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

He seems now to have quitted politics, and to have betaken himself, in a great measure, to learned and theological inquiries; for, in 1718, he published a work of about one hundred and fifty pages in 8vo, with this long title, “Nazarenus or Jewish, Gentile, or Mahometan Christianity containing the history of the ancient Gospel of Barnabas, and the modern Gospel of the Mahometans, attributed to the same apostle, this last Gospel being now first made known among Christians. Also, the original plan of Christianity occasionally explained in the Nazarenes, whereby divers controversies about this divine (but highly perverted) institution may be happily terminated. With the relation of an Irish manuscript of the four Gospels, as likewise a summary of the ancient Irish Christianity, and the reality of the Keldees (an order of lay religious) against the two last bishops of Worcester.” We make no observation upon this work: the reader knows enough of Toland to conclude that it was not written with any friendly view to revelation. He published the same year “The Destiny of Rome; or, the speedy and final destruction of the Pope,” &c.

In 1720 Dr. Hare, then dean of Worcester, published a fourth edition of his visitation sermon, entitled “Church authority vindicated,” &c, and subjoined a postscript, in which, speaking of bishop Hoadly’s writings, he has the following stroke at Mr. Toland: “It must be allowed his lordship judges very truly, when he says they are faint resemblances of Mr. Chillingworth for envy itself must own his lordship has some resemblance to that great man, just such a one as Mr. Toland has to Mr. Locke, who, in 4 Christianity not mysterious,' is often quoted to support notions he never dreamed of.” Toland, upon this, advertised against Dr. Hare, that he never named Locke in any edition of that book, and was so far from often quoting him, that he had not so much as brought one quotation out of him. This was true, and Hare immediately corrected himself by another advertisement, in which he directs, “makes great use of Mr. Locke’s principles,” to be read, instead of, “is often quoted to support notions he never dreamed of.” Dr. Hare’s advertisement occasioned the publishing of a pamphlet with this title, “A short essay upon Lying, or, a defence of a reverend dignitary, who suffers under the persecution of Mr. Toland, for a lapsus calami.”

Upon a dispute between the Irish and British houses of lords, with respect to appeals, when the latter ordered a bill to be brought in for the better securing the dependency of the kingdom of Ireland upon the crown of Great Britain, Mr. Toland published “Reasons most humbly offered to the House of Commons, why the bill sent down to them should not pass into a Law,” 1720. About this time he printed a profane Latin tract, entitled “Pantheisticon: sive, formula celebrandae sodalitatis Socraticae, in tres particulas divisa: quae Pantheistarum, sive sodalium, continent; I. Mores et axiomata. 2. Numen et philosophiam. 3. Libertatem et non fallen tern legem neque fallendam. Prsemittitur de antiquis et novis eruditorum sodalitatibus, ut et de universo infinito et seterno, diatriba. Subjicitur de duplici Pantheistarum philosophia sequenda, ac de viri optirni et ornatissimi idea, dissertatiuncula. Cosmopoli, MDCCXX.” He had subscribed himself a Pantheist, as we have seen, in a pamphlet published in 1705, and here we have his doctrines and his creed explicitly set forth: “In. mundo omoia sunt unum, unumque est omne in omnibus. Quod omne in omnibus, Deus est; geternus ac imraensus, neque genitus, neque interiturus. In eo vivimus, movein ur, et existimus. Ab eo natum est unumquidque, in eumque denuo revoluturum; omnium ipse principium et finis.” This is Pantheism, that is, it is atheism, or there is no such thing. The author knew it very well; and fear* ing lest he migh; have gone too far, he got it printed se-< cretly, at his own charge, and but a few copies, which he distributed with a view of receiving presents for thent. There is a short preface to this piece, under the name of Janus Junius Eoganesius; which, though it was his true Christian name, and the name of his country, luis-Eogan being the place of his birth, yet served for as good a cover as any whatever, nobody in England being acquainted with these particulars.

Some time after, but in the same year, 1720, he published another learned work, of about 250 pages in 8vo, including the preface, entitled “Tetradymus.” This is divided into four parts, each of which has a distinct title. The first is called “Hodegus; or, the pillar of cloud and fire that guided the Israelites in the Wilderness, not miraculous, but, as faithfully related in Exodus, a thing equally practised by other nations, and in those places not only useful, but necessary/' The second is called” Clydophoras; or, of the exoteric and esoteric philosophy;“that is, of the external and internal doctrine of the ancients; the one open and public, accommodated to popular prejudices and the established religions; the other private and secret, wherein, to the few capable and discreet, was taught the real truth, stripped of all disguises. There is more display of learning in this dissertation than in any work produced by Toland; though they all of them display learning where the subject admits it. The title of the third is,” Hypatia; or, the history of the Philosophic Lady, who was murdered at Alexandria, as was supposed at the instigation of the clergy. “The fourth is called” Mangoneutes;" or, A defence of Nazarenus against Dr. Mangey, who had attacked it. In the last of these tracts he inserted his advertisement against Dr. Hare, with the doctor’s answer.

In 1721, Dr. Hare published a book, entitled“Scripture vindicated from the Misrepresentations of the lord bishop of Bangor;” in the preface of which, speaking of the Constitutions of Carolina, he observes, that, by one of the articles, none are excluded from settling in that country upon account of their opinions, “but downright atheists,” says he, “such as the impious author of the Pantheisticon;” and, at the bottom of the page, he refers us to a profane prayer, composed by T6!and, a more perfect copy of which he afterwards, upon farther intelligence, inserted in the errata. The prayer runs in these terms: “Omnipotens & sempiterne Bacche, qui humanam societatem max u me in bibendo cotisiiumii; concede propitius, ut istorum capita, qui hestern& compotatione gravantur, hodierna leventur; idque fiat per pocula poculorum. Amen.” Des Maizeaux, however, affirms, that it was not composed by To­)and, who knew nothing of it; but by a persoo whose name he forbears, on account of his profession; though he believes he only designed it as a ridicule on Mr. Toland' s club of Pantheistic philosophers, whom he injuriously imagined to be all drunkards, whereas they are grave, sober, and temperate men. This year, 1721, Toland published, and it was the last thing he published, “Letters of lord Shaftesbury to Robert Moles worth, esq.” afterwards lord Molesworth, with a large introduction by himself, 8vo.

He had, for above four years past, lived at Putney, from whence he could conveniently go to London, and come back the same day; but he used to spend most part of the winter in London. Being in town about the middle of December, he found himself very ill, having been out of order for some time before: his appetite and strength failed him; and a physician, who was called to him, made him worse, by bringing a continual vomiting and looseness upon him. He made a shift, however, to return to Putney, where he grew better, and had some hopes of recovery. In this interval, he wrote “a dissertation to prove the uncertainty of physic, and the danger of trusting our lives to those who practise it.” He was preparing some other things, but death put an end to all his purposes, the llth of March, 1722, in his fifty-second year. We are told that he behaved himself, throughout the whole course of his sickness, with a true philosophical patience, and looked upon death without the least perturbation of mind, bidding farewell to those about him, and telling them, “he was going to sleep.” Some few days before he died, he wrote his own epitaph.

Toland was a man of uncommon abilities, and, perhaps, the most learned of all the infidel writers; but his system being atheism, if to own no God but the universe be atheism^ he was led to employ those great parts and learning, very much to the offence and injury of society. Vanity, and an immoderate desire to distinguish himself, were predominant qualities in his composition, and his character in many other respects was far from being a desirable one, for neither were his morals pure, npr his manners amiable. In his political career, he had all the selfishness of the common hireling.

At the end of Des Maizeaux’s life there is “An Elegy on the late ingenious Mr. Toland,” which, that biographer says, was published a few days after his death; and be adds, that it was a matter of doubt with some, whether the author intended to praise or ridicule him. Few things can be more weak than Des Maixcaux’s own defence of Toland. There is a considerable collection of To land’s Mss. in the British Museum (Ayscough’s Catalogue), but of little real Talue.

, a learned cardinal, was born in 1532, at Cordova, and appointed professor of philosophy in the university of Salamanca at the early age of fifteen, which is not remarkable if, according to Dominic Soto, who was his master, he was a “monster of genius.” Having afterwards entered the Jesuits’ order, he was sent to Rome, where he taught theology and philosophy with reputation, and philosophised after the genuine manner of the Peripatetic school. Paul V. chose father Tolet for his preacher, and he held the same office under the succeeding pontiffs, with that of theologian in ordinary, besides being entrusted with several important commissions. Pope Gregory XIII. appointed him judge and censor of his own works, and Clement VIIL raised him to the cardinalate in 1594, being the first Jesuit who held that dignity. He is said to have been a lover of justice and equity, and laboured with great zeal and success to reconcile Henry IV. with the court of Rome. He died in that city in 1596, aged sixty-four. Henry IV. out of gratitude, ordered a solemn service to be performed for him at Paris and at Rouen. This learned cardinal left several works, the principal are “Commentaries on St. John,” Lyons, 1614, fol.; “On St. Luke,” Rome, 1600, folio “On St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans,” Rome, 1602, 4to “A Summary of cases of conscience, or instruction for priests,” Paris, 1619, 4to, translated into French, 4to, and a great number of other treatises.

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

She was honoured with the friendship of sir Isaac Newton, who was much pleased with some of her first essays. It has been observed, that a few of her poems have such a philosophical cast, and so great a depth of thought, that they will scarce be understood by common readers. Her Latin poems are also written in a truly classical taste. She would not suffer her works to appear till she herself was beyond the reach of envy or applause. They abound with sentiment and simplicity, and yet are far from being destitute of spirit and poetical ornament.

Her estate, which was a considerable one, she left to her youngest nephew. Her eldest nephew, Gkorge Toilet, of Betley, in Staffordshire, but formerly of Lincoln’s-inn, who was well known for his valuable notes on Shakspeare, died Oct. 21, 1779. “He was,” says Mr. Cole, " a fellow-commoner of King’s college, and my contemporary about 1745; ashy, reserved man, and of no genteel appearance or behaviour.

, a physician and very learned man, was a native of Ingra, in the territory of Utrecht; and taught the belles lettres in his own country with great reputation and profit for some time. In 1684, the marquis of Brandenburg appointed him professor of eloquence and the Greek tongue. He made several journeys into different parts of Germany, Hungary, and Italy; of which he has given some account in a posthumous work, published under the title of “Epistolae Itinerant, by Henninius, at Amsterdam, 1700, in 4to. It is said there are some useful and curious things in these epistles. Tollius was the editor of two ancient authors, of” Ausonius, cum notis variorum, 1671,“8vo; and of” Longinus, 1694,“4to, with a Latin version in the same page, and Boileau’s French version in the opposite. On reading this excellent edition Gibbon pronounced Tollius to be,” though a commentator, a man of taste and genius.“Much, however, cannot be said for his judgment, as the title of the following work may shew:” Fortuita sacra, in quibus prseter critica nonnulla tola fabularis historia Grasca, Phoenicia, Ægyptiaca, ad chymiam pertinere asseritur, 1687," 8vo. He pushed this extravagant notion so far as to seek for the secrets of chymistry and the philosopher’s stone in the fables of Paganism. This does not shew a very sound judgment; yet there is a great deal of learning, and some curious things, in his book. He died in 1696.

He had a brother, named Cornelius Tollius, who was also a very learned man. He was born at Utrecht, and in the beginning of his life was an amanuensis to Isaac Vossius: he was afterwards professor of eloquence and the Greek tongue at Harderwic, and secretary to the curators of the academy. He published an “Appendix to Pierius Valerian us’s treatise De Infelicitate Literatorum,” Amst. 1707, 12mo; and an edition of “Palaephatus,” which last is a scarce and valuable work. Alexander Tollius was also brother to the two persons above mentioned, and is known in the literary world by an edition of “Appian,” 1670, 2 vols. 8vd, which is much esteemed.

, a brave English officer, was descended of a family said to be more ancient than the Norman conquest. He was the son of sir Lionel Tolmach of Helmingnam in the county of Suffolk, bart. by Elizabeth, daughter and heir of William Murray, earl of Dysart, afterwards married to John, duke of Lauderdale. His talents and education were improved by his travels, in which he spent several years, and after he entered into the army, distinguished himself so much by skill and bravery, as very soon to acquire promotion. But L| the reign of James If. whose measures he thought hostile to the true interests of the kingdom, he resigned his commission, and went again abroad. The same political principles inclining him to favour the revolution, he was, on the accession of William III. appointed colonel of the Coldstream regiment, which had been resigned by William, carl of Craven, on account of his great age and infirmities; and was soon advanced to the rank of lieutenant-general. In 1691, he exerted himself with uncommon bravery in the passage over the river Shannon, at the taking of Athlone in Ireland, and in the battle of Aghrim. In 1693, he attended king William to Flanders, and at the battle of Landen against the French, commanded by marshal Luxemburg, when his majesty himself was obliged to retire, the lieutenant-general brought off the English foot with great prudence, resolution, and success. But, in June the year following, he fell in the unfortunate attempt for destroying the harbour of Brest in France. He had formed this desigrt, and taken care to be well instructed in every circumstance relating to it. Six thousand men seemed to be more than necessary for taking and keeping Cameret, a small neck of land, which lies in the mouth of and commands the river of Brest. The project and the preparations were kept so secret, that there was not the least suspicion till the hiring of transport-ships discovered it. A proposition for that purpose had indeed been made two years before to the earl of Nottingham; who, among other things, charged admiral Russel with having neglected that scheme, when it was laid before him by some persons who came from Brest. Whether the French apprehended the design from that motion, or whether it was now betrayed to them by some who were in the secret; it is certain, that they had such timely knowledge of it, as put them upon their guard. The preparations were not quite ready by the day that had been fixed; and when all was ready, they were stopt by a westerly wind for some time; so that they arrived a month later than was intended. They found the place well fortified with many batteries, which, were raised in different lines upon, the rocks, that lay over the place of descent; and great numbers were posted there to dispute their landing. When the English fleet came so near as to see all this, the council of officers declared against making the attempt; but the lieutenant-general was so possessed with the scheme, that he could not be diverted from it. He imagined, that the men they saw were only a rabble brought together to make a shew; though it proved, that there were regular bodies among them, and that their numbers were double to his own. He began with landing of six hundred men, and put himself at the head of them, who followed him with great courage; but they were so exposed to the enemies’ fire, and could do them so little harm, that the attempt was found absolutely impracticable. The greatest part of those, who landed, were killed or taken prisoners; and not above an hundred of them came back. The lieutenant-general himself was shot in the thigh, of which he died in a few days, extremely lamented. Thus failed a design, which, if it had been undertaken before the French were so well prepared to receive it, might have been attended with success, and followed with very important effects. In this manner bishop Burnet represents the affair, who styles the lieutenant-general a brave and generous man, and a good officer, very fit to animate and encourage inferior officers and soldiers. Another of our historians speaks of this affair in somewhat a different strain, declaring, that the lieutenantgeneral “fell a sacrifice in this desperate attempt, being destined, as some affirmed, to that fall by the envy of some of his pretended friends.” His body was brought to England, and interred on the 30th of June, 1694, at Helmingham in Suffolk.

According to Dr. Brady, general Tolmach was “singularly remarkable for all the accomplishments of a gentleman; his conversation familiar and engaging, his wit lively and penetrating, his judgment solid and discerning; and all these adorned with a graceful person, a cheerful aspect, and an inviting air. And if we consider him as a soldier, he was vigorous and active; surprisingly brave in the most dangerous emergencies, and eagerly catching at all opportunities, in which he might signalize his courage without forfeiting his judgment. But with all this ardour of an invincible courage, he was not of an uneasy turbulent disposition, or apt to be engaged in idle quarrels; for as the sweetness of his nature, and the politeness of his education, hindered him from offering an affront to any man; so the modest sense which he had of his own merit, would not suffer him to suspect that any was intended him. In short, he may justly be characterized under the titles of a complete gentleman, a zealous lover of his country, and an excellent general.”

, an Italian prelate and biographer, was born at Padua, Nov. 17, 1597, of a noble family, originally of Lucca. He was instructed in Greek, Latin, and logic, by the learned divine and lawyer, Benedetti, of Legnano, and afterwards entered the congregation of the regular canons of St. George, in Alga, where he studied philosophy and theology, and received the degree of doctor in the latter faculty at Padua, in 1619. He would then have made profession, but the rules of the congregation not permitting it, he employed himself in the composition of his various works. At length his merit advanced him to the first situations in his order; and when he went to Rome, as visitor, he was very favourably received by many persons of eminence, and especially by pope Urban VIII. who would have appointed him to a bishopric in the island of Candy, but at his own request this was exchanged for the see of Citta Nuova, in Istria, to which he was consecrated in 1642. Study and the care of his diocese occupied the whole of his time until his death in 1654, in the fifty-seventh year of his age.

He wrote, 1. “Illustrium viror.ucn Elogia iconibus exornata,” Padua, 1630, 4to. Th portraits in this volume (which is by no means uncommon in this country) amounting to forty-five, are well engraven, and taken from pictures in his collection. The lives or eloges are short, but accurate. He published a second volume in 1644, but this is less common. 2. “Titus Livius Patavinus,” ibid. 1630, 4to; a life of Livy, of which a much improved edition was published at Amsterdam in 1670. He published also other single lives, and had intended a biography of all the authors of Padua, but published only a “Prodromus Athenarum Patavinarum,” 1633, 4 to. 3. “Petrarcha redivivus integratn Poetae celeberrimi vitam iconibus aere cselatis exhibens,” ibid. 1635, 4to, and reprinted with additions in 1650. 4. Clarissimae fceminae Cassandra Fidelis Venetae epistolae et orationes posthumae,“&c. ibid. 1636, 12mo. 5.” De Donariis ac Tabellis votivis liber singulari.*,“Utin. 1639, 4to, reprinted and enlarged, at Padua, 1654, 4to, and inserted by Graevius in the 12th volume of his Roman antiquities. 6.” Laurae Ceratae Epistolae, cum notis et vita,“&c. Padua, 1640, 12mo. 7.” Bibliothecae Patavinac Manuscriptae publicae et privatae, quibus diversi scriptores hactenus incogniti recensentur,“ibid. 1639, 4to. 8.” BibJiothecae Venetae Mss. publicae et privatae,“Utin. 16.50, 4to. He wrote some other works on the antiquities of Padua, and closed his labours with his” Gymnasium Pat.ivinum," 1654, 4to, a kind of history of the university of Padua.

, one of the most learned Baptist divines of the seventeenth century, was born at Bewdley in Worcestershire in 1603 and, being intended for the church, was educated at the grammar-school, where he made such proficiency as to be thought fit for the university at the age of fifteen. He was accordingly sent to Magdalen-hall, Oxford, at that time, and William Pcmble was his tutor. Here he acquired such distinction for talents and learning, that on his tutor’s death in 1624, he was chosen to succeed him in the catechetical lecture in Magdalen-hall. This he held with great approbation for about seven years, during which he was, amongst other pupils, tutor to Mr. Wilkins, afterwards bishop of Chester. He then, we may presume, took orders, and went to Worcester, and after that to Leominster in Herefordshire, of which he had the living, and became a very popular preacher, and when the living was found insufficient for a maintenance, lord Scudamore. made some addition to it. Tombes was, says his biographer, among the first of the clergy of those times who endeavoured a reformation in the church, that is, was an enemy to the discipline or ceremonies, for which he suffered afterwards, when the king’s forces came into that country; and being in 1641 obliged to leave it, he went to Bristol, where the parliamentary general Fiennes gave him the living of All Saints. When Bristol was besieged by prince Rupert, the year following, he removed again to London with his feu mily, and there first communicated to some of the West* minster divines, his scruples as to infant-baptism, and held conferences with them on the subject, the result of which was, that he made no converts, but was more confirmed in his own opinions, and a sufferer too, for, being appointed preac-her at Fenchurch, his congregation not only refused to hear him, but to allow him any stipend. From this dilemma he was relieved for a time by a call to be preacher at the Temple-church, provided he would abstain, in the pulpit, from the controversy about infant-baptism. To this he consented on these terms: first, that no one else should preach for the baptising of infants in his pulpit; and, secondly, that no laws should be enacted to make the denial of infant-baptism penal. All this being agreed upon, he continued to preach at the Temple for four years, and was then dismissed for publishing a treatise against infant-baptism. This was construed into a breach of his engagement, but he endeavoured to defend it as necessary to his character, he being often attacked in the pulpit for those opinions. on the subject which he had communicated to the Westminster assembly, although they had neither been published, or answered, by that learned body.

After this he accepted an invitation from the people of Bewdley, his native place, to be their minister; and there he not ojily publicly avowed his sentiments, but formed a biptist church, or sect, while he continued minister of tho parish, and had also the parsonage of Ross given to him. This last he resigned on being made master of Ledbury hospital, and his parishioners at Bewdley having forsaken him on account of his opinions on baptism, he was restored to his first living at Leominster; and that and Bewdley, amidst all the disaffection of the parishioners, he held till the Restoration. Notwithstanding his differing in opinion with the generality of his brethren, he was, in 1653, ap-. pointed one of the triers, or those appointed to examine and approve candidates for the ministry. In this office he appears to have procured a sort of toleration for the baptists, for at the restoration several of that persuasion were found in possession of livings.

