Henry III. at Oxford, whither his majesty came, in order to hold a general council of his lords. In this discourse, Bacon plainly told the king the mischiefs to which himself and his subjects were exposed, by his reposing too great a confidence in Peter de Rupibus, bishop of Winchester, and other foreigners and this honest sermon had a great effect on the mind of his master, and inclined him to give satisfaction to his nobility, who were then, generally speaking, disaffected. This seasonable service rendered to the nation, did more to secure his memory from oblivion, than his many years laborious reading, or even his learned writings.

After the promotion of Dr. Rich to the see of Canterbury, the famous Richard Fishakel, whom Lelaitd calls Fizacrius, read, in conjunction with our Bacon, in St. Edward’s schools, for many years together, to their own great honour, and to the benefit of all their hearers, nor were they less assiduous in preaching. In 1240, Bacon lost his great patron and intimate friend, Edmund, archbishop of Canterbury, and perhaps this accident, joined to his fervent piety and love of retirement, might induce Bacon, though he was very old, to enter into the order of friars preachers, of which order also was his associate Fishakel. In gratitude to the memory of the archbishop, Bacon wrote his life, which was highly esteemed. He wrote also many pieces, which were esteemed in his day to be learned and useful. These were a book of “Glosses on the Holy Scriptures,” another <f On the Psalter,“and two collections of” Discourses“and” Lectures." At length worn Out with so long a course of studious application, he died in 1248, and is supposed to have been interred in the Dofninican convent at Oxford, Pitts, Leland, Hearne, Cave, and other authors, have confounded this Robert Bacon with Roger, the subject of the following article, as has been properly explained in the Biographia Britannica, from which this article is taken. Wood, in his history and antiquities of Oxford, has in general avoided this mistake.

Dr. Pegge, whose excellent life of bishop Grosseteste we have seen since the above article was written, thinks that Robert Bacon was either elder brother, or more probably, as Leland imagines, uncle of Roger Bacon. Robert was the person who initiated Edmund archbishop of Canterbury in the study of divinity, but Bulaeus, in his history of the university of Paris, says he was himself the scholar of that saint, which Dr. Pegge doubts. However, he wrote “Edmund’s life,” and is noticed by Leland, as the particular acquaintance and intimate of bishop Grosseteste. Matthew of Westminster gives him and Fishakel the character of being two such as were not exceeded by any in Christendom, or even equalled, especially as preachers. Dr. Pegge observes, that this character is the more extraordinary as coming from a monk, and that from the latter part of it, as well as from the list of Robert’s productions, it appears that his excellence lay in theology, a particular which constitutes an essential difference in the character of him and Roger Bacon, who was eminently skilled in the mathematics and philosophy, as well as divinity, and perhaps more so.

, a learned English monk of the Franciscan order, who flourished in the thirteenth century, was born near Ilchester in Somersetshire, in 1214, and was descended of a very ancient and honourable family. He received the first tincture of letters at Oxford, where having gone through grammar and logic, the dawnings of his genius gained him the favour and patronage of the greatest lovers of learning, and such as were equally distinguished by their high rank, and the excellence of their knowledge. It is not very clear, says the Biographia Britannica, whether he was of Merton college, or of Brazen-nose hall, and perhaps he studied at neither, but spent his time at the public schools. The latter is indeed more probable than that he studied at Merton college, which did not then exist. It appears, however, that he went early over to Paris, where he made still greater progress in all parts of learning, and was looked upon as the glory of that university, and an honour to his country. In those days such as desired to distinguish themselves by an early and effectual application to their studies, resorted to Paris, where not only many of the greatest men in Europe resided and taught, but many of the English nation, by whom Bacon was encouraged and caressed. At Paris he did not confine his studies to any particular branch of literature, but endeavoured to comprehend the sciences in general, fully and perfectly, by a right method and constant application. When he had attained the degree of doctor, he returned again, to his own country, and, as some say, took the habit of the Franciscan order in 1240, when he was about twenty-six years of age but others assert that he became a monk before he left France. After his return to Oxford, he was considered, by the greatest men of that university, as one of the ablest and most indefati^ gable inquirers after knowledge that the world had ever produced and therefore they not only shewed him all due respect, but likewise conceiving the greatest hopes from his improvements in the method of study, they generously contributed to his expences, so that he was enabled to lay out, within the compass of twenty years, no less than two thousand pounds in collecting curious authors, making trials of various kinds, and in the construction of different instruments, for the improvement of useful knowledge. But if this assiduous application to his studies, and the stupendous progress he made in them, raised his credit with the better part of mankind, it excited the envy of some, and afforded plausible pretences for the malicious designs of others. It is very easy to conceive, that the experiments he made in all parts of natural philosophy and the mathematics, must have made a great noise in an ignorant age, when scarcely two or three men in a whole nation were tolerably acquainted with those studies, and when all the pretenders to knowledge affected to cover their own ignorance, by throwing the most scandalous aspersions on those branches of science, which they either wanted genius to understand, or which demanded greater application to acquire, than they were willing to bestow. They gave out, therefore, that mathematical studies were in some measure allied to those magical arts which the church had condemned,and thereby brought suspicions upon men of superior learning. It was owing to this suspicion that Bacon was restrained from reading lectures to the young students in the university, and at length closely confined and almost starved, the monks being afraid lest his writings should extend beyond the limits of his convent, and be seen by any besides themselves and the pope. But there is great reason to believe, that though his application to the occult; sciences was their pretence, the true cause of his ill-usage was, the freedom with which he had treated the clergy in, his writings, in which he spared neither their ignorance nor their want of morals. But notwithstanding this harsh feature in the character of the times, his reputation continued to spread over the whole Christian world, and even pope Clement IV. wrote him a letter, desiring that he would send him all his works. This was in 1266, when our author was in the flower of his 4 age, and to gratify his holiness, collected together, greatly enlarged and ranged in some order, the several pieces he had written before that time, and sent them the next year by his favourite disciple John of London, or rather of Paris, to the pope. This collection, which is the same that himself entitled Opus Majus, or his great work, is yet extant, and was published by Dr. Jebb, in 1773. Dr. Jebb had proposed to have published all his works about three years before his edition of the Opus Majus, but while he was engaged in that design, he was informed by letters from his brother at Dublin, that there was a“manuscript in the college library there, which contained a great many treatises generally ascribed to Bacon, and disposed in such order, that they seemed to form one complete work, but the title was wanting, which l,iad been carelessly torn off from the rest of the manuscript. The doctor soon found that it was a collection of those tracts which Bacon had written for the use of pope Clement IV. and to which he had given the title of Opus Majus, since it appeared, that what he said of that work in his Opus Tertium, addressed to the same pope, exactly suited with this; which contained an account of almost all the new discoveries and improvements that he had made in the sciences,. Upon this account Dr. Jebb laid aside his former design, and resolved to publish only an edition of this Opus Majus. The manuscripts which he made use of to complete this edition, are, 1. ms. in the Cotton library, inscribed^” Jul. D. V.“which contains the first part of the Opus Majus, under the title of a treatise” Jl)e utijitate Scientiarnii). “2. Another ms. in the same library, marked” Tib. C. V." containing the fourth part of the Opus Majus, in which is shewn the use of the mathematics in the sciences and affairs of the world in the ms. it is erroneously called the fifth part. 3. A ms. in the library belonging to Corpus Christi in Cambridge, containing that portion of the fourth part which treats of geography. 4. A ms. of the fifth part, containing a treatise upon perspective, in the earl of Oxford’s library. 5. A ms. in the library of Magdalen college, Cambridge, comprehending the same treatise of perspective. 6. Two Mss. in the king’s library, communicated to the editor by Dr. Richard Bentley, one of which contains the fourth part of Opus Majus, and the other the fifth part. It is said that this learned book of his procured him the favour of Clement IV. and also some encouragement in the prosecution of his studies but this could not have lasted long, as that pope died soon after, and then we find our author under fresh embarrassments from the same causes as before; but he became in more danger, as the general of his order, Jerom de Ascoli, having heard his cause, ordered him to be imprisoned. This is said to have happened in 1278, and to prevent his appealing to pope Nicholas III. the general procured a confirmation of his sentence from Rome immediately, but it is not very easy to say upon what pretences. Yet we are told by others, that he was imprisoned by Reymundus Galfredus, who was general of his order, on account of some alchemistical treatise which he had written, and that Galfredus afterwards set him at liberty, and became his scholar. However obscure these circumstances may be, it is certain that his sufferings for many years must have brought him low, since he was sixty-four years of age when he was first put in prison, and deprived of the opportunity of prosecuting his studies, at least in the way of experiment. That he was still indulged in the use of his books, appears very clearly from the great use he made of them in the learned works he composed.

Pope Nicholas III. dying in the year 1280, Simon de Brie, cardinal of St. Cecilia, was elected pope, and four years after, was succeeded by cardinal Savelli, who took the name of Honoring IV. in the year 1285. Both reigns were full of troubles and very short so that in all this time our author could find no opportunity of applying to the holy see for the mitigation of the sentence pronounced against him- But when he had been ten years in prison, Jerom de Ascoli, who had condemned his doctrine, was chosen pope, and assumed the name of Nicholas IV. As he was the first of the Franciscan order that had ever arrived at this dignity, was reputed a person of great probity and much learning, our author, notwithstanding what had before happened, resolved to apply to him for his discharge and in order to pacify his resentment, and at the same time to shew both the innocence and the usefulness of his studies, he addressed to him a very learned and curious treatise, “On the means of avoiding the infirmities of Old Age,” printed first at Oxford, 1590, and translated and published by Dr. Richard Browne, under the title of “The cure of Old Age and preservation of Youth,” London, 1683, 8vo. It does not appear, however, that his application had any effect on the contrary, some writers say that he caused him to be more closely confined. But towards the latter end of his reign, Bacon, by the interposition of some noblemen, obtained his release, and returned to Oxford, where, at the request of his friends, he composed “A compendium of Theology,” which seems to have been his last work, and of which there is a copy in the royal library. He spent the remainder of his days in peace, and dying in the college of his order, on the 11th of June 1292, as some say, or in 1294, as others assert, was interred in the church of the Franciscans. The monks gave him the title of “Doctor Mirabilis,” or the Wonderful Doctor, which he deserved, in whatever sense the phrase is taken.

He was certainly the most extraordinary man of his time. He was a perfect master of the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew, and has left posterity such indubitable marks of his critical skill in them, as might have secured him a very high character, if he had never distinguished himself in any other branch of literature. In all branches of the mathematics he was well versed, and there is scarcely any part of them, on which he has not written with a solidity and clearness, which have been deservedly admired by the greatest masters in that science. In mechanics particularly, the learned Dr. Freind says, that a greater genius had not arisen since the days of Archimedes. He understood likewise the whole science of optics, with accuracy and is very justly allowed to have understood, both the theory and practice of those discoveries, which have bestowed such high reputation on those of our own and of other nations, who have brought them into common use. In geography also he was admirably well skilled, as appears from a variety of passages in his works, which was the reason that induced the judicious Hackluyt to transcribe a large discourse out of his writings, into his Collection of Voyages and Travels. But his skill in astronomy was still more remarkable, since it appears, that he not only pointed out that error which occasioned the reformation in the calendar, and the distinction between the old stile and the new, but also offered a much more effectual and perfect reformation, than that which was made in the time of pope Gregory XIII. There are also remaining some works of his relating to chronology, which would have been thought worthy of very particular notice, if his skill in other sciences had not made his proficiency in this branch of knowledge the less remarkable. The history of the four great empires of the world, he has treated very accurately ind succinctly, in his great work addressed to pope Clelent IV. He was so thoroughly acquainted with Cheistry at a time that it was scarcely known in Europe, id principally cultivated among the Arabians, that Dr. Freind ascribes the honour of introducing it to him, who speaks in some part or other of his works, of almost every operation now used in chemistry. Three capital discoveries lade by him deserve to be particularly considered. The first is, the invention of gun-powder, which, however confidently ascribed to others, was unquestionably known to him, both as to its ingredients and effects. The second is that which commonly goes under the name of alchemy, or the art of transmuting metals, of which he has left many treatises, some published, and some still remaining in ms. which, whatever they may be thought of now, contain a multitude of curious and useful passages, independently of their principal subject. The third discovery in chemistry, not so deserving of the reader’s attention, was the tincture of gold for the prolongation of life, of which Dr. Freind says, he has given hints in his writings, and has said enough to shew that he was no pretender to this art, but understood as much of it as any of his successors. That he was far from being unskilled in the art of physic, we might rationally conclude, from his extensive knowledge in those sciences, which are connected with it: but we have a manifest proof of his perfect acquaintance with the most material and useful branches of physic, in his Treatise of Old Age, which, as Dr. Freind, whose authority on that subject cannot well be disputed, observes, is very far from being ill written; and Dr. Brown, who published it in English, esteemed it one of the best performances that ever was written. In this work he has collected whatever he had met with upon the subject, either in Greek or Arabian writers, and has added a great many remarks of his own. In logic and metaphysics he was excellently well versed, as appears by those parts of his works, in which he has treated of these subjects; neither was he unskilled in philology and the politer parts of learning. In ethics, or moral philosophy, he has laid down some excellent principles for the conduct of human life. But, as his profession required a particular application to theology, it appears, that he made all his other studies subservient thereto. He had the highest deference for the Holy Scriptures, and thought that in them were contained the principles of true science, and of all useful knowledge. He therefore pressed the study of them in their original languages, and an assiduous application to the several branches of learning, which he thought necessary for the thorough understanding of them,

As to the vulgar imputation on his character, of his leaning to magic, it was utterly unfounded and the ridiculous story of his making a brazen head, which spoke and answered questions, is a calumny indirectly fathered upon him, having been originally imputed to Robert Grosseteste, bishop of Lincoln. That he had too high an opinion of judicial astrology, and some other arts of that nature, was not so properly an error of his as of the age in which he lived and considering how few errors, among the many which infected that age, appear in his writings, it may be easily forgiven. As his whole life was spent in labour and study, and he was continually employed, either in writing for the information of the world, or in reading and making experiments, that might enable him to write with greater accuracy; so we need not wonder his works were extremely numerous, especially when it is considered, that on the one hand his studies took in the whole circle of the sciences, and that on the other, the numerous treatises ascribed to him, are, often in fact, but so many chapters, sections, or divisions and sometimes we have the same pieces under two or three different names so that it is not at all strange before these points were well examined, that the accounts we have of his writings appeared very perplexed and confused. But notwithstanding this seeming perplexity and confusion, it is not a very difficult thing, to give a distinct account of his writings, the greater part of which are extant, and catalogued in the Biographia Britannica, and it were to be wished, that they were also made public. He was very far from being a hasty, incorrect, or desultory writer; on the contrary, all his works have a just reference to one great and general system, which he has executed in all its parts to a much greater degree of perfection, than has been hitherto supposed.

, surnamed the Resolute Doctor, and one of the most learned men of his time, was born about the end of the 13th century, at Baconthorp, an obscure village in Norfolk, from which he took his name. In his youth, he was a monk in the convent of Blackney, a small town in Norfolk, about five miles from Walsingham. After some years dedicated to learning and piety, he removed to Oxford, and from thence to Paris, where he was honoured with the degrees in divinity and laws, and acquired a great reputation for learning, being esteemed the head of the followers of the philosopher Averroes. Upon his return into England, he was unanimously chosen the twelfth provincial of the English Carmelites, in a general assembly of that order held at London, in the year 1329. Four years after he was invited by letters to Rome where, in several disputations on the subject of marriage, he gave no little offence, by carrying the papal authority too high in the case of divorces; but he thought fit afterwards to retract his opinion, and was held in great esteem at Rome, and other parts of Italy. His biographers report that he was of small stature, but of a great and lofty genius, and besides the encomiums bestowed upon him by his own countrymen, he has had the praises, not less high, of Baptista Mantuanus, and Paulus Panza. Bale seems to think that he anticipated the better opinions of more enlightened times. Of his works, which are numerous, the following have been published “Commentaria, seu Questiones per quatuor libros sententiarum,” which has undergone six editions; “Compendium iegis Chris ti,- et Quodlibeta,” Venice, 1527. Leiand, Bale, and Pitts give a catalogue of his manuscripts. He died at London in 1346.

, the only Protestant who went back to popery that was made bishop in the reign of Louis XIV. was born at Castelgeloux, in Gascony. After having quitted his religion, he entered himself of the Franciscan order, was then made bishop of Glandeve, and afterwards of Pamiers, where he died in 1694, at the age of ninety-four. His Latin poem on the Education of a Prince, 1671, 4to, procured him the episcopal dignity, by the interest of the duke of Montausier. This poem was reprinted in 8vo, in 1685, with notes, and the addition of some odes by the same author. He published also " Carmen pancgyricum/' Toulouse, 1667, 4to, dedicated to pope Clement IX.

, king’s advocate in the exchequer of Paris, flourished about the close of the sixteenth century, and was profoundly skilled in the municipal and civil law. He wrote many treatises on different branches of these laws, which were first published in 1608, and again in 1688, with the commentaries of Claude de Ferrieres, A third, and improved edition was printed at Lyons, 1744, 2 vols. fol. He died in April 1597, of grief for the death of his son-in-law, Charpentier, a professor of medicine in the university of Paris, who was executed for being concerned in the league, or insurrection against the succession of Henry IV.

, an English divine, and critical and polemical writer of considerable eminence, was the son of a butcher at South Moulton, in Devonshire, where he was born, Feb. 23, 1747. His relations and friends being dissenters, he was designed by them for the ministerial function and after receiving the first rudiments of his education under his maternal uncle, Mr. Blake, a dissenting minister at South Moulton, he was sent to the dissenting academy at St. Mary Ottery, in the same county. The doctrines taught in this academy were those of the old Nonconformists or Puritans, and for a considerable time, Mr. Badcock adhered to them with sincerity. His proficiency in other respects was such, in the opinion of his tutors, that at the age of nineteen, he received a call to be the pastor of a dissenting congregation at Winborne in Dorsetshire, from which he was invited to the same office, soon after, at Barnstaple in Devonshire where his’ income was more considerable, and which place was more agreeable to him as it was but a few miles from his native town. The date of his removal here is said to be in 1769, and he continued to be the pastor of this congregation for nine or ten years.

The cause of his removal from Barnstaple has been variously represented. On the one hand, it is said that a notorious indiscretion had excited the resentment of his hearers, but that he amply vindicated his character in this instance, although he could not prevent the consequences of their displeasure. On the other hand, it appears that a change in his religious opinions interrupted the union which must necessarily subsist between a pastor and his flock in dissenting congregations, where the former depends entirely for his maintenance on the good will and affection of the latter. It is certain that after he had been three or four years settled at Barnstaple, he met with some of Dr. Priestley’s Socinian productions, with which he was so captivated as to pay a visit to the Doctor, at Calne, in Wiltshire, and commenced a correspondence with him, from which it is evident that he had discarded the opinions, not only of his Calvinistic tutors, but those which are accounted orthodox by the generality of Christians.