In the mean time he was often called to defend his prin-% ciples in public disputations, which were then much the fashion, and it is said that Baxter and others who differed most from him, paid due respect to his learning and argumentative powers. At the restoration, he gladly hailed the monarchical government, and wrote a treatise to justify the taking the oath of supremacy; but being disappointed in his expectations from the new government, he resigned his livings, and the exercise of his ministry altogether, which he could do without personal inconvenience, as he had married an opulent widow at Salisbury, by whom he enjoyed a good estate. Offers were made to him, if he would conform, but his sentiments on the subject of baptism were insuperable. In all other fespects, he not only conformed to the church as a lay communicant, but wrote a treatise to prove the lawfulness of so doing. He appears to have had the good opinion of eminent men of his time, of all ranks and persuasions, of lord Clarendon, and the bishops Barlow, Sanderson, and Ward, and of Baxter and Calamy. Wood says “that there were few better disputants in his age than he was;” and Nelson, in his Life of bishop Bull, says, *' It cannot be denied but that he was esteemed a person of incomparable parts.“In 1702 a singular compliment was paid to him by the House of Lords, in their conference with the Commons relative to the bill for preventing occasional conformity. In proving that receiving the sacrament in the church does not necessarily import an entire conformity, they bring him as an instance,” There was a very learned and famous man that lived at Salisbury, Mr. Tombes, who was a very zealous conformist in all points but one, infant -baptism" He died at Salisbury, May 22, 1676, and was buried in St. Edmund’s church-yard. Aubrey has several anecdotes creditable to his learning and liberality. His works are numerous, but chiefly in defence of his opinions on infant baptism. He wrote also some tracts against the quakers, the papists, and the Socinians.

, a learned Italian scholar, was born at Venice, of an Albanian family, in 1456. He studied Greek at Florence, and made such progress, that be became able to explain Aristotle in the original language. For this purpose he was invited to Padua in 1497. He was brought up to the church, and taught the learned languages at Venice, but in 1520 he returned to Padua, where he gave instructions to cardinal Pole. He was much attached to the Platonic philosophy, and passed his time remote from worldly pursuits, and solely intent upon his studies. Bembo, Jovius, and others, speak of him with great esteem, and Erasmus mentions him with honour, as a man equally respectable for the purity of his morals and the profundity of his erudition. He died in 1531, and was buried in the church of St. Francis, at Padua. He translated several of the works of Aristotle, Proclus’s Commentary on the Timaeus of Plato, and other treatises of the ancient philosophers. He wrote ten dialogues on subjects, philosophical and moral, a work “De Varia Historia,” and some Italian poems.

, a learned cardinal, son of Julius Tommasio, or Tomrnasi, duke of Palma, was born at Alicata in Sicily, Sept. 14, 1649. Having from his infancy placed himself under the protection of the holy virgin, he assumed in the greater part of his works the name of Joseph Mariacarus . The same veneration led him to imitate the virtues of his protectress by taking the vow of chastity, and although the eldest son of an illustrious house, he chose to follow the example of an uncle and four sisters, who had renounced the world and all its honours. He entered the society of the Theatins, and became distinguished by his austere piety and mortifications. He did not neglect human learning however, but applied with great diligence to the Greek, Hebrew, and Chaldaic languages, as well as to philosophy and ancient literature, but his favourite study was theology, church history, and especially the history of the offices and liturgies, valuable editions and collections of which he published from time to time. Cardinal Albani, who had a great regard for him, when he became pope appointed him first, qualificator of the holy office, then consultor of the congregation of the rites, and lastly cardinal in May 18, 1712; but this last honour he did not long enjoy, dying Jan. 1, 17 13, in the sixty-fourth year of his age.

, a learned English schoolmaster, was the second of five sons of Benjamin Tooke, citizen and stationer of London, and born in 1673. He was educated at the Charterhouse-school, and in 1690 sent to Clare-hall in Cambridge, where he took both the degrees in arts, that of B. A. in 1693, and of M.A. in 1697. In 1695, he was chosen usher of the Charterhouse-school; and, in 1704, professor of geometry in Gresham college, in the room of Dr. Hooke; being recommended by a testimonial from the master, Dr. Burnet, and other officers of the Charterhouse. In Nov. following, he was chosen a fellow of the Royal Society. In 1723, several thousand pounds were left him by his elder brother, Mr. Benjamin Tooke, a bookseller in Fleet-street; yet, notwithstanding this addition to his fortune, he still held his place of usher in the Charterhouse-school, and was preferred to the mastership of the school in 1728; and, the year after, married the widow of Dr. Henry Levett, physician to the Charterhouse. He then, as he was obliged by the statutes, resigned his professorship of Gresham, and from that time attended no other business but his school. This began to be too much for him, for he had some years before declined in his health, till at length he fell into a dropsy, which carried him off, Jan. 20, 1731, in his fifty-eighth year. He was buried in the Charter-house*chapel, in the middle of which is placed a white marble monument, in the form of a shield, against a pillar, with a Latin inscription upon it; to his memory. He had taken deacon’s orders, and sometimes preached, but devoted himself principally to the instruction of youth, for which he was no less fitted by his temper than learning.

He published some things for the benefit and assistance of youth: as, “Synopsis Grsecas linguae;” “Ovid’s Fasti,” from the Delphin edition, with an English interpretation and notes; and, “The Pantheon, or history of the heathen gods.” This book was first written in Latin by Francis Pomey, a Jesuit, and translated into English by one who conceals his name under initial letters. This translation was afterwards revised and corrected, with the addition of a new index, cuts of the deities, and other improvements, by Mr. Tooke; and the tenth edition, printed in 1726, was adorned with new cuts, copied from the sixth Latin, edition, published at Utrecht by Samuel Pitiscus, in 1701. Mr. Tooke translated PuffendorPs “Whole Duty of Man according to the law of nature,” with the notes of Barbeyrac, into English; and bishop GastrelP* “Institutes of the Christian Religion,” into Latin. The supplement to the account of Gresham college, inserted in the second appendix of “Stow’s Survey of London,” was written by him, and given to the editor Mr. Strype.

, of Popes, in the county of Hertford, esq. born about 1595, was sent in the unfortunate expedition against Cadiz in 1625, as captain of a band of volunteers, sir Edward Cecil being both admiral of the fleet, and also lieutenant-general and lord marshal of the land-forces. On Sept. 3, they joined the fleet at Plymouth, where sir Samuel Argol, who had been employed with 28 sail against the Dunkirkers, came up with the admiral, and brought nine of their ships as prizes. Here they waited so long for the arrival of the king (who knighted several of the officers), that they did not weather the Lizard till Oct. 9; and were 13 days reaching Cadiz, occasioned by a tempest, which Mr. Tooke, who appears to have been a considerable actor in the expedition, has well described in a poem, of which it may be observed, en passant, that the versification is perfectly in the vitiated taste of the times in which it was written; but the thoughts are just and manly, the poetry strong and nervous, and the imagery every where correspondent and true. In a mixture of prose and verse, Mr. Tooke proceeds to describe the various distresses of the fleet, both in their fruitless attack and unsuccessful search of the plate-fleet. “Loud complaints,” says Hume, “were made against the court, for entrusting so important a command to a man like Cecil, whom, though he possessed great experience, the people, judging by the event, esteemed of very slender capacity.” Nor did their misfortunes cease with their voyage. A severe mortality attended the ships after their arrival at Plymouth. “For my own peculiar,” says Mr. Tooke, “though outwardly I held up, and fair awhile after, yet this forbearance wrought so little quittance, that several diseases (hence contracted) laid at length such peremptory fetters of a warm bed and a cautious diet over me, that I was compelled to retire, and verse myself out of that profession which I had formerly been versed in for several years together.”

The manor of Popes had been in this family from 1483. Mr. Thomas Tooke sold it in 1664 to Stephen Ewre and Joshua Lomax; and they the next year to Daniel Siiottorden, of Eltham in Kent, esq. He sold it to col. Thomas Taylor; and Taylor to sir David Mitchel, who gave it to his lady for life, and afterwards to his nephew John Mitchel, esq. who was not many years ago the possessor. They were likewise lords of the manor of Wormley in Hertfordshire, and patrons of the rectory. For, we find by the records, that Henry VIII. at the dissolution of the monastery of Ecclesia Sanctse Crucis de Waltham, or Waltham Holy Cross, granted the manor of Wormley, and the advowson of the rectory, to Edward North and his heirs, at the rent of 1l. 13s. per ann. He sold it to Elizabeth Woodcliffe, from whom it came to William Woodcliffe of London. This William, by Elizabeth his wife, daughter of Fisher of Longworth, left a daughter Angelot, married to Walter Tooke, of Popes, in Hatfield, esq. This Angelot, as appears by her epitaph on the north side of the chancel of Wormley church, was a second daughter, in right of whom her husband presented to the living alternis vicibus. It appears by Mr. Purvey’s epitaph, who married lord Denny’s sister, that he also was patron alternis vicibus. Hence it has been conjectured, that Mr. Purvey’s father, John, married the elder sister; and they were sharers, in right of their wives, both of the manor and advowson, till it fell entirely to Tooke, upon the elder sister’s death. The Purveys presented twice, and the Tookes four times; and the first presentation was Purvey’s, as probably marrying the elder sister. Ralph Tooke succeeded his father Walter, and, dying without issue, was buried at Essingdon, and divided the estate between his brothers George and John. George sold his part to Richard Woollaston, esq. who was gun-founder to Oliver Cromwell. He left a jon John; and John, a son Richard, who conveyed it to “William Fellows, esq. whose eldest son Coulston Fellows, csq. succeeded to it. This- Ralph Tooke died December 22, 1635, aged seventy-seven years. He married Jane, the daughter of Edward Byth, of Smallfield in the county of Surrey, esq. She died Dec. 8, 1641. George Tooke, our author, who had the other moiety, called Wormleybury, died possessed of it in 1675, aged eighty years. His device was a hedge-hog; and under it his family motto,” Militia mea multiplex.“On which in his old age he wrote,” A key to the Hedge-hog combatant and my motto."

, S. T. P. was born in East-Kent, the son of Mr. Thomas Tooke, of the family of the Tookes of Beere. His father and grandfather were hearty sufferers in the royal cause. Their enterprising zeal was severely punished by the prevailing party, and acknowledged at the restoration by such rewards as royal hands, tied down by promise and compositions, could afford. His education was first at St. Paul’s school, chiefly under the care of Mr. Fox, to whom he owed many obligations, and to whose family he was a constant and generous benefactor. Thence he went to Corpus-Christi-college, Cambridge; and while bachelor of arts was chosen fellow; the learned Dr. Spencer, and the body, having a just regard to his talents and improvement. It was about this period that he engaged in the school of Bishop-Stortford, whose reputation was then in ruins, and had nothing to recommend it but the name of Leigh, not yet out of mind. At the request of Dr. Tooke, a new school was built by contributions of the gentlemen of Hertfordshire and Essex, and of the young gentlemen who had been educated at Bishop- Stortford. The school was thus raised to a great degree of fame, as the numbers of gentlemen, sent by Dr. Tooke to his own and other colleges, attested; and considerably increased the trade of the town, by such a beneficial concourse. He revived the annual school-feast here, and charged his estate with a yearly present to the preacher on that occasion. Dr. Tooke gave also to this school-library a tegacy of ten pounds for books, which are added to it and procured a great number of valuable authors from gentlemen that were his scholars. By his interest and care the gallery in the church, for the use of the school, was erected. He gave by will to this church a chalice of 20l. value; and died May 4, 1721, after more than thirty years intent and successful labours here. He was buried in the parishchurch of Lamborn in Essex, of which he had been rector from 1707.

, a man of very considerable literary abilities, but more famous as a political adventurer, was the son of John Home, a poulterer in Newport-market, and was born in Newport street in June 1736. He was educated both at Westminster and Eton schools, and after remaining at these seminaries about five or six years, was sent to St. John’s college, Cambridge, in 1755, which he quitted in 1758, after taking his bachelor’s degree. Little seems to be known of his conduct or proficiency in his studies, but his future works showed that the latter could not have been neglected; nor have we much accurate information as to his proceedings when he left college, dates, evidently wrong, being assigned by all who have professed to give any account of him. We can only, therefore, say generally that he was for some time an usher at Mr. Jennings’s school at Blackheath, that he took deacon’s orders at the request of his father, who had probably given him a learned education with that view, and that he first served a curacy in Kent. His own choice is said to have been the law, for which he was well qualified, but he was unable to resist the importunities of his family, and therefore entered into the church, for which he undoubtedly was the most unfit man that ever disgraced the profession. This was a radical error in his outset, and eventually the cause of much of the obloquy which attended his life. It is, as a very acute writer has observed, very necessary to keep steadily in view, in order to form a correct and candid estimate of his character, “that he was from beginning to end, a man labouring under great, perpetual, irremoveable civil disabilities.” It was a real misfortune to a man of an enterprizing disposition, and one regardless, as Home Tooke was, of the means by which such a disposition may be indulged, to become a member of an order, in which propriety and duty enjoin a sparing and partial interference with the concerns of the world, and in which, if propriety and duty are found too feeble restraints, the law interposes with a strong arm, to curb profane activity and unprofessional exertions.

The die, however, was cast. In 1760, Mr. Tooke received priest’s orders, and was inducted to the chapelry of New Brentford, which his father had purchased for him. In what manner he performed the duties of this office, we have no certain information. What he thought of his profession is less doubtful. In one of his letters to Wilkes, whom he hoped to gratify by such a declaration, he says, “It is true I have suffered the infectious hand of a bishop to be waved over me whose imposition, like the sop given to Judas, is only a signal for the devil to enter but I hope I have escaped the contagion and, if I have not, if you should at any time discover the black spot under the tongue, pray kindly assist me to conquer the prejudices of education and profession.” This letter was written while he was travelling in France as tutor to the son of Mr. Elwes of Berkshire; and on this expedition he threw off every external appearance of the clerical character, which, however, he resumed on his return, and for some time continued to officiate at Brentford.

Soon after his return he found his friend Wilkes a candidate to represent the county of Middlesex, and not only supported his pretensions, but pledged his credit for his expences, and in the hearing of his parishioners, declared that, “in a cause so just and so holy, he would dye his black coat red.” He also laid hold of other opportunities to acquire a name with the party in opposition to the court. Among these schemes he supported the widow Bigby in an appeal of blood. Two brothers, named Kennedy, had murdered Bigby, a watchman, and were capitally convicted, but afterwards pardoned. It was suggested that this lenity was procured through the interest of their sister, a well-known courtezan, with a nobleman high in office. If such was the fact, and it has often been asserted, and never sufficiently contradicted, the royal mercy could not have been worse directed, nor through a more disgraceful course. But in this affair, Mr. Home was disappointed, for the woman accepted a compensation in money, and desisted from her suit; and he, suspecting that the late Mr. Murphy had negociated the arrangement, hated him till the time of his death. His activity was also shown in some affairs arising out of election slaughters, particularly in the instances of Allen, Balfe, and M'Quirk. He was chosen a freeman of Bedford, to vex and oppose the duke of Bedford; he is said to have prompted the sheriffs in their proceedings respecting the execution of two rioters, Doyle and Valine: and he suggested the verbal reply which alderman Beckford made to the king, recorded ou the monument of that magistrate in Guildhall. He became also the founder of the “Society for supporting the Bill of Rights,” but this eventually terminated in his disgrace, as much at least as he could be disgraced by a separation from Wilkes. In 1770 and 1771, these two patriots amused the public by an epistolary controversy, illustrative of both their characters; but while these letters amused, they also perplexed the public, for it became a matter of great difficulty to ascertain which was the best, or rather which was the worst character of the two. The origin of the quarrel, however, was not discreditable to Mr. Home. His first objection was that the “Society for supporting the Bill of Rights” was, become merely an instrument for paying Wilkes’s private debts, and this objection might have been fatal to a society that had the public good only in view; but Wilkes finally triumphed for the society of the Bill of Rights, like others since, never took private character into consideration,

In 1771, he went to Cambridge for the purpose of taking the degree of M. A. which was granted to him, although opposed by some of the members, and particularly by the afterwards celebrated Dr. Paley. He now returned, and mixed, as much as he could, in the temporary politicks of the day. It would be as tedious as useless to revive the memory of all his newspaper effusions. The most finished specimen of his composition is probably to be found in two or three letters written in answer to the attacks of Junins: and he had the honour, which in those days was deemed no inconsiderable one, of being the only knight that returned with his lance unbroken from a combat with that unknown but terrible champion. If he wants the exquisite polish and the brilliant invective of his adversary, that dexterous malignity which comes in with such effect to blacken a character by insinuation, after invective has exhausted its powers; and above all, that well-sustained tone of austere dignity which gives to Junins the air and authority of a great personage in disguise; he is superior to him in facility, vivacity, and that appearance of plainness and sincerity which is of such importance in controversial writings. Soon after these controversies he resigned his living at Brentford, and, as far as he could, the clerical character. That he could not do so altogether, evidently soured his temper for the rest of his life, and prompted him to those sallies of profaneness, and that general conduct, which showed his contempt for the profession and every thing that belonged to it. He now studied the law, with an intent to practise; and while thus employed, an incident occurred which was important to his future fortune. This was his rendering a service to a Mr. Tooke of Purley in Surrey, in the case of an inclosure-bill, who, in gratitude, made him his heir; but he did not reap the full benefit of this intention, and it is said that first and last all he received from Mr. Tooke amounted to no more than 8000l. It was on this account, however, that some time afterwards, he assumed the name of Tooke. The particulars of this cause are related with so little attention to facts by most of his biographers, that we have not thought it necessary to attempt reconciling the different accounts of a matter now of comparative insignificance.

In 1775, Mr. Home having published an advertisement, accusing the king’s troops of barbarously murdering the Americans at Lexington, he was prosecuted and tried at Guildhall, where he pleaded his own cause; but even in those factious days, the libel was too gross for success, and being found guilty, he was sentenced to an imprisonment of twelve months in the king’s bench, and a fine of 200/, It was in consequence of this verdict, that he wrote a “Letter to Mr. Dunning,” which contained the germ of his subsequent philological work. In this, says the acute writer, whom we have already quoted, “he comes hot from the court of King’s Bench to discuss the nature of particles, of which, it seems, a shameful ignorance, on the part of the judges, had just been manifested in a verdict against him. His head is never clear from the politics of the day long enough to write five pages together without alluding to them: and he constantly rouses his readers from calm meditation upon the origin of but and to andyhwi, by smart epigrams upon the natural objects of his hostility, the prime minister and the chief justice for the time being.”

When released from imprisonment, he attempted to be called to the bar, but was rejected. His friends are willing to impute his rejection to jealousy, but for this there seems no foundation. His general character, and his clerical orders, of which he could not divest himself, afford a more reasonable excuse for the conduct of the benchers. It may be supposed, however, that this event would exasperate his antipathies. “He could not be a lawyer, and therefore he resisted the law, and reviled those who administered it.” A habit of hatred, if we may so speak, had grown up with Mr. Tooke, and was undoubtedly strengthened by his numerous disappointments, and that mediocrity of rank, to which with all his talents and all his bustle, he was confined in the political world. The same temper rendered him unjust to almost every species of excellence in his contemporaries. “He hated Dr. Johnson, he hated Mr. Burke, he hated lord Mansfield, he hated Mr. Pitt, he hated Mr. Fox, and he spoke of them without any of that respect or forbearance which great talents and high station, and the esteem of the greatest part of the world, generally extort from less resolute or less acrimonious adventurers. The Ishmael of literature and politics, his hand was against every man, and every man’s hand against his.”

In 1780, he published an invective against the war, called “Facts,” in which Dr. Price supplied two chapters on finance; but the war was soon over, and Mr. Tooke became a farmer in Huntingdonshire; but making no figure in this employment, he returned to London at a time when the contests between the administrations of Mr. Pitt and Mr. Fox promised a wide field for his exertions. This produced “A Letter on Parliamentary Reform,” in which he is the advocate for universal suffrage; and he sided with Mr. Pitt against Mr. Fox, whom he considered as disgraced by the coalition. It may be here mentioned, although out of chronological order, that in 1788 he published “Two Pair of Portraits;” the figures in which were the two Pitts and the two Foxes, of the past and present generation, the preference being given to the Pitts; but praise was not much in Mr. Tooke' s way; and in a few years both Pitt and Fox shared his aversion alike.

In 1786 he published an octavo volume, entitled “Epea Pteroenta, or the Diversions of Purley,” which has given him a considerable rank in the literary world, although opinions were long at variance on the merit of his system, which he afterwards expanded in two volumes, quarto. It seems now generally agreed that this work evinces ingenuity and research; and has served to illustrate some passages hitherto little understood in our ancient poets. It is a mistake, however, to suppose that the idea originated with Mr. Tooke: that all language is reducible to nouns and verbs (the point which he has laboured to establish with respect to the English tongue), was perfectly well known to the philosophical grammarians of antiquity: “Aristoteles duas parte.s orationes esse dicit, vocabula et verba,” says Varro, “De Lingua Latina.” This principle Mr. Tooke has successfully applied in the analysis and etymology of a multitude of English words, especially conjunctions and prepositions, by tracing them to their Saxon original. His speculations, however, though undoubtedly curious, have neither opened to us any new views of the human understanding, nor have they at all extended the limits of metaphysical or logical science, as his admirers wished the world to believe; while his work, professing to be a grammatical treatise, was most preposterously used as the vehicle, of political invective; and, as occasion offered, was made subservient to other purposes still more reprehensible. The disquisition upon the word right is ingeniously contrived to confound all moral distinctions, if the common honesty of mankind did not rest upon some surer foundation than the conclusions of an etymologist of his principles.