On his quitting Barnstaple, he removed to South Moulton, where he had a congregation willing enough to receive his doctrines as he pleased to dispense them, but too few to be able to provide for him many of the comforts of life. In this retirement, his mind, ever active, and well stored with miscellaneous literature, turned its views to some employment in the learned world. During the progress of the London Review, which terminated in 1730, he occasionally corresponded with the editor, Dr. Kciirick and contended with that sceptic, a man of no mean talents, on different points of Christianity. He occasionally also wrote some articles in that Review, which are yet distinguishable by their spirit and intelligence. He was before this period an occasional correspondent in the Westminster Magazine, where, in 1774, he wrote "An essay on modern Education: Anecdotes of Mr. John Wesley, with, two of his original letters A Shandean letter A scription of a desperate case The Presbyterian Parson’s Soliloquy The Expostulation An improved copy, occasioned by a most horrid murder: An essay on Infidelity Extracts of a letter sent by a clergyman to his friend, after having met with ill treatment from Lord (a real letter on his own case) A clerical character, aimed at a free-thinking Lecturer, who made some noise at that time. These, it must be confessed, are trifles, but discover much vivacity of imagination, and a turn for poetry which might have been cultivated with advantage.

We find Mr. Badcock afterwards frequently corresponding with the Gentleman’s Magazine the London Magazine, where for some time he had a regular engagement the General Evening Post and St. James’s Chronicle. But the gjreat scene of his literary warfare, was in the Monthly Review, in which he appears to have criticized many works of considerable note, and in a manner which attracted the attention of the public to a journal, (already the highest in general estimation) in no common degree, lu 1780, when a controversy arose respecting materialism, Mr. Badcock published “A slight sketch of the controversy between Dr. Priestley and his opponents,” and from this time he became the decided antagonist of the doctor in all those opinions upon which they formerly corresponded, and appeared to agree. The influence of Mr. Badcock’s education seems to have returned with increased force, and although he did not revert to some of the principles of his early days, and in no respect resumed the garb or the behaviour of a Puritan, he certainly became a zealous contender for the Trinitarian system, in opposition to Socinianism in all its modifications. This was particularly displayed in his review of Dr. Priestley’s “History of the Corruption of Christianity,” in 1783, and 1784, and the controversy to which that work gave rise between Dr. Priestley, and Dr. Horsley, then archdeacon of St. Alban’s, and successively bishop of Rochester and St. Asaph. He, had before this, however, interested the public attention by the review of Mr. Madan’s “Thejyphthora,” and displayed a force of genius, skill of argument, and depth of learning, which that author found irresistible. No work apparently of eminence, and calculated for popularity, perhaps ever was so completely driven into oblivion by the efforts of a periodical reviewer. Nor was Mr. Badcock’s triumph less complete over the believers in Chatterton’s imposture, although it must be owned that in this last controversy he had able coadjutors.

While at Barnstaple, Mr. Badcock became acquainted with a daughter of Mr. Samuel Wesley, master of Tiverton-school, and elder brother of the celebrated John Wesley from her he received a considerable quantity of papers, consisting chiefly of letters and pieces of poetry. Some of these he published entire, as already mentioned, in the Westminster Magazine for 1774, and from the whole, with some oral communications, he drew up that account of the family which was published in N. XX. of the “Bibliotheca Topographica Britannica.” The whole of these letters and papers fell afterwards into Dr. Priestley’s hands, who published them upon Mr. Wesley’s death.' Dr. Whitehead, the biographer of Wesley, seems ­to think there is some mystery in this transaction, which he confesses he was not able to clear up.

Among his other literary labours, Mr. Badcock frequently gave assistance to authors who were about to publish, but had diffidence in their own abilities. One instance of this kind occasioned a temporary controversy a few years ago. When professor White of Oxford was appointed Bampton lecturer, he formed the plan of a course of lectures, which induced him to apply to Mr. Badcock, with whose talents he had become acquainted, for some assistance his application was accordingly effectual, and Mr. Badcock, to whom the subjects to be treated were familiar, contributed very considerably to the first, third, fourth, seventh, and eighth lectures, and supplied many of the ndtes. There was certainly nothing in this, but what one man of learning may owe to another, without detracting much from his own character. But Dr. White unfortunately neglected to make the usual complimentary acknowledgements of assistance, in his preface and upon Mr. Badcock’s death, the late Dr. Gabriel of Bath published a pamphlet tending to prove that Mr. Badcock’s contributions were so large as to leave Dr. White the reputation only of having preached and published these very popular lectures. Dr. White, however, answered this charge in such a manner as to vindicate his literary fame from the attempts made to diminish it.

We are now come to an uera in Mr. Badcock’s life which may appear very remarkable, his quitting his dissenting connexions, and embracing the doctrines and discipline of the established church. This brought much undeserved obloquy on his character, for there appears no reason to doubt his sincerity in reverting to principles most of which had been inculcated in his youth, and of which he had already become the zealous champion when he could have no motive but the love of truth, and no expectations but the perishing fame of a polemic. In Sept. 1786, he thus writes to a friend “I have resigned my function as dis<­senting minister. It was long long a most grievous op^­pression. I have boldly shook it off, and I will run the risk of the displeasure of my relations, and defy the con^ tumacy of my enemies. I have not absolutely determined on my future plan. Whatever it may be, I hope to secure the protection of Providence, by preserving the integrity of my own mind.”

It has been supposed that his acquaintance with the bishop of Exeter, Dr. Ross, and the most respectable clergymen of his diocese, might have led him to examme the foundation of dissent audit might have appeared to him, as it has to very many of sound judgment and acknowledged abilities, that this foundation was groundless. He was led to conform by no promise, and, at best, by very distant views of advancement. It is, indeed, impossible to read the heart of man but, if it can be read by an intimate acquaintance, his conformity was sincere. But whatever were his views, or the views of those who wished to see him among the defenders of the established church, they were disappointed by a premature death, In the spring of 1787, he was ordained deacon by bishop Ross, and, by a very distinguished compliment, received priest’s orders the following week. The title upon which he was ordained was the curacy of Broad Clyst, near Exeter, and he afterwards preached, as assistant to Dr. Gabriel, in the Octagon chapel, Bath. He was much afflicted with head-aches, which frequently interrupted his public services. In May, 1788, he was attacked by an illness which proved fatal on the 19th of that month, while on a visit to his friend sir John Chichester, bart. in Queen- street, May-Fair.

Some time before his death, he was requested to arrange the papers which Mr. Chappie had collected for his improved edition of Risdon’s “Survey of Devon.” After this was done, he was earnestly urged, from these materials, with additional assistance, such as influence or fortune could bestow, to write the history anew. For this undertaking he had many qualifications, if his health could have been preserved. When at Bath, he preached a chanty sermon, which was afterwards printed, but not published. In his person, Mr. Badcock was short, but well made, active, lively, and agreeable his eyes were peculiarly vivacious, and his whole countenance indicated strong intellectual powers, far above the general run of mankind, and a disposition replete with sensibility, tenderness, and generosity. This short sketch of his life has been taken from very copious materials, published in the Gentleman’s Magazine* vol. LVIII, p. 595, 69.1, 780, 781, 868; LIX, p. 571, 713, 776, 871, 877; and the reader may form a judgment of his critical talents by perusing the following articles in the Monthly Review, in addition to what have been already mentioned Sherlock’s Letters; David Williams’ s Lectures; Steevens’s Shakspeare, edit. 1780; Malone’s Supplement; Milne’s Sermons; Mac-NicoFs Remarks on Dr. Johnson History of Moravianism Jacob Behmen’s Life; Mainwaring’s Sermons; Von Troil’s Letters on Iceland Milles’s edition of Rowley’s poems Nichols’s Life of Hogarth, and Bowyer’s Miscellaneous Tracts, 1785. His first review was of Ruhnkenius’s edition of Homer’s Hymn to Ceres, which he sent anonymously to the Editor.

, who, as founder of Clare-hall, Cambridge, is justly entitled to a place among the benefactors of learning, was descended from a knightly family, seated at Great Badew, or Badow, near Chelmsford, in the county of Essex. From this place, they took their surname and here, probably, Richard de Badew was born. In 1326, he was chancellor of the university of Cambridge and having purchased two tenements in Miln-street, of Nigel Thornton, a physician, he laid there, in the year abovementioned, the foundation of a building, to which was given the name of University hall. Stow differs from this account, in asserting that the twq houses of old belonged to the chancellor and university. Badew, however, placed a principal in this hall, who was to take care of th pensioners that came to live there at their own expence or, as others say, at the charge of the university for, as yet, it was not endowed, and this, it must be confessed, suits rather better with the term pensioner. University hail continued in this condition for the space of sixteen years, and then by an accidental fire Was burnt down. Richard de Badew being unable to rebuild it, it lay for a few years in ruins. But one of the late pensioners having a great interest with Elizabeth, daughter of sir Gilbert de Clare, earl of Gloucester, and third sister and co-heir of sir Gilbert de Clare, the last earl of Gloucester and Hertford, of that name and family, he prevailed upon her to undertake what de Badew was not able to perform. Accordingly this lady, after the resignation of Walter Thaxted the principal, and with the consent of Richard de Badew, rebuilt that hall, and endowed it, in the year 1347, with revenues for one master, ten fellows, and ten scholars, and at the same time named it Clare hall. When she founded it, king Edward III. gave licence of mortmain to the master and scholars to take lands and tenements, to the value of forty pounds a year. The revenues of this hall have been augmented since by several benefactors. It was again rebuilt in 1638, and the magnificent chapel in 1763. It contains a master, ten senior fellows, fifteen juniors, and three lay- fellows.

, or in Latin, Jodocus Badius Ascensius, an eminent French printer, was born in 1462, at Assche, a village in the territory of Brussels, from which he derived the name Ascensius. He first studied at Ghent, then at Brussels, and lastly at Ferrara in Italy. He made great progress in the languages, and principally in the Greek, which he learned at Lyons and at Paris. He printed a great many books, and usually in the frontispiece had a printing press as his mark. He is also the author of some books, among which are <c Sylva moralis contra vitia“” Psalterium B. Mariae versibus“” Epigrammatum Lib. I“* f Navicula stultarum mulierum” “VitaThomce a Kempis” “De Grammatica” “De conscribendis Epistolis.” He wrote also commentaries on Horace, Virgil, Juvenal, Lucan, Sallust, Valerius Maximus, Quintilian, Aulus Gellius, and soiue parts of Cicero’s works. At Paris he taught Greek, and' explained the poets at Lyons. His high reputation in these studies induced Treschel, the famous printer, to engage him as corrector of his press, not only secured his valuable services by taking him as a partner in the business, but also gave him his daughter Thalia in marriage, who was also a learned lady. After the death of his father-in-law, in 1500, he was engaged by Gagnin, the royal librarian, to visit Paris, where he removed with his family, and established an excellent printing office, by the name of Praelum Ascensianum, from which many good editions issued, although his type was not so much admired as that of the Stephens’s. He died in 1535. His son Conrad Badius settled at Geneva, having embraced Calvinism, and was both a printer and an author. Two of his daughters were married to eminent printers, one to Michel Yascosan, and the other to Robert Stephens.

, a senator of Venice, who died an 1580, has left various treatises on the civil law, which were printed at Venice in 1593, and reprinted at Boulogne in 1744. His son Peter Badoaro, was also celebrated for his knowledge of law, and died in 1591. His “Orationi Civili,” were published in 1593, if this be not, as we suspect, a production of the father. Frederick Badoaro, of the same family, was distinguished for his learning, and talents as a negociator. He was Venetian ambassador at the court of Charles V. and Philip II. and was the founder, of the academy known by the name of Delia Fama, at Venice. He died in 1593. From the three concurring events under this year, it is probable, there are some mistakes in this account, which we have taken from the Diet. Hist.

, an eminent Italian painter, born at Parma, according to Basan, in 1581, was a disciple of Annibai Caracci, by whose admirable precepts he made an extraordinary progress in a short time, and proved the best designer of any of those who were educated with him in that illustrious school. He possessed a lively imagination, and a singular readiness of hand' and it was concluded by all who saw his performances, that he would have arrived at a high degree of merit, if he had not died in the very bloom of life, and if he had applied himself with more assiduity to his profession. Basan’s account, however, makes him reach his sixty-sixth year, but it does not appear on what authority. Badofocchi is to be ranked among engravers also, and there are many etchings by him, in a slight, free, masterly style. They are generally more finished than those of Guido but the extremities are by no means so finely drawn. Amongst the best, is Raphael’s Bible, from the pictures of Raphael in the Vatican, small plates, lengthways, engraved canjointly with Lanfranchi. This is a well-known work.

, in Latin Baduellus, a Protestant divine of the sixteenth century, was a native of Nismes, and taught in the university of that city. In 1557 he went into Switzerland, and became the pastor of a church in the vicinity of Geneva, and“taught philosophy and mathematics till his death in 1561. He translated several of Calvin’s sermons into Latin, which he published at Geneva, also” Acta Martyrum nostri sseculi,“Genev. 1556” Oratio ad Instituendum Gymnasium Nemausensi de Studiis Literarum“” De Collegio et Universitate Nemausensi;“”Epistola Paracnetica ad Paulum filium de vero patrimonio et hsereditate quam Christiani parentes suis liberis debent relinquere,“and some other works, all in Latin, which he was thought to write with great fluency. But his most remarkable work was entitled” De ratione vitoe studiosa3 ac literatas in Matrimonio collocandae ac degendae," which has been three times printed in 8vo and 4to, 1544, 1577, and 1581. A defence of marriage, at that time, was an object of some importance, and its advantages to men of literature are displayed with good sense in this work. Bayle gives a long account of it, and a farther list of BaduePs works may be seen in Gesner’s Bibliotheca.

, a native of Milazzo in Sicily, was born in 1639, and cultivated with success the dissimilar studies of mathematics and poetry. After travelling from 1660 to 1680 over most parts of Europe, he remained for some years at Paris and Madrid, and then returned to his native country, where he produced two dramatic pieces, the “Temple of Tempe,” and “Polixenes,” and published “Odes,” “Sonnets,” and an “Historical account of the City of Messina,” Francfort, 1676. The time of his death is uncertain.

, son of Eric Basngius, a divine, was born at Helsingborg in Sweden, in 1633, and studied first at Stregne,s in Sudermania, and afterwards at UpsaL Colonel Sylver Sparre, hearing of his good character and abilities, appointed him tutor to his son, with whom Bsengius travelled into Denmark, Germany, and the Netherlands, and visited eleven universities. On his return to his own country, he was called to the theological chair of Abo in Finland, when only in his thirty-second year. In 1682, Charles IX. king of Sweden, appointed him to the bishopric of Wyburgh in Carelia. Baengius introduced many useful regulations in his diocese, particularly with respect to schools, and established a printing-office. He died in 1696. He wrote a commentary, in Latin, on the epistle of St. Paul to the Hebrews, which was printed at Abo in 1671, 4to the “.Life of St. Anscharius” a work on the ecclesiastical history of Sweden a treatise on the sacraments a Lutheran catechism several disputations, and funeral orations, and a sacred chronology.

, a learned printer at Louvain, of the sixteenth century, was also an able mathematician, and wrote, 1. “De compositione et usu Decretorii Pianetardm,” 1530, 4 to. 2. “De compositione et usu Quadrantis,” 1534, 4to. He published also, but without his name, “Tabulae perpetuae Longitudinum ac Latitudinum Planetarum, ad Meridianum Lovanierisem,” edited by Gilbertus Masius, 1528, 4to.

, an eminent French physician, was born at Nancy, Jan. 2, 1686, and died there, Dec. 7, 1772. We have no farther particulars of his life, but his works were numerous, and accounted valuable. They are, 1. “Histoire de la Theriaque,” 1725, 8vo. 2. “Dissertation sur les Tremblemens de Terre, et les Epidemies qu'ils occasionnent,” 8vo. 3. “Explication d‘un passage d’Hippocrate sur les Scythes qui deviennent Eunuques,” 3759, 8vo. 4. “Analyses des eaux Minerales de Contrexeville et de Nancy.” 5. “Des Memoires sur la petite verole, les centenaires, et les vomissemens, produits par la passion liiaque.” He published also in Latin, a Dispensatory, in folio, and a treatise on the Materia Medica, both about the year 1771, the latter in 8vo.

, an Arabian mathematician, is usually classed among the authors of the tenth century. He is said to have written some treatises on geometry, and among others, one entitled “De superficierum divisionibus,” which Dr. Dee of London, and Frederic Commandini of Urbino, translated into Latin. The latter published his translation at Pesaro in 1570, with another on the same subject of his own composition. Some, however, are of opinion that the original treatise was by Euclid, to whom Proclus ascribes one on that subject, and that Bagdedin was only the translator of it into the Arabic language.

, an English writer of considerable talents, was born Feb. 29, 1728, at Darley, a hamlet in the parish of St. Alkmond’s, Derby, where his father was employed on a paper-mill. When put to school, this son made an uncommon progress in such learning as was within his reach, and after remaining there the usual time, he was trained to his father’s business. When he advanced in life, married, and became settled in the business of papermaking, he continued 'to cultivate his mind, by adding a knowledge of the French and Italian languages, and even the more abstruse branches of mathematics. His conversation and correspondence sparkled with all the wit and information which are expected in men of a literary turn, but he was considerably advanced in life before he tried his powers in any regular composition. A loss sustained in business is said to have first induced him to take up the pen, not as a source of emolument, but to divert his mind from repining reflections. With this view he wrote, and in 1781, published “Mount Heneth,” a novel which became justly popular, from the vivicity of its style and dialogue, and the many well-drawn characters, and apposite reflections on questions of morality and humanity. This was followed by other productions of the same kind, < Barham Downs,“the Fair Syrian,” and “James Wallace,” which were all favourably received by the public, as far superior to the common run of novels. In private life, Mr. Hutton of Birmingham, has celebrated him as a man of most amiable and benevolent character; but we are sorry that he adds, that “he laid no stress upon revelation/' and was” barely a Christian." There are, indeed, passages in his works which justify this character, and leave us much to regret in the history of a man of stfich excellent talents and personal worth in other respects. Mr. Bage died Sept. 1, 1801, in the 74th year of his age, at Tamworth.

, an industrious antiquary and collector of literary curiosities, the son of John and Elizabeth Bagford, of the parish of St. Anne, Blackfriars, London, was born in October 1675, and bred to the humble occupation of shoemaker. He was early led, by whatever means, to inquiries respecting the antiquities of his own country, and its literary history, and in the course of his researches he acquired an extensive knowledge of old English books, prints, and rarities, dear to the heart of a collector, which he carefully picked up at low prices, and sold again for a moderate profit. In this mixture of study and trade he passed the greater part of his life, and with such zeal, that he more than once travelled abroad, with commissions from booksellers, and collectors, whom he amply satisfied by his skilful punctuality, and moderate charges. In the course of his labours, he made himself acquainted with the history of printing, and of the arts connected with it, and in 1707, published in the Philosophical Transactions, his “Proposals for a History of Printing, Printers, Illuminators, Chalcography, Paper-making, &c.” soliciting the humble price of one pound for a folio volume, to consist of two hundred sheets. These proposals, of which there are several copies in the British museum, are printed on a half-sheet, with a specimen on another, containing the life of Caxton, and a list of his books. The numerous manuscripts by him on this subject, now in the British museum, prove that he had at least provided ample materials for a work of this description, and was not upon the whole ill qualified to have written it, as far as a liberal education could have been dispensed with. He had probably no encouragement, however, and at his death, nine years afterwards, these ms collections were purchased by Mr. Humphrey Wanley, for lord Oxford’s library, and came in course with the Harleian Mss. into the British museum. The assertion, in the last edition of this dictionary, that a part of his collections were deposited in the public library at Cambridge, and never opened, has been contradicted on the authority of Dr. Farmer, the late learned master of Emanuel college.

It appears that Bagford practised the art of printing, although in an humble way. There are among his collections two whimsical cards, printed by him, on the Thames when it was frozen over, Jan. 18, 1715-16, with devices

and inscriptions alluding to the history of printing. His curious letter to Hearne, in the first volume of the second edition of " LelancTs Collectanea^' p. 58, relative to London, and the antiquities in its vicinity^ is very creditable to his talents as an antiquary. He was much employed and respected by lord Oxford, Dr. John Moore bishop of Ely^ sir Hans Sloane, sir James Austins-, Mr. Clavel, &c; and it is said, that for having enriched bishop Moore’s library with many curiosities (which were purchased by George I. and given to the university of Cambridge), his lordship procured him an admission into the charter-house, as a pensioner on that foundation, in the cemetery of which he was buried. He died at Islington, May 15, 1716, aged sixty-five. In Mr. Dibdin’s Bibliomania, are many curious particulars respecting Bagford, and an estimate of his talents and usefulness founded on Mr. Dibdin’s very laborious inspection of his Mss.

, bishop of Copenhagen, was born at Lunden in 1646. His father Olaus Bagger taught theology in the school of Lunden, but sent his son to Copenhagen for education. He afterwards travelled to Germany, the Netherlands, and England, studying under the most able masters in divinity and the oriental languages, and then returned to Copenhagen. When Lunden became a part of the Swedish dominions, the king established an academy there, and Bagger was appointed to teach the oriental languages. He had scarcely begun to give lessons, however, when by the advice of his friends of Copenhagen, he solicited and obtained, in 1674, the office of first pastor of the church of the Holy Virgin in that metropolis. In 1675, after the usual disputation, he got the degree of doctor, and on the death of John Wandalin, bishop of Zealand or Copenhagen, he was appointed to succeed him, at the very early age of twenty-nine. His promotion is said to have been in part owing to his wife Margaret Schumacher, the widow of Jacob Fabri, his predecessor, in the church of the Holy Virgin at Copenhagen, and to the brother of this lady, the count de Griffenfeld, who had great interest at court. Bagger, however, filled this high office with reputation, as well as that of dean of theology, which is attached to the bishopric of Copenhagen. He revised the ecclesiastical rites which Christian V. had passed into a law, as well as the liturgy, epistles, and gospels, collects, &c. to which he prefixed a preface. He also composed and published several discourses, very learned and eloquent, some in Latin, and others in the Danish tongue. He died in 1693, at the age of 47. By his second wife, he left a son Christian Bagger, who became an eminent lawyer, and in 1737 rose to be grand bailly of Bergen, and a counsellor of justice.

, a Roman artist, was born about 1573, and acquired the rudiments of art from Francesco Morelli, a Florentine, but formed himself on better masters feeble in design and expression, he is distinguished by chiaroscuro, and a colpur which approaches that of Cigoli his praised picture of the Resuscitation of Tabitha, is lost, but his frescoes in the Vatican and the Capella Paolina at S. Maria Maggiore, still remain to give an idea of his powers. He lived long, employed and ennobled by pontiffs and princes but owes the perpetuity of his name perhaps more to his “Lives of Painters, Sculptors, and Architects,” than to great technie eminence. That work was entitled “Le Vite de' Pittori, Scultori, ed Architetti dal 1572 al 1642,” Rome, 1642, and again in 1649, 4to. It forms a continuation of Vasari’s Lives. Baglioni died about the time of publication.

, an eminent Italian physician, was born at Ragusa, in the year 1669, of a family which originally came from Armenia. Pietro Angelo Baglivi, an eminent and opulent physician, is said to have adopted this youth, and bestowed on him his name, while he charged himself with his maintenance and education. George Baglivi, accordingly, was sent to Salerno, where he took his first degree, and where he became partial to the study of natural history. The same pursuit he afterwards followed at Padua and Bononia, but his chief instructor and most intimate friend was Malpighi, whom he visited at Rome, and by whose influence he was promoted to teach anatomy in that city. With many frionds, this occupation procured him also some enemier, excited probably by the fame he obtained. He persisted, however, in his lectures, and published his “Praxis,” which differed much from that in common use, as he recommended a closer attention to clinical observations than had been usual, and discarded the humoral system altogether^ attributing the cause of diseases to the altered tone of the solids. He supposed likewise an alternate motion between the heart and the- dura mater, by which the whole animal machine was actuated. He had, however, no sooner published these doctrines, than Antonio Pacchione accused him of having stolen them from his works, if he denied the charge, or of having taken them, if he would confess it; but Baglivi proved that Pacchione’s observations were published almost a year later than his own, and urged, that whatever coincidence there might be, he had the credit of establishing his doctrines upon a more firm basis. His enthusiasm in his profession led him to devote much of his time to writing, and his pieces went through many editions before they were collected, and printed together at Nurimberg, 1738, 4to, but afterwards much more completely at Venice, in 1752, and lastly, with a preface, notes, and emendations by Phil. Pinel, M. D. 2 vols. 1788, 8vo. There are also Paris editions in 4to, 1711 and 1765. His biographer represents him as a man of piety and benevolence, and of much learning, independent of his more immediate studies. He died March 1707.

, an Italian poet, a man of opulence as well as fame by his writings, and esteemed among the good poets of his age. His failing is said to have been that of being difficult to please in his own compositions, which he filed and polished till he wore off the strength of the metal. He knew how to draw an exact outline, and to give a strong colouring, but he held his pencil too long, and was over-anxious in the finishing part. These were not, however, the failings of his time. He is best known at present to those who study Italian poetry by “The Arragonians,” a tragedy, and “The Judgment of Paris.” We have no dates of his birth or death, except that he was famed as a poet, about 1590, and Erythraeus (Le Koux) says that he died an old man.

, an English prelate, son of sir Walter Bagot, bart. and brother to the first lord Bagot, was born Jan. 1, 1740. He was educated at Westminster school, and chosen thence student of Christ-church, took the degree of M.A. May 23, 1764, and LL.D. Feb. 29, 1772. In In 1771 he was made canon of Christ-church in the room of Dr. Moore, the late archbishop of Canterbury, and the same year he married Miss M. Hay, niece to the earl of Kinnoul. He was installed dean of Christ- church, Jan. 25, 1777, on the translation of Dr. Markham to the see of York, about which time he resigned the livings of Jevington and Eastbourne in Sussex, in favour of his nephew, the Rev. Ralph Sneyd. In 1782 he was promoted to the see of Bristol, translated to Norwich the year following, and thence to St. Asaph in 1790, where he rebuilt the palace on an uncommon plan, but necessary for the situation, where, among the mountains, and in the vicinity of the sea, storms are often violent. The palace, therefore, is low; and being on the assent of a hill, the vestibule, dining-room, and drawing-room, which occupy the whole front of the building, are on a level with the first floor in the other apartments, two of which, on the ground-floor, are a neat domestic chapel and a library.

Dr. Bagot was a man of great learning, an accomplished scholar, and of the most gentle and amiable manners. As a patron, he deserves much praise for bestowing the ample patronage of his see, with great disinterestedness and impartiality, among the learned and meritorious clergy of his diocese, acquainted with the language and manners of the district. His publications were not very numerous. In the “Pietas et Gratulatio Univ.Oxon. 1761,” on the accession, of his present majesty, are some English blank verses, by him and he also contributed some verses on his majesty’s marriage, and on the birth of the prince of Wales, all which are inserted in vol. VIII. of Nichols’s poems. In ]772, when the question of subscription to the thirty-nine articles was agitated, he published “A defence of subscription to the XXXIX Articles, as it is required in the university of Oxford.” This was anonymous, and occasioned by a pamphlet, also anonymous, entitled “Reflections on the impropriety and expediency of Lay Subscription in the university of Oxford.” In 1779 he preached and published the Radcliffe Infirmary sermon, and in 1730 his principal work appeared, “Twelve discourses on the Prophecies,” preached at the Warburtonian lecture in Lincoln’s Inn chapel. The earnestness with which he contends in these discourses for the essential doctrines of the church, was again apparent in his next publication, “A letter to the Rev. W, Bell, D. D.” on the subject of his late publications upon the authority, nature, and design of the Lord’s Supper,“1781, 8vo. In this Dr. Bagot objects to the Socinian tendency of Dr. Bell’s arguments and about the same time he reprinted, with a short preface, Dr. Isaac Barrow’s” Discourse on the doctrines of the Sacrament," which is now one of the tracts dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge. His other publications were, a sermon before the house of lords, Jan. 30, 1783 one for the Norwich hospital; and two others before the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, 17 88, and the Society for propagating the Gospel, 1790. A small pamphlet against the Anabaptists, and a charge delivered when bishop of Norwich, were printed by Dr. Bagot, but not generally published. In all his works he displays a fervent zeal for the principles of religion and of loyalty, joined with much knowledge of the true grounds of both nor will it be thought an objection of much consequence, that he did not stand high in the opinion of those who contended for such innovations as in his opinion endangered the whole fabric of church government and doctrine.

For nearly ten years before the death of this worthy prelate, he had been in a declining state of health, and was wasted to the appearance of a mere skeleton. He was confined to bed, however, only the day before he departed this life, June 4, 1802. His remains were interred at St. Asapk with those of Mrs. Bagot, whom he survived not quite three years.

, a gentleman of a Derbyshire family, was born in London, and in 1604 became a commoner of Brazen-nose college, Oxford, under the tuition of the pious Mr. Robert Bolton four years after, he took a degree in arts, and then removed to the Middle Temple, where he studied law, became a bencher, and of considerable reputation in his profession. In 1639 he was elected Lent reader, and chose for his first reading an argument very suitable to the growing turbulence of the times, endeavouring to prove that a parliament may be held without bishops, and that bishops ought not to meddle in civil affairs, but the lord keeper Finch, at archbishop Laud’s request, ordered him to desist. This, however, giving bim a character unhappily too popular, he was elected M. P. for the borough of Southwark, in the parliament of 1640; but perceiving the outrages the members were about to commit, beyond all bounds of temperate reformation, he went to Oxford, and sat in the parliament called there by the king. After continuing at Oxford for some time, he was taken prisoner by the rebels in Oxfordshire, and sent to London, where the house of commons committed him to the king’s bench, and he suffered afterwards in his estate in Northamptonshire. On the Restoration we find him treasurer of the Middle Temple. He died in 1662, and was interred in Morton-Pinkney in Northamptonshire, leaving two sons, Henry and Edward, of whom some notice will be taken. He published, 1. “The life and death of Mr. Robert Bolton,” London, 1633, 4to, 2. “Several speeches in parliament,” 1640, 1641, 4to. 3. “Two arguments in parliament, on the Canons and Praemunire,” London, 1641, 4to. 4. “Treatise defending the revenues of the church in Tithes and Glebe,” ib. 1646, 4to. 5. “Treatise maintaining the doctrine, liturgy, and discipline of the Church of England.” The two last written during his imprisonment. 6. “Short censure of the book of Will. Prynne, entitled ‘The university of Oxford’s plea refuted’,” 1648, 4to. 7. “Just vindication of the questioned part of his reading had in the Middle Temple hall, Feb. 24, 1639,” London, 1660, 4to. 8. “True narrative of the cause of silencing him, by the archbishop of Canterbury,” printed with the preceding. See Rushworth’s Collections, p. 990. 9. “The rights of the Crown of England, as it is established by law,” London, 1660, 8vo, written, as most of the others were, during his confinement.

, son of the preceding, was born at Broughton in Northamptonshire, in 1629, educated at Westminster school, and elected student of Christ-church in 1646, where, according to Wood, his conduct for some time was turbulent and disorderly. Having finished his studies, however, he was in 1656 appointed to officiate as second master of Westminster school, and in 1657 was confirmed in the office. Behaving improperly to the celebrated Busby, he was, in 1658, turned out of this place; but soon after he became vicar of Ambrosden in Oxfordshire, having taken orders from Brownrig, bishop of Exeter. After the Restoration, Arthur earl of Anglesey appointed him his chaplain, on which Mr. Bagshaw left Ambrosden, in hopes of farther promotion, which, however, he never attained, having written and preached doctrines against the church and state, for which he was committed prisoner, first to the Gatehouse in Westminster, next to the Tower, and thence to South Sea castle, Hampshire, in 1664. After his release he returned to London, and fell tinder fresh suspicions, and having refused the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, was committed to Newgate, where he continued twenty-two weeks. He appears to have been again released, as he died at a house in Tothill-street, Westminster, Dec. 28, 1671, and was buried in Bunhillfields cemetery, with an altar monument, and an inscription written by the celebrated Dr. Owen, implying that he had been persecuted for his adherence to the gospel, and had now taken sanctuary “from the reproaches of pretended friends, and the persecutions of professed adversaries.” Baxter’s account is less favourable he records him as an anabaptist, fifth-monarchy man, and a separatist, a man of an extraordinary vehement spirit, but he allows that he had been exasperated by many years “hard and grievous imprisonment.” Wood has a long list of his writings, mostly controversial with Baxter, L'Estrange, and others, and probably forgotten. All his biographers, however, allow him to have been a man of abilities.

, D.D. brother of the above, was also born at Broughton in 1632, and educated at Westminster school, and elected student of Christ-church in 1651, of which he was M. A. 1657. He was chaplain to sir Richard Fanshaw, ambassador in Spain and Portugal, and on his return was made chaplain to archbishop Stern, who gave him the prebend of Southwell and rectory of Castleton in Synderick. In 1667 he held the prebend of Barnaby in York cathedral, and in 1668, that of Friday Thorp. He took the degree of B.D. 1668, and D.D. 1671. In 1672 he was made chaplain to the lord treasurer Danby, and rector of St. Botolph’s church, Bishopsgate, London, which he exchanged for Houghton-le-Spring. In 1680 he was installed a prebendary of Durham, and died at Houghton, Dec. 30, 1709. He was of a totally different character from his brother. He published “Diatribae, or discourses upon select texts, against Papists and Socinians,” London, 1680, 8vo, and several single sermons.

, a nonconformist minister, was born at Litton in the parish of Tidswell, Jan. 17, 1627-8, and educated in Corpus Christi college, Cambridge after which he entered into orders, and preached with great applause in different parts of Derbyshire. He obtained the living of Glessop, which he held till 1662, when he was obliged to resign it, because he would not comply with the act of uniformity and then he preached privately at different places till the Revolution, when a large meeting-house was built for him, and he continued pastor of a numerous congregation till his death, April 1, 1702. He was the author of several small practical treatises, much esteemed in that age. Among these is a work, partly of a biographical kind, entitled “De Spiritualibus Pecci, or notes concerning the work of God, and some that have been workers together with God, in the High Peak,” (of Derbyshire), 1702. Besides his printed works, he left behind him fifty volumes, on various subjects, some in folio and some in 4to, fairly written with his own hand.

, a French Latin poet, was born at Chatillon in the Lower Maine, and became a priest of the Oratory at Paris, in 1659. He had considerable genius, and was much addicted to study, so that he soon became one of the best scholars and best poets of his order. When M. Fouquet, superintendant of finances, was arrested, he published a Latin poem, entitled “Fuquetius in vinculis,” which was much applauded. He published another poem at Troyes in 1668, the title of which was, “In tabellas excellentissiim pictoris du Wernier, ad nobilem et eximium virum Eustachium Quinot, apud quern illae visuntur Trecis, carmen.” Father Bahier translated this production afterwards into French verse, under the title of “Peinture poctique des tableaux de mignature de M. Quinot, faits par Joseph de Werner.” At the time he taught rhetoric at Marseilles, in 1670, he delivered and published an oration on Henrietta of England, duchess of Orleans, and the same year printed a Latin poem of six hundred verses in praise of Toussaint Fourbin de Janson, bishop of Marseilles. He wrote some other pieces, which were less known; such was Uis reputation, however, that he was chosen secretary of the Oratory, an office which he filled with great credit for thirty years his latter days were distinguished by many acts of ciiarity, and it was during his attendance on a dying friend that he caught a disorder, which proved fatal in the month of April 1707.

, one of those German writers who have of late years disgraced the profession of religion and philosophy, was born in 1741, at Leipsic, where his father was a clergyman, and educated this son for the church, but with so little success that he soon left college, and enlisted in the army. Being bought off, however, he returned to the university, and in 1761 was admitted to the degree of M. A. Soon afterwards he became catecbist in his father’s church, was a popular preacher, and in 1765 published sermons and some controversial writings, which evinced that he possessed both learning and genius. From his early days he appears to have been of a debauched turn, with a propensity to satire which no considerations could restrain and these two qualities, which he persisted in all his life, laid the foundation of what he termed his misfortunes, although they were no other than the contempt which his infamous conduct and impious doctrines have a natural tendency to produce in every well-ordered society. His life became a series of adventures too numerous for the plan of this work but the principal were these.

One of his shameful amours having rendered it necessary for him to leave Leipsic, his friends, with some difficulty, obtained for him a professorship at Erlangen, afterwards at Erfurth, and in 1771 at Giessen. But the boldness of his doctrines, and the malignity of his satirical compositions, of which he was very fond, would soon have expelled him from Giessen, if, just as he was about to be dismissed from his professorship, he had not received an invitation to Marschlins in Switzerland, to superintend an academy. To this place he went about 1776, and began his new career by forming the seminary after the model of an academy which had before been projected by Basedow, in the principality of Anhalt Dessau, under the name of P hilanthropinum. The plan of this was professedly to form the young mind to the love of mankind and of virtue, without any aid from religion, except what he was pleased to call philosophical religion. But the Swiss were not yet prepared torso great a change of system, and after disgusting them with doctrines, the immoral tendency of some of which could no longer be mistaken, he removed to Durkheim, a town in the Palatinate, and formed an association for a Philanthropinum of his own. A large fund was collected, and he was enabled to travel into Holland and England to engage pupils. England is said to have furnished four.