In 17yO, Mr. Tooke offered himself as a candidate to represent the city of Westminster, in opposition both to Mr. Fox and lord Hood, and on the hustings from day to day displayed that kind of oratory which was likely to gain the affections of a mob. He did not, however, succeed, although he polled near 1700; but it afforded him an opportunity of sending a petition to the House of Commons, filled with coarse invective, which was declared frivolous and vexatious. His next memorable appearance was at the bar of the Old Bailey, where he was tried in 1794 for high treason. The history of the trial is too recent to require a particular detail. It is well known he was acquitted, and that the event to him was no small triumph. There was no sufficient proof of the charge; and as he knew himself to be perfectly safe, he displayed, on his trial, a degree of coolness, presence of mind, wit and subtlety, which astonished and delighted a great portion of his hearers. Even his adversaries have allowed that he was endowed with every species of courage, active and passive,personal and political, although some of them have expressed his courage by the more offensive word, impudence. When it was reported that, upon being committed to the Tower, his spirit had failed, and he had burst into tears, Wilkes expressed great surprize, and said, “I knew he was a knave, but I never thought him a coward.” On his trial indeed he endeavoured as much as possible to keep principles out of view, and to prove that if he did associate with men of factious designs, it was only to laugh at them; and it is certain that after he made his escape on this memorable occasion, he employed his powers of ridicule, which were very strong, against many of that character whom he met with in other houses, or entertained in his own.

In 1796 he appeared again as a candidate for Westminster, in opposition to sir Alan Gardner, but not in conjunction with Mr. Fox, and although not successful, polled 2819 votes, without expence, or any other solicitation than the speeches he delivered from the hustings. At length, however, in 1801 he obtained what appeared to have been his fond aim, a seat in the House of Commons, an antipathy against which assembly, it has been said, was one of his earliest, strongest, and most enduring feelings. The errors of representation had been long a standing topic with him, and rotten boroughs and corruption his never-failing accusations. But, like others, he seemed at last to think that there was no harm in taking advantage of the present system as long as it lasted. The borough of Old Sarum, offered to him by a young and almost insane nobleman, and which had been a bye-word among parliamentary reformers, had the singular honour of returning him to parliament, and he took his seat, apparently, without any scruple as to the number or quality of his constituents; nor did his dislike to the present order of things reach its utmost height, till all the doors of the House had been finally barred against him by an act of the legislature. In the mean time the expectations excited by his election were completely disappointed. He made no figure in parliament that answered either the hopes or wishes of his friends; and he bad not sat long before his incapacity, as being a priest, was called in question, and it was proposed to expel him. The then minister, Mr. Addington, now lord Sidmouth, was of opinion that a milder course would be more proper, and therefore brought in a declaratory act, effectually preventing a repetition of the abuse; and Mr. Tooke was permitted to sit till the dissolution of parliament in 1802, and then to retire without the renown of martyrdom. His last appearance as the busy, meddling politician, was in the case of a Mr. Paull, a man without birth, property, education, or public services, who offered himself as a candidate for Westminster. This man he first supported, and afterwards deserted. The consequences to this unhappy candidate are well known, but as they involve the characters of persons yet living and perhaps reclaimable, we shall pass them over in silence.

Mr. Tooke died at his house at Wimbledon, March 19, 1812, in the seventy-seventh year of his age. He desired that no funeral service should be said over his remains, but that they should be deposited in a vault in his garden. This injunction, however, as his house was to be sold, was dispensed with by his executors, and he was buried in a vault at Baling church. He was never married, but left natural children, to whom he bequeathed his property.

In spite of labour and dissipation his life was protracted to a period which indicated an originally sound and vigorous frame. For the last twenty years, however, he was subject to severe, distressing, and incurable infirmities. These he bore with a patience and firmness which it was impossible not to admire. What remains untouched of his character shall be given nearly in the words of a writer to whom we have already been indebted, and who appears, of all who have written on the subject, to have appreciated his character with most candour and impartiality.

"Mr. Tooke was possessed of considerable learning, as indeed his writings sufficiently show. To other more casual acquirements he united a very extensive acquaintance with the Gothic dialects, of which he has so copiously and so judiciously availed himself in his etymological researches; and it seems probable that the leading ideas of his philosophical work first presented themselves to his mind whilst he was pursuing this comparatively unfrequented track of literature. He was extremely well versed in the law, a science, which both in theory and practice was particularly congenial to his mind, and which he had once studied with professional accuracy in the hope of being called to the bar. We are unable to state with precision what was the amount of his attainments in classical learning, but we apprehend he by no means possessed that accurate acquaintance with the literature of ancient Greece and Rome, which is necessary to constitute a great scholar, in the ordinary acceptation of the term. He was familiar with all our best writers, most so with those of an early date. His knowledge of modern languages was considerable, and he was particularly well read in Italian authors. On the whole, exclusively of philosophy and politics, he would have passed for a very accomplished man.

"One of the taxes which men pay for being eminent is to have their private as well as their public conduct made the subject of criticism: we shall therefore offer no apology for adding a few such remarks as our information enables us to supply upon that of Mr. Tooke. In the essential particulars of truth, honour, and justice, in all that, in a popular sense, forms the morality of a gentleman, he stood, we believe, unimpeached; at least no charge against him for the violation of it was ever substantiated, although he lived for half a century exposed to the public eye, and beset by the vigilant hostility of active and powerful enemies. His great fault, as a private man, was a libertinism, in his habits and discourse, which ill became his character, his profession, and, latterly, his age. It may seem an uncharitable suspicion, but we are really afraid that the tendency of which we complain, was rather increased than checked by the profession to which, however unwillingly, he belonged. He had a sort of spite at all its restraints. Many of them he never could throw off; but he was anxious to show that in licentiousness at least he could be a layman.

"In the ordinary intercourse of life he was kind, friendly, and hospitable. We doubt whether his temper was naturally good; but if it was not, he had a merit the more; for he had so completely subdued it by care and self-controul, as never to betray, under any provocation, the slightest mark of that irritability which often accompanies talent, and which gains so rapidly upon those who know not how to guard against its approaches. Indeed the aspect under which he appeared in private was by no means such as the stern cynicism and ferocious turbulence of his public conduct would have led one to expect; and those, whose opinion of him has been formed exclusively upon his political character and his writings, will have some difficulty in believing that the curate of Brentford was one of the best-bred gentlemen of the age. In this respect he was a sort of phenomenon. He was born in a low station: at no period did he appear to have possessed any remarkable advantages for the study of good breeding; on the contrary, the greater part of his life was spent in constant intercourse with coarse, vulgar, and uneducated men. Yet his natural taste was so

good, and he had profited so judiciously by whatever opportunities he enjoyed, that courts and high stations have seldom produced a better example of polite and elegant behaviour than was exhibited by the associate of Messrs. Hardy and Thelwall. Indeed his manner had almost every excellence that manner can display grace, vivacity, frankness, dignity. Perhaps, indeed, in its outward forms, and in that which is purely conventional, his courtesy wore the air of the ‘ vieille cour,’ and was rather more elaborate than is consistent with the practice of this lounging unceremonious age: but it was never forced or constrained, and it sat not ungracefully upon an old man."

Mr. Tooke’s talents in conversation have been always praised by those who knew him, and never praised too highly. He possessed an inexhaustible fund of anecdotes, which he introduced with great skill, and related with neatness, rapidity, and pleasantry. His principal fault as a companion was “a love of paradox, and a tendency to disputation which led him continually to argue for the mere sake of victory, and in evident contradiction to his own real opinion a practice quite insufferable when adopted, as it often is, by persons of ordinary understanding, and who only flatter themselves that they possess the acuteness with which Mr. Tooke was really endowed, and to which we must own, that even his liveliness, native ingenuity, and felicity of illustration, could never wholly reconcile us.” He possessed a rich vein of humour, sometimes coarse, but always striking, comic, and original. His speeches afforded some good specimens of it to the public, and he indulged in it still more freely in private. Perhaps, indeed, it may be fairly objected to him, that his conversation was hardly ever quite serious; and that, what with paradox, and what with irony, it was not easy to get at his true meaning. The truth seems to be, that he comforted himself for not having a larger share in the business of the world, by laughing at every body and every thing it contained^ His sceptical disposition probably kept his mind unsettled upon many important facts as to which the generality of men entertain more fixed opinions, and he was therefore ready to espouse either side with equal zeal and equal insincerity, just as accident or caprice inclined him at the moment. There were other subjects on which he was accustomed to speak more positively, but on which we are apt to suspect that his esoteric doctrines were very different from those which he taught to aldermen, shoemakers, and other patriotic persons. On such occasions he could not have been in earnest. He must have seen through the designs of those with whom he was acting he must have loathed their vulgarity he must have despised their folly. We are aware how severe a censure upon his honesty this opinion implies, but we really think that a fair estimate of the strength of his understanding can lead to no other conclusion." These remarks applied very forcibly to many whom he admitted to his table, when company became necessary to him, sciolists and pretenders in philosophy and politics, some of whom he delighted to ridicule even to their faces, and this with an art, a force, and a pleasantry, which were absolutely irresistible. On such occasions, had they been present, Mr. Tooke would have suspended the prejudices, and caught the admiration of his most inveterate enemies.

, a learned antiquary, was a native of Malton, in Yorkshire and, in an humble situation under the late Philip Carteret Webb, esq. solicitor to the treasury, acquired such a knowledge of ancient hands and muniments as raised him to a place in the state-paper office, with his friends and patrons, the late sir Joseph AyiofFe, bart. who died in his arms, and Thomas Astle, esq. He was also one of the gentlemen engaged in preparing for the press the six volumes of the Rolls of Parliament; an office in which he succeeded his friend Richard Blyke, esq, with whom, in 1775, he was joint editor of Gianville’s “Reports of cases of controverted Elections determined and adjudged in parliament, 21 and 22 Jac. I.” 8vo. To this is prefixed an historical account of the ancient rights of determining cases upon controverted elections. He was also editor, if not translator, of an English edition of sir John Fortescue’s “De laudibus Legum Anglise,” 1775, 8vo. On Mr. Webb’s death he entered himself at Gray’s Inn; applied to the study of the law; was called to the bar, and appointed a commissioner of bankrupts. He succeeded Dr. Lort as keeper of the archbishop of Canterbury’s library at Lambeth; was secretary to the commissioners for selecting and publishing the public records of this kingdom; and registrar to the charity for relief of poor widows and children of clergymen, and treasurer to the orphan charity-school. He married, in 1794, one of the coheiresses of the late Mr. Swindon, an eminent and opulent schoolmaster at Greenwich, in Kent. Mr. Topham’s publications in the Archaeologia are, vol. VI. p. 116, on Esnecca, or the King’s Yacht, in a charter of Henry II.; ibid. 179, on the picture in Windsor castle representing the embarkation of Henry VIII. at Dover; VII. 337, on a subsidy roll of 51 Edward III. The wardrobe account of 21 Edward I. was published by the society in 1787, under his direction; and he was one of the committee for publishing other wardrobe accounts, in “A collection of Ordinances and Regulations for the government of the Royal Household, in divers reigns, from Edward III. to William and Mary,” 1790, 4to. Mr. Topham was elected F. S. A. in 1767, and treasurer (on the death of Mr. Bartlet) in

1787, and was also elected F. R. S. in 1779. He died at Cheltenham, Aug. 19, 1803.

, a strenuous champion for the Calvinism of the church of England, was born at Farnham, in Surrey, Nov. 4, 1740. His father was Richard Toplady, esq. a captain in the army, and his mother, Catharine Bate, sister to the late Rev. Julius Bate, and to the rev. Mr. Bate, rector of St. Paul’s, Deptford,by whom they were married, at the said church, on Dec. 31, 1737. They had issue one son, Francis, who died in his infancy, and afterwards the subject of our memoir. His godfathers were Augustus Middleton, and Adolphus Montague, esqrs.; in respect to whom, he bore the Christian name of the one, and the surname of the other. His father died at the siege of Carthagena, soon after his birth. He received the rudidiments of his education at Westminster school; but, it becoming necessary for his mother to take a journey to Ireland to pursue some claims to an estate in that kingdom, he accompanied her thither, and was entered at Trinity college, in Dublin, at which seminary he took his degree of bachelor of arts. He received orders on Trinity Sunday, the 6tli of June, 1762; and, after some time, was inducted into the living of Broad Hembury in Devonshire. Here he pursued his labours with increasing assiduity, and composed most of his writings. He had for some years occasionally visited and spent some time in London; but, in 1775, finding his constitution much impaired by the moist atmosphere of Devonshire, with which it never agreed, he, removed to London entirely, after some unsuccessful attempts to exchange his living for another, of equivalent value, in some of the middle counties. In London, by the solicitation of his numerous friends, he engaged the chapel, belonging to the French reformed, near Leicester-fields; where he preached twice in the week, while his health permitted, and afterwards occasionally, as much as, or rather more than, he was well able to do. He died Aug. 11, 1778. His body was buried, agreeable to his own desire, communicated to some friends, in Tottenham-court chapel. It is supposed that his intense application to study, which he frequently pursued through the night to three and four o'clock in the morning, was the means of inducing his disorder, and of accelerating his end. From this severe pursuit, so long as his body was able to bear it, he could not be dissuaded.

He had no preferment in the church besides the vicarage of Broad Hembury, which, as his mind could never? brook the idea of living in animosity with his parish upon the account of tithes, did not amount, coinmunibus annis, to eighty pounds a year. For this living he exchanged another, not far distant from it, which had been procured for him by his friends in a mode which (though usual enough) his conscience could not approve; and therefore, when he became acquainted with the manner of their diligence, which was not for some time afterwards, he could not rest satisfied till he had parted with it.

His publications were, 1. “The Church of England vindicated from the charge of Arminianism; and the case of Arminian Subscription particularly considered; in a Letter to the rev. Dr. Nowell,” 1769. 2. “The Doctrine of absolute Predestination stated and asserted; with a preliminary discourse on the Divine Attributes: translated in great measure, from the Latin of Jerom Zanchius; with some account of his Life prefixed,” 1769. 3. “A Letter to the Rev. Mr. John Wesley, relative to his pretended abridgment of Zanchius on Predestination,” 1770, 2d edit. 1771. 4. “A Caveat against unsound Doctrines: a Sermon preached at Blackfryars, April 29, 1770.” 5. “Jesus seen of Angels; and God’s mindfulness of man: three Sermons, preached at Broad Hembury, Devon, Dec. 25, 1770.” 6. “Free Thoughts on the projected Application to Parliament for the Abolition of Ecclesiastical Subscriptions,” 1771. 7. “More work for Mr. John Wesley: or a vindication of the Decrees and Providence of God from the defamations of a late printed paper, entitled ' The Consequence proved/ 1772.” 8. “Clerical Subscription no grievance: a Sermon, preached at the annual Visitation of the archdeaconry of Exeter, May 12, 1772.” 9. “Historical Proof of the Doctrinal Calvinism of the Church of England,” 1774, 2 vols. 8vo. 10. “Free-will and merit fairly examined; or men not their own Saviours: a Sermon preached at Blackfryars, May 25, 1774.” 11. “Good News from Heaven or, the Gospel a joyful sound a Sermon, preached at the Lock-chapel, June 19, 1774.” 12. “The scheme of Christian and Philosophical necessity asserted, in answer to Mr. John Wesley’s tract on that subject,” 1775. 13. “Joy in Heaven, and the Creed of Devils: two Sermons, preached in London,” 1775. 14. “Moral and Political Moderation recommended” a Sermon, preached on the general fast, Dec. 13, 1776. 15. “Collection of hymns for public and private worship,” 1776. 16. “His dying avowal, dated Knightsbridge,” July 22, 177S. Since his death, a complete edition of his Works has been printed in 6 vols. 8vo, besides a volume of posthumous pieces, concerning the authenticity of which some doubts had been entertained, but these were removed by a letter from his executor, Mr. Hussey of Kensington, to whom he gave permission to publish them. How far this was done with judgment has been doubted. It is certain that some of Mr. Toplady’s posthumous works have placed his character in a different point of view from that in which his followers and admirers were wont to contemplate it.

The chief object of his writings, as well as of his sermons, was the defence of Calvinism, and the proof that Calvinism was to be found in the articles, &c. of the church of England. His creed, says one of his reviewers, (we suspect Mr. Badcock) was Calvinism in the extreme; and when he reasoned on some of its distinguishing principles, particularly predestination, he discovered no mean talent for disputation. He understood all the niceties of that article; and if his arguments could not convince, his subtleties would confound an Arminian. He would take his adversary on his own ground, and make his own concessions contribute to his defeat. Of this we have a remarkable example, related by himself, in a letter to Mrs. Macauley, in which he tells her of a debate he once had with Mr. Burgh, author of the “Political Disquisitions.” “I should have had,” says he, “a sharp onset if he had been in perfect health. Even as it was, he could not forbear feeling mv pulse on the article of free will. In the course of our debate, I drove him into this dreadful refuge, viz. 6 that God doth all he possibly can (these were Mr. Burgh’s own words) to hinder moral and natural evil: but he cannot prevail, men will not permit: God to have his wish.'” On Mr. Toplady’s asking him, if this would not render the Deity an unhappy being? he replied, “No, for he knows that he must be disappointed and defeated, and that there’s no help for it: and therefore he submits to the necessity, and does not make himself unhappy about it.”

As Mr. Toplady had thus laboured in all his works 'for the revival of Calvinism, he passed with the generality, and particularly with the public critics, for an enthusiast, with all its supposed accompaniments of austerity, bigotry, and separation from the enjoyments of life and from all society but that of his immediate followers. When therefore in his posthumous works it was discovered that he was much more a man of the world than ever had “been suspected, the opinion of many of his admirers was in some measure altered. It appeared indeed that he mixed very freely in all the habits of social intercourse with persons of all persuasions and denominations; and we have seen a letter of his in print, in which he not only enters on an elaborate defence of card-playing, but speaks even with gentleness on the subject of theatrical and other public amusements. His admirers thought all this might be candid, or liberal, but they could not conceive it to be consistent with the spirit and tendency of his works, nor indeed discoverable in them. Of his defences of Calvinism, his ' Historical Proof” is by far the most able, and although the same arguments or proofs have been more recently repeated in a memorable controversy, excited by Mr. Overton’s publications, they have not been placed either in a more fair or more clear light than by Mr. Toplady. As a controversialist, in his disputes with Wesley and others, he has been blamed for a degree of acrimony unworthy of his cause; but he possessed a warm and active imagination, and a degree of zeal which was not always under the guidance of judgment. Against Wesley he may be said to have had a confirmed antipathy, and employed ridicule as well as argument in opposing his opinions and conduct. The last act of his life was to publish what he called his “Dying Avowal,” in which he contradicted a report circulated by Wesley or his followers, respecting his having changed his sentiments. In this short “Avowal,' 7 he informs us that his Arminian prejudices received their first shock from reading Dr. Manton’s sermons on the xviiih chapter of St. John’s Gospel. Besides the works abovementioned, Mr. Toplady was the editor, for some year?, of” The Gospel Magazine,“began in 1774; and in it, under the article,” Review of Books, 1 * will be found some of his bitterest philippics against Wesley. Upon the whole, however, he must be considered as one of the ablest of modern writers in defence of Calvinism, and brought a larger share of metaphysical acuteness into the controversy than any man of his time.

, son of the celebrated French minister, Colbert, was born Sept. 19, 1665. Being sent early in life to several foreign courts, he was deservedly appointed secretary of state for the foreign department in 1686, director-general of the posts in 1699, and counsellor to the regency during the minority of Louis XV.; all which offices he filled with great distinction. His embassies to Portugal, to Denmark, and to England, put him upon a level with the most able negociators. He died at Paris the 2d of September, 1746, at the age of eightyone, an honorary member of the academy of sciences. He had married a daughter of the minister of state Arnauld de Pomponne, by whom he had several children. Ten years after his death, in 1756, were published his “Memoirs of the Negotiations from the treaty of Ryswic to the peace of Utrecht,” 3 vols. 12mo, divided into four parts. The first is assigned to the negociations for the Spanish succession; the second to the negociations with Holland; the third to those carried on with England; and the fourth to the affairs concerning the treaty of Utrecht. These memoirs, says the author of the Age of Louis XIV. consist of particulars interesting to those who are desirous of gaining a thorough knowledge of this business. They are written with greater purity than any of the memoirs of his predecessors: they are strongly marked with the taste that prevailed in the court of Louis XIV. But their greatest value arises from the sincerity of the author; whose pen is always guided by truth and moderation. Torcy has been justly characterised as profoundly wise in all great affairs, fertile in resources in times of difficulty, always master of himself amid the allurements of good fortune, and under the pressures of bad. Though of a serious disposition, yet in company he could be agreeably gay, especially whenever he chose to give way to a vein of delicate pleasantry which was peculiar to him. His temper, always even, was neither ruffled nor clouded by the most arduous circumstances. To this rare quality he added that of a good husband, a tender father, and a humane and gentle master.

, an Italian mathematician, was born at Verona, Nov. 4, 1721, and was educated at Padua, principally in jurisprudence, in which faculty he took his doctor’s degree, but he did not confine himself to that science. The knowledge which he acquired was so general, that upon whatever subject the conversation happened to turn, he delivered his sentiments upon it as if it had formed the only object of his study. On his return from the university, he entered on the possession of a considerable fortune, and determined to devote himself entirely to literary pursuits. The Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and Italian languages occupied much of his time, his object being to understand accurately the two first, and to be able to write and speak the two last with -propriety and elegance. He also learned French, Spanish, and English, the last particularly, for he was eager to peruse the best English writers, and was enabled to enter into their spirit. Ethics, metaphysics, divinity, and history, also shared much of his attention, and he displayed considerable taste in the fine arts, music, painting, and architecture. Nor did he neglect the study of antiquities, but made himself familiarly acquainted with coins, gems, medals, engravings, &c. Scarce any monumental inscriptions were engraved at Verona which he had not either composed or corrected. With the antiquities of his own country he was so intimately acquainted, that every person of eminence, who visited Verona, took care to have him in their company when they examined the curiosities of the city.

But these pursuits he considered merely as amusements; mathematics and the belles lettres were his serious studies. These studies are in general thought incompatible; but Torelli was one of the few who could combine the gravity of the mathematician with the amenity of the muses and graces. Of his progress in mathematics we have a sufficient proof in his edition of the collected works of Archimedes, printed at Oxford in 1792, folio, Greek and Latin. The preparation of this work had been the labour of most part of his life. Having been completely ready for publication, and even the diagrams cut which were to accompany the demonstration, the manuscript was disposed of after his death to the curators of the Clarendon press, by whose order it was printed under the immediate care of Dr. Robertson, the present very learned professor of astronomy. It seems to be the general opinion that there have been few persons in any country, or in any period of time, who were better qualified, than Torelli, for preparing a correct edition of Archimedes. As a Greek scholar he was capable of correcting the mistakes, supplying the defects, and illustrating the obscure passages that occurred in treatises originally written in the Greek tongue; his knowledge of Latin, and a facility, acquired by habit, of writing in this language, rendered him a fit person to translate the Greek into pure and correct Latin, and his comprehensive acquaintance with mathematics and philosophy qualified him for conducting the whole with judgment and accuracy. Torelli wrote the Italian language with the classic elegance of the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, as appears by his different works in that language, both in prose and verse. He translated the whole of jtsop’s fables into Latin, and Theocritus, the epithalamium of Catullus, and the comedy of Plautus, called “Pseudolus,” into Italian verse. The first two books of the Æneid were also translated by him with great exactness, and much in the style of the original. Among his other Italian tanslations was Gray’s Elegy.

His life, like his studies, was drawn after the model of the ancient sages. Frugal, temperate, modest, he exhibited a striking contrast to the luxurious manners of his age. In religion he adhered strictly, though not superstitiously, to the opinions of his ancestors. He was firm in his resolutions, but not foolishly obstinate: and so strict an observer of equity, that his probity would have remained inviolate, even though there had been no law to bind him to justice. He never married, that he might have leisure to devote himself, with less interruption, to his favourite studies. Every one readily found admission to him, and no man left him without being both pleased and instructed; such was the sweetness of his temper, and the readiness with which he communicated information. He adhered with great constancy to his friendships. This was particularly exemplified in the case of Clemens Sibiliati, whose life of him is prefixed to the Oxford edition of his Archimedes; with him he kept up the closest connection from a school boy to the day of his death. He was peculiarly attached likewise to many men of distinction, both in Italy and Britain, the late earl Stanhope, earl Mansfield, John Strange, esq. &c. Torelli died August 18, 1781, in the sixtieth year of his age.

, a learned Danish historian and antiquary, was born in Iceland, and partly educated there, but completed his studies in Denmark. Here he became so well known for his acquaintance with history, that when Frederick III. king of Denmark, himself a very learned prince, wanted some able scholar to translate certain Icelandic Mss. which were in his library, Torfa-us was recommended to him, and executed his task so much to the king’s satisfaction, that he retained him for several years in his court, and employed him on other affairs that had no connexion with his studies, and always admired him as a man of talent and probity. As a reward he gave him a valuable appointment in the customs, but Torfseus found it not very agreeable to one of his disposition, and was about soliciting an exchange when the king died. His successor and son, Christian V. appointed him his historiographer for Norway, with a salary of 600 German crowns. This enabled Torfaeus to reside either at Copenhagen, or at an estate he had in Stongeland, pursuing his researches into history and antiquities. He died in 1719, or 1720, nearly eighty years old. As an historian, he occupies a very high rank among his countrymen. His principal works, or those best known, although all are scarce, are, 1. “Historia rerum Norvegicarum,” Hafniae (Copenhagen) 1711, 4 vols. in 2, fol. 2. “Orcades, seu rerum Orcadensium historiae libri tres,” ibid. 1697, 1715, fol. 3 “Series Dynastarum et Regum Daniae, a Skioldo Odini filio, ad Gormum Grandaevum,” ibid. 1702, 4to. 4. “Historia VinJandiae antiquae,” 1705, 8vo. 5. “Groenlandia antiqua, seu veteris Groenlandiae descriptio,” 1706, 8vo.

, the first of a family of eminent printers and booksellers, called in French Detournes, was born at Lyons in 1504, and learned printing first in the house of Sebastian Gryphius. He appears to have established another house about 1540, and printed many books in the name and on account of Gryphius; but from 1544 we find his own name to a number of very correct editions. Among others may be mentioned, an edition of “Petrarch,” in Italian, 1545, 16mo, with a letter from him to Maurice Sceva, of Lyons, in which he gives a curious account of the discovery of Laura’s tomb, in 1533, in the chapel of the Cordeliers’ church at Avignon a “Dante,” 1547, 16mo “Les Marguerites des Marguerites de la reine de Navarre,” 1547, 8vo; “Vitruviu$,” with Philander' s commentary and woodcuts finely executed, 1552, 8vo and “Froissart’s Chronicles,” 1559—61, 4 vols. fol. Most of his editions have Latin prefaces or dedications from his pen. His talents procured him the honour of being appointed king’s printer at Lyons, where he died of the plague in 1564. His device was two vipers forming a circle, the female devouring the head of the male, while she herself is devoured by her young, with the inscription “Quod tibi fieri non vis, alteri ne faceris.” This device is still to be seen on the front of a house at Lyons, in the rue Raisin, where his printing-office stood. He was succeeded by his son, John, who was also king’s printer, and carried on the business until 1585. His editions did not yield in elegance or correctness to those of his father, but being obliged at the date above-mentioned to quit his country, upon account of his religion, for he was a protestant, he settled at Geneva, where he had every encouragement, and in 1604 became a member of the council of two hundred. Like the Geneva printers, however, he deteriorated what he printed here by employing bad paper. He died in 1615. His descendants continued the printing and bookselling business at Geneva, and had established a very extensive trade, when in 1726, John James, and James Detournes purchased the stock of Anisson and Posnel, famous booksellers of Lyons, and obtained permission, notwithstanding their religion, to settle there; and as they also continued their house at Geneva, they greatly extended their trade, particularly to Spain and Italy. In 1740 the learned John Christian Wolff dedicated to them his “Monumenta Typographica,” as to the oldest printing and bookselling family in Europe. Their trade, which consisted chiefly in theological works, having begun to fall off when the Jesuits were suppressed, their sons, who had a plentiful fortune, sold off the whole of their stock in 1730, and retired from a business which had been carried on in their family with great reputation for nearly two hundred and forty years.

, a celebrated Dominican, better known by the name of Turrecremata, was born in 1388, of an illustrious family at Valladolid. He attended the council of Constance in 1417, was admitted doctor of the Sorbonne in 1429, held some important offices in his order, and became master of the sacred palace. Pope EugeniusIV. sent him to the council of Basil, where he strenuously supported the court of Rome. He was created cardinal in 1439, did oreat services to his order, and died at Rome, September 26, 14-68, aged eighty. His works are, “Commentaries on Gratian’s Decretal,” Venice, 157S, 5 torn. a treatise “On the Church and the Papal Authority,” Venice, 1562, fol. “Expositio super toto Psalterio,” Rome, 1470, 4to, reprinted in 1472, and at Mentz in 1474 “Medltatione*,” Rome, 1467, often reprinted in the same century, and all now of great rarity. He wrote also various others in Latin, in which, says L'Avocat, he servilely defends the Ultramontane opinions, like a slave to the court of Rome, rather than like an impartial divine, and a bishop. He was unquestionably an excessive bigot, and of a most persecuting spirit. Father Touron has written his life.

, a learned antiquary, was born in 1657, of a noble family at Ciudad in the Frioul. His connexions with Octavio Ferrari, one of the most learned antiquaries of Italy, increased his natural taste for that study. Haying settled at Rome, he gained the esteem and friendship of the cardinals Imperial! and Noris, pope Innocent XII. and Clement XI. which latter gav<- him the bishopric of Adria, in 1702, where he died in 1717. His works are, “Monumenta veteris Antii,” 1700, 4to, much valued; “Taurobolium antiquum,” Lugduni, 1704, reprinted in Sallengre’s “Thesaurus Antiquitatum;” “De annis imperil M. Antonii Aurelii Heliogabali,” &c. 1714, 4to; Dissertations on worms in the human body, and on an eclipse of the Sun, with several other learned pieces in the Italian journals.

, a celebrated philosopher, was born at Rome in 1710, of a family originally of Genoa, and studied in the Clementine college at Rome. He became afterwards professor of philosophy and mathematics at the college of Ciudad, in the Frioul. Thence he went to Naples, and taught these sciences in the archiepiscopal seminary. Charles of Bourbon, king of Naples, appointed him in 1754 to be his librarian, superintendant of the royal printing-office, and keeper of the museum, which enabled him to devote his time to his favourite pursuits, one of which was the improvement of microscopes, which he brought to a very great degree of perfection, by inventing the highest magnifiers that had ever been known, four of which he sent in 1765 to our royal society. An account of them may be seen in the Philosophical Transactions, vols, LV. and LVI. This ingenious author was a member of the principal academies of Italy, and a corresponding member of those of Paris, London, and Berlin. He died March 7, 1782, not more rt gretted as a man of genius, than as a man of private worth and amiable manners. His principal works are, “On Natural Philosophy,” Naples, 174-9, 2 vols. 4to. 2. “Elementa Physicae,” ibid. 1767, 8 vols. 3. “History and phenomena oi Vesuvius,” 1755, 4to. 4. “Microscopical Observations,” 1766, &c. ]

, in his native language called Vander Beken, a very learned man, who flourished not long after the restoration of letters, was born at Ghent, in Flanders, in 1525, and educated at Louvain, Thence he went to Bologna, in order to study the civil law and antiquities; where he so distinguished himself by his skill in polite literature, and particularly in poetry, that he became known all over Italy, and acquainted with all the learned of Rome, Venice, and Padua. He was not only a man of learning, but of business also; and hence, after returning to his own country, was thought a fit person to be employed in several embassies. He took holy orders, and at length was raised to the bishopric of Antwerp. Hence he was translated to the metropolitical church of Mechlin, where he died in 15;<5, at seventy years of age. He* founded a college of Jesuits at Louvain, the place of his education, to which he left his library, coins, &c. Besides an octavo volume of “Latin poems,” printed by Plantin, at Antwerp, in 1594, he wrote “Commentaries upon Suetonius and Horace;” the former printed in 1592, the latter in 1608, 4to. Scaliger, Lipsius, Scioppius, and indeed all the learned, have spoken well of his “Commentaries.” Fabricius, speaking of explications and emendations of Horace, says, that he and Lambinus were men of great learning and critical talents, and had carefully consulted the best manuscripts, but it is thought that Torrentius had intrusted the collation to some person who had not his own accuracy

an illustrious mathematician and philosopher of Italy, was born at Faenza, in 1608, and was trained in Greek and Latin literature by an uncle who was a monk, Natural inclination led him to cultivate mathematical knowledge, which he pursued some time without a master; but, at about twenty years of age, he went to Rome, where he continued the pursuit of it under father Benedict Castelli. Castelli had been a scholar of the great Galilei, and had been called by pope Urban VIII. to be a professor of mathematics at Rome. Torricelli made so extraordinary a progress under this master, that, having read Galilei’s “Dialogues,” he composed a “Treatise concerning Motion” upon his principles. Castelli, astonished at the performance, carried it and read it to Galilei, who heard it with much pleasure, and conceived a high esteem and friendship for the author. Upon this Castelli proposed to Galilei, that Torricelli should come and live with him; recommending him as the most proper person he could have, since he was the most capable of comprehending those sublime speculations which his own great age, infirmities, and, above all, want of sight, prevented him from giving to the world. Galilei accepted the proposal, and Torricelli the employment, as things of all others the most advantageous to each. Galilei was at Florence, whither Torricelli arrived in 1641, and began to take down what Galilei dictated, to regulate his papers, and to act in every respect according to his directions. But he did not enjoy the advantages of this situation long, for at the end of three months Galilei died. Torricelli was then about returning to Rome. But the grand duke Ferdinand II. engaged him to continue at Florence, making him his own mathematician for the present, and promising him the chair as soon as it should be vacant. Here he applied himself intensely to the study of mathematics, physics, and astronomy, making many improvements and some discoveries. Among others, he greatly improved the art of making microscopes and telescopes; and it is generally acknowledged that he first found out the method of ascertaining the weight of the atmosphere by a proportionate column of quicksilver, the barometer being called from him the Torricellian tube, and Torricellian experiment. In short, great things were expected from him, and great things would probably have been farther performed by him if he had lived; but he died, after a few days illness, in 1647, when he was but just entered the fortieth year of his age.

Torricelli published at Florence, in 1644, a volume of ingenious pieces, entitled “Opera Geometrica,” in 4t There was also published at the same place, in 1715, “Le zioni Accademiche,” consisting of 96 pages in 4to. These are discourses that had been pronounced by him upon different occasions. The first of them was to the academy of La Crusca, by way of thanks for admitting him into their body. The rest are upon subjects of mathematics and physics. Prefixed to the whole is a long life of Torricelli, by Thomas Buonaventuri, a Florentine gentleman.

, an eminent Florentine sculptor, was born about 1472, and was the contemporary of Michael Angelo, in competition with whom he executed some works in the town-hall of Florence. He was an artist of very superior merit, but a proud, inconsiderate, and ungovernable character. It was in one of his passionate fits that he struck Michael Angelo with such force as to flatten his nose. Benvenuto Cellini, in his own life, has recorded this affair, as related to him by Torrigiano himself: “His conversation one day happening to turn upon Michael Angelo Buonarroti, on seeing a drawing of mine made from the celebrated cartoon of the battle of Pisa: ‘ This Buonarroti and I (said Torrigiano), when we were young men, went to study in the church of the Carmelites, in the chapel of Masaccio; and it was customary with Buonarroti to rally those who were learning to draw there. One day, amongst others, a sarcasm of his having stung me to the quick, I was extremely irritated, and, doubling my fist, gave him such a violent blow upon his nose, that I felt the bone and cartilage yield as if they had been made of paste, and the mark I then gave him he will carry to his grave’.”

Cellini’s account of Torrigiano is, that “he was a hand*­some man; but of consummate assurance, having rather the air of a bravo than a sculptor: above all, his strange gestures and sonorous voice, with a manner of knitting his brows, enough to frighten every man who saw him, gave him a most tremendous appearance, and he was continually talking of his great feats among those bears of Englishmen whose country he had but recently left.” At what time he came into England is not known, but in 1519, according to Stow, he executed the superb tomb of Henry VII. in Westminster-abbey, for which he received 1000l. for the whole stuff and workmanship. It is also said by Vasari that he executed variety of works in marble, brass, and wood, in concurrence with other masters of this country, over all whom he was allowed the superiority. Vertue ascribes to him the tomb of Margaret countess of Richmond, mother of Henry VII.; and that of Dr. Young master of the Rolls in the chapel at the Rolls in Chancerylane; and lord Orford is inclined to attribute to him ahead of Henry VIII. in plaister in a round at Hampton-court. His lordship adds, that at Strawberry-hill is a model in stone of the head of Henry VII. in the agony of death. It is in the great style of Raphael and Michael Angelo, and worthy of either, though undoubtedly by Torrigiano.

The ungovernable and restless habits of this artist precipitated him into great difficulties, and the circumstances of his death furnish a melancholy instance of the vicissitude of life, and the baneful effects of inquisitorial jurisprudence. Upon leaving England, he visited Spain, and after distinguishing himself by many excellent works, was employed by a Spanish grandee to sculpture in marble a Madonna and Infant Christ, of the size of nature, with high promises to be rewarded in proportion to its merit; and as the grandee was of the first rank, Torrigiano flattered himself with proportionate expectation. After much study and application he completed his work to his own satisfaction, and the grandee saw the performance with delight and reverence, bestowing on him the highest praise. Impatient to possess his treasure, he immediately sent for it, and that his generosity might be displayed to the greatest advantage he loaded two lacqueys with the money to defray the purchase. The bulk was promising; but when the bags were found to contain nothin^but brass maravedi, which amounted only to the small sum of thirty ducats, vexation and disappointment roused Torrigiano’s resentment, who considered this present rather as an insult than as a reward for his merit, and, on a sudden, snatched up his mallet, and without regard to the perfection of his workmanship, or the sacred character of the image, he broke it in pieces, and dismissed the lacqueys, with their load of farthings, to tell the tale. The grandee, with every passion alive to this merited disgrace, and perhaps impressed with superstitious horror for the sacrilegious nature of the act, presented him before the court of inquisition; and impeach* d him for his conduct as an infidel and heretic. Torrigiano urged the right of an author over his own creation reason pleaded on his side, but all in vain he was condemned to lose his life with torture. The holy office, however, lost its victim, for Torrigiano starved himself to death in prison, in 1522.

, otherwise Aretin, from being born at Arezzo, was one of the learned men of the fifteenth century, although our accounts of him are not very satisfactory. He either composed or translated a “Life of St. Atnanasius.” He was admitted into the confidence of Nicholas V. whose chamberlain he was. His conversation and candour have been much praised. He was principally skilled in grammar, as appears by his book “De Potestate Literarum.” Gesner’s “Bibliotheca” gives the titles of many other works; and Magius quotes a “Lexicon” of his. Laurentius Valla must have been one of his admirers, as he dedicates to him his books “De Latina Elegantia.” He died in 1466.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Montbeillard, then belonging to the dukes of Wirtemberg, July 15, 1541. His father, Peter Toussain, who was minister of that place, had formerly been a canon of Metz, but afterwards embraced the reformed religion, and was employed by George duke of Wirtemberg to introduce it at Montbeillard, which he did with great effect until his death in 1573, in his seventy-fourth year. His latter days were embittered by the loss of two of his sons, one of whom was assassinated at Montbeillard, and the other perished in the massacre at Paris in 1572.

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

While Tossanus was here, he was frequently exposed to the greatest dangers during the war which broke out between the catholics and protestants, Orleans being besieged, and being full of adherents to the duke of Guise and his party. But by various means, although much persecuted, he escaped all, and finally reached Heidelberg, whither he had been invited by the pious Frederick III. elector palatine; and was so well received by that prince and by all descriptions of people, as soon to be able to forget his many dangers and sufferings. The prince afterwards employed him in visiting the reformed churches in his dominions, and in composing some differences of opinion among them, which he is said to have performed with equal ability and zeal. On the death of that prince, however, in 1576, he experienced a reverse, his son Louis being a Lutheran, and unwilling to retain Toussain, who was a Calvinist, in his service. His brother prince Casimir, who was of his father’s persuasion, then invited Toussain to Newstadt, made him superintendant of the churches there, and on the death of Ursinus, professor of divinity. He also officiated in the church of St. Lambert, composed of refugees; and preached to them in French, and by the prince’s desire, joined Zanchius and Ursinus in the publication of various works in support of the reformation. In 1578 he presided at a synod which prince Casimir had assembled for the purpose of establishing conformity in doctrine and discipline, and of assisting the exiles of the palatinate. With this prince Toussain became so great a favourite, that his highness took no steps in ecclesiastical matters without consulting him, and such was the general report of his character, that foreign princes or ambassadors who visited the court at Newstadt, made it a point to pay their respects to Toussain. On the death of the elector Louis IV. in 1583, prince Casimir, his brother, had the charge of his infant son and successor Frederick IV. On this he removed to Heidelberg, in order to take the regency into his own hands, and employed Toussain in promoting the reformed religion. In this, however, he was much obstructed by the violence of the Lutheran party; and the prince, after in vain endeavouring by conferences to allay the fervour of their zeal, was under the necessity of dismissing the most turbulent from their situations in the church or university. This was no more than had been done by the late elector without any ceremony: but the prince regent in the present case took every pains to show that it was a matter of necessity with him, all other means of pacification having failed.