On his return he obtained the castle of count Leining Hartzburgh at Heidesheim, for his Pkilanthropinum^ and in 1778 it was consecrated by a solemn religious festival. His conduct here, however, was too obnoxious both in principle and practice, to permit him a long continuance, and his shocking treatment of his wife contributed to render the scheme abortive. His academy became in debt, and he took to flight, but was imprisoned at Dienheim. On his release he settled at Halle, as the keeper of a tavern and billiard table, and lived in open adultery with a woman who was his assistant, and for whom he turned his wife and daughter out of doors.

His next design was to direct the operations of a secret society called the “German Union for noting out superstition and prejudices, and for advancing true Christianity.” To forward this project, which was but a branch of the general conspiracy then carrying on by the enemies of religion and government, he published a great many books, containing principles fortunately so wild and extravagant as to prove in some measure an antidote against the intended mischief. When he had laboured in this cause about two years, some of the secrets of the Union transpired his former conduct and his constant imprudence made him suspected his associated friends lodged informations against him his papers were seized, and he himself was sent to prison, first at Halle, and then at Magdeburg. After a year’s confinement he was released, and would probably have concerted some new projects, had he not been attacked by a disorder which put an end to his life, April 23, 1793.

, a celebrated physician, born at Jena in 1677, practised his art in several towns of Germany; among others, at Nuremberg, Ratisbon, and Altorf. He was professor at this last-mentioned place, and member of the Academy des Curieux de la Nature, in 1720. He was chosen president of it in 1730, and died at Altorf the 14th of July 1735. He was author of, 1. “Thesaurus Gemmarum affabre sculptarum, coliectus a J. M. ab Ebermayer,” Nuremberg, 1720, folio. 2. “Horti medici acad. Altorf. Historia,” Altorf, 1727, 4to. 3. A great number of dissertations or theses, on particular plants, in 4to, from 1710 to 1721.

, a French divine,and subpemtentiary of the metropolitan church of Paris, was born at Abbeville, it is supposed of English parents. He arrived at his doctor’s degree in 1628. In 1651 he published his most celebrated work, dedicated to the archbishop of Paris; “De triplici examine ordinand. confess, etpcenitent.” 8vo, which passed through many editions in his life- time. He assisted also in the publication of some editions of the Councils. In 1666 he published a work upon the most celebrated preachers from the earliest times to the beginning of the seventeenth century, a 4to volume, under the title of “Sapientia foris prgedicans,” in which he not only gives a succinct account of the lives of the most celebrated preachers, but also points out in what they excelled, and the most remarkable passages in their discourses. Before this he published a tivatise, “De Beneficio Crncis,” Paris, 1653. 8vo, in opposition to the sentiments of Jansenius on the subjects of grace and predestination. His “Philosophic affective” appeared at Paris in 1657, 12mo. It contains many small devotional pieces, and a curious collection of “Pieuses reparties,” or pious repartees, selected from various authors, and some from his own experience. The time of his death is not specified in Moreri, or any of the authorities from which this article is taken.

, the author of a well-known dictionary of the English language, resided principally at Stepney, and there probably died, June 27, 1742, leaving no memorials of his personal history or character. In religion he is said to have been a Sabbatarian. His life, however, appears to have been spent in useful pursuits. His English dictionary, printed first in the early part of the last century, in 8vo (edit. 4th, 1728), was long the only one in use, and still continues a favourite with a certain class of readers. It was afterwards enlarged into 2 vols. 8vo, and some years after printed in folio, with additions in the mathematical part by G. Gordon, in the botanical by Phil. Miller, and in the etymological by T. Lidiard, the whole revised by Dr. Josepii Nicol Scott, a physician. Of this there was an improved edition in 1759, about which time the fifteenth edition of the 8vo was published. The 8vo, about twenty-five years ago, was revised by Dr. Harwood. Bailey also published a “Dictionarium domesticum, or a household dictionary,” 1736; “The Antiquities of London and Westminster,” 24mo, 1726, an useful abridgment; “An introduction to the English Tongue, two parts;” and school editions of Ovid’s Metamorphosis, Ovid’s Epistles, Justin, Erasmus’s Dialogues, Phædrus’s Fables, and a book of Exercises, which are all still in use.

, an eminent French critic, was born at Neuville near Beauvais in Picardy, June 13, 1649. His father, who was poor, and unable to give him a learned education, sent him to a small school in the neighbourhood, where he soon learned all that was taught there, and desirous of more, went frequently to a neighbouring convent, where, by his assiduities in performing little menial offices, he ingratiated himself with them, and by their interest was presented to the bishop of Beauvais. The bishop placed him in the college or seminary of that name, where he studied the classics with unwearied assiduity, borrowing books from his friends, and it is even said he took money privately from his father, in order to buy books. In the course of his reading, which was accurate and even- critical, he formed, about the age of seventeen, a commonplace book of extracts, which he called his “Juvenilia,” in two large volumes, very conducive to his own improvement, and afterwards to that of M. de Lamoignon, his patron’s son. He then studied philosophy, but with less relish, his predilection being in favour of history, chronology, and geography; yet in defending Ins philosophical theses, he always proved his capacity to be fully equal to his subject. In 1670 he went to one of those higher seminaries, formerly established by the French bishops for the study of divinity, which he pursued with his usual ardour and success, although here his early taste discovered itself, in his applying with most eagerness to the fathers and councils, as more nearly connected with ecclesiastical history. So intent was he on researches of this kind, that he fancied himself solely qualified for a life of studious retirement, and had a design of going, along with his brother Stephen, to the abbey La Trappe, but this was prevented by the bishop of Beauvai? bestowing upon him, in 1672, the appointment of teacher of the fifth form in the college, from which, in 1674, he was promoted to the fourth. This produced him about sixty pounds a-year, with part of which he assisted his poor relations, and laid out the rest in books, and had made a very good collection when he left the college. Among other employments at his leisure hours he compiled two volumes of notices of authors who had disguised their names, of which the preface only has been published.

In 1676, he received holy orders, and passed his examinations with high approbation. Monnoye, one of his biographers, mentions a circumstance very creditable to his superiors, that, although they were satisfied with his learning, they would not have admitted him into orders, if they had not discovered that he was superior to the vanity which sometimes accompanies a reputation for learning. The bishop of Beauvais now gave him the vicarage of Lardieres, which netted only 30l. yearly, yet with this pittance, Baillet, who maintained a brother, and a servant, contrived to indulge his humanity to the poor, and his passion for books, to purchase which he used to go once a year to Paris. His domestic establishment was upon the most temperate scale, no drink but water, and no meat, but brown bread, and sometimes a little bacon, and a few herbs from his garden boiled in water with salt, and whitened with a little milk. The cares of his parish, however, so much interrupted his favourite studies that he petitioned, and obtained another living, the only duties of which were singing at church, and explaining the catechism. A higher and more grateful promotion now awaited him, as in 1680, he was made librarian to M. Lamoignon, not the first president of the parliament, as Niceron says, for he was then dead, but his son, who at that time was advocate-general. To this place he was recommended by M. Hermant, a doctor of the Sorbonne, who told Lamoignon that Baillet was the proper person for him, if he could excuse his awkwardness. Lamoignon answered that he wanted a man of learning, and did not regard his outward appearance. To Baillet such an appointment was so gratifying that for some time he could scarcely believe M. Hermant to be serious. When he found it confirmed, however, he entered upon his new office with alacrity, and one of his first employments was to draw up an index of the library, which extended to thirty-five folio volumes, under two divisions, subjects and author’s names. The Latin preface to the index of subjects, when published, was severely, but not very justly censured by M. Menage, as to its style. After this, he completed four volumes of his celebrated work “Jugemens des Savans,” and gave them to the bookseller with no other reserve than that of a few copies for presents. The success of the work was very great, and the bookseller urged him to finish the five volumes that were, to follow. He did not, however, accomplish the whole of his design, which was to consist of six parts. I. In the first he was to treat of those printers, who had distinguished themselves by their learning, ability, accuracy, and fidelity. Of critics, that is, of those who acquaint us with authors, and their books, and in general those, who give an account of the state of literature, and of all that belongs to the republic of letters. Of philologists, and all those who treat of polite literature. Of grammarians and translators of all kinds. II. Poets, ancient and modern writers of romances and tales in prose rhetoricians, orators, and writers of letters, either in Latin, or in any of the modern languages. III. Historians, geographers, and chronologists of all sorts. IV. Philosophers, physicians, and mathematicians. V. Authors upon the civil and canon law, poJitics, and ethics. VI. Writers on divinity particularly the fathers, school-divinity heretics, &c. He published, however, only the first of these divisions, and half of the second, under the title of “Jugemens des Savans sur les principaux ouvrages des Auteurs,” Paris, 1685, 12mo. It is, in fact, a collection of the opinions of others, with seldom those of the author, yet it attracted the attention of the literary world, and excited the hostility of some critics, particularly M. Menage, to whom, indeed, Baillet had given a previous provocation, by treating him rather disrespectfully. The first attack was by father Commire, in a short poem entitled “Asinus in Parnasso,” the Ass on Parnassus, followed afterwards by “Asinus ad Lyram,” and “Asinus Judex,” all in defence of Menage and the poets and an anonymous poet wrote “Asinus Pictor.” It does not appear, however, that these injured the sale of the work; and in 1686, the five other volumes, upon the poets, were published, with a preface, in which the author vindicates himself with ability. M. Menage now published his “Anti-Baillet,” in which he endeavoured to point out Baillet' s errors and another author attacked him in “Reflexions sur le Jugemens des Savans, [envoy 6ez a l'auteur par un Academicien,” 1691, with Hague on the title, but really in France, and, according to Niceron, written by father Le Tellier, a Jesuit, all of which order resented Baillet' s partiality to the gentlemen of Port Royal. The editor of the Amsterdam edition of the “Jugemens,” attributes this letter to another Jesuit, a young man not named. Of these censures some are undoubtedly just, but others the cavils of caprice and hypercriticism.

In 1688, Baillet published his very amusing work, “Les Enfans devenus celebres par leurs etudes et par leurs ecrits,” Paris, 2 vols. 12mo. This collection of examples of young geniuses was thought well calculated to excite emulation, and soon became a very popular book, the professors of the universities, and other teachers of youth, strongly recommending it. His next work was of a singular cast. Conceiving that when Menage wrote his “Anti-Baillet” he meant a personal, as well as a critical attack, he began to form a catalogue of all works published with similar titles, beginning with the Anti-Cato of Cassar, the most ancient of the Anti’s, and concluding with trie AntiBaillet. This was published in 1689. “Des Satyres personelles, Traite historique et critique de celles, qui portent le titre d'Anti,” Paris, 2 vols. 12mo. The industrious Marchand, however, has given a very long catalogue of Anti’s omitted by Baillet, in his vol. I. under the article Anti-Garasse. Bailiet afterwards prepared a more useful work, for which he had made copious collections, with a view to discover the names of those authors who have used fictitious ones. In 1678 he had written in Latin “Elenchus Apocalypticus Scriptorum Cryptonymorum,” but of this he published only a preliminary treatise in French, “Auteurs degnisez sous des noms etraiigers, &c. tome I. contenant le traite preliminaire, sur le changement et la supposition des noms parmi les Auteurs,” Paris, 1620, 12mo. His design resembled that of Placcius in his treatise “De Anonymis et Pseudonymis,” and they had some communication together on the subject. Niceron attributes Baillet’s suppression of this work to the fear of giving offence, which might surely have been avoided if he had left contemporary writings to some future editor. In 1691, he wrote the “Life of Des Cartes,” in 2 vols. 4to, which was criticised in “Reflexions cl' un Academicien sur la Vie de M. des Cartes, envoyees a un de ses amis en Hollande,” ascribed, by Le Long, to Gallois, and by Marchand, to Le Tellier. The chief fault, is that very common one, in single lives, of introducing matters very slightly, if at all, connected with the history of the principal object, and from much that is in this work, Des Cartes might be supposed a warlike general, or a controversial divine. It succeeded so well, however, that a second edition was prevented only by his death but before that event he abridged it in one volume 12mo, and also wrote the life of Richer, doctor of the Sorbonne, which was not printed until several years after his death, at Liege, 1714, 12mo.

His next publication ranks him among the pseudonymous authors, a “History of Holland,” from the peace in 1609 to that of Nimeguen in 1679, under the name of Balthasar d'Hezenail de la Neuville, the anagram of Baillet de la Neuville en Hez, 4 vols. 12mo. Next year he published “De la Devotion a la Sainte Vierge, et du Culte qui lui est du,” 12mo, a piece of catholic superstition, which was attacked in two pamphlets. He had formed many more useful designs, as an universal ecclesiastical dictionary, embracing every subject of doctrine, morality, and discipline; but this and all his other schemes were interrupted by his death, Jan. 21, 1706. He was much regretted as an indefatigable scholar, and a valuable contributor to literary history. His extreme temperance and close application to study injured his health, and brought on all those miseries of a sedentary life, which exhausted his constitution, when only in his fifty-sixth year. In Lamoignon’s family, he was treated with the tenderness and respect due to his laborious services and blameless character. His last moments were marked by piety and fortitude, and his last breath expressed a blessing on his benefactors. His “.lugemens des Savans,” Mr. Dibdin justly observes, is one of those works with which no man fond of typographical and bibliographical pursuits, can dispense. In 1722, a new edition of it in 7 vols. 4to, was published by M. de la Monnoye, including the “Anti-Baillet” and a new edition at Amsterdam, 1725, in 16 or sometimes 8 vols. 12mo, by far the best. These editions are improved by Monnoye’s useful notes, a life of Baillet, some of the pamphlets written against him, and other documents of importance.

, known also by the name of La Riviere, who flourished in the latter part of the sixteenth century, was a native of Falaise in Normandy, and physician in ordinary to Henry IV. He acquired considerable reputation for learning, but, as he practised on the principles of Paracelsus, he was involved in disputes with his brethren, and frequently obliged to vindicate his method. Besides medicine, he was well versed in philosophy and the belles lettres, and was an excellent naturalist. He died at Paris, Nov. 5, 1605. When feeling the approaches of death, he sent for all his servants, and distributed his money and property among them, on condition that they immediately left the house, which was so punctually complied with, that when the physicians came on their next visit, they found the doors open, and their patient by himself, with no property left hut the bed he lay upon. When the physicians remarked this circumstance to him, he answered that he must now go likewise, “as his baggage was sent off before him, 17 and immediately expired. Pierre de l'Etoile, however,^ in his journal of Henry IV. represents him as a true penitent, and compares him to the thief on the cross. His works are” Demosterion, sive CCC Aphorismi, continentes summam doctrinae Paruecelsse,“Paris, 1573, 8vo.” Resp*onsio ad questiones propositas a medici* Parisiensibus,“Paris, 1579, 8vo.” Traite-de la Peste,“1580.” Traite* de Tantiquite et singularite de la grande Bretagne Armorique," Rennes, 1587, 4to.

, an eminent Presbyterian divine of the seventeenth century, was born at Glasgow in the year 1599. His father, Mr. Thomas Baillie, was a citizen of that place, and son to Baillie of Jerviston. Our Robert Baillie was educated in the university of his native city where, having taken his degrees in arts, he turned his thoughts to the study of divinity and, receiving orders from archbishop Law, he was chosen regent of philosophy at Glasgow. While he was in this station, he had, for some years, the care of the education of Lord Montgomery, who, at length, carried him with him to Kilwinning; to which church he was presented by the earl of Eglintoun. Here he lived in the strictest friendship with that noble family, and the people connected with it; as he did also with his ordinary the archbishop of Glasgow, with whom he kept up an epistolary correspondence. In 1633, he declined, from modesty, the offer of a church in Edinburgh. Being requested in 1637, by his friend the archbishop, to preach a sermon before the assembly at Edinburgh, in recommendation of the canon and service book, he refused to do it; and wrote a handsome letter to the archbishop, assigning the reasons of his refusal. In 1638 he was chosen by the presbytery of Irvine, a member of the famous assembly at Glasgow, which was a prelude to the civil war. Though Mr. Baillie is said to have behaved in this assembly with great moderation, it is evident that he was by no means deficient in his zeal against prelacy and Arminianism. In 1640 he was sent by the covenanting lords to London, to draw up an accusation against archbishop Laud, for his obtrusions on the church of Scotland. While he was in England, he wrote the presbytery a regular account of public affairs, with a journal of the trial of the earl of Strafford. Not long after, on his return, he was appointed joint professor of divinity with Mr. David Dickson, in the university of Glasgow, and his reputation was become so great, that he had before this received invitations from the other three universities, all of which he refused. He continued in his professorship till the Restoration but his discharge of the duties of it was interrupted for a considerable time, by his residence in England for, in 1643, he was chosen one of the commissioners of the church of Scotland to the assembly of divines at Westminster. Though he never spoke in the debates of the assembly, he appears to have been an useful member, and entirely concurred in the principles and views of its leaders. Mr. Baillie returned again to his own country in the latter end of 1646. When, after the execution of Charles I. Charles II. was proclaimed in Scotland, our professor was one of the divines appointed by the general assembly to wait on the king at the Hague; upon which occasion, March 27, 1649, he made a speech in the royal presence, expressing in the strongest terms his abhorrence of the murder of the late king and, in his sentiments upon this event, it appears that the Presbyterian divines of that period, both at home and abroad, almost universally agreed. After the restoration of Charles II. Mr. Baillie, Jan. 23, 1661, by the interest of the earl of Lauderdale, with whom he was a great favourite, was made principal of the university of Glasgow, upon the removal of Mr. Patrick Gillespie, who had been patronised by Cromwell. It is said by several writers, that Mr. Baillie had the offer of a bishopric, which he absolutely refused. Though he was very loyal, and most sincerely rejoiced in his majesty’s restoration, he began, a little before his death, to be extremely anxious for the fate of Presbytery. His health failed him in the spring of 1662. During his illness he was visited by the new-made archbishop of Glasgow, to whom he is said to have addressed himself in the following words “Mr, Andrews (I will not call you my lord), king Charles would have made me one of these lords but I do not find in the New Testament, that Christ has any lords in his house.” Notwithstanding this common-place objection to the hierarchy, he treated the archbishop very courteously. Mr. Baillie died in July 1662, being 63 years f age. By his first wife, who was Lilias Fleming, of the family of Cardarroch, in the parish of Cadder, near Glasgow, he had many children, five of whom survived him, viz. one son, and four daughters. The posterity of his son, Mr. Henry Baillie, who was a preacher, but never accepted of any charge, still inherit the estate of Carnbrae, in the county of Lanerk, an ancient seat of the Baillies. Mr. Baillie’s character ha% been drawn to great advantage, not only by Mr. Woodrow, but by an historian of the opposite party. His works, which were very learned, and acquired him reputation in his own time, are 1. “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” Amsterdam, 1668, fol. 2. “A Defence of the Reformation of the Church of Scotland, against Mr. Maxwell, bishop of Ross.” 3. “A Parallel betwixt the Scottish Service-Book and the Romish Missal, Breviary,” &c. 4. “The Canterburian Self-Conviction.” 5. “Queries anent the Service-Book.” 6. “Antidote against Arminianism.” 7. “A treatise on Scottish Episcopacy.” 8. “Laudensium.” 9. “Dissuasive against the Errors of the Times, with a Supplement.” 10. “A Reply to the Modest Enquirer,” with some other tracts, and several sermons upon public occasions but his “Opus Historicum et Chronologicum,” was his capital production. The rest of his writings, being chiefly on controversial and temporary subjects, can, at present, be of little or no value. But his memory is perhaps yet more preserved by a very recent publication, “Letters and Journals, carefully transcribed by Robert Aiken containing an impartial account of public transactions, civil, ecclesiastical, and military, both in England and Scotland, from 1637 to 1662 a period, perhaps, the most remarkable that is to be met with in the British History. With an Account of the Author’s life, prefixed and a Glossary annexed,” Edinburgh, 1775, 2 vols. 8vo. The chief correspondents of Mr. Baillie were, Mr. William Spang, minister first to the Scotch Staple at Campvere, and afterwards to the English Congregation in- Middleburgh in Zealand, who was his cousin -german Mr. David Dickson, professor of Divinity, first at Glasgow, then at Edinburgh and Messrs, Robert Ramsay and George Young, who were ministers in Glasgow. There are, in this collection, letters to several other persons but Mr. Spang was the gentleman with whom Mr. Baillie principally corresponded. The journals contain a history of the general assembly at Glasgow, in 1638; an account of the earl of Stafford’s trial the transactions of the general assembly and parliament, in 1641 and the proceedings of thegeneral assembly, in 1643.