In the mean time Grynaeus, first professor of divinity at Heidelberg, having been removed to Basil in 1586, Toussain was appointed to succeed him, and after entering on the office, complied with the statutes of the university by taking his doctor’s degree. In 1587 his wife died, and about a year and a half after he married the widow of M. Chapelle, who had been chaplain to the prince of Conde. In 1592 he lost his illustrious patron prince Casimir, but as the young elector adhered to the same sentiments in religion, no change took place in ecclesiastical matters. In 1594, Toussain was chosen rector of the university, an office which he filled with great credit. In 1596 when the plague had driven not only the court, but most of the professors and students from Heidelberg, Toussain remained at his post, preaching, and administering what support and consolation he could to the sufferers. Beginning now to feel the infirmities of age, he would have resigned his professorship, but this was not accepted, although he was permitted to relax in every way suitable to his health. He died Jan. 10, 1602, in the sixty-first year of his age, and was buried in the chapel belonging to the university.

, a very eminent critic, was descended from a family formerly settled in Dorsetshire. His grandfather, Onesiphorus Toup, had been a man of good property, and patron, as well as incumbent, of Bridport in that county; but he appears to have been embarrassed in his circumstances before his death, as he parted with the advowson, and left a numerous family very slenderly provided for. His second son, Jonathan, was bred to the church, and was curate and lecturer of St. Ives, Cornwall. He married Prudence, daughter of John Busvargus, esq. of Busvargus in Cornwall, and by her had issue Jonathan, the subject of this memoir, and one daughter.

Jonathan, our critic, was born at St. Ives, in December 1713. He received the first principles of his education in a grammar-school in that town, and was afterwards placed under the care of Mr. Gurney, master of a private school, in the parish of St. Merryn. He was removed from this school to Exeter college, Oxford, where he took his degree of batchelor of arts; but his master of arts degree was taken at Pembroke hall, Cambridge, in 1756. In 1750, he was appointed to the rectory of St. Martin’s, and, in 1774, was installed prebendary of Exeter. In 1776, he was instituted to the vicarage of St. Merryn’s. He owed these two last pieces of preferment to the patronage of Dr. Keppel, bishop of Exeter.

Mr. Toup had lost his father whilst he was a child: and his mother sometime after marrying Mr. Keigwin, vicar of Landrake in Cornwall, his uncle Busvargus (the last male of that family) took him under his care: considered him as his own child; and bore the whole charge of his education both at school and college. By the death of this excellent man, without issue, in 1751, Mrs. Keigwin succeeded, as heir at law, to his estate and effects. A will was indeed found, supposed to have been signed by old Mr. Busvargus two days before his death: but there were so many suspicious circumstances attending it, that the persons who would have been benefited by it never ventured to prove it. Mrs. Keigwin died in 1773, and left a will, bequeathing the whole of her estates to her son Jonathan, which accounts for the property of which he died possessed, and which could not have accumulated from his preferments or his publications.

In 1760, Mr. Toup published the first work which made him known to the world as a critic. This was the first part of his “Emendationes in Suidam, in quibus plurima loca veterum Grsecorum, Sophoclis et Aristophanis imprimis, cum explicantur turn emenclantur,” 8vo. The second part appeared in 1764. This work procured him the notice of bishop Warburton, who, from the time of its publication, honoured him with his correspondence and patronage. The bishop, in one of his letters, laments his having a see without any preferment on it: “had it been otherwise, he should have been too selfish to invite any of his brethren to share with him in the honour of properly distinguishing such merit as Mr. Toup’s.” All, however, that the bishop could do, he did with the warmth and earnestness of sincere friendship. He repeatedly recommended Mr. Toup to archbishop Seeker, to the trustees for disposing of his options, to lord Shelburne, and to bishop Keppel; and the favours that prelate conferred on Mr. Toup were owing to the solicitations of bishop Warburton.

In 1766 the third part of the “Emendationes in Suidam” was published, and in the following year archbishop Seeker expressed a desire that Mr. Toup would lend his assistance towards a new edition of Polybius, which was then in contemplation; and bishop Warburton, who seconded this wish, advised him to lay aside for a while the notes he was preparing for Warton’s edition of Theocritus, but it does not appear what progress was made in this edition. In 1767, he published his “Epistola critica ad virum celeberrimum Guhelmum episcopum Glocestriensern,” 8vo. In this letter to his friend Warburton, he takes occasion to correct and illustrate many passages in ancient and especially Greek authors, with his usual acuteness and judgment. In 1770, Mr. Warton’s edition of Theocritus was printed at the university press at Oxford. Mr. Toup had been a large contributor towards the corrections and annotations of this edition, in the title page of which is noticed, “Epistola Jo. Toupii de S^racusis, ejusdemque Addenda in Theocritum, necnon collationes quindecim codicum.” But a note of his on idyll. XIV. written, we should have said, in an unguarded moment, had he not repealed and attempted to defend it afterwards, gave such offence (to Dr. Lowth particularly) that the vice-chancellor of Oxford had it cancelled and another substituted in its room. Mr. Warton, according to Mr. Cole, pleaded that Toup had inserted it without his knowledge. On the other hand, our principal authority vindicates Mr. Toup, by saying that Mr. Warton had not stopped this note from going to the press, and that “a respectable friend, in a letter on this subject, declares his persuasion of Mr. Toup’s sincere veneration for religion.” Mr. Nichols very candidly adds, “The matter is before the public, who may form their own judgment on it.*' One thing is very certain, that the note is grossly indecent, and such a one as ne should not have suspected from a man who had” a sincere veneration for religion;“and that it was a deliberate act on the part of Mr. Toup, appeared from his publication in 1772 of his” Curae posteriores, sive Appendicula notarum atque emendationum in Theocritum, Oxonii nuperrime pubhcatum,“4to, in which the cancelled note is repeated, with a reflection (in the preface) on the persons who had found fault with it, as” homunculi eruditione mediocri, ingenio nullo,“and perhaps the following may allude 10 Lowth,” qui in Hebraicis per omnem fere vitam turpiter volntati, in litteris elegantioribus plane hospites sum.“By the same spirit of captious criticism and contempt for his brethren, in which, it must be allowed, Toup too frequently indulged, he gave great offence to Reiske, who in complimenting Warton for his urbanity, calls Toup” ferocious and foul-mouthed," although few critics have deserved this character more than Reiske himself.

Mr. Toup’s next work was the “Appendiculum notarum in Suidam,” 177.5, which may be considered as a fourth volume of his “Emendationes.” He closed his labours in 1773 by his edition of “Longinus,” which places his fame as a critic, on an imperishable basis. Indeed as a writer of profound learning, and singular critical sagacity, Mr. Toup must be acknowledged to rank wirli the most eminent men, in those departments. Dr. Buruey, uhose right to judge cannot easily be disputed, place* him as one of the seven pre-eminent scholars who were the critical luminaries of the eighteenth century. As his life was passed in literary retirement, his personal character was known to few. Hrefailings seem principally confined to his works, in which we are often led to lament an excess of conceit, and a petulant manner of noticing his contemporaries. He censured too freely, and praised too sparingly. In private life he was a kind neighbour, an indulgent master, and an affectionate and tender relation. He was a man, too, of great humanity, which he delighted to extend to the brute creation. We may suppose he also carefully attended to his duties as a parish priest, for, of all things, he expressed the greatest aversion to non-residence, and rejected every proposal to quit his situation upon such terms. Mr. Toup died Jan. 19, 1785, in the seventy-second year of his age, and was buried under the communion table in his church of St. Martin. He bequeathed his property to a half-sister, a widow, and her daughters, who lived with him. It was one of his whims, in his latter writings to call himself Joannes, instead of Jonathan Toup. Many additional particulars respecting this excellent scholar may be found in our authority.

, -viscount de Turenne, a celebrated French general, was born in September 1611, at Sedan, and was the second son of Henry de la Tour, duke de Bouillon, descended from one of the most illustrious French families. He very early discovered uncommon talents for the military art, and made his first campaign in Holland under Maurice, and Frederic Henry of Nassau, his uncles on the mother’s side. He went socm after into Lorrain with his regiment in 1634, and having contributed to the taking of la Mothe, was appointed major-general, though at that time very young. In 1636 he took Saverne, and the year following, the castles of Hirson and Sorle, and it was on this occasion, that he acted like Scipio, with respect to a very beautiful woman, whom he sent back to her husband. He was made marechal of France, in 1644, and had the misfortune to be defeated at the battle of Mariendal, 1645; but gained that of Nortlingen, three months after, restored the elector of Treves to his dominions, and the following year effected,. that famous junction of the French with the Swedish army commanded by general Wrangel, which compelled the duke of Bavaria to sue for peace. This duke having broken the treaty he made with France, the viscount de Turenue defeated him at Zumarshausen, and drove him entirely from his dominions in 1643. During the civil wars he joined the princes, and was defeated at the battle of Rhetel, in 1650; but his majesty, being soon reconciled to him, gave him the command of his army in 1652. His conduct was afterwards much admired at the battles of Jergeau, Gien, and the Fauxbourg St. Antoine, and in his retreat before the army of the princes at Villeneuve-Sainte-George. In 1654 he forced the Spaniards to raise the siege of Arras, and in 1655, took Condé, Saint Guillain, and several other places; won the famous battle of the Downs, and took Dunkirk and Oudenarde, with almost all the rest of Flanders; which obliged Spain to conclude the peace of the Pyrenees in 1660. These important services deservedly acquired him the office of marechal-general of the royal camps and armies. A fresh war breaking out with Spain, 1667, Turenne commanded under the king’s orders in Flanders, where he took so many places that the Spaniards were forced to propose peace the following year. In the same year he abjured the Protestant religion, probably from ambitious motives. In 1672 he commanded the French troops during the war against Holland, took forty towns in 22 days, drove the elector of Brandenburg quite to Berlin, won the battles of Sintsheim, Lademburg, Ensheim, MuU hausen and Turkeim, and compelled the Imperial army, consisting of 70,000 men, to re-pass the Rhine. This campaign acquired the viscount de Turenne immortal honour. He crossed the Rhine to attack general Montecuculli, and pursued him to Saspach, near the town of Acheren; but having ascended an eminence to observe the enemy’s camp, he was killed by a cannon-ball, July 27, 1675, at the age of sixty-four. All France lamented the loss of this great man, whose generosity and modesty, joined to his military virtues, and the noblest qualities of the hero, had made him admired throughout Europe. The king ordered a solemn service to be performed for him in the cathedral church at Paris, as for the first prince of the blood, and that his remains should be interred in the abbey of St. Denys, the burying-place of the royal personages of France, where the cardinal, his nephew, raised a superb mausoleum to his memory. He married Anne de Nompar de Caumont, daughter of the duke and marechal de la Force, but had no children by her. His life has been written by the abbe Raguenet, and M. de Ramsay. The viscount de Turenne, one of his ancestors, wrote a valuable treatise on “The Military Art.”

, a famous botanist of France, was born of a good family, at Aix in Provence, June 5, 1656. He had a taste for observing and collecting plants from his childhood; and, when he was at school, used frequently to play truant, though he was frequently punished for it, in order to traverse the fields in quest of new discoveries. The same passion continued when he was more grown up, and after he began to study philosophy and divinity; and, though all endeavours were used by his father, who designed him for the church, to cure him of it, his favourite study prevailed, and plants continued his object. In pursuit of them he was ready to traverse the globe, as he did a great part of it afterwards; but, for the present, was obliged to content himself with what the neighbourhood of Aix and the gardens of the curious afforded. Becoming his own master by the death, of his father in 1677, he quitted theology, which indeed he had never relished, and gave himself up entirely to physic, natural philosophy, and botany, at the instigation of an uncle, who was a very ingenious and reputable physician. In 1678, he ran over the mountains of Dauphine and Savoy, and thence enriched his collection with a great number of curious specimens. In 1679 he went to Montpelier, to study medicine and anatomy. In this town was a garden of plants, which had been established by Henry IV. but this did not satisfy his curiosity: he travelled over the country round about Montpelier, and brought back with him plants which were before unknown to the botanists of that place. His curiosity becoming more ardent, he formed a scheme of passing over into Spain, and set out for Barcelona in April 1681. He spent some time in the mountains of Catalonia, whither he was accompanied by the young physicians of the country, and the students in physic, to whom he pointed out and explained the various sorts of plants; but was often exposed to dangers, and was once stripped naked by the miquelets, a kind of banditti, who, however, so far took pity on him as to return him his waistcoat, in the lining of which, by good luck, he happened to have some silver tied up in a handkerchief. After other risks, he arrived safe at Montpelier in 1681, and continued his studies in medicine, and his operations in chymistry and anatomy. He was afterwards received doctor of physic at Orange, and thence went to Aix, where his passion for plants, which was as high as ever, did not suffer him to continue long. He now visited the Alps, and he brought back with him new treasures, which he had acquired with great fatigue and danger.

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

In 1700 he received an order from the king to travel to Greece, Asia, and Africa, not only to take cognizance of the plants which the ancients have mentioned, or even of those which escaped their observation, but to make also observations upon natural history at large, upon ancient and modern geography, and upon the religion, manners, and commerce, of different nations and people. The king ordered farther A. Gundelsheimer, a native of Anspach, and physician to the king of Prussia, to attend him as a draughtsman, who might draw plants, animals, orany thing curious, that fell in his way. Almost three years were employed in this learned voyage; and, as botany was M. Tournefort’s favourite object, he herborized over all the isles of the Archipelago, upon the coasts of the Black Sea, in Bithynia, Pontus, Cappadocia, Armenia, and Georgia. At his return he took a different route, in hopes of new subjects of observation, and came tbrough Galatia, Mysia, Lyiiia, and Ionia. The plague being then in Egypt hindered him from proceeding to Africa; yet he brought home 1356 species of plants, entirely new.

He now resumed the business of his profession, which his travels had interrupted, and was soon after made professor of physic in the college-royal. He had also the offices of his botanic professorship in the king’s garden, and the usual functions of the academy of sciences required of every member, to attend, together with the work of preparing an account of his travels, which was now to be expected from him. This being more than his constitution could bear, gradually impaired his health, but it was an unforeseen accident that cost him his life: as he was going to the academy his breast was violently pressed by the axle of a carriage, which brought on a spitting of blood, to which he did not pay a proper regard; and this ending in a dropsy of the breast, carried him off, after languishing some months, December 28, 1708. He was the greatest botanist of his time; and it was by his skill and care that the king of France’s gardens, almost quite neglected and abandoned before, were afterwards holden in honour, and thought worth the attention of all the virtuosi in Europe. Yet he was not so particularly attached to botany as to neglect every thing else; for he had made a most valuable collection of all kinds of natural curiosities, which he left by will to the king.

His writings are as follow “Elemens de Botanique: ou, Methode pour connoitre les plantes, avec figures, Paris, 1G94,” 3 tomes in 8vo. He afterwards enlarged this work considerably, and translated it into Latin for the benefit of foreigners, with this title, “Institutiones rei herbarise: sive, Elementa botanices,” Paris, 1700, 3 vols. 4to. The first volume contains the names of the plants, distributed according to his method; the two other the figures of them, very well engraven. This is his great work, and long made him be considered as the oracle of botany. In his system he divided the plants into twenty-two classes, whiqh he determined by the different formation of the flower, and their orders he ascertained by the fruit. He divided all the plants which were known to him from the quality of the flower (corolla) into classes, which his predecessors had limited by the fruit, and these classes he subdivided into orders. He arranged the genera by solid, distinctive marks, which he borrowed of the fruit gave them fixed generic names, and placed the species, with their manifold variations, under the genera. This classification is by no means difficult, and were it not for the imperfect characters of a few of the classes, might certainly be followed; but it yielded at length to the Linnaean method, with which it certainly will not bear a comparison. His next -work was “Histoire des Plantes qui naissent aux environs de Paris, avec leur usage dans la me'decine,” 1698, in 12mo, enlarged by another hand, into 2 vols. 12mo, in an edition of Paris, “l 725. This was translated by Dr. Marty n in 1732, 2 vols. 8vo.” De optima methodo in instituenda re herbaria,“in 1697, 8vo. This is an epistle to our Mr. Ray, who had dissented from Tournefort’s method of classing plants, and ranging them into their several genuses.” Corollarium institutionum rei herbarire, in quo plantse 1356 munificentia Ludovici magni in Orientalibus regionibus observatae recensentur, et ad genera sua revocantur, Paris, 1603,“in 4to. This work is printed in the third volume of Ray’s” Historia Plantarum, 1740,“in folio.” Relation d‘un voyage du Levant, contenant l’histoire ancienne et moderne de plusieurs isles d'Archipel, de Constantinople," &c. Paris, 1717, 2 vols. in 4to, and 3 in 8vo, with figures; reprinted at Amsterdam, 1718, in 2 vols. 4to. This work comprises not only discoveries in botany, but other curious particulars relating to history, geography, and natural philosophy. Besides these larger works, there are several pieces of Tournefort printed in the History of the Academy of Sciences.

, a learned French Jesuit, was born at Rennes, April 26, 1661,- of an ancient family. He entered among the Jesuits in 1680, and besides other literary honours due to his merit, was appointed librarian to the society in Paris. His range of study had been so extensive that most of his learned contemporaries considered him as an oracle in every branch of science, taste, or art. The holy scriptures, divinity, the belles lettres, antiquities, sacred and profane, criticism, rhetoric, poetry, had all been the objects of his pursuit, and added to his accomplishments. He was for many years editor of the “Journal de Trevoux,” one of the most celebrated in France, in which he wrote a great many essays and criticisms of considerable merit and acuteness. He published also a good edition of“Menochius,” 1719, 2 vols. fol. and an edition of Prideaux’s History of the Jews. He died May 16, 1739, He was a man of a communicative disposition, and very attentive to strangers. There was, however, some degree of vanity in his composition, and he even prided himself on his birth, but upon the whole, was an estimable character, and contributed, by his Journal, to the diffusion of much useful knowledge.

, a pious French divine, was born April 30, 1640, at Rouen, of poor parents, but the inclination for learning which he discovered from his childhood, induced M. du Fosse, maitre des comptes at Rouen, to encourage him in that pursuit, and to send him to the Jesuits’ college at Paris. He completed his philosophical studies at the college de Grassins, under M. Hervent, and was afterwards vicar of $t. Etienne des Tonneliera, at Rouen, where he distinguished himself by his public services. During a visit to Paris in 1675, he gained the prize given by the French academy. Reflecting afterwards on the inconsiderate manner in which he had engaged in the sacred office, he went again to Paris, and renounced all the duties of the priesthood, that had done him so much honour, till M. de Sacy, to whom he applied for directions in his penitence, drew him from this state of dejection, and persuaded him to resume the sacred functions. His talents procured him a benefice in the holy chapel, and the priory of Villers, which the archbishop of Rouen gave him. M. Tourneux would gladly have resigned his benefice in favour of some pious ecclesiastic; but only simple resignations were at that time accepted. A change of this rule was hoped for, but did not take place during his life. The king gave him a pension of 300 crowns. He preached one Lent in the church of St. Benoit, at Paris, to a prodigious number of auditors. M. le Tourneux spent his last years at his priory of Villers-sur-Fere, in Tardenois, in the dio* cese of Soissons. M. le Maitre de Sacy, and M. de.Santeuil, who were his friends, placed great confidence in him, and frequently consulted him, in consequence of which he was involved in some difficulties. He died suddenly at Parts, Nov. 28, 1686, aged forty -seven, and his remains were interred at Port Royal. The principal among his numerous works are, “La Vie.de Jesu Christ;” “La meiliure maniere d'entendre la Messe;” “L‘Anne’e Chretienne,” Paris, 1685, 13 vols. 12mo; a French “Translation of the Roman breviary,” 4 vols. 8vo; with other works suited to persons of his communion. His translation of the breviary was censured by a sentence from M. Cheron, official of Paris, 1688; but M. Arnauld undertook its defence. An “Abridgment of the principal Theological Treatises,” 4to, is also ascribed to M. le Tourneux. L'Avocat says that he had a peculiar talent for homilies and instructions, and it is said that while he preached the Lent sermons at St. Benoft, in Paris, instead of father Quesnel, who had been obliged to abscond, Louis XIV. inquired of Boileau concerning a preacher named le Tourneux, whom every body was running after. “Sire,” replied the poet, “your majesty knows that people always run after novelties this man preaches the gospel.” The king then pressing him to give his opinion seriously, Boileau added, *' When M. le Tourneux first Ascends the pulpit, his ugliness so disgusts the congregation, that they wish he would go down again but when he begins to speak, they dread the time of his descending."

, a French writer, and one of the Encyclopedists, was born at Paris in 1715, and was bred an advocate, but forsook the bar to cultivate general literature. In his youth he is thought to have been somewhat fanatical, as he wrote Latin hymns in praise of the abb Paris, at whose tomb extraordinary miracles were performed. (See Paris). An enthusiasm of a very opposite kind connected him with the philosophers who were exerting their powers against revealed religion, and in 1748 he contributed his first share by his book called “Moeurs,” or “Manners,” in which, although tolerably disguised, are some of those bold attacks, both on Christianity and morals, which afterwards appeared more plainly in the writings of his associates D'Alembert, Diderot, &c. This work procured him, however, a name in the world, although some have endeavoured to deprive him of it, by asserting that the work was written by an impious priest, and that Toussaint consented to bear the praise or blame. For this, however, there seems little foundation, if, according to the abbe Barruel, he afterwards publicly recanted his errors. In the mean time he published “Eciaircissemens sur les Mceurs,” 1764, which he meant as an apology for the former, but it was condemned by the parliament of Paris, and the author made his escape to Brussels, where he became editor of a French paper, devoted to the inte^ rests of the house of Austria. In this, of course, he treated the king of Prussia with little respect, even using the epithet, the “highwayman of the North,” and the philosopherking was not ignorant of this, but had been so much pleased with his book on “Manners,' 7 that he bestowed on him the professorship of logic and rhetoric at Berlin, where Tous* saint died in 1772. While there he published an excellent translation of Gellert’s Fables; and while in France had contributed some articles on jurisprudence to the Encyclopaedia, and assisted in a Dictionary of Medicine, published in 6 vols. folio. His” Mceurs" were translated into English about 1750.