, or Ballonius, an eminent French physician and writer, was born about 1538, of a considerable family in Perche, and studied at Paris, where he received his doctor’s degree, in 1570, and during the course of his licentiate, was so able and victorious in the disputations, as to be named the Scourge of Bachelors. he was dean of the faculty in 1580, and his high reputation influenced Henry the Great to choose him first physician for his son, the dauphin, in 1601 But he preferred the sweets of domestic life to the honours of the court, and employed such leisure as his practice allowed, in writing several treatises on medical subjects, and was not more distinguished for knowledge in his profession, than for true piety and extensive charity. He died in 1616, His works were published after his death 1. “Consiliorum Medicinalium lib. II.” Paris, 1635, 4to, edited by his nephew Thevart. 2. “Consiliorum Med. lib. tertius,” ibid. 1649, 4to. 3. “Epidemiorum et Ephemeridum lib. II.” ibid. 1640, 4to, and in 1734, dedicated to sir Hans Sloane. 4. “Adversaria Medicinalia,” 4to, ibid, or, according to Haller, the same as “Paradigimata et historic morborum ob raritatem observatione dignissimse,” ibid. 1648, 4to. 5. “Definition tun Medicarum liber,” ibid. 1639, 4to. 6. “Commentarius in libellum Theophrasti de Vertigine,” ibid. 1640, 4to. 7. “De Convulsionibus libellus,” ibid. 1640, 4to. 8. “De Virginum et Mulierium morbis,” ibid. 1643, 4to. 9. “Opuscula Medica,” ibid. 1643, 4to. 10. “Liber de Rheumatismo et Pleuritide dorsali,” ibid. 1642, 4to. Of all these, and other works by him, a complete edition was published at Geneva, 1762, 4 vols. 4 to.

, an eminent French astronomer, was born in Paris, Sept. 25, 1736. His father was the fourth in succession of his family who followed the profession of a painter and young Bailly was also destined to painting, and had already made some progress in the art, when he showed a decided inclination for the study of the belles-lettres. Poetry was the first object that engaged his attention he even produced some tragedies which were praised by Lanoue, not however without advising his young friend to attend rather to science and Lacaille essentially contributed to direct his attention to the study of Natural Philosophy accordingly, in the year 1762, he presented to the academy “Observations on the Moon,” which Lacaille had made him draw up with all the particularity of detail required* by the new state of astronomy, and which were quoted by him with approbation, in the sixth volume of the Ephemerides.

He calculated the orbit of the comet of 1759, the period of whose return had occupied the attention of astronomers, and on the 29th of January 1763, he was received into the Academy of Sciences. In the same year he published a large and useful work, the reduction of the observations which Lacaille had made in 1760 and 1761, on 515 zodiacal stars, 132 of which are not to be found in preceding catalogues the remainder are contained in Meyer’s Zodiac, but their positions are laid down with much greater exactness by Lacaille. Bailly thus rendered an important service to astronomy by editing a work, which, on account of the death of its author, would have remained useless, if it had not been for the zeal of his pupil.

Bailly began about this period also to turn his attention to the theory of the satellites of Jupiter, the difficulty and importance of which had already attracted the notice of the academy, who proposed it as a prize subject in April 1764. Le Grange, who now stood first among tha geometricians of Europe, was one of the candidates for the prize. The theory of Clairaut was employed by Bailly in calculating the same perturbations the united efforts of these two philosophers for the first time made us acquainted with the singular derangements of these little planets, by constructing new tables of them, for all former attempts had been merely empirical.

In 1766 he published an important treatise, with the modest title of “Essai sur la theorie des Satellites de Jupiter,” together with tables of their movements, and fche history of this branch of astronomy, in 53 pa-es 4to, The most ingenious memoir which he published, is that for 1771 on the light of the satellites. On this occasion he availed himself of an excellent idea of F'ouchy, of covering the end of a telescope with thin pieces of bladder till the satellite could be no longer seen, in orderly this means to measure the degree of its light. He also observed and calculated the changes produced by their proximity to Jupiter, and their altitude above the horizon he ascertained their diameters, the duration of their several immersions, and invented a method of composing the observations made with different telescopes, by which he introduced a degree of perfection till that time unknown in this part of astronomy. The intervals of his astronomical labours were agreeably occupied by general literature. In 1767 he was elected member of the academic Frangoise, for his eloge of Charles V. a work which obtained distinguished praise from the academy, though fhe prize was adjudged to La Harpe.

In 1768 he sent to the academy of Rouen the eloge of Corneille, which gained the accessit. His eloge of Leibnitz, sent to the academy of Berlin, obtained the prize. In 1769 his eloge of Moliere gained the accessit at the academic Franchise the prize was gained by Chamfort. His abilities in this style of writing were still further rendered conspicuous by the eloges of Cook, Lacaille, and Cresset; so much so, that Buffon and many other members of the Academic des Sciences wished to obtain him the appointment of secretary to that distinguished society; and though at the election in 1771, Condorcet had the majority of votes, yet the nobility of his birth and the exertions of d'Alembert probably contributed very essentially to secure him the preference. Bailly was at length recompensed by the Academic Franchise, by being appointed on February 26th, 1784, the successor of Tressan.

In 1781 and 1782 he composed a great work on the “Origin of Fables and Aflcient Religions,” the continuation of which was published in 1800, abounding with erudition and information. He did not entirely adopt the allegorical system of the ancient traditions which citizen Dupuis has so victoriously established in the Journal des Savans of 1779 and 1780, and in his other works.

His “History of India and Oriental Astronomy,” which appeared in 1787, well justified the choice of the academy, for it demanded a multitude of researches which no one was capable of making to an equal extent with himself, since they required not only great erudition, but a vast variety of calculations, to which men of letters are seldom equal.

The animal magnetism of Mesmer, as practised by Deslon in 1784, occasioned a most extraordinary and unaccountable agitation at Paris. In order to satisfy the curiosity of the public on this subject, a number of physicians were nominated by the king, and of natural philosophers by the academy Bailly was one of the commissioners, and was chosen by the rest to draw up their report. It occupied 108 pages in octavo, and engaged his principal attention for a considerable time, for it was an important fact in the history of the errors of the human mind, and a most extraordinary instance of the power of imagination.

The academy having nominated in 1786, commissioners to examine a plan by Poyet, architect, for a new Hotel Dieu, Bailly drew up their report in 250 pages octavo which is a valuable instance both of the professional knowledge and the humanity of the author. He proposed the erection of four different hospitals and Breteuil, who was then minister, and had great reliance on Bailly, had finally resolved on executing his plan, when the revolution of 1789 drove him from the ministry.

On April the 26th, 1789, the electors of Paris as*. sembled for the nomination of deputies for the statesgeneral, appointed Bailly for their secretary. There were assembled, on this important occasion, many academicians, but none, except Bailly, was a member of all the academies. His talent for writing was well known the interesting reports that he had made on the subject of the hospitals and animal magnetism, had powerfully excited the attention of the public his character stood equally high for calmness of temper and strictness of morals, so that no one possessed so many claims as himself to that important office. The choice of the public was too flattering to be resisted and from that time he was lost for ever to astronomy. The motives that occasioned his first appointment soon advanced him to the dignity of deputy and president of the tiers etat, which assembled on the 5th of May at Versailles. The several deputies from the communes having constituted themselves on the 17th of June, a national assembly, Bailly was still continued president, and distinguished himself considerably. He it was, who on the 20th, of the same month, conducted the asse-nbly to the tennis-court, and he still continued to preside, when, on the 27th, the two other orders united themselves to the tiers-etat. He resigned his office on July 22d, and the duke of Orleans was appointed his Sik> cessor.

When the king arrived at Paris, on the 25th of July, after the capture of the Bastile, Bailly was chosen by public acclamation, chief magistrate of the city, under the name of Mayor of Paris. It is not our intention to follow him through the whole of his political career his eulogist, however, affirms that in his situation as deputy, president, and mayor, he exhibited the wisdom, the firmness, and the moderation of a philosopher. He is accused by some of having endeavoured to debase the royal dignity, and by others of having wished unreasonably to exalt it. The validity of these contradictory charges can only be ascertained by some future generation. He might possibly be mistaken, but the rectitude of his conduct as a magistrate, his ardent desire to promote the welfare of his countfy, and his entire devotedness of his time, his life, his favourite studies, and his happiness, to this great object, are unquestionable. The public bodies to which Baiily belonged, bore distinguished evidence to his worth; his bust was placed in the municipality, and in the academy of sciences, where that of any of its living members had never been deposited. His honours now rose to their futl height. Placed between the people and the king, though responsible to both, he protected them from each other his influence was of infinite service to them, and he maintained the equilibrium of a philosopher, amid the sohcitations of both parties.

The most disagreeable period of his administration, and the most fatal in its effects, was the 17th of July, 1792, when the party in opposition to the monarchical constitution excited commotions in the people, which he was obliged to quell, by order of the national assembly. He was forced to repair to the Champ de Mars, where, notwithstanding his precaution, some muskets were discharged on the crowd. For this act, two years after, his head was demanded, when the only object of the reigning tyrant was to flatter the people, to indulge its passions, and even exceed its resentments.

Bailly was mayor of Paris from July 15, 1789, to November 16th, 1791, that is, uvo years and a half. At the conclusion of this period he was induced to resign his situation on account of the opposition raised by the democratic party who wished to substitute Petion, the declining state of his health not allowing him to engage in active measures to secure his continuance in office. He spent the year 1792 and part of 1793 in travelling, and writing an account of those extraordinary events which he had witnessed, and in which he had been a distinguished actor. These memoirs, which are not carried lower than October 2, 1789, were published in 1804. The edition in two volumes published in 1790 by Debure, of his speeches and memoirs, contains only those that were written before Sept. 1789. When the remainder of them shall be collected, they will add much interest to his character and conduct. During his journey he was by no means ignorant of the plans that were forming against him, and several opportunities offered of quitting France Cato said ingrata patria mea, nee ossa habebis. Bailly, more firm than Cato, preferred the example of Socrates, and refused to abandon his country.

Such a man could only be condemned for an error, or by a crime but the retroactive effect of a law expressly declared to be unjust by the fourteenth article of the rights of man, was a crime daily committed during the nine months reign of that ferocious wild beast, which was extinguished on the 9th of Thermidor. Bailly became a victim of this bloody tribunal on November llth, 1793, and those that had procured his condemnation, prolonged the period of his suffering by changing the place of execution when he had already arrived at the scaffold.

Bailly married, in 1787, Jeanne le Seigneur, the widow of his intimate friend Raymond Gaye. She was of an age proper to inspire the regard and attachment of a man of worth, who was not to be influenced by the ordinary motives of beauty or fortune, especially since he had eight nephews, whom he educated with all the care of a father.

In person Bailly was tall, of a sedate but striking countenance, and his temper, though firm, was joined to much sensibility. His disinterestedness appeared frequently, and in a very striking manner, towards his relations and during his magistracy, he expended a considerable part of his income in administering to the necessities of the poor. Few men of letters have eminently distinguished themselves in so many different ways, and no one has ever united so many titles of respect with such various and general applause; but his highest and greatest fame is derived from his virtue, which always remained unblemished, unsuspected, and admired by the academy, by the metropolis, in the highest situations, in the most respectable public bodies: those who knew him the best loved him the most, and in his own family he was almost adored.

Such is the life and character of Bailly, as given by La Lande in his eloge, and as far as respects his learning and private life seems to admit of no deduction. It is evident, however, that he was ill qualified for the transition he made from the calm pursuits of study to the wild enthusiasm of a revolution conducted, almost throughout, by the vilest and most worthless of mankind, at the expence of the wise, the learned, and the honest part of the French nation, many of whom were unfortunately seduced to be their auxiliaries. It is very probable that he saw his error when too late, and when summoned as a witness on the trial of the queen, he had the courage to declare that the facts in the act of accusation drawn up against this princess, were false and forged.

, M. D. a physician of the fifteenth century, was a native of Scotland, and after being educated in his native country, went to Italy, where he studied medicine with such reputation as to be made rector, and afterwards professor of medicine in the university of Bologne, about the year 1484. In his theory, he adopted the Galenic system in preference to the empiric, and wrote “Apologia pro Galeni doctrina contra Empiricos,” Lyons, 1552, 8vo. Dempster says that he returned to Scotland before his death, the date of which is not mentioned. Mackenzie thinks he also wrote a book published in 1600, 8vo, “De Quantitate Syllabarum Græcarum, et de Dialectis.”

, an eminent physician and astronomer, born in 1582, at Ashby de la Zouch, Leicestershire, was educated at the public school of that town; and from thence went to Emanuel college in Cambridge, under the tuition of Dr. Joseph Hall, afterwards bishop of Norwich. When he had taken his degrees of bachelor and master of arts, he went, back to Leicestershire, where he taught a grammar-school for some years, and at the same time practised physic. He employed his leisure hours in the mathematics, especially astronomy, which had been his favourite study from his earliest years. By the advice of his friends, who thought his abilities too great for the obscurity of a country life, he removed to London, where he was admitted a fellow of the college of physicians. His description of the comet, which appeared in 1618, greatly raised his character. It was by this means he got acquainted with sir Henry Savile, who, in 1619, appointed him his first professor of astronomy at Oxford. Upon this he removed to that university, and was entered a master commoner of Merton college; the master and fellows whereof appointed him junior reader of Linacer’s lecture in 1631, and superior reader in 1635. As he resolved to publish correct editions of the ancient astronomers, agreeably to the statutes of the founder of his professorship; in order to make himself acquainted with the discoveries of the Arabian astronomers, he began the study of the Arabic language when he was above 40 years of age. Some time before his death, he removed to a house opposite Merton college, where he died in 1643. His body was conveyed to the public schools, where an oration was pronounced in his praise by the university orator; and was carried from thence to Merton college church, where it was deposited near the altar. His published works are, 1. “An astronomical description of the late Comet, from the 18th of November 1618, to the 16th of December following,” London, 1619, 4to. This piece was only a specimen of a large work, which the author intended to publish in Latin, under the title of “Cometographia.” 2. “Procli sphæra. Ptolomæi de hypothesibus Planetarum liber singularis.” To which he added Ptolemy’s “Canon regnorum.” He collated these pieces with ancient manuscripts, and has given a Latin version of them, illustrated with figures, 1620, 4to. 3. “Canicularia; a treatise concerning the dog-star and the canicular days.” Published at Oxford in 1648, by Mr. Greaves, together with a demonstration of the heliacal rising of Sirius, or the dog-star, for the parallel of Lower Egypt. Dr. Bainbridge undertook this work at the request of archbishop Usher, but left it imperfect; being prevented by the breaking out of the civil war, or by death.

There were several dissertations of his prepared for and committed to the press the year after his death, but the edition of them was never completed. The titles of them are as follow[s]: 1. " Antiprognosticon, in quo manlixYis astrologicæ, cœlestium domorum, et triplicitatum commentis, magnisque Saturni et Jovis (cujusmodi anno 1623, et 1643, contigerunt, et vicesimo fere quoque deincips anno, ratis naturæ legibus, recurrent) conjunctionibus innixæ, vanitas breviter detegitur.“2.” De meridianorum sive Longitudinum differentlis inveniendis dissertatio.“3.” De stella Veneris diatriba." There were also some celestial observations of his, which may be seen in Ismael Bullialdus’s Astronomia Philolaica, published at Paris, in 1645.

Besides what we have mentioned, there are several other tracts which were never published, but left by his will to archbishop Usher; among whose manuscripts they are preserved in the library of the college of Dublin. Amongst others are the following, 1. A theory of the Sun. 2. A theory of the Moon. 3. A discourse concerning the Quantity of the Year. 4. Two volumes of Astronomical observations. 5. Nine or ten volumes of miscellaneous papers relating to the Mathematics. He undertook likewise a description of the British monarchy, in order to shew the advantages of the union of England and Scotland under one monarch; but this treatise was either lost or suppressed by him.

, was born at Melun, in the territory of Ath, in 1513. The emperor Charles V. made choice of him to be professor of divinity in the university of Louvain. He was afterwards chancellor of that body, guardian of its privileges, and inquisitor-general. The university, in concert with the king of Spain, elected him deputy to the council of Trent, whiere he acquired reputation. He had already published several small pieces, but was destined to be involved in controversy. Like the other followers of Augustin, he had an invincible aversion to that contentious, subtle, and intricate manner of teaching theology, that had long prevailed in the schools; and, under the auspicious name of that famous prelate, who was his darling guide, he had the courage to condemn, in an open and public manner, the tenets commonly received in the church of Rome, with respect to the natural powers of man, and the merit of good works.

This bold step drew upon Baius the indignation of some of his academical colleagues, and the heavy censures of several Franciscan monks. Whether the Jesuits immediately joined in this opposition, and may be reckoned among the first accusers of Baius, is a matter unknown, or at most, uncertain, but it is evident that, even at the rise of this controversy, they abhorred the principal tenets of Baius, which he had taken from Augustm, and adopted as his own. In 1567, he was accused at the court of Rome, and seventy-six propositions drawn from his writings, were condemned by pope Pius V. in a circular letter expressly composed for that purpose. The principal doctrines maintained in these propositions were, that unregenerate men have no ability to perform what is spiritually good, and that no man’s best works are meritorious of eternal life. The pope’s condemnation, however, was issued out in an artful and insidious manner, without any mention being made of the name of the author for the fatal consequences that had arisen from the rash and inconsiderate measures employed by the court of Rome against Luther, were too fresh in the remembrance of the prudent pontiff to permit his falling into new blunders of the same nature. The person and functions of Baius, therefore, were spared, while his tenets were censured. About thirteen years after this transaction, instigated by Tolet, the Jesuit doctor, Gregory XIII. confirmed the sentence, and again condemned the propositions. Dreading further severity, or more probably because his condemnation was vague and ambiguous, Baius submitted but others exclaimed against the papal decisions, as manifestly unjust. Baius’s doctrine was propagated with no inconsiderable zeal, in the flourishing universities of Douay and Louvaine. When the Jesuits Lessius and Hamelius attempted to preach a scheme of predestination, different from that of Augustin, the doctors of these universities condemned their opinions in 1587 and 1588. The bishops of the Low Countries prepared to do the same, but pope Sixtus V. suspended their proceedings, and by imposing silence on both parties, hushed the controversy. Even at this day, many“divin of the Romish communion, and particularly the Jansenists declare openly that Baius was unjustly treated, and that the two edicts of Pius and Gregory are absolutely destitute of all authority. He died the 16th of September 1589, at the age of 76. We have his controversial tracts against Maniix, 1579 and 1582, 2 vols. 8vo. His entire works were collected in 1696, in 4to, at Cologn, and the following year were prohibited by the pope. His style is greatly superior to that of the divines of his time, being simple and close. Baius had studied the fathers with such care, that it is affirmed he read St. Augustin over nine times a proof of his patience, if not of his judgment. Baius by his will founded a college for education. His nephew, James Baius, likewise doctor of Louvain, and who died in 1614, left behind him a tract on the Eucharist, printed at that city in 1605, 8 vo, and a catechism in folio, Cologn, 1620. The opinions of Michael Baius did not die with him. Cornelius Jansenius revived a great number of them in his book, entitled” Augustinus."

, an English Benedictine monk, and ecclesiastical historian and antiquary, the son of William Baker, gent, and nephew to Dr. David Lewes, judge of the admiralty, was born at Abergavenny, Dec. 9, 1575, and first educated at Christ’s hospital, London, whence he went to Oxford, in 1590, and became a commoner of Broadgate’s hall (now Pembroke college), which he left without a degree, and joined his brother Richard, a barrister of the middle temple, where he studied law, and in addition to the loose courses he followed, when at Oxford, now became a professed infidel. After the death of his brother, his father sent for him, and he was made recorder of Abergavenny, and practised with considerable success. While here, a miraculous escape from drowning recalled him to his senses as to religion, but probably having no proper advice at hand, he fell upon a course of Roman catholic writings, and was so captivated with them that he joined a small congregation of Benedictines then in London, and went with one of them to Italy, where, in 1605, he took the habit, and changed his name to Augustin Baker. A fit of sickness rendering it necessary to try his native air he returned to England, and finding his father oa his death-bed, reconciled him to the Catholic faith. From this time he appears to have resided in London and different places in the country, professing his religion as openly as could be done with safety. Some years before his death he spent at Canjbray, as spiritual director ‘of the English Benedictine nuns there, and employed his time in making collections for an English ecclesiastical historj’, in which, when at home, we are told, he was assisted by Camden, Cotton, Spelman, Selden, and bishop Godwin, to all of whom, Wood says, “he was most familiarly known,” but not, we presume, so sufficiently as this biographer supposes. Wood, indeed, tells us, that when at the house of gentlemen, he passed for a lawyer, a character which he supported in conversation by the knowledge he had acquired in the Temple. He died in Gray’s Inn lane Aug. 9, 1641, and was buried in St. Andrew’s church. He wrote a great many religious treatises, but none were published. They amounted to nine large folios in manuscript, and were long preserved in the English nunnery at Cambray. His six volumes of ecclesiastical history were lost, but out of them were taken father Reyner’s “Apostolatus Benedictinorum in Anglia,” and a good deal of Cressy’s “Church History.” Wood has given a prolix account of this man, which was probably one of those articles in his Athenee that brought upon him the suspicion of being himself attached to popery. It is certainly written with all the abject submission of credulity.

, an eminent physician, was the son of the Rev. George Baker, who died in 1743, being then archdeacon and registrar of Totness. He was born in 1722, educated at Eton, and was entered a scholar of King’s college, Cambridge, in July 1742, where he took his degree of B. A. 1745, and M. A. 1749. He then began the study of medicine, and took the degree of doctor in 1756. He first practised at Stamford, but afterwards settled in London, and soon arrived at very extensive practice and reputation, and the highest honours of his faculty, being appointed physician in ordinary to the Jking, and physician to the queen. He was also a fellow of the Royal and Antiquary Societies, created a baronet Aug. 26, 1776, and in 1797 was elected president of the College of Physicians, London. Besides that skill in his profession, and personal accomplishments, which introduced him into the first practice, and secured him a splendid fortune, he was a good classical scholar and critic, and his Latin works are allowed to be written in a chaste and elegant style. He died June 15, 1809, in his eighty-eighth year, after having passed this long life without any of the infirmities from which he had relieved thousands.

Sir George Baker, as an author, is to be estimated rather from the value than the'bulk of his works. His very extensive practice, while it enriched his own treasures of experience, left him little leisure for writing, and he never went beyond the extent of a tract or dissertation. Those he published were, 1. “De affectibus animi et morbis hide oriundis, dissertatio habita Cantabrigiae in scholis publicis, 5 kalend. Feb. 1755,” London, 1755, 4to. 2. “Oratio ex Harveii institute, habita in theatro coll. reg. Medicorum Lond. Oct. 19, 1761. Calci orationis accedit Commentarius quidam de Joanne Caio Anatomise conditore apud nostrates,” 4to, ib. 1761. This contains an elegant eulogy on Dr. Stephen Hales, and an argument to prove that Dr. Caius was the founder of anatomy in this country. Dr. Baker also adverts to Dr. Conyers Middleton’s essay on the servile condition of physicians in ancient Rome, which, he imagined, glanced at the honour of the profession itself. 3. “De Catarrho, et de Dysenteria Londinensi, epidemicis utrisque anno 1762, libellus,” 4to, ib. 1763. 4. “An Inquiry into the merits of a method of inoculating the Small Pox, which is now practised in several counties in England,” 8vo, ib. 1766. This produced two letters from Dr. Glasse, addressed to Dr. Baker, on the same subject. 5. “An essay concerning the cause of the Endemial Colic of Devonshire, which was read in the theatre of the College of Physicians, June 29, 1767,” printed at first for private distribution, but afterwards inserted in the Medical Transactions, vol. I. In this he derives the Devonshire colic from an impregnation of lead in the making of cyder, lead being very much used in the vessels employed in that operation. It was immediately followed by “Some observations on Dr. Baker’s Essay, by Francis Geach, surgeon at Plymouth,” 8vo, in which he endeavours to invalidate Dr. Baker’s theory, by proving that lead is not used in the preparation of cyder but this pamphlet was also immediately answered by Dr. Saunders, 8vo, and in 1769 Mr. Geach published “A Reply to Dr. Saunders’s pamphlet,” 8vo, and was supported by the Rev. Thomas Alcock in a pamphlet entitled, “The Endemical Colic of Devon not caused by a solution of lead in the cyder,” 1769, 8vo. At a considerable distance, in point of time, appeared “A candid examination of what has been advanced on the Colic of Poitouand Devonshire, by James Hardy, M.D. of Barnstaple, Devonshire,” 1778, 8vo. This writer, while inclined to agree with Drs. Baker and Saunders, as to the cholic arising from a solution of lead, wished to transfer the evil from the cyder- utensils to the drinking vessels, which are of glazed earthen ware, the vitreous coating of which contains a large proportion of lead but the argument is rather feebly supported. In 1771, Dr. Baker re-published the three first tracts, under the title of “Opuscula.” His other treatises were published in the Medical Transactions, vol. I. II. and III.

, an ingenious and diligent naturalist, the son of William Baker, a clerk in Chancery, was born in Chancery-lane, London, May 8, 1698. He was placed in 1713 with John Parker, whom he left in 1720, to reside for a few weeks with Mr. John Forster an attorney. Mr. Forster had a daughter of eight years old, who was born deaf and dumb. Mr. Baker, possessed with the idea that he could instruct her in reading, writing, and understanding what was spoken, made the attempt, and was so successful that her father retained him in his house for some years, during which he succeeded equally well with a second daughter who laboured under the same privation. He afterwards made this the employment of his life. In the prosecution of so valuable and difficult an undertaking, he was very successful. Among his pupils were the hon. Lewis Erskine, son of the late earl of Buchaii lady Mary, and lady Anne O'Brien, daughters of the earl of Inchiquin the earl of Sussex and his brother Mr. Yelverton the earl of Haddington, the earl of Londonderry, and many others. At the end of his instructions, he is said to have taken a bond for lOOl. of each scholar not to divulge his method, an instance of narrowness of mind which we wish we could contradict.

In April 1729, he married Sophia, youngest daughter of the famous Daniel Defoe, who brought him two sons, both of whom he survived. On the 29th of January 1740, Mr. Baker was elected a fellow of the society of antiquaries; and, on the 12th of March following, the same honour was conferred upon him by the royal society. In 1744, sir Godfrey Copley’s gold medal was bestowed upon him, for having, by his microscopical experiments on the crystallizations and configurations of saline particles, produced the most extraordinary discovery during that year. This medal was presented to him by sir Hans Sloane, thjen president of the royal society, and only surviving trustee of sir Godfrey Copley’s donation, at the recommendation of sir Hans’s worthy successor, Martin Folkes, esq. and of the council of the said society. Having led a very useful and honourable life, he died, at his apartments in the Strand, on the 25th of Nov. 1774, aged seventy-seven. His wife died in 1762; and he left only one grandson, William Baker, who was born Feb. 17, 1763, and to whom, on his living to the age of twenty-one, he bequeathed the bulk of his fortune, which he had acquired by his profession of teaching deaf and dumb persons to speak. This gentleman is now rector of Lyndon and South Luffenham, in the county of Rutland. He gave also by his will a hundred pounds to the royal society, the interest of which was to be applied in paying for an annual oration on natural history or experimental philosophy, now known by the name of the Bakerian oration. He gave to each of his two executors one hundred pounds and his wife’s gold watch and trinkets in trust to his daughter-in-law Mary Baker for her life, and to be afterwards given to the future wife of his grandson. To Mrs. Baker he gave also an annuity of fifty pounds. His furniture, printed books, curiosities, and collections of every sort, he directed should be sold, which was accordingly done. His manuscripts are in the possession of his grandson. His fine collection of native and foreign fossils, petrifactions, shells, corals, vegetables, ores, &c. with some antiquities and other curiosities, were sold by auction, March 13, 1775, and the nine following days, He was buried, as he desired, in an inexpensive mannef, in the church-yard of St. Mary le-Strand within which church, on the south wall, he ordered a small tablet to be erected to his memory, but owing to some particular regulations annexed to the new churches under the act of queen Anne, leave for this could not be obtained. “An inscription for it,” he said, “would probably be found among his papers if not, he hoped some learned friend would write one agreeably to truth.”

Mr. Baker was a constant and useful attendant at the meetings of the royal and antiquary societies, and in both was frequently chosen one of the council. He was peculiarly attentive to all the new improvements which were made in natural science, and very solicitous for the prosecution of them. Several of his communications are printed in the Philosophical Transactions and, besides the papers written by himself, he was the means, by his extensive correspondence, of conveying to the society the intelligence and observations of other inquisitive and philosophical men. His correspondence was not confined to his own country. To him we are obliged for a true history of the coccus polonicus, transmitted by Dr. Wolfe. It is to Mr. Baker’s communications that we owe the larger alpine strawberry, of late so much cultivated and approved of in England. The seeds of it were sent in a letter from professor Bruns of Turin to our philosopher, who gave them to several of his friends^ by whose care they furnished an abundant increase. The seeds likewise of the true rhubarb, or rheum palmatum, now to be met with in almost every garden in this country, were first transmitted to Mr. Baker by Dr. Mounsey, physician to the empress of Russia. These, like the former, were distributed to his various acquaintance, and some of the seeds vegetated very kindly. It is apprehended that all the plants of the rhubarb now in Great Britain were propagated from this source. Two or three of Mr. Baker’s papers, which relate to antiquities, may be found in the Philosophical Transactions. The society for the encouragement of arts, manufactures, and commerce, is under singular obligations to our worthy naturalist. As he was one of the earliest members of it, so he contributed in no small degree to its rise and establishment. At its first institution, he officiated for some time gratis, as secretary. He was many years chairman ^of the committee of accounts and he took an active part in the general deliberations of the society. In his attendance he was almost unfailing, and there were few questions of any moment upon which he did not deliver his opinion. Though, fronl the lowness of his voice, his manner of speaking was not powerful, it was clear, sensible, and convincing; what he said, being usually much to the purpose, and always proceeding from the best intentions, had often the good effect of contributing to bring the society to rational determinations, when many of the members seemed to have lost themselves in the intricacies of debate. He drew up a short account of the original of this society, and of the concern he himself had in forming it; which was read before the society of antiquaries, and would be a pleasing present to the public. Mr*. Baker was a poetical writer in the early part of his life. His “Invocation of Health” got abroad without his knowledge; but was reprinted by himself in his “Original Poems, serious and humourous,” Part the first, 8vo, 1725. The second part came out iri 1726. He was the author, likewise, of “The Universe^ a poem, intended to restrain the pride of man,” which has been several times reprinted. His account of the water polype, which was originally published in the Philosophical Transactions, was afterwards enlarged into a separate treatise, and hath gone through several editions. In 1728 he began, and for five years conducted the “Universal Spectator,” a periodical paper, under the assumed name of Henry Stonecastle a selection of these papers was afterwards printed in 4 vols. 12mo. In 1737 he published “Medulla Poetarum Romanorum,” 2 vols. 8vo, a selection from the Roman poets, with translations. But his principal publications are, “The Microscope made easy,” and “Employment for the Microscope.” The first of these, which was originally published in 1742, or 1743, has gone through six editions. The second edition of the other, which, to say the least of it, is equally pleasing and instructive, appearedin 1764. These treatises, and especially the latter, contain the most curious and important of the observations and experiments which Mr. Baker either laid before the royal society, or published separately. It has been said of Mr. Baker, “that he was a philosopher in little things.” If it was intended by this language to lessen his reputation, there is no propriety in the stricture. He was an intelligent, upright and benevolent man, much respected by those who knew him best. His friends were the friends of science and virtue and it will always be remembered by his contemporaries, that no one was more ready than himself to assist those with whom he was conversant in their various researches and endeavours for the advancement of knowledge and the benefit of society. His eldest son, David Erskine Baker, was a young man of genius and learning, and, like his father, a philosopher, an antiquary, and a poet. Being very partial to mathematical and geometrical studies, the duke of Montague, then master of the ordnance, placed him in the drawing-room in the Tower, to qualify him for the royal engineers. In a letter to Dr. Doddridge, dated 1747, his father speaks of him in these terms: “He has been somewhat forwarder than boys usually are, from a constant conversation with men. At twelve years old he had translated the whole twenty-four books of Telemachus from the French before he was fifteen, he translated from the Italian, and published, a treatise on physic, of Dr. Cocchi, of Florence, concerning the diet and doctrines of Pythagoras and last year, before he was seventeen, he likewise published a treatise of sir Isaac Newton’s Metaphysics, compared with those of Dr. Leibnitz, from the French of M. Voltaire. He is a pretty good master of the Latin, understands some Greek, is reckoned no bad mathematician for his years, and knows a great deal of natural history, both from reading and observation, so that, by the grace of God, I hope he will become a virtuous and useful man.” In another letter he mentions a singular commission given to his son, that of making drawings of all the machines, designs, and operations employed in the grand fire- works to be exhibited on occasion of the peace of 1748. It is to be regretted, however, that his father’s expectations were disappointed by a reverse of conduct in this son, occasioned by his turn for dramatic performances, and his marrying the daughter of a Mr. Clendon, a clerical empiric, who had, like himself, a similar turn. In consequence of this unhappy taste, he repeatedly engaged with the lowest strolling companies, in spite of every effort of his father to reclaim him. The public was, however, indebted to him for “The Companion to the Playhouse,” 1764, 2 vols. 12mo; a work which, though imperfect, had considerable merit, and shewed that he possessed a very extensive knowledge of our dramatic authors and which has since (under the title of “Biographia Dramatica”) been considerably improved, first in 1782, by the late Mr. Isaac Reed, 2 vols. 8vo, and more recently, in 1812, enlarged and improved by Mr. Stephen Jones, so as to form 4 vols. 8vo. He died Feb. 16, 1767. Mr. Baker’s other son, Henry, followed the profession of a lawyer, and occasionally appeared as a poet and miscellaneous writer. In 1756 he published te Essays Pastoral and Elegiac,“2 vols. 8vo, and left ready for the press an arranged collection of all the statutes relating to bankruptcy, with cases, precedents, &c. entitled” The Clerk to the Commission," a work which is supposed to have been published under another title in 1768.

, a statesman of some note in the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and Mary, is said to have been the son of Thomas Baker, a Kentish gentleman, but his pedigree in the' college of arms begins with his own name. He was bred to the profession of the laws, and in 1526, when a young man, was sent ambassador to Denmark, in company with Henry Standish, bishop of St. Asaph, according to the fashion of those times, when it was usual to join in foreign negociations, the only two characters which modern policy excludes from such services. At his return he was elected speaker of the house of commons, and was soon after appointed attorney-general, and sworn of the privy council, but gained no farther preferment till 1545, when, having recommended himself to the king by his activity in forwarding a loan in London, and other imposts, he was made chancellor of the exchequer. Henry constituted him an assistant trustee for the minor successor, after whose accession his name is scarcely mentioned in history, except in one instance, which ought not to be forgotten he was the only privy counsellor who steadfastly denied his assent to the last will of that prince, by which Mary and Elizabeth were excluded from inheriting the crown. Sir John married Elizabeth, daughter and heir of Thomas Dinely, and widow of George Barret, who brought him two sons sir Richard (whose grandson was created a baronet) and John and three daughters Elizabeth, wife of Thomas Scott; Cecily, married to the lord treasurer Dorset, and Mary to John Tufton, of Heathfield in Kent. He died in 1558, and was bu ied at Sissingherst in Kent, where he had a fine estate, formerly belonging to the family of De Berham; and a noble mansion built by himself, called Sissingherst Castle, which remained with his posterity till the family became extinct about sixty years since, and has since bowed down its battlements to the unfeeling taste of the present day.