, a political and miscellaneous writer, was born in Southwark, March 31, 1737, where his father was a dealer in second-hand books, the easy access to which gave his son a taste for reading, and enabled him at an early period of life to accumulate a fund of useful knowledge. He appears to have had no regular education, for when scarcely twelve years old, he was placed, as an errand boy, in the shop of a stationer under the Royal Exchange. With him he remained some years, until in 3754, he was bound apprentice to Mr. Robert Goadby, printer at Sherborne in Dorsetshire. During his first years here, he applied at his leisure hours to the Latin and Greek languages, and acquired a competent knowledge of both, and by carefully perusing the best books in other branches of learning, he very successfully supplied the want of a regular education, although he never could be reckoned a profound scholar in any pursuit.

In 1763, he commenced author by publishing “A Review of the genuine doctrines of Christianity,” &c. in which he stated his reasons for renouncing the doctrines of Calvin, in which he had been educated, and from which he afterwards departed much farther. In the following year he left Sherborne, came to London, and having taken out his freedom, supported himself by working as a journeyman printer; and having long before this turned his attention to political, as well as religious subjects, he published a pamphlet on libels, which Wilkes and his party had then rendered an interesting topic. In 1765, his late master, Mr. Robert Goadby, formed the design of publishing, periodically, the lives of eminent men of the English series, and employed Mr. Towers as the editor. The first volume appeared accordingly in 1766, 8vo, under the title of “British Biography,” and was continued by him as far as the seventh volume. The remaining three were written by a clergyman in the west of England. This, although the lease known, is by far the best of Mr. Towers’s works. The compilation is every where judicious; his principal authority, indeed, is the “Biographia Britannica,” but he evidently consulted original authorities, studied much among the treasures of the British Museum, and produced a work certainly very creditable to his talents and judgment. He was also at this time far more free from political prejudices than when he became a coadjutor of Dr. Kippis’s in the new edition of the “Biographia Britannica.” As his name, however, was not prefixed to the “British Biography,” he derived no fame from it, although it served to recommend him to his employers.

About this time he acquired some property by marriage, and laid it out partly in furnishing a bookseller’s shop in Fore-street. Here he carried on trade for about nine years, but with no great success. During this time he published various pamphlets on the political topics of the day, and always in opposition to the measures and supporters of administration. In 1774 he resigned his business, and was ordained a preacher among the dissenters, and soon after chosen pastor of a congregation at Highgate. In 1778 he exchanged this situation for the office of forenoon preacher at Newington Green, where Dr. Price preached in the afternoon. When Dr. Kippis was employed by the London booksellers on a new edition of the “Biographia Britannica,” he recommended Mr. Towers as his assistant; and he wrote several lives, but, as already noticed, under the influence of prejudices which did no credit to the work. It seems indeed rather surprising that a work in which the lives of the eminent men of the church of England must necessarily be expected to form a large, if not the largest share, should be entrusted to one who had no sympathy with the constitution or doctrines of that church, and who, while he probably exerted as much impartiality as he was capable of, could not, in the nature of things, divest himself of a degree of prejudice which must damp his praise, if it did not dispose him to censure.

His religious opinions, respecting the doctrine of the Trinity, are said to have been those of Dr. Samuel Clarke; with a more moderate degree of Arianism; and although he associated much with the zealous advocates for Unitarian principles, he expressed no doubts of the pre-existence of Christ; nor did he become a convert to their notions respecting materialism, or what is called philosophical necessity. He was disposed to think that, whatever might be the means of meliorating the hardened and wicked in another state, the whole human race would ultimately have reason to acknowledge, that their existence was a blessing bestowed by the father of mercies.

Dr. Towers had enjoyed an unusual share of health and spirits, until about the beginning of 1795, when both appeared evidently to decline, and the jaundice in particular undermined his constitution. He died May 20, 1799, ip the sixty-third year of his age. He was a man whose life points out the numerous advantages, which may be derived from industry and application; and shows how much may be done, in overcoming the obstructions of poverty and want of education, by a steady attention, accompanied with moral habits and prudent ceconomy. His acquisitions were certainly very considerable: and his knowledge of literary history, and of ecclesiastic controversy, very extensive. His manners also were pleasing, and recommended him to the best society; and his conversation, easy, good-humoured, and instructive, was enlivened by anecdotes and remarks, which rendered him every where a welcome guest.

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

, a protestant dissenting divine of considerable eminence, was born at Axminster, in Devonshire, Dec. 6, 1700. His father was a physician of the same place, and the son of Mr. Matthew Towgood, one of the ministers ejected by the act of uniformity in 1662. He had his grammar learning under the rev. Mr. Chadwick of Taunton: and in 1717 entered upon a course of academical studies in the same place, under the direction of Mr. Stephen James and Mr. Grove. Soon after he had commenced a preacher, he settled with a congregation of dissenters at Moreton-Hampsted in Devonshire, and was ordained there in August 1722, and the following year married the daughter of James Hawker, esq. of Luppit. He removed to Creditor], in the same county, in 1735, and soon after published, without his name, a pious tract entitled “Recovery from Sickness.” He likewise published without his name, a pamphlet entitled “High flown episcopal and priestly claims freely examined, in a dialogue between a country gentleman and a country vicar,” 1737. Dr. Warren, rector of St. Mary Stratford, Bow, a zealous champion of the church of England, having in a volume of posthumous sermons, compared the schism of the dissenters to that of the Samaritans, Mr. Towgood wrote “The Dissenters Apology,” 1739, in which he endeavours to vindicate a separation from the church. In 1741, when the nation was engaged in a war with Spain, he assumed a different character, by publishing “Spanish cruelty and injustice, a justifiable plea for a vigorous war with Spain.” 1 In this pamphlet, he encourages Britons to hope for success from the justice of the war on our part: the cruelty of our enemies towards Pagans, Jews, Mahometans, and Christians: and from their trusting in false protectors. He published afterwards several occasional sermons; and during the rebellion in 1754, a pamphlet against the legitimate birth of the Pretender. The work, however, by which he is held in highest esteem among his party, is “The Dissenting Gentleman’s answer to Mr. White,” a clergyman of the diocese of Norwich, who had written against the principles of the dissenters with -so much ability as to demand the exertions of their best writers. Mr. Towgood’s letters to him appeared separately from 174 to 1748, and have passed through six editions; the last, in 1787, is accompanied by a portrait of the author, from a painting by Opie. In 1748 he published a pamphlet intended to diminish the respect paid to the memory of king Charles I. It consists principally of extracts from historians, but is deficient in impartial investigation. He was more successful in 1750, when settled at Exeter, in some pamphlets in defence of infant baptism. In 1761 he became a teacher in an academy at Exeter for the education of dissenting ministers. His office was to lecture on the New Testament, which he continued till 1769. In 1784 the infirmities of age obliged him to resign his public ministry; he enjoyed, however, a moderate share of health and spirits until Jan. 31, 179-2, when he died at Exeter, in the ninety-second year of his age. His private character is represented as highly amiable, and his learning had a very extensive range. His public character may be collected from the contents of his publications. “His religious sentiments,” we are told, “were such as were deemed highly heretical when he first entered upon public life; on which account he found some difficulty in procuring ordination, and experienced the resentment of bigots long after: but they would be esteemed what is termed orthodox, by many in the present day, as he attributed to Christ a high degree of pre-existent dignity, and considered him as a proper object of religious worship.” It appears by this account that, in departing from the creed of his forefathers, Mr. Towgood went farther than his contemporaries, and not so far as his successors.

, an accomplished scholar and connoisseur, was the eldest son of William Townley, of Townley, esq. and Cecilia his wife, sole heiress of Ralph Standish, of Standish in Lancashire, esq. by lady Philippa Howard, daughter of Henry duke of Norfolk. His paternal grandmother was heiress of the house of Widdrington. He was born in the house of his ancestors October 1, 1737; and succeeded to the family estate, by the premature death of his father, in 1742. This event, united with religious considerations, sent him in early childhood to France for education; to which, however, much more attention was paid than is usual in the seminaries of that couutry. At a tetter period he was committed to the care of Turbervile Needham, a man of considerable reputation at that time upon the Continent as a natural philosopher. His own native taste and activity of mind carried him far beyond his companions in classical attainments; and a graceful person easily adapted itself to all the forms of polished address, which are systematically taught in France. Thus accomplished he came out into the world, and was eagerly received into the first circles of gaiety and fashion, from the dissipations of which it would be vain to say that he wholly escaped. These habits of life, however, in which imbecility grows old without the power, and vanity without the will, to change, after having tried them for a few years, his vigorous and independent mind shook off at once; and by one of those decisive efforts of which it was always capable, he withdrew to the Continent, resumed his literary pursuits, studied with critical exactness the works and principles of ancient art, and gradually became one of the first connoisseurs in Europe. During this period of his life he principally resided at Rome; from whence, ki different excursions, he visited the remotest parts of Magna Graecia and Sicily. He has been heard to relate, that on arriving at Syracuse, after a long and fatiguing journey, he could take neither rest nor refreshment till he had visited the fountain of Arethusa. This, though a trifling, is a characteristic circumstance; for he never spared himself, nor ever desisted from any pursuit, till he had either obtained his object or completely exhausted his strength^

Though far from indifferent to any of the fine arts, statuary was his favourite, and he soon became too ardent a lover of antiquity to remain a spectator of its fairest forms without courting the possession. His principal agent at Rome, after he ceased to reside there, was Mr. Jenkins. How he acquired so many specimens of ancient art from the East we have now no means of learning. When his “dead family,” as he was wont to call them, grew considerable, he purchased for their reception two successive houses in London; the latter of which (in Park-street, Westminster,) he fitted up with great elegance, and made it his principal residence till his death, which happened, to the unspeakable grief of his friends, January 3, 1805.

The Townley Marbles were now become a national object; the trustees of the British Museum, therefore, obtained from Parliament a grant of 20,000l. probably not halt the original cost; and for this sum they were purchased from the family. In the midst of an expensive war, and under the administration of one whose great mind rarely condescended to patronize the fine arts, this may be considered as a remarkable testimony to their value. They were, on the whole, undoubtedly the most select assemblage of Greek and Roman sculpture ever brought into England. That of the earl of Arundel, the first which travelled so far beyond the Alps, though much more numerous, appears from the remnants of it which are preserved, to have been filled with subjects of very inferior merit. The same perhaps may be said of a few celebrated collections yet remaining in some noble houses. But in the Townley Museum there was not a single statue, bust, or basso relievo, which did not rise far above mediocrity; and with the exception of seven or eight subjects beyond the hope or possibility of private attainment, it certainly contained the finest specimens of ancient art yet remaining in the world. Among these may be distinguished the farfamed head of Homer, the apotheosis of Marcus Aurelius, the younger Verus, the Astragalizontes, a small but exquisitely beautiful group, the Isis, the female Bacchus, the ivy-crowned Muse, and the small bronze of Hercules Alastor, found at Biblus in Syria.

The Townley Museum was also rich in gems, terra cottas, sepulchral monuments; and, above all, in a series of Roman imperial, large brass, second only in extent and preservation to that of the late king of France, which alone had cost the collector above 3000l. The Greek medals were rather specimens than a collection; having been selected for a particular purpose, which will now be explained.

Mr. Townley was a zealous advocate for the mythological system of D'Ancarvilef; who compiled the greater part of his curious work in Park-street, and derived some of his best illustrations from specimens in that collection. Of this system, which has not been generally received in England, it must be allowed that, amidst the silence of the earlier writers of antiquity, it is powerfully supported by the later Platonists, and the remains of ancient art. The symbols employed by sculptors and engravers to adumbrate the creative, destroying, and restoring powers of the universe, appear to have been connected with the mysteries. By the vulgar they were considered as the attributes of common Polytheism by the initiated they were referred to the Απορητα of their own system.

Though an indefatigable writer, Mr. Townley never printed any thing but a dissertation on the Ribchester helmet, in the “Vetusta Monumenta” of the Society of Antiquaries. The reason of this reserve may partly have been much native delicacy of mind, and partly a consciousness that his English style was tinctured witl\ foreign idioms. Indeed, he never spoke his native tongue but with some hesitation, and had frequent recourse to French and Italian words to remove his embarrassment. He had much native delicacy of mind; a quality never more conspicuous than in the familiar, extenuating manner in which he spoke of his own antiquarian treasures: treasures such as the Medici might have boasted of.

To young connoisseurs, and in general to his inferiors in taste and science, who sought his assistance, he was an active and zealous patron, sparing neither his interest nor his exertions to promote their views.

But it would be injurious to the memory of this excellent person to consider him merely as a virtuoso. He was one of the most benevolent and generous of men. The demands of taste, however importunate, could never tempt him either to rapacity or retention. In his conduct to a numerous tenantry he was singularly considerate and humane: and whether present or absent from his house in the country, the stream of his bounty to the indigent never dried up or diminished. In one year of general distress, approaching to famine, he distributed among the poor of the neighbouring townships a sum equivalent to a fourth part of the clear income arising from the estate. His personal habits, though elegant, were frugal and unostentatious. He never even kept a carriage. He was an early riser, and an exact ceconomist of his time. To his own affairs he was minutely and skilfully attentive. In his later years he grew more attached to his native place, and displayed in adorning the grounds about it a taste not inferior to that which distinguished his other pursuits. His temper, though naturally cheerful, was calm and sedate. His conversation, though regulated by the nicest forms of goodbreeding, was seasoned with a kind of Attic irony, not always unfelt by those about him. His manner had much both of dignity and sweetness. He was happy in a vigorous constitution, and still more so in a slow and sensible decay; for, after half a century of uninterrupted health and spirits, which gave but too keen a relish to every enjoyment, a. lingering disorder which hung over him for the three last years of his life, co-operating with other means, brought him to a deep and serious sense of religion; and in this sense he died.

Mr. Townley was interred, Jan. 17, 1805, in the family chapel at Burnley in Lancashire, where those who love his memory would rejoice to see the best judge of sculpture in Europe commemorated by a bust at least. Added to that memorial his name would be enough: for, till this generation shall have passed away, the truest sepulchral panegyric would be useless in another it would be suspected.

, a learned master of Merchant Taylors’ school, was the second son of a merchant, and born in London in 1715. He was educated at that school over which he afterwards presided, whence he was elected to St. John’s college, Oxford. Soon after taking orders, he was chosen morning preacher at Lincoln’s-inn chapel, and lecturer of St. Dunstan’s in the East. He married, in 1740, Miss Jane Bonnin of Windsor, descended from the Poyntz family, and related to the late dowager lady Spencer, through whose patronage Mr. Townley obtained the living of St. Bennett, Gracechurch-street, London. He afterwards became grammar-master to Christ’s hospital; and in 1759 was chosen high master of the Merchant Taylors’ school, in which office he died July 15, 1778, having been presented in 1777 to a living in Wales, by bishop Shipley, to whom he was chaplain. He was the close intimate of Garrick, from whom he held for some years the valuable vicarage of Hendon, in Middlesex; and it has been supposed that many of Garrick’s best productions and revisals partook of Mr. Townley’s assisting hand. He was the long- concealed author of the celebrated farce of “High Life below Stairs,” anno 1759, a piece which has held its constant place on the stage, against all the variations of dramatic taste and literary caprice. He also produced, in 1764, “False Concord,” a farce, for his friend Woodward’s benefit; and, in 1765, the “Tutor,” a farce, under Mr. Column’s protection, at Drury-lane, but which, from the juvenile characters, did not succeed. It is to be remarked, that “False Concord” contains three characters of lord Lavender, Mr. Suds, an enriched soap-boiler, and a pert valet, who are not only the exact lord Ogleby, Mr. Sterling, and Brush, of the “Clandestine Marriage,” brought out in 1767 by Garrick and Colman conjointly; but that part of the dialogue is nearly verbatim. We leave the application of the inference to the reader.

Mr. Townley also (with Dr. Morell) materially assisted his friend Hogarth in his “Analysis of Beauty,” as. Mr. Hogarth’s erudition was wholly of the pencil. Although bestowing so much attention on the business of the stage, he is said to have been much admired as a divine. “His manner of delivery was graceful, impressive, and energetic. The style of his discourses was correct, yet unstudied, and (what is the highest praise of sacred oratory) adapted to the understanding of a general auditory. Some single sermons only are in print.” When chosen head master of Merchant Taylors* school, the first improvement which he suggested in the system of education, was the introduction of mathematical learning, for which he had acquired a taste at Christ’s hospital, but this he was not able to accomplish. He was more successful, however, in substituting, instead of the old practice of declaiming, repetitions, every three or four months, of select passages in Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and English, which first took place in February 1761. In the following year, his partiality to theatrical representations induced him to request permission from the company of Merchant Taylors for the boys to perform a Latin play. This was at first granted, and plays were performed for two seasons, but the company finally disapproved of them, and we cannot help thinking, very justly, as likely to draw the attention of the scholars from more useful pursuits, and more important acquirements. In other respects, he appears occasionally to have di tiered from the guardians of the school, but was upon the whole a diligent master, and many of his pupils are now filling the highest stations in the three professions of divinity, law, and medicine.

, a late very learned divine, was the eldest son of the rev. John Townson, M. A. rector of Much Lees, in Essex. He was born in 1715; and, having been instructed a-while by his father, was placed under the rev. Henry Nott, vicar of the neighbouring parish of Terling, where he was soon distinguished for quickness of apprehension and a most retentive memory. From Terling he was removed to the free-school at Felstod, then under the direction of the rev. Mr. Wyatt. On March 13, 1733, he was entered a commoner of Christ Church, Oxford, where he had for his tutor the rev. John Whitfield, M. A. afterwards poetry professor. In July 1735, he was elected demy of Magdalen college, and two years afterwards fellow of that society, having in the intermediate year (Oct. 20) been admitted to the degree of B. A. He commenced M.A, June 20, 1739; and was ordained deacon, Dec. 20, 1741, and priest Sept. 19, 1742, by Dr. Seeker, bishop of Oxford.

On his return to college he resumed the employment of tutor. Mr. Lovibond, the poet, and lord Bagot, were two of his pupils. In 1746 he was presented to the living of Hatfield Peverel, in Essex. In 1749 he was senior proctor of the university; and, resigning Hatfield, was presented to the rectory of Blithfield, in Staffordshire, by sir Walter Wagstaffe Bagot, bart. Soon after he quitted the proctorship he was admitted (June 15) to the degree of B. D. and the same summer Mr. Drake offered him the lower rnediety of Malpas, in the county of Chester. After some reluctance, principally arising from his unwillingness to leave Oxford, he accepted this offer, and was instituted Jan. 2, 1751. At the close of the year (Dec. 19) he quitted Oxford, and resigned his fellowship the month following. He now divided his time between Malpas and Blithfield, which he held for a few years with his new preferment; and then, having resigned it, he inducted (Feb. 23, 1759) his worthy successor, the rev. Walter Bagot, M. A. son of his esteemed friend and patron. In 1758, a very considerable accession of fortune came to him by the death of the rev. William Barcroft, rector of Fairsted and vicar of Kelvedon, in Essex, who bequeathed him his library and the principal part of his fortune, amounting in the whole to more than eight thousand pounds. According to the testimony of his biographer, his conduct as a Christian' pastor seems to have been in all respects most exemplary.

About 1766, and for some time afterwards, he employed himself in composing an exposition of the Apocalypse. This he finished, but never published. “It was his humble request to God, that if his system were wrong, the work might never see the light) and it so proved, that whenever he thought of revising his papers and preparing them for the press, something still intervened, and hindered his design.” In this uncertainty, as to the probable success of his undertaking, it was suffered to lie quiet in his stiKlv, with a direction to be burnt, whicji he never rescinded. He found leisure, however, while employed on it, to attend to the controversy excited by the publication of 4 * The Confessional,“and published, but without his name, 1.” Doubts concerning the authenticity of the 1 last publication of the Confessional, and the current editions of certain books cited in it; addressed to the author of that learned work,“1767. 2.” A Defence“of them, in answer to” Occasional Remarks,“&c. 1768; and 3. in the same year,” A Dialogue between Isaac Walton and Homologistes; in which the character of bishop Sanderson is defended against the author of the Confessional." All these valuable pamphlets are reprinted in the late edition of his works.

In Sept. 1768, at the earnest request of his friend and patron, Mr. Drake, Dr. Townson went abroad with his eldest son, Mr. William Drake, a gentleman-commoner of Brazen Nose college, and performed nearly the same tour which he went over twenty-six years before. After his return to Malpas in October 1769, he studied and produced his “Discourses on the Four Gospels.” They originated in a sermon first preached in the parish church of Biithfiold, and afterwards before the university, June 2, 1771, where he was desired to publish what had been heard with so much satisfaction. This induced him to re-consider the subject; and, by a progress which every literary man will readily understand, it grew under his revision to its present form and size, and was published in 1778, in a quarto volume, and received with the universal approbation of his learned brethren. Bishop Lowth’s testimony to its merit may be selected from a number: “It is a capital performance, and sets every part of the subject it treats of in a more clear and convincing light than ever it appeared in before.” But, adds his biographer, he received testimony to the merit of his book, on which he set a higher value than on the commendation of any individual, however exalted in character, or dignified by station. This was the degree of D. D. by diploma, which was with perfect unanimity conferred on him in full convocation, by the university of Oxford, February 23, 1779. This honour will appear the greater to our readers, when they are told that diploma degrees are very rarely conferred by this university.

In 1783 the divinity chair of the university of Oxford, then vacant by the death of Dr. Wheeler, was offered to him by lord North, chancellor 'of Oxford, in a very handsome letter; but this offer he declined, “as he was now so far in the decline of life, that he was very apprehensive, or rather satisfied, that he was not equal to the exertions which a faithful discharge of the duties of that office would require.”

During the same year, when the attention of the reading and literary world was occupied by the controversy between Dr. Priestley and Dr. Horsley (then archdeacon of St. Alban’s) Dr. Townson sent to the archdeacon some remarks on his opponent’s letters, which were printed in the appendix of Dr. Uorsley’s Letters to Dr. Priestley, published in 1784, but without his name, which he concealed. In the northern part of the diocese of Chester, the Roman Catholics form a considerable body. This induced our author to turn his mind to examine the claims of the church of Rome, and he accordingly composed a dissertation on the subject; but, although this work was highly approved by his friends, and was even transcribed for the press, he deferred the publication with his wonted diffidence; nor did he at last, when the question was put to him, pronounce decisively whether it should or should not be printed. This, however, Whs done in 1797, and it now forms a part of his esteemed works. In 1784 he printed part of the work on the Resurrection, already noticed as begun in 1778, under the title of “A Discourse on the Evangelical Histories of the Resurrection and first Appearances of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,” 4to. Of this he dispersed six or eight copies among those in whose judgment he placed confidence; but the final publication was posthumous.

The above sketch has been taken from the “Account” prefixed by Mr. Churton to “The Works of Dr. Townson,” collected and published by him in 1810, 2 vols. 8vo. The contents of these volumes are: Vol. I. the “Discourses on the Gospels,” to which is subjoined “A Sermon on the manner of our Saviour’s teaching.” The original part of this volume consists of a sermon, entitled “The Quotations in the Old Testament considered,” preached before the university of Oxford, at St. Mary’s Oxford, in 1807, by Mr. Churton, and placed here “in humble hope that it may form no improper introduction to the Discourses of Dr. Townson on the Gospels, by shewing that what is there maintained, in the case of the evangelists, was the known and established practice of revelation, from the days of the first prophets that succeeded Moses.” Prefixed to this excellent discourse, is an introduction of very considerable length, principally in vindication of Dr. Townson from the attack lately made on his work by the author of “ Discursory Considerations on the Hypothesis of Dr. Macknight and others, that St. Luke’s Gospel was the first written.” In handling this controversy, Mr. Churron displays abilities of which it is certainly not too much to say that they place him in the first rank of biblical scholars; but, what is perhaps yet more valuable, they exhibit that uniform candour and calmness of temper, which, if they do not end in conviction, would certainly make many controversies end in peace.

, a learned divine who deserves to be recorded as a rare specimen of a doctrinal puritan, who retained his loyalty to the king and attachment to the church with equal firmness, was born at North-Tawton in Devonshire, in 1602. He was educated at Exeter- college, Oxford, where he took his degrees, and was chosen fellow in 1623. Having afterwards taken orders, he was, according to Wood, useful in moderating, reading to novices, and lecturing in the chapel. He was alsp an able and laborious preacher, had much, Wood says, of the -primitive religion in his sermons, and “seemed to be a most precise puritan in his looks and life, on which account his sermons and expositions in the churches of St. Giles’s and St. Martin at Oxford, were much frequented by the puritanical party.” He appears however to have been decidedly averse to the proceedings of those who were intent on overturning the establishment of the church; and although, in 1643, he was, from his general character, nominated one of the assembly of divines, he declined attending them, and preferred remaining at Oxford, where he preached at Christ Church before the king, and at St. Mary’s before the parliament. In both instances he was so much approved that he was appointed by the chancellor of the university, in 1646, to take his doctor’s degree, but this he declined. Adhering to his loyalty, and to the use of the Common Prayer, after it had been abolished, he was soon denounced by the usurping party. Dr. Hakewell, the rector, having left the college, the government devolved on Mr. Tozer, as sub-rector, who manfully opposed the illegality of the parliamentary visitation, and maintained the rights and privileges of the college, although the university was at that time in complete possession of the parliamentary forces, and every man was to be expelled who did not obey their orders as given from the mouth of the visitors. In March 1647-8, he was cited before these visitors, who kept their judgment-hall in Merton-college, and was accused of “continuing the Common Prayer in the college, after the ordinance for the Directory (the new form) came in force: also of having sent for and admonished one of the house, for refusing to attend the chapel-prayers on that account.” It was among his crimes, likewise, that he had constantly shown the utmost dislike to the parliamentary faction, and always countenanced and patronized the loyalists of his college. And although the visitors had thought proper to put off the term, yet as Dr. Fell, the vice-chancellor, had proceeded to open it at the usual time in the university, without any regard to the visitors’ pleasure, Mr. Tozer did the same in Exeter college. In answer to all this, Mr. Tozer did what at the close of the same century conferred immortal honour on the fellows of Magdalen college, he disowned their authority; and told them, that “the things about which he was questioned, concerned the discipline of the college; and that he had some time before answered in the name of the whole college, that they could not, withr out perjury, submit to any other visitors than those to whom their statutes directed them,” meaning the bishop of Exeter, a title sufficiently obnoxious. This answer being, as may be expected, unsatisfactory to the visitors, they ordered him to be ejected, aad committed the execution of the sentence to the soldiers of the garrison. Mr. Tozer however contrived to keep possession of the college for some time; in consequence of which, in June 1648, the visitors again sent for him, and with equal contempt for the statutes of the house, peremptorily forbade him to proceed to an election the day following; and as it is probable he refused to comply, they expelled him both from the college and the university. But he was not to be terrified from what he thought his duty even by this sentence, and refused to deliver up the keys of the college, there being no rector to whom he could legally give them, and then they imprisoned him. Even when he was, in the same month, preaching at St. Martin’s church, he was dragged out of it by the soldiers, and forbidden to officiate there any more, because he seduced the people. By what means the visitors were afterwards induced to show any degree of lenity to Mr. Tozer, we are not told; but it is certain that after all their harsh treatment of him, and his spirited opposition to their authority, he was allowed to remain in his rooms in the college, and they even gave him the profits of a travelling fellowship for three years. On the strength of this, he went to Holland, and became minister to the English merchants at Rotterdam, where he died Sept. 11, 1650, in the forty-eighth year of his age, and was interred in the English church in that place. Mr. Tozer published a few occasional sermons; “Directions for a godly life, especially for communicating at the Lord’s Tahle,” 1628, 8vo. of which a tenth edition appeared in 1680; and “Dicta et facta Christi ex quatuor evangelistis collecta,” 1634, 8vo.

, an eminent physician, was born in 1640, at Aversa, in the kingdom of Naples, and after studying medicine at Naples, took his doctor’s degree in 1661. Although at this time only in his twenty-first year, he was thought capable of instructing others, and first gave lectures on physiology; he afterwards for several years taught for Thomas Cornelio of Cosenza, whose advanced age prevented him from lecturing as professor of medicine and mathematics. He was also employed to supply the place of Andrew Lamez, another of the professors, and often gave four lectures in a day. At length be succeeded to Cornelio’s professorship of the theory of medicine, which he tilled with increasing reputation. In 1679 he had attained such high fame, that the university of Padua solicited him to accept, a chair there; hut this and many otuer most liberal offers he declined from his attachment to Naples, where he was deservedly appointed p!u >?cian to ti t hospital or' the Annunciata, and first physician to the state. On the death, however, of Malpighi, in 1694, he was induced to change his resolution. Pope Innocent XII. appointed him, in the year following, to succeed Malpighi as his first physician, and having accepted this honourable situation, the pope gave him the principal professorship in the college of Sapienza. After the death of this pontiff in 1700, Tozzi was chosen physician to the conclave, but could not accept it, as he was invited to Spain to attend the king, Charles II. then in a bad state of health. But hearing, when on the road to Madrid, of this king’s death, he returned to Rome to pay his respects to the new pope Clement XI. by whom he was highly esteemed, and who made him great offers if he would remain at Rome. His former attachment however to his native country returning, he proceeded again to Naples, whence the duke of Medina Celi, the viceroy, would not allow him any more to depart, a constraint which was perfectly agreeable to his inclination. He died at Naples, March 11, 1717, in his seventy-seventh year. He published several professional works separately, which, with many additions, were republished in 5 vols. 4to, under the title of “Opera omnia Medica,” Venice, 1711 1728. Tozzi, in his practice, as well as theory, held some singular opinions. He rejected blisters and bloodletting, and did not admit of the existence of plethora. With Van Helmont and Sylvius de Le Boe, he considered acidity as the cause of most diseases, which he endeavoured to obviate by absorbents. His specific in continued fevers, was a precipitate of mercury and in consumptions distilled water of vipers.

, an eminent botanist, the son of Leonard Targioni, born at Florence Sept. 11, 1722, was sent to the university of Pisa, where he very soon distinguished himself by a thesis on the use of medicine. At the age of nineteen he became acquainted with the famous botanist Micheli, by whom he was protected, with whom he kept up an uninterrupted friendship till 1737, when Micheli died, and whom he succeeded in the care of the famous botanic garden. Of the plants in this garden Micheli had already made a catalogue, which Targioni published after his death, with very considerable additions by himself. In the year 1737, he was made professor of botany in the Studio Fiorentino, a kind of university at Florence, and at the same time member of the academy ofApatisti. In 1738, he became a member of the Collegio Medico, or faculty of Medicine. Much about the same time he was named by government consulting physician in pestilential disorders, aud had the place of fiscal physician (physician to the courts of justice). This last place obliged him to write a great deal, being often consulted on the accidents that became discussions for a court of justice, such as deaths by poison, sudden deaths, unheard-of distempers, and (when, as it sometimes happened, foolish accusations of the kind were brought into court) witchcraft. Some time after, he was named, together with the celebrated Antonio Cocchi, to make a catalogue of the library, begun by P</lagliabecchi and increased by Marni, duke Leopold, and others, which consisted of 40,000 volumes of printed books, and about 1100 volumes of manuscripts. It is to this nomination we are indebted for the five volumes of letters of famous men, as, during his employment in this capacity, he used to make extracts of the curious books which fell into his hands. On Micheli’s death in 1737, Mr. Targioni had inherited his Hortus Siccus, Mss. and collection of natural history, which last, however, he purchased, but at a very cheap rate, with his own money. This seemed to lay him under the necessity of publishing what his master had left behind him, and accordingly he had prepared the second part of the “Nova Plantarum Genera,” but not exactly in the manner in which Micheli himself would have published them; for, though the drawings were too good to be lost, as they have all the accuracy which distinguish the other works of the great naturalist, Targioni could not suffer the work to come forth with the Zoophytes and Keratophytes classed among the plants, asMicheli had intended. Targioni therefore meant to have given the work another form. It was to be divided into two parts, the first of which would have contained the “Fucus’s, Algae, and Confervae;” and the second the “Zoophytes:” the first part was finished a week before Targioni’s death. Many of the plates are from drawings by Ottaviano Targioni, the son of John Targioni, who succeeded his father as reader of botany in the hospital of Sancta Maria Maggiore, a new establishment formed by the grand duke upon a liberal and extensive plan, in which ducal professors of medicine, anatomy, chemistry, physiology, surgery, &c. read gratis on the very spot where examples are at hand to confirm their doctrine. In 1739, Targioni was chosen member of the academy Naturae Curiosorum; and, in 1745, the Crusca gave him a public testimony of the value they set upon his style, by chusing him one of their members. In 1749, he was chosen member of the academy of Etruscans at Cortona, as he was of that of the Sepolti at Volterra in-4749. The academy of Botanophiles made him one of their body in 1757; as did that of practical agriculture at Udino in 1758. In 1771, he was chosen honorary member of the royal academy of sciences and belles lettres at Naples; and, finally, was named corresponding member of the royal society of medicine at Paris in 1780. It is much to be regretted that we cannot give an account of his manuscript works, several of which are known to be very important, as he was one of the most celebrated physicians of this time, and is known to have written a great deal on inoculation (of which he was one of the first promoters in Tuscany), putrid fevers, &c. &c. His printed works are extremely numerous; among the first of them was his “Thesis de prsestantia et usu Plantarum in medicina.” Pisis, 1734,“folio; and the latest, * Notizie degli Aggrandimenti delle Scienze Fisiche accaduti in Toscana nel corso di anni 60, nel secolo 17, Firenze,” 1780, 4 vols. 4to. He had just published the fourth volume of this last great work, on the improvement made in natural knowledge and natural philosophy in Tuscany in sixty years only of the 17th century, when he died of an atrophy in 1780. Mr. Targioni had a large cabinet of natural history, the foundation of which, as has been said, had been laid by Micheli. It consists of the minerals and fossils which are found in Tuscany, and the Zoophytes and Hortus Siccus of Micheli. There is a drawer made at Amboyna, by order of Rumphius, containing all the sorts of wood of that island. Besides this, there is a great suite of animals and shells and petrified animal substances, particularly of the bones of elephants which are found in the environs of Florence.

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

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

In what year the elder Tradescant died is uncertain, though it seems to have happened most probably in 1652. The son inherited the museum, and bequeathed it by a deed of gift to Mr. Ashmole, who lodged in Tradescant’s house. (See Ashmole.) It afterwards becoming part of the Ashmolean museum, the name of Tradescant was sunk. John, the son, died in 1662, and was buried April 25 of that year. Besides the prints prefixed to the “Museum Tradescantianum,” there are several portraits of the Tradescant family in the Ashmolean Museum, both male and female, esteemed good; but there are no dates to the pictures, nor any painter’s name or mark. John’s widow erected a monument to the family in Lambeth church-yard, in 1662, which was much injured by time; but two fine drawings of it, happily preserved in the Pepysian library, came in aid of the mutilated parts, and in 1773 it was repaired by a public subscription.

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

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, was descended of an ancient family that had been in possession of the estate of Blebo, in the county of Fife, from the time of Walter Traill, archbishop of St. Andrew’s, 1385, who, as some say, purchased it; but Keith calls him “a son of the laird of Blebo,” by which it would appear that the estate had been in the family before the archbishop’s time. This prelate had been a canon of St. Andrew’s, and pursued his studies on the continent, where he was honoured with the degree of doctor both of civil and canon law, and when at Rome became referendary to pope Clement VIL This pontiff had a very high opinion of him, and when the see of St. Andrew’s became vacant, preferred him to it by his authority, without any election. So excellent indeed was his character in that comparatively dark age, that even Buchanan speaks in his praise. He built the castle of St. Andrew’s, the scene afterwards of many remarkable transactions in the history of the church of Scotland, and died in 14-01. He was buried in the cathedral, near to the high altar, with an inscription characteristic of the encomiastic genius of the times:

He is said to have given the estate of Blebo to a nephew, but we are unable to trace his descendants until we arrive at the sixteenth century, when we meet with Andrew Traill, the great grandfather of our author, who was a younger brother of the family of Blebo. Following the profession of a soldier, he rose to the rank of a colonel, and was for some time in the service of the city of Bruges, and other towns in Flanders, in the wars which they carried on in defence of their liberties, against Philip II. of Spain. When he left this service his arrears amounted to 2,700l. for which he received a bond secured upon the property of the States. He then served under the king of Navarre, afterwards Henry IV. of France, in the civil wars of that kingdom, and had occasion to do that prince considerable service in taking a town by stratagem. Upon his return to Britain he was made a gentleman of prince Henry’s privychamber. When he died is not known; but he had a son, James Traill, who endeavoured to recover the sum due to him by the cities of Flanders; and, upon a petition to king James, which was referred to sir Harry Martin, judge of the admiralty, he obtained a warrant to arrest a ship belonging to the city of Bruges, which was done accordingly. But the duke of Buckingham being gained by the adverse party, the ship was soon released; nor could he ever afterwards recover any part of the debt. This circumstance, together with the expence of the prosecution, obliged him to dispose of a small estate in the parish of Deninno, in the county of Fife.

The son of this James Traill, Robert, the father of the immediate subject of this article, was minister, first of Ely, in the county of Fife, and afterwards of the Grey Friars church, in Edinburgh, and was much distinguished for his fidelity and zeal in discharging the duties of his function, until after the restoration, when being prosecuted for nonconformity before the Scotch council, he was imprisoned seven months in Edinburgh, and banished from the kingdom. He then went to Holland, whence he wrote a letter of advice to his wife and children, the only piece of his which has been published. He returned afterwards, and died in Scotland, but at what time is uncertain. He was one of the ministers who attended the marquis of Montrose on the scaffold. While in Holland, a very characteristic portrait of him was painted there, which is now in the possession of the earl of Buchan, and from which there is an engraving in Mr. Pinkerton’s “Scotish Gallery.”

His son, Robert, the subject of this memoir, was born at Ely in May 1642. After the usual course of education at home, he was sent to the university of Edinburgh, where he recommended himself to the several professors by his capacity and diligent application to his studies. Having determined to devote himself to the church, he pursued the study of divinity with great ardour for several years. Partaking with his father in zeal for the principles and discipline of the presbyterian church, he became a sufferer in its cause, unusual severity being exercised against those who would not accede to the introduction of episcopacy. In 1666 he was obliged to secrete himself, together with his mother and elder brother, because some copies of a book entitled “An apologetic Relation,” &c. which the privy council had ordered to be publicly burnt, were found in Mrs. Traill’s house; and in the following year, being suspected as having been one of those who took up arms and resisted the king’s forces, or of being a favourer of their cause, a proclamation was issued for apprehending him. This obliged him to join his father in Holland, where he resumed his divinity studies, and assisted Nethenus, professor of divinity at Utrecht, in the republication of Rutherford’s “Examination of Arminianism.” In the preface to his edition of that book, Nethenus speaks of Mr. Robert Traill as a pious, prudent, learned, and industrious young man.

In 1670 he ventured to come over to England, where he was at least free from the sanguinary tyranny which disgraced his own country about this time, and was ordained by some presbyterian divines in London. Seven years afterwards, however, he was at Edinburgh, and for preaching privately, was apprehended, and brought before the privy council. Before them he acknowledged he had kept house-conventicles, but as to field-conventicles, which was a criminal offence, he left them to prove that, and peremptorily refused to answer upon oath any interrogatories that might affect himself. On this he was sent to prison, but released by order of government in October of the same year, 1677. He then returned to England, and preached in a meeting at Cranbrook, in Kent, but was afterwards for many years pastor to a Scotch congregation in London, and at one time was colleague with the Rev. Nathaniel Mather in a meeting in Lime-street.

As he was warmly attached to the doctrines usually called Calvinistic, he took a zealous concern in the controversy that followed the publication of Dr. Crisp’s works. In 1692 he published his “Vindication of the Protestant doctrine of Justification, and of its first preachers and professors, from the unjust charge of Antinomianisrn.” In this he discovers great zeal against Arminianism, and is not a little displeased with those divines who were for adopting what they called a middle way, and who wrote against Dr. Crisp.

Mr. Traill lived to see the revolution established, and to rejoice in the settlement of the protestant succession in the illustrious house of Hanover. He died in May 1716, aged seventy-four. His works, principally sermons, which have long been popular, particularly in Scotland, were printed for many years separately, but in 1776 were published together at Glasgow in 3 vols. 8vo. In 1810a more complete edition appeared at Edinburgh in 4 vols. 8vo, with a life prefixed, of which we have partly availed ourselves. It is not mentioned in any account we have seen, where Mr. Traill died, but it is probable that he had returned to Scotland before that event, as all his descendants were settled there. His son, Robert, was minister of Panbride, in the county of Angus, and was the father of Dr. James Traill, who, conforming to the English church, was presented to the living of West Ham, Essex, in 1762. He accompanied the earl of Hertford as chaplain to that nobleman when ambassador in France, and was afterwards his chaplain when he became lord lieutenant of Ireland. In 1765 he was appointed bishop of Down and Connor, and died in Dublin in 1783.