, grandson of the preceding, and son of John, the youngest son of sir John Baker by Catherine daughter of sir Reynold Scot of Scot’s hall in Kent, was born at Sissingherst in Kent, about the year 1568. In 1584, he was entered a commoner at Hart-hall in Oxford, where he remained three years, which he spent chiefly in the study of logic and philosophy. From thence he removed to one of the inns of court in London, and afterwards travelled abroad, in order to complete his education. In 1594, he was created master of arts at Oxford and in May 1603, received the honour of knighthood from James I. at Theobalds. In 1620, he was high-sheriff of Oxfordshire, having the manor of Middle-Aston and other estates in that county, and was also in the commission of the peace. He married Margaret, daughter of sir George Manwaring, of Ightfield in Shropshire, knight and having become surety for some of that family’s debts, was thereby reduced to poverty, and thrown into the Fleet prison, where he died Feb. 18, 1645, and was buried in St. Bride’s church, Fleet-street. He was a person tall and comely (says Mr. Wood), of a good disposition and admirable discourse, religious, and well-read in various faculties, especially in divinity and history, as appears from the books he composed.

His principal work was, his “Chronicle of the kings of England, from the time of the Romans’ government unto the death of king James,” Lond. 1641, fol. again in 1653, and 1658, to which last was added, the reign of Charles I. with a continuation to 1658, by Edward Phillips, nephew to the illustrious Milton. The fourth edition of 1665 has a continuation to the coronation of Charles II. The account of the restoration was principally written by sir Thomas Clarges, although adopted by Phillips. It was most severely criticised by Thomas Blount, in his “Animadversions upon sir Richard Baker’s Chronicle and its continuation,” and many errors are unquestionably pointed out, but it became a popular book, and a common piece of furniture in every ’squire’s hall in the country, for which it was not ill calculated by its easy style and variety of matter, and continued to be reprinted until 1733, when another edition appeared with a continuation to the end of the reign of George I. but still with many errors, although perhaps not of much importance to the “plain folks” who delight in the book. This is called by the booksellers the best edition, and has lately been advancing in price, but they are not aware that many curious papers, printed in the former editions, are omitted in this. The late worthy and learned Daines Barrington gives the most favourable opinion of the Chronicle. “Baker is by no means so contemptible a writer as he is generally supposed to be it is believed that the ridicule on this Chronicle arises from its being part of the furniture of sir Roger de Coverley’s hall” in one of the Spectators. Sir Richard’s own opinion probably recommended it to many readers he says that “it is collected with so great care and diligence, that if all other of our chronicles were lost, this only would be sufficient to inform posterity of all passages memorable, or worthy to be known.” He wrote also several other works 1. “Cato Variegatus, or Cato’s Moral Distichs varied; in verse,” Loud. 1636. 2. “Meditations and Disquisitions on the Lord’s Prayer,” Lond. 1637, 4to. The fourth edition of it was published in 1640, 4to. It was highly praised by sir Henry Wotton, who had studied with him in Hart-hall. 3. “Meditations and disquisitions on the three last Psalms of David,” Lond. 1639. 4. “Meditations and disquisitions on the fiftieth Psalm,” Lond. 1639. 5. “Meditations and disquisitions on the seven penitential Psalms, which are, 6, 32, 38, 51, 102, 130, 143,” Lond. 1639, 4to. 6. “Meditations and disquisitions on the first Psalm,” Lond. 1640, 4to. 7. “Meditations and disquisitions on the 'seven consolatory Psalms of David, namely, 23, 27, 30, 34, 84, 103, and 116,” Lond. 1640, 4to. 8. “Meditations and prayers upon the seven clays of the week,” Lond. 1640, 16 mo, which is supposed to be the same with his Motive of Prayer on the seven days of the week. 9. “Apology for Laymen’s writing in Divinity,” Lond. 1641, 12mo. 10. “Short meditations on the fall of Lucifer,” printed with the Apology. 11. “A soliloquy of the Soul, or a pillar of thoughts, &c.” Lond. 1641, 12mo. 12. “Theatrum lledivivun), or the Theatre vindicated, in answer to Mr. Pryone’s Histrio-mastrix, &c.” Lond. 1662, 8vo. 13. “Theatrum triumphans, or a discourse of Plays,” Lond. 1760, 8vo. 14. He translated from Italian into English, the marquis Virgilio Malvezzi’s Discourses on Tacitus, being 53 in number, Lond. 1642, fol. And from French into English, the three first parts of the “Letters of Monsieur Balzac,” printed at London, 1638, 8vo, and again in 1654, 4to, with additions, and also in 8vo. The fourth and last part seem to have been done by another hand the preface to it being subscribed F. B. Sir Richard wrote also his own life, and left it in manuscript but it was destroyed by one Smith, who married one of his daughters.

, an eminent mathematician in the seventeenth century, the son of James Baker of Ikon in Somersetshire, steward to the family of the Strangways of Dorsetshire, was born at Ikon about the year 1625, and entered in Magdalen-hall, Oxon, in the beginning of the year 1640. In April 1645, he was elected scholar of Wadham college and did some little servicb to king Charles I. within the garrison of Oxford. He was admitted bachelor of arts, April 10, 1647, but left the university without completing that degree by determination. Afterwards he became vicar of Bishop’s-Nymmet in Devonshire, where he lived many years in studious retirement, applying chiefly to the study of the mathematics, in which he made very great progress. But in his obscure neighbourhood, he was neither known, nor sufficiently valued for his skill in that useful branch of knowledge, till he published his famous book. A little before his death, the members of the royal society sent him some mathematical queries to which he returned so satisfactory an answer, that they gave him a medal with an inscription full of honour and respect. He died at Bishop’s-Nymmet aforementioned, on the 5th of June 1690, and was buried in his own church. His book was entitled “The Geometrical Key, or the Gate of Equations unlocked, or a new Discovery of the construction of all Equations, howsoever affected, not exceeding the fourth degree, viz. of Linears, Quadratics, Cubics, Biquadratics, and the rinding of all their roots, as well false as true, without the use of Mesolahe, Trisection of Angles, without Reduction, Depression, or any other previous Preparations of Equations, by a Circle, and any (and that one only) Farabole, &c.” London, 1684, 4to, in Latin and English. In the Philosophical Transactions, it is observed, that the author, in order to free us of the trouble of preparing the equation by taking away the second term, shews us how to construct all affected equations, not exceeding the fourth power, by the intersection of a circle and parabola, without omission or change of any terms. And a circle and a parabola being the most simple, it follows, that the way which our author has chosen is the best. In the book (to render it intelligible even to those who have read no conies), the author shews, how a parabola arises from the section of a cone, then bow to describe it in piano, and from that construction demonstrates, that the squares of the ordinates are one to another, as the correspondent sagitta or intercepted diameters then he shews, that if a line be inscribed in a parabola perpendicular to any diameter, a rectangle made of the segments of the inscript, will be equal to a rectangle rr.ade of the intercepted diameter and parameter of the axis. From this last propriety our author deduces the universality of his central rule for the solution of ai! 2 biquadratic and cubic equations, however affected or varied in terms or signs. After the synthesis the author shews the analysis or method, by which he found this rule which, in the opinion of Dr. R. Plot (who was then secretary to the royal society) is so good, that nothing can be expected more easy, simple, or universal.

, a very ingenious and learned antiquary, was descended from a family ancient and wellesteemed, distinguished by its loyalty and affection for the crown. His grandfather, sir George Baker, knt. to whom our author erected a monument in the great church at Hull, almost ruined his family by his exertions for Charles I. Being recorder of Newcastle, he kept that town, 1639, against the Scots (as they themselves wrote to the parliament) with a “noble opposition.” He borrowed large sums upon his own credit, and sent the money to the king, or laid it out in his service. His father was George Baker, esq. of Crook, in the parish of Lanchester, in the county of Durham, who married Margaret, daughter of Thomas Forster of Edderston, in the county of Northumberland, csq. Mr. Baker was born at Crook, September 14, 1656. He was educated at the free-school at Durham, under Mr. Battersby, many years master, and thence removed with his elder brother George, to St. John’s college, Cambridge, and admitted, the former as pensioner, the latter as fellow-commoner, under the tuition of Mr. Sanderson, July 9, 1674. He proceeded, B. A. 1677; M. A. 1681; was elected fellow, March 1680; ordained deacon by bishop Compton of London, December 20, 1685; priest by bishop Barlow of Lincoln, December 19, 1686. Dr. Watson, tutor of the college, who was nominated, but not yet consecrated, bishop of St. David’s, offered to take him for his chaplain, which he declined, probably on the prospect of a like offer from Crew, lord bishop of Durham, which he soon after accepted. His lordship collated him to the rectory of Long- Newton in his diocese, and the same county, June 1687; and, as Dr. Grey was informed by some of the bishop’s family, intended to have given him that of Sedgefieid, worth six or seven hundred pounds ayear, with a golden prebend, had he not incurred his displeasure, and left his family, for refusing to read king James the Second’s declaration for liberty of conscience. Mr. Baker himself gives the following account of this affair: “When the king’s declaration was appointed to be read, the most condescending thing the bishop ever did was coming to my chambers (remote from his) to prevail with me to read it in his chapel at Auckland, which I could not do, having wrote to my curate not to read it at my living at Long-Newton. But he did prevail with the curate at Auckland to read it in his church, when the bishop was present to countenance the performance. When all was over, the bishop (as penance I presume) ordered me to go to the dean to require him to make a return to court of the names of all such as did not read it, which I did, though I was one of the number.” But this bishop, who disgraced Mr. Baker for this refusal, and was excepted out of king William’s pardon, took the oaths to that king, and kept his bishopric till his death. Mr. Baker resigned Long-Newton August 1, 1690, refusing to take the oaths; and retired to his fellowship at St. John’s, in which he was protected till January 20, 1717, when, with one-and-twenty others, he was dispossessed of it. This hurt him most of all, not for the profit he received from it but that some whom he thought his sincerest friends came so readily into the new measures. particularly Dr. Robert Jenkin the master, who wrote a defence of the profession of Dr. Lake, bishop of Chichester, concerning the new oaths and passive obedience, and resigned his precentorship of Chichester, and vicarage of Waterbeach, in the county of Cambridge. Mr. Baker could not persuade himself but he might have shewn the same indulgence to his scruples on that occasion, as he had done before while himself was of that way of thinking. Of all his sufferings none therefore gave him so much uneasiness. In a letter from Dr. Jenkin, addressed to Mr. Baker, fellow of St. John’s, he made the following remark on the superscription “I was so then I little thought it should be by him that I am now no fellow; but God is just, and I am a sinner.” After the passing the registering act, 1723, he was desired to register his annuity of forty pounds, which the last act required before it was amended and explained. Though this annuity left him by his father for his fortune, with twenty pounds per annum out of his collieries by his elder brother from the day of his death, August 1699, for the remaining part of the lease, which determined at Whitsuntide 1723, was now his whole subsistence, he could not be prevailed on to secure himself against the act, but wrote thus in answer to his friend “I thank you for your kind concern for me; and yet I was very well apprized of the late act, but do not think it worth while at this age, and under these infirmities, to give myself and friends so much trouble about it. I do not think that any living besides myself knows surely that my annuity is charged upon any part of my cousin Baker’s estate or if they do, I can hardly believe that any one, for so poor and uncertain a reward, will turn informer or if any one be found so poorly mean and base, I am so much acquainted with the hardships of the world, that I can bear it. I doubt not I shall live under the severest treatment of my enemies or, if I cannot live, I am sure I shall die, and that’s comfort enough to me. If a conveyance will secure us against the act, I am willing to make such a conveyance to them, not fraudulent or in trust, but in as full and absolute a manner as words can make it and if that shall be thought good security, I desire you will have such a conveyance drawn and sent me by the post, and I'll sign it and leave it with any friend you shall appoint till it can be sent to you.” He retained a lively resentment of his deprivations and wrote himself in all his books, as well as in those which he gave to the college library, “socius ejectus,” and in some “ejectus rector.” He continued to reside in the college as commoner-master till his death, which happened July 2, 1740, of a paralytic stroke, being found on the floor of his chamber. In the afternoon of June 29, being alone in his chamber, he was struck with a slight apoplectic fit, which abating a little, he recovered his senses, and knew all about him, who were his nephew Burton, Drs. Bedford and Heberden. He seemed perfectly satisfied and resigned and when Dr. Bedford desired him to take some medicine then ordered, he declined it, saying, he would only take his usual sustenance, which his bedmaker knew the times and quantities of giving he was thankful for the affection and care his friends shewed him, but, hoping the time of his dissolution was at hand, would by no means endeavour to retard it. His disorder increased, and the third day from this seizure he departed. He was buried in St. John’s outer chapel, near the monument of Mr. Ash ton, who founded his fellowship. No memorial has yet been erected over him, he having forbidden it in his will. Being appointed one of the executors of his elder brother’s will, by which a large sum was bequeathed to pious uses, he prevailed on the other two executors, who were his other brother Francis and the hon. Charles Montague, to layout 1310l. of the money upon an estate to be settled upon St. John’s college for six exhibitioners. Mr. Masters gives a singular instance f his unbiassed integrity in the disposal of these exhibitions. His friend Mr. Williams, rector of Doddington, had applied to Mr. Baker for one of them for his son, and received the following answer

Mr. Baker likewise gave the college lOOl. for the consideration of six pounds a-year (then legal interest) for his life and to the library several choice books, both printed and ms. medals, and coins besides what he left to it by his will which were “all such books, printed and ms. as he had, and were wanting there.” All that Mr. Baker printed was, 1. “Reflections on Learning, shewing the insufficiency thereof in its several particulars, in order to evince the usefulness and necessity of Revelation, London, 1710,” which went through eight editions; and Mr. Boswell, in his “Method of Study,” ranks it among the English classics for purity of style; a character perhaps too high, yet it is a very ingenious work, and was at one time one of the most popular books in our language. Its principal fault is, that the author has too much depreciated human learning, and is not always conclusive in his arguments. 2. “The preface to bishop Fisher’s funeral sermon for Margaret countess of Richmond and Derby, 1708” both without his name. Dr. Grey had the original ms. of both in his own hands. The latter piece is a sufficient specimen of the editor’s skill in antiquities to make us regret that he did not live to publish his “History of St. John’s college, from the foundation of old St. John’s house to the present time; with some occasional and incidental account of the affairs of the university, and of such private colleges as held communication or intercourse with the old house or college collected principally from Mss. and carlied on through a succession of masters to the end of bishop Gunning’s mastership, 1670.” The original, fit for the press, is among the Harleian Mss. No. 7028. His ms collections relative to the history and antiquities of the university of Cambridge, amounting to thirty-nine volumes in folio, and three in 4to, are divided between the British Museum and thfe public library at Cambridge the former possesses twenty-three volumes, which he bequeathed to the earl of Oxford, his friend and patron the latter sixteen, in folio, and three in 4to, which he bequeathed to the university. Dr. Knight styles him “the greatest master of the antiquities of this our university;” and Hearne says, “Optandum est ut sua quoqn^ collectanea de antiquitatibus Cantabrigiensibus juris taciat publici cl. Bakerus, quippe qui eruditione summa judicioque acri et subacto polleat.” Mr. Baker intended something like an Athenae Cantabrigienses on the plan oLthe Athenae Oxonienses. Had he lived to have completed his design, it would have far exceeded that work. With the application and industry of Mr. Wood, Mr. Baker united a penetrating judgment and a great correctness of style, and these improvements of the mind were crowned with those amiable qualities of the heart, candour and integrity. He is very frequently mentioned by the writers of his time, and always with high respect. Although firm in his principles, he corresponded with and assisted men of opposite ways of thinking, and with the utmost readiness made them welcome to his collections. Among his contemporaries who distinguished themselves in the same walk with himself, and derived assistance from him, may be reckoned Mr. Hearne, Dr. Knight, Dr. John Smith, Hilkiah Bedford, Browne Willis, Mr. Strype, Mr. Peck, Mr. Ames, Dr. Middleton, and professor Ward. Two large volumes of his letters to the first of these antiquaries are in the Bodleian library. There is an indifferent print of him by Simon from a xnemoriter picture but a very good likeness of him by C. Bridges. Vertue was privately engaged to draw his picture by stealth. Dr. Grey had his picture, of which Mr. Burton had a copy by Mr. Ilitz. The Society of Antiquaries have another portrait of him. It was his custom, in every book he had, or read, to write observations and an account of the author. Of these a considerable number are at St. John’s college, and several in the Bodleian library, among Dr. Rawiinson’s bequests. A fair transcript of his select ms observations on Dr. Drake’s edition of archbishop Parker, 1729, was some time ago in the hands of Mr. Nichols. Dr. John Bedford of Durham had Mr. Baker’s copy of the “Hereditary Right,” greatly enriched by him. Dr. Grey, who was advised with about the disposal of the books, had his copy of Spelman’s Glossary. Mr. Crow married a sister of Mr. Baker’s nephew, Burton; and, on Burton’s death intestate in the autumn after his uncle, became possessed of every thing. What few papers of Mr. Baker’s were among them, he let Mr. Smith of Burnhall see and they being thought of no account, were destroyed, excepting the deed concerning the exhibitions at St. John’s, his own copy of the historyof the college, notes on the foundress’s funeral sermon, and the deed drawn for creating him chaplain to bishop Crew, in the month and year of the revolution, the day left blank, and the deed unsubscribed by the bishop, as if rejected by him.

, a learned printer, son of Mr. William Baker, a man of amiable character and manners, of great classical and mathematical learning, and more than forty years master of an academy at Reading, was born in 1742. Being from his infancy of a studious turn, he passed so much of his time in his father’s library as to injure his health. His father, however, intended to have sent him to the university, but a disappointment in a patron who had promised to support him, induced him to place him as an apprentice with Mr. Kippax, a printer, in Cullum- street, London, where, while he diligently applied to business, he employed his leisure hours in study, and applied what money he could earn to the purchase of the best editions of the classics, which collection, at his death, was purchased by Dr. Lettsom. This constant application, however, to business and study, again 'endangered his health, but by the aid of country air and medicine he recovered and on the death of Mr. Kippax he succeeded to his business, and removed afterwards to Ingram court, where he had for his partner Mr. John William Galabin, now principal bridgemaster of the city of London. Among his acquaintance were some of great eminence in letters Dr. Goldsmith, Dr. Edmund Barker, the Rev. James Merrick, Hugh Farmer, Caesar de Missy, and others. An elegant correspondence between him and Mr. Robinson, author of the “Indices Tres,” printed at Oxford, 1772, and some letters of inquiry into difficulties in the Greek language, which still exist, are proofs of his great erudition, and the opinion entertained of him by some of the first scholars. Such was his modesty, that many among his oldest and most familiar acquaintance were ignorant of his learning, and where learning was discussed, his opinion could never be known without an absolute appeal to his judgment. There are but two little works known to be his; 1. “Peregrinations of the Mind through the most general and interesting subjects which are usually agitated in life, by the Rationalist,” 12mo, 1770, a collection of unconnected essays, not, as hie biographer says, in the manner of the Rambler, but somewhat in the manner of a periodical paper. 2. “Theses GrifcciE et Latince selectse,” 8vo, 1780, a selection from Greek and Latin authors. He left behind him some manuscript remarks on the abuse of grammatical propriety in the English language in common conversation. He wrote also a few minor poems, which appeared in the magazines, and is said to have assisted some of his clerical friends with sermons of his composition. la the Greek, Latin, French, and Italian languages, he was critically skilled, and some knowledge of the Hebrew. He died after a lingering illness, Sept. 29, 1785, and was interred in the vault of St. Dionis Backchurch, Fenchurch-street, and an elegant Latin epitaph to his memory was placed on the tomb of his family in the church-yard of St. Mary, Reading, by his brother John.

, the most successful and celebrated experimental farmer ever known in England, was born at Dishley in Leicestershire, about 1725 or 1726. His grandfather and father had resided on the same estate since the beginning of the last century; and his father, who died about the year 1760, had the reputation of being a very ingenious farmer. Mr. Bakewell having conducted the Dishley farm several years before the decease of his father, began about fifty -five years ago, that course of experiments which has procured him such extensive fame. He originally adopted a principle, a priori, which was confirmed by the whole experience of his future life. Having remarked that domestic animals, in general, produced others possessing qualities nearly similar to their own, he conceived he had only to select from the most valuable breeds such as promised to return the greatest possible emolument to the breeder; and that he should then be able, by careful attention to progressive improvements, to produce a race of sheep, or other animals, possessing a maximum of advantage. Under the influence of this excellent notion, Mr. Bakewell made excursions into different parts of England, to inspect the various breeds, and to ascertain those which were best adapted to his purposes, and the most valuable 0f their kinds.

His next step was to select and purchase the best of all the sorts wherever they could be found and this selection, the result of several years experience, was the original stock from which he afterwards propagated his own. This excellent ground- work was alone fostered to its present unrivalled perfection by the persevering ingenuity and industry of Mr. Bakewell. About the year 1760, Mr. Bakewell sold his sheep, by private contract, at not more than two or three guineas each. Some time after he began to let some of his rams, and for a few seasons received only fifteen shillings and a guinea a-piece for them but as the fame of his breed extended itself, he advanced his prices, and by the year 1770 was enabled to let some of his rams for the season for twenty-five guineas. Since that time the prices and credit of his stock have been progressively increasing and of late years single rams have been let for the season for the enormous price of four hundred guineas and upwards. It is a fact which has no former example, that one ram, called the Two Pounder, produced in one season the sum of eight hundred guineas, independent of ewes of Mr. Bakewell' s own stock, which, at the same rate, would have made a total the produce of a single ram of twelve hundred guineas!

The first sale which we advert to was that of Mr. Fowler of Rollwright, in Oxfordshire. This gentleman had commenced his breeding-speculations with a couple of cows and a bull which he hired of Mr. Bakewell. After his death, one article of his live stock, the horned cattle, sold for a value equal to that of the fee simple of his farm Fifteen head alone of bulls and cows sold for 2464l. or at the rate of 164l. each!

The other auction was that of Mr. Paget, at Ibstock. Mr. Paget had been many years the intimate friend, and in the Breeding Society, a very eminent and successful colleague, of Mr. Bakewell. The sale of his stock was therefore looked up to with much eagerness by the public. At this sale, one bull sold for the sum of four hundred guineas (and a sixth share of the same has since been sold for one hundred), and a two-year old heifer for eighty- four! Two hundred and eleven ewes and theaves fetched 3315 guineas —on the average, seventeen guineas each; and one lot of five ewes was sold for 310 guineas!

Mr. Bakewell, at the time of his death, was verging on his seventieth year. As he had never been married, his business devolved to Mr. Honeyborn, his nephew, a gentleman possessed of genius and enterprise similar to that of his predecessor. In person Mr. Bakewell was tall, broad set, and, in his latter years, rather inclined to corpulence. His countenance bespoke intelligence, activity, and a high degree of benevolence his manners were frank and pleasing, and well calculated to maintain the extensive popularity he had acquired. His domestic arrangements at Dishley were formed on a scale of hospitality to strangers, that gained him universal esteem of the numerous vistants induced by curiosity to call at his house, none ever left it without having reason to extol the liberality of its owner. Many interesting anecdotes are related of his humanity towards the various orders of animals he continually deprecated the atrocious barbarities practised by butchers and drovers; shewing, by example on his own farm, the most pleasing instances of docility in the animals under his care. He departed this life on Thursday, October 1, 1795, after a tedious illness, which he bore with the philosophical fortitude that ever distinguished his character.

, of Sicily, was physician to pope Leo X. who had a high esteem for him. He was no less skilled in the belles lettres than in medicine and cultivated poetry and Greek with much success. He translated, from the Greek into Latin, several pieces of Galen; which were first printed separately, and afterwards inserted in the works of that ancient physician, published at Venice in 1586, in folio. He flourished at Rome about the year 1555.

, a Genoese Dominican, named also Janua or Januensis, composed, in the thirteenth century, Commentaries, and several >ther works. His “Catholicon, seu Summa Grammaticalis,” was printed at Mentz, 1460, folio, by Fust and Schceffer. He entitled it Catholicon, or Universal, because it is not a simple vocabulary, but a kind of classical encyclopaedia, containing a grammar, a body of rhetoric, and a dictionary. Notwithstanding that this book is badly digested, yet it was much wanted in the time of Balbi. A surprising number of copies were printed of it and it was one of the first books on which the art of printing was employed. It is very dear, and said to be very scarce, but the Diet. Hist, speaks of thirtysix copies being in existence. It was reprinted at Augsburgh, in 1469, fol. also a very rare book. This John Balbi is to be distinguished from Jerom Balbo, bishop of Goritz, who died at Venice in 1535, author of the following works: 1. “De rebus Turcicis,” Rome, 1526, 4to. 2. “De civili et beliica Fortitudine,” 1526, 4to. 3. “De futuris Caroli V. successibus,” Bologna, 1529, 4to. 4. “Carmina,” in the “Deliciae Poetarum Italorum,” and in 1792, Retzer published the whole under the title “Opera Poetica, Oratoria, ac Poetica-moralia,” Vienna, 2 vols. 8vo.

, a Spanish poet, was bishop of St. John in Porto Rico, in North America, to which he was appointed in 1620. He was a native of Valdepeguas, a village in the diocese of Toledo, took his doctor’s degree at Salamanca, from whence he was sent to America, and had the charge of judicature in Jamaica, and then was made bishop of Porto Rico. He was there when in 1625 it was plundered by the Dutch, who carried away his library. He died in 1627. He is reputed to be one of the first poets Spain has produced, although one of the least known. His productions are, a heroic poem, printed at Madrid, 4to, in 1624, entitled “El Bernardo, 6 Victoria de Roncesvalles;” ten eclogues, entitled “Siecle d‘or dans les bois d’Eriphile,” Madrid, 8vo, 1608; and a work in prose and verse, on “the grandeur of Mexico,” printed at the same place, 1604, 8vo. Antonio censures the age very severely for having neglected the writings of Bernard, in which he discovers great majesty and elevation of verse, a prolific invention, a pleasing variety, and a style not inferior in purity to that of any writer of the present age. His comparisons are just, and his descriptions rich and elegant, and lively beyond all the Spanish poets.

, an eminent German poet, was born at Ensisheim, in Alsace, in the year 1603. He entered the order of Jesuits in 1624, and after bestowing several years on the study of theology and the languages, became a preacher of note, even at the court of Bavaria. He was requested to write the history of Bavaria, and Leibnitz says he saw some parts of the performance but such was his attachment to the muses, that his history suffered many interruptions, while he gratified with eagerness those friends who asked him for poetical pieces. He died at Nieubourg, Aug. 9, 1663. His works are, 1. “Carmen panegyricum Henrico Ottoni Fuggero vellere aureo donate,” Augs. 1629. 2. “Francisco Andrew, comiti de Tilly, geniale ac praesagum carmen,” Ingold. 1631, 8vo. 3. “Maximilianus primus Austriacus,” Ingold. 1631, and Munich, 1639. This work is in prose and verse, and contains the history of Maximilian the First. 4. “Epithalamion Maximiliano Boiarioe duci et Marise Austriacae,” Munich, 1635. 5. “Hecatombe de vanitate mundi,” Munich, 1636, 8vo, in German and Latin. 6. “Poema de vanitate mundi,” Munich, 1638, 16mo, and 1651, 12mo. 7. “Batrachomyomachia Homeri, tuba Romana cantata, et in libros V distributa.” 8. “Interpretatio Homeric! poematis oratione soluta.” 9. “Usus Batrachomyomachix ethicus, politicus, et polemicus,” Ingold. 1637, and 1647, 12mo. 10. “Templum honoris apertum virtute Ferdinand! III. Austriaci, regis Romanorum,” Ingold. 1637, 8vo. 11. “Agathyrsus; encomii etbiGorum,” in Anacreontic verse, Munich, 1638, 24mo. 12. “Ode Parthenia, sive de laudibus beatae Mariae Virginis,” in German, Munich, 1638 and 1647. 13. “Olympia sacra in stadio Mariano, sive certamen poeticum de laudibus beatse Mariae Virginis super ode Parthenia Germairica,” Cologne. 14. “Lyricorum lib. IV. Epodon lib. I.” Munich, 1643, but a more correct and complete edition was published by Bleau at Amsterdam, which has, however, Cologne in the*title, 1646, 12mo. 15. “Sylvae Lyricae,” Munich, 1648, 12rao. Cologne (i.e. Amsterdam, Bleau), 12mo. 16. “Medicinas gloria per Satyras XXII. asserta prcemittitur hymnus in laudem sanctorum Cosmae etDamiani.” 17. “Vultuosae torvitavis encomium, in gratiam philosophorum et poetarum explication, cum dissertatione de studio poetico.” 18. “Satyra contra abusnm tabaci.” 19. “Antagathyrsus, apologia pro pinguibus,” in heroic verse, Munich, 1643 and, 1651, 12mo. 20. “Poesis osca, sive drama Georgicum, in quo belli mala, pacis bona carmine antique, aetellano, osco, casco,” Munich, 1647, 4to. 21. “Chorea mortalis, sive Lessus in obitu augustissimae imperatrices Leopoldinae, Caesari Fernandino III. nuptae an. 1648, in puerperio mortuae anno 1649,” Munich, 1649, Latin and German. 22. “Jephtias, tragcedia,” Amberg, 1654, 8vo. 23. “Eleonorae Magdalenae Theresiae Neoburgicae genethliacon,” Nieubourg, 1655. 24. “Musae Neoburgicae in ortum J. G. J. Ignatii ducis Neoburgici,” Nieubourg, 1658. 25. “Paraphrasis lyrica in Philomelam sancti Bonaventurae.” 26. “Poematum tomi IV.” 1660, 12mo, an incorrect collection of odes, epodes, and lyric pieces. 27. “Solatium podagricorum,” Munich, 1661, 12mo. 28. et De eclipsi solari anno 1654, die 12 Augusti a pluribus spectata tubo optico, iterum a Jacobo Balbe tubo satyrico perlustrata lib. duo,“Munich, 1662, 12mo. 29.” Urania victrix, sive animse Christianae certamina adversus illecebras quinque sensuum corporis sui,“Munich, 1663, 8vo. This work, which is in elegiac verse, gave so much pleasure to pope Alexander VII. that he sent the author a gold medal, a very considerable mark of regard from one who was himself a good Latin poet. 30.” Paean Parthenius, sive hymnus in honorem S. Ursulas et sociarum martyrum,“Cologne, 1663, 8vo. 31.” Expeditio polemico-poetica sive castrum ignorantise, a poetis veteribus ac novis obsessum, expugnatum, eversum.“32.” Apparatus novarutn inventionum et thematum scribendorum," Munich, 1694, 12mo. who object to the style and taste of some of his works, allow that if he had not written too rapidly, he might have attained great excellence and reputation.

, a French historian, a native of Orleans, according to some writers, or of Mehun, a small town on the Loire, according to others, -flourished in the twelfth century. He was abbé of Bourgueil, in 1089, bishop of Dol, in Britanny, in 1114, and 1115 he received the pallium from pope Paschal II. at the council of Rheims. About the year 1095, he had assisted at the council of Clermont, held upon account of the holy war, of which he wrote a history in four books, from its commencement to the taking of Jerusalem by Godfrey of Boulogne in 1099. He wrote also various works of the historical kind in verse and prose, with the life of Robert D'Abrissel, founder of the order of Fontevraud. Michael Cosnier, curate of Poitiers, published an edition of this life, with very curious notes and Du Chesne has printed Balderic’s poems in the fourth volume of his collection of French writers. Balderic is said to have died Jan. 7, 1131, but this does not agree with his epitaph, which says that he was bishop of Dol twenty-two years, to which, as mentioned above, he was appointed in 1114.

, born at Urbino in the year 1553, was made abbot of Guastalla in 1586, without any solicitation of his own. He began his studies with the mechanics of Aristotle, and a course of history he had also made verses but, on being appointed abbot, he applied himself entirely to the canon law, the fathers, the councils, and to the oriental languages. He died in 1617, with the reputation of a very laborious man, who understood sixteen several languages. We have by him a great number of tracts on mechanics, as “De tormentis bellicis et eorum inventoribus;” “Commentaria in mechanica Aristotelis,” 1582. “De Verborum Vitruvianorum significatione.” “Novæ Gnomonices, lib. V.” 1595. “Vitæ Mathematicorum, &c.” Some of these are to be seen in the Vitruvius of Amsterdam, 1649, folio. “Versi e Prose,” Venice, 1690, 4to. Crescembini put his fables into Italian verse, Rome, 1702, 12mo. He had begun an historical and geographical description of the world, in all its parts; but he did not live to finish this great undertaking.

, a celebrated lawyer of the fourteenth century, was a native of Perugia, and the son of Francis Ubaldi, a learned physician, who had him educated with great care. After studying philosophy and belles lettres, he became the pupil of Bartolus in law studies, and afterwards was his powerful rival. He taught law himself at Perugia, where he had for his scholar cardinal Peter Beaufort, afterwards pope Gregory XI. He next became professor at Padua, from which the duke of Milan invited him to the same office at Pavia. He died April 28, 1400, aged 76, of the consequences of the bite of a favourite cat, a circumstance thus expressed on his epitaph:

, an eminent German physician, was born at Erfurt, May 18, 1738. During the seven years’ war, he had the direction of the military hospital belonging to the Prussian army, and after the conclusion of peace, the landgrave of Hesse Cassel appointed him his first physician. He was afterwards professor of medicine at Gottingen and Marpurg, where he died Jan. 2, 1804. He wrote very copiously on the subject of his profession 1. “A treatise on the Diseases of the Army,” 1774, 8vo. 2. A species of periodical work or “Magazine for Physicians,” 3 vols. 1779 1799. 3. “Sylloge opusculorum selectorum argument! medicopract.” 4to, Gottingen, 1776 1782, and some other works; and he edited an edition in German, of Boerner’s lives of physicians.

, an Italian count, and a man of learning, was a native of Placentia, where he was born July 3, 1654. After studying philosophy and the classics in the college of St. Francis Xavier at Bologna, he went to Rome, and passed through a course of theology, law, and mathematics. He was so pleased with Rome as to determine to take up his abode there and when the pope offered him the‘ place of nuncio at Brussels, and in Poland, he preferred a life of literary employment. Some time after, however, he accompanied cardinal d’Estrees to Paris, and the marchioness of Montecuculi to St. Germain and afterwards went to Poland, to be present at the election of a successor to king John Sobieski, then deceased. In 1698, duke Francis, of Parma, sent him to Madrid, as his deputy; and in 1710 Sophia Dorothy duchess of Placentia employed him in the same honourable office at Vienna, and at several courts in Germany, England, and Utrecht. On his return, he passed the rest of his life in a retired manner, and died Feb. 23, 1725. When in England he was elected a member of the royal society, with M. Bianchini. His rich cabinet of natural history, and his extensive library, were always open to men of learning, many of whom he assisted in their pursuits with great liberality. We know of none of his writings, except a discourse on the maps in the Atlas Historique, published at Amsterdam in 1719.

, a learned Italian antiquary and philosopher, was born at Brescia in 1677, and died at Tivoli in 1765. He entered early into the congregation of the regular clerks, and arrived at their highest dignities. His works, all in ItaHan, were, 1. “Sopra le forze moventi.” 2. “Relazione dell' Aurora Boreale, veduta in Roma,” 1737, both inserted in “Calogerae opusculis philologis.” 3. “Dissertazione sopra certi Vasetti di creta trovati in una camera sepolcrale nella Vigna di S. Cesario, in Roma.” 4. “Dissertazione sopra un‘ antica piastra di bronzo, che si suppone un’ Orologie da sole:” these two are inserted in “Saggi de Dissertation! di Cortona,” vol. II. and III. He published an edition of Vaillant’s Numismata Imp. Romanorum, Rome, 1743, 4to, to which Khella published a supplement in 1767, Vienna. He was also author of remarks on Anastasius Bibliothecarius’s lives of the popes.

, of Florence, an useful biographer of the academy of la Crusca, was born in 1624. Having acquired great knowledge in painting and sculpture, and made many discoveries by studying the works of the best masters, he was qualified to gratify cardinal Leopold of Tuscany, who desired to have a complete history of painters. Baldinucci remounted as far as to Cimabue, the restorer of painting among the moderns and he designed to come down to the painters of the last age inclusive. He only lived to execute part of his plan, which was published in his life-time, in 3 vols. After his death (in 1696), three more appeared, and a new edition of the whole in ^1731. The work, without being free from errors, is a valuable addition to Vasari. He published also, in Italian, a “Treatise on Engraving, and the lives of the principal Engravers,” 1686, 4to.