, a learned modern Greek, was born in 1395, in the island of Crete, but took the name of Trapezuntius, or “of Trebisond,” because his family were originally of that city. In his youth he wenj; to Venice, where Francis Barbaro, who had invited him, became his patron. Having been instructed in the Latin language he went to Padua, and afterwards to Vicenza, where in 1420 his patron obtained for him the professorship of the Greek, but he did not remain long in this situation. Finding himself harassed by the intrigues of Guarino, of Verona, who regarded him with sentiments of determined hostility, he gave up his professorship, on which Barbaro recalled him to Venice, where by the interest of this steady friend he was appointed to teach rhetoric, and was enrolled among the citizens of Venice. Barbaro afterwards recommended him to the court of Rome, where we find Trapezuntius in 1442, in the pontificate of Eugenius, teaching the belles lettres and the Aristotelian philosophy. During the same time he was employed in translating several Greek authors into Latin, which induced Nicholas V. the successor of Eugenius, to make him apostolic secretary. These translations he was thought to have executed well, but his reputation declined so far on one occasion as to end in his disgrace. He had received orders from the pope to translate the Almagest of Ptolemy, and to add a commentary, or notes. This he performed in 1451, and the following year was banished from Rome on account of this work. What there was so offensive as to bring upon him this punishment is not known, or at least not clearly expressed by his biographers; but it seems not improbable, that his general temper, which was irritable, had disgusted some of his contemporaries, and that the pope had listened to the insinuations of his enemies. Many errors had been detected in his translations by some of those able scholars whom Nicholas V. had assembled at his court, and this probably rendered Trapezuntius more apt to take offence. It was probably while in this temper, that a disgraceful quarrel took place between him and the celebrated Poggio, in Pompey’s theatre, where the pontifical secretaries were assembled, for the purpose of correcting certain official papers. It was occasioned by some satiric remarks of Poggio, which provoked Trapezuntius to give him a blow on the face. Poggio returned it, and continued the battle until, as we may suppose, the combatants were parted.

Trapezuntius now retired to Naples with his family, and wrote to his old protector Barbara, but found he had been dead about a month. The good offices of Philelphus, however, made his peace with the pope, and Philelphus wrote to him, that he might not only return to Rome by permission, but that the pope even wished it; and he was accordingly reinstated in his former office. He had always defended the peripatetic philosophy against the Platonists with great vehemence and acrimony, and now wrote his “Comparison of Aristotle and Plato,” full of bitter invective. This involved him in a controversy with Gaza, and particularly with Bessarion; the particulars of which we have already given in our account of the latter. His first quarrel with Gaza was owing to their having jointly undertaken the translation of Aristotle, “On Animals,” each claiming to himself the exclusive merit of having overcome the difficulties which arose from the great number of names of animals which are found in that work.

Trapezuntius appears to have met with some reverse after this controversy, for in 1549 he was again at Venice, supplicating the aid of the State, and was in consequence appointed professor of the belles-lettres. While in this office he wrote his Art of Rhetoric, dedicated to the Venetians, which appeared under the title of “Rhetorica Trapezuntina,” but was not printed until 1470, at Venice, in folio, and then only the first book. In 1464 and 1465, he took a voyage to Crete, and another to Constantinople. On his return, being informed that one of his scholars was now pope, under the name of Paul II. he went to Rome, in hopes of being well received; but all he received was an order to be imprisoned in the castle of St. Angelo, where he remained for four months, and was afterwards under confinement in his house. The most probable cause of this treatment was his having returned to Rome without leave; but this is merely conjecture; the pope, however, at length condescended to forgive him, and he remained at Rome much respected. In his latter years his faculties began to decay, and before his death, which took place in 1484, in the ninetieth year of his age, all traces of memory and understanding were gone.

, an English divine, and voluminous translator, was the grandson of the rev. John Trapp, vicar of Weston-upon-Avon, and schoolmaster at Stratford in Warwickshire, who wrote large commentaries upon almost all the books of the Old and New Testament, published in several quarto volumes, 1646, &c. and other tracts on subjects of divinity. He never had, nor wished to have, any preferment besides his vicarage, which lay at the convenient distance of two miles from his school. His character, as a man and as a preacher, would have recommended him to higher promotion; but he always refused to accept it, as his condition was equal to his wishes. He died Oct. 17, 1669, aged sixty-eight.

Our author’s father, the rev. Joseph Trapp, rector of Cherrington in Gloucestershire, was a master of arts, and had formerly been student of Christ-church, Oxford, and was inducted into Cherrington in 1662, where he was buried Sept. 24, 1698, with a Latin inscription, immediately over his grave, in the North chancel. His son, the subject of the present account, was born, probably in November, as he was baptised on the sixteenth of that month, 1679. After some education at home under his father, he was removed to the care of the master of New-collegeschool, Oxford, and became so good a scholar, that in 1695, at sixteen years of age, he was entered a commoner of Wadham-college, and, in 1696, was admitted a scholar of the same house. In 1702, he proceeded master of arts, and in 1704, was chosen a fellow. In 1708, he was appointed the first professor of poetry, on the foundation of Dr. Birkhead, sometime fellow of All-Souls-college, and continued in the same for ten years, the period allotted by the founder. In 1709-10, he acted as a manager for Dr. Sacheverell on his memorable trial; and in 1711, was appointed chaplain to sir Constantine Phipps, lord chancellor of Ireland, and one of the lords justices of that kingdom.

In 1720, Mr. Trapp was, by the favour of the earl of Peterborough, presented to the rectory of Dauntzey, in Wiltshire, which he resigned in 1721 for the vicarage of the united parishes of Christ-ohurch, Newgate-street, and St. Leonard’s, Foster-lane. In February 1727, in consequence of the merit and usefulness of his two books, entitled “Popery truly stated,” and “Answer to England’s Conversion,” both printed in that year, he was presented by the university of Oxford with a doctor of divinity’s degree by diploma. In 1733, he was, on the demise of Robert Cooper, M. A. and archdeacon of Dorset, preferred to the rectory of Harlington, Middlesex, on the presentation of the celebrated lord Bolingbroke, to whom he had been appointed chaplain by the recommendation of dean Swift, and in defence of whose administration he had written a number of papers in the “Examiner,” during 1711 and two following years. In 1734, he was elected one of the joint-lecturers of St. Martin’s-in-the-Fields: and dying at Harlington of a pleurisy, Nov. 22, 1747, aged sixtyseven, was interred on the North side of the entrance into the chancel of Harlington-cburch. He desired in h’s will, that each of his parishioners in Christ-church and St. Leonard’s Foster-lane, and in Harlington, Middlesex, who were housekeepers, might, from the highest to the lowest, “have a copy of his little book, entitled ‘ The Four last Things,’ beseeching them, for the sake of their immortal souls, to read it, and practise it, and recommend it to their children and servants, and all others committed to their charge.” His parishioners of Christ-church had so grateful a sense of his memory, as to erect a monument by subscription in their church, with an inscription apparently taken from some lines in the poem which he bequeathed them.

Dr. Trapp was in person of a middle stature, slender habit, olive complexion, and a countenance of uncommon openness and animation, arising from the concurrence of an arched high forehead, fine eyebrows, and expressive vivid eyes, which, accompanied with an erect attitude, gave him an air of consequence and dignity, prepossessing his audience, at his first appearance in the pulpit, with a favourable expectation of what he was about to deliver. The portrait of him in the Oxford picture-gallery is a striking resemblance. In his temper, he was somewhat impatient and hasty, but in general had a considerable command over it, where professional decorum was necessary. Being a man of wit, he could unbend agreeably among his intimate friends, and had seen much of the world, and conversed with men of all parties in an age strongly marked with party-spirit. Like most divines about the commencement of the last century, he was challenged to personal controversies with those of the popish persuasion, but always resisted them. “Disputes by word of mouth,” he says, in the preface to Popery truly stated, “I always declined, and always will: I never knew any good come of them: much harm, I am sure, may, and I believe often does: much empty wrangling at the time of the debate, and much misreport and misrepresentation after it. And therefore I chose writing rather than talking.”

He was so much addicted to books, that it was the late bishop Pearce’s opinion that he studied harder than any man in England. In consequence of this he was liable to absence of mind, as it is called, and frequently ordinary matters and occurrences passed unheeded before him. When at college, according to the imperfect account of him in the Supplement to the “Biographia Britannica,” he was somewhat dissipated, and was led to pursuits not becoming his intended profession. When he applied to Dr, Robinson, bishop of London, for orders, that prelate censured him, with much warmth, for having written a play (“Abramule”); but, after taking on him the sacred profession, he was uniform in a conduct which did credit to it. And his consistency in this respect for a series of years, during the most turbulent times, both in church and state, procured him the greatest honours and respect from persons of the first order and character. The university of Oxford, who confers her honours only by the test of merit, and the rules of propriety, could not express her opinion of his merit more significantly than by presenting him with a doctor of divinity’s degree, by diploma, in full convocation. When he preached his assize sermon at Oxford, 1739, it was observed, that the late rev. Dr. Theophilus Leigh, master of Baliol-college, and then vice-chancellor of Oxford, stood up all the time of his preaching, to manifest his high sense of so respectable a character. Nor was he regarded only by those of his own church and country, for he was much esteemed by foreigners, and even by those of the Romish communion, against whom he stood foremost in controversy, and that with some acrimony. When, in 1742, his son was at Rome, he was asked by one of the cardinals, whether he was related to the great Dr. Trapp, and the cardinal being informed that he was his son, he immediately requested, that on his return to England, he would not fail to make his particular respects to the doctor.

Dr. Trapp acquired fame in his day by a great variety of writings, theological, critical, controversial, political, and poetical. He seems to have valued himself as a translator, in which he was confessedly unsuccessful. When appointed poetry professor, he gave a regular course of lectures in very elegant Latin, which were published in 1718, in three vols, octavo, under the title of “Prelectiones Poeticae.” A translation appeared afterwards: but, although he acquitted himself in these lectures as a good critic, he was not able to exemplify his own rules, and his translation of Virgil bears no resemblance to the original, owing to an imprudent choice of words and figures, and a total want of harmony. He had most success in a Latin translation of “Anacreon,” for Latin poetry was his forte; but failed when he attempted to transfuse the spirit of Milton into that language.

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

Dr. Trapp married, in 1712, Miss White, daughter of Mr. Alderman White of Oxford, by whom he had two sons, Henry, so baptised after his godfather lord Bolingbroke, who died in infancy, and Joseph, who became in 1734 fellow of New college Oxford, and in 1751 was presented by George Pitt, esq. afterwards lord Rivers, to the living of Stratfield, near Hertford Bridge, Hampshire. He died in 1769.

, a learned judge, was born, as Wood thinks, at or near Plympton in Devonshire in 1644, and was admitted a commoner of Exeter college, Oxford, in 1660. After studying some time here, he left college without taking a degree, as, we have repeatedly had occasion te observe, was usual with young gentlemen intended for the law; and went to the Inner Temple. After being admitted to the bar, he had much practice, and was accounted a good common lawyer. In 1678 and 1679, he sat in parliament as representative for Plympton, and in the lastmentioned year was appointed chairman of the committee of secrecy for the investigation of the popish plot, and was in 1680 one of the managers in the impeachment of lord Stafford. In December of the same year, when sir George Jeffries was dismissed from the recordership of London, Mr. Treby was elected in his room, and in January 1681 the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood: but when the quo warranto issued, and the city charter, for which he pleaded along with Pollexfen, was withheld, he was deprived of the recordership in Oct. 1685. On the revolution, king William restored him to this office, and he had the honour of addressing his majesty, in the absence of the lord mayor, sir John Chapman, who was confined by sickness. His very able speech on this occasion was published in the “Fourth collection of papers relating to the present juncture of affairs in England,” 1683, 4to, and in Bohun*s “History of the Desertion,” 1689, 4to, In March 1688 he was made solicitor -general, and the following year attorney-general. In April 1692 he was called to the rank of serjeant, and in May following was promoted to be chief justice of the Common Pleas, on which he resigned the office of recorder. This learned and upright lawyer died in March 1701-2, aged fifty-six. His son and grandson, of the same names, represented Plympton and Dartmouth, and the latter was master of the household to George II. and a lord of the treasury.

, an eminent naturalist, was born at Gen-eva in 1710, and was intended by his father for the church, for which reason he sent him to pursue his studies in Holland. There he became tutor to the children of M. Bentinck, and coming afterwards to London, had the young duke of Richmond for his pupil. On his return to Geneva in 1757, he settled there, and became most esteemed for learning and private character. He had early devoted his leisure to some branches of natural history, and when appointed one of the commissioners for providing Geneva with a granary of corn, he was enabled by his knowledge of the insects which infest grain, to prevent their ravages in a great measure. But his reputation as a naturalist was first promoted throughout Europe by his discoveries on the nature of the polypes. These animals were first discovered by Leeuwenhoek, who gave some account of them in the Philosophical Transactions for 1703; but their wonderful properties were not thoroughly known until 1740, when Mr. Trembley began to investigate them; and when he published the result of his experiments in his “Memoires sur les Polypes,” Leyden, 1744, 4to, all naturalists became interested in the surprising facts which were disclosed. Previous to this, indeed, Leibnitz and Boerhaave, by reasonings a priori, had concluded that animals might be found which would propagate by slips like plants; and their conjecture was soon verified by the observations of Mr. Trembley. At first, however, he was uncertain whether he should reckon these creatures animals or plants: and while thus uncertain, he wrote a letter on the subject to Mr. Bonnet in January 1741; but in March the same year, he had satisfied himself that they were real animals. He also made several communications to the Royal Society, of which he was elected a member in 1743, on the same subject. There are other papers on subjects of natural history by him in the Philosophical Transactions. Mr. Trembley also acquired no small fame by the publication of some valuable books for young persons, particularly his “Instructions d'un pare a ses enfans sur la nature et la religion,” 1775 and 1779, 2 vols. 8vo “Instructions sur la religion naturelle,” 1779, 3 vols. 8vo and “Recherches sur le principe de la vertu et du bonheur,” 8vo, works in which philosophy and piety are united. Mr. Trembley died in 1734.

, a protestant divine of great learning, and the editor of a Latin translation of the Bible, was born at Ferrara in 1510. He was the son of a Jew, and was educated with such care as to become a great master in the Hebrew tongue; but was converted to Christianity, first as a Roman catholic, by cardinal Pole, and secondly as a protetant by the celebrated Peter Martyr, and went with him to Lucca. Afterwards, leaving Italy altogether, he went into Germany, and settled at Strasburgh; whence he proceeded to England in the reign of Edward VI. where he lived in intimacy with the archbishops Cranmer and Parker, particularly the latter, and also taught Hebrew at Cambridge; but after the death of the king, he returned to Germany, and taught Hebrew in the school of Hornbach. Thence he was invited to Heidelberg, under the elector palatine Frederic III. where he was professor of the Hebrew tongue, and translated the Syriac Testament into Latin. There also he undertook a Latin translation of the Bible out of Hebrew, and associated Francis Junius to him in that work. His next remove was to Sedan, at the request of the duke of Builloin, to be the Hebrew professor in his new university, where he died, 1580, in his seventieth year.

His translation of the Bible was first published in 1575, and afterwards corrected by Junius in 1587. The Protestant churches received it with great approbation; and our learned Matthew Poole, in the preface to his “Synopsis Criticorum,” reckons it among the best versions; but popish writers have not spoken so favourably of it, but represent it as very faulty “As Tremellius,” says father Simon, “was a Jew, before he was a Protestant, he has retained something peculiar to himself in his translation, and deviates often from the true sense. His Latin is affected, and full of faults.”

, an English political writer, of the democratic cast, was descended of an ancient family, the son of sir John Trenchard, secretary of state to king William III. and was born in 1669. “”He had a liberal education, and was bred to the law, in which he was well skilled; but politics, and his place of commissioner of the forfeited estates in Ireland, which he had enjoyed in the reign of king William, took him from the bar, whither he had never any inclination to return. He was also rendered independent by the death of an uncle, and by his marriage, and determined to employ his time in political discussions. His first publication of this kind, in conjunction with Mr. Moyle, appeared in 1698, entitled “An Argument, shewing that a standing army is inconsistent with a free government, and absolutely destructive to the constitution of the English monarchy;” and, in 1698, “A short history of Standing Armies in England;” which two pamphlets produced several answers. In November 1720, in conjunction with Mr. Thomas Gordon, he began to publish, in the “London,' 7 and afterwards in the” British Journal,“a series of letters, under the name of” Cato,“upon various and important subjects relating to the public. These were continued for almost three years with very great reputation among those who were not very closely attached to the government or the church; but there were some papers among them, written by Mr. Trenchard, under the name of” Diogenes,“upon several points of religion, which were thought exceptionable, and animadverted upon, particularly by Mr. John Jackson, in a” Defence of human Liberty.“Dr. Clarke also wrote some animadversions upon Trenchard’s principles, but which were never published. They are inserted in the General Dictionary. Mr. Gordon afterwards collected the papers written by Mr. Trenchard and himself, and published them in four volumes, 12mo, under the title of” Cato’s Letters, or Essays on Liberty, civil or religions, and other important subjects;“the fourth edition of which, corrected, was printed in 1737. It was imagined at the time, that lord Molesworth had a chief, at least a considerable, hand in those letters; but Mr. Gordon assures us, in the dedication of them to John Milner, esq. that this noble person never wrote a line in them, nor contributed a thought towards them. As to the purport and design of them, Mr. Gordon says, that” as they were the work of no faction or cabal, nor calculated for any lucrative or ambitious ends, or to serve the purposes of any party whatsoever, but attacked falsehood and dishonesty in all shapes and parties, without temporising with any, doing justice to all, even to the weakest and most unfashionable, and maintaining the principles of liberty against the practices of boih parties; so they were dropped without any sordid composition, and without any consideration, save that it was judged that the public, after all its terrible convulsions, was become calm and safe. They had treated of most of the subjects important to the world, and meddled with public measures and public men only in great instances.“He wrote also in” The Independent Whig," another paper hostile to 'the hierarchy.

Mr. Trenchard was member of parliament for Taunton in Somersetshire, and died Dec. 17, 1723, of an ulcer in his kidneys. He is said to have thought too much, and with too much solicitude, to have done what he did too intensely and with too much vigour and activity of the head, which caused him many bodily disorders, and is supposed at last to have worn out the springs of life. He left no writings at all behind him, but two or three loose papers, once intended for Cato’s Letters. Mr. Anthony Collins, in the manuscript catalogue of his library, ascribes to him the following pieces: “The natural history of Superstition,” 1709. “Considerations on the public debts,” 1709. “Comparison of the proposals of the Bank and South-Sea Company,” 1719. “Letter of thanks, &c.” 1719. “Thoughts on the Peerage-bill,” 1719. Arid “Reflections on the Old Whig,” 1719. Mr. Gordon, who has drawn his character at large in the preface above cited, tells us in his dedication, that " he has set him no higher than his own great abilities and many virtues set him; that his failings were small, his talents extraordinary, his probity equal; and that he was one of the worthiest, one of the ablest, one of the most useful, men that ever any countrywas blessed withal.

, an excellent artist of the English school, and a member of the Royal Academy of London, and of the academies of Rome and Bologna, was a native of Ireland, which country he left at an early age; and having devoted himself to the arts, repaired to Italy, at a time when an acquaintance with the master-pieces of the arts which that country possessed, was considered as an essential requisite for completing the education of a gentleman. The friendships and acquaintance formed by Mr. Tresham while abroad, were not a little conducive to the promotion of his interests on his return to this country; and their advantages were experienced by him to the last moment of his life. As an artist, Mr. Tresham possessed very considerable talents; and, while his health permitted him to exert them, they were honourably directed to the higher departments of his art. A long residence in Italy, together with a diligent study of the antique, had given him a lasting predilection for the Roman school; and his works display many of the powers and peculiarities which distinguish the productions of those great masters whose taste he had adopted. He had much facility of composition, and his fancy was well stored with materials; but his oil pictures are deficient in that richness of colouring and spirit of execution which characterize the Venetian pencil, and which have been displayed, in many instances, with rival excellence in this country. His drawings with pen and ink, and in black chalk, evince uncommon ability; the latter, in particular, are executed with a spirit, boldness, and breadth which are not often to be found in su; a productions. In that which may be termed the erudition of taste, Mr. Tresham was deeply skilled: a long acquaintance with the most eminent masters of the Italian schools made him familiar with their merits and defects; he could discriminate between all their varieties of style and manner; and as to every estimable quality of a picture, he was considered one of the ablest criticks of his day: in the just appreciation, also, of those various remains of antiquity which come under the different classifications of virtu, his opinion was sought, with eagerness, by the connoisseur as well as the artist, and held as an authority, from which few would venture lightly to dissent. This kind of knowledge proved not a little beneficial to him. Some years since, Mr. Thomas Hope, whose choice collections of every kind are well known, had given to one of his servants a number of Etruscan vases, as the refuse of a quantity which he had purchased. Accident made Mr. Tresham acquainted with the circumstance; and the whole lot was bought by him of the new owner for \00l. It was not long before he recefved 800l. from Mr. Samuel Rogers, for one moiety; and the other, increased by subsequent acquisitions, he transferred a few years ago to the earl of Carlisle. That nobleman, with a munificence and liberality which have invariably marked all his transactions, settled on the artist an annuity of 300l. for life, as the price of this collection. With such honour was this engagement fulfilled, that the amount of the last quarter, though due only a few days before Mr. Tresham’s death, was found to have been punctually paid. When Messrs. Longman and Co. commenced their splendid publication of engravings from the works of the ancient masters, in the collections of the British nobility, and others who have distinguished themselves by their patronage of the fine arts, they, with a discernment which does them credit, deputed Mr. Tresham to superintend the undertaking. To the honour of the owners of those master-pieces it must be recorded, that every facility was afforded to this artist, not only in the loan of pictures, but in the communication of such facts relating to the respective works as they were able to furnish. The salary paid him by these spirited publishers, contributed materially to the comfort of his declining years. We should not omit to mention, to the credit of Mr. Tresham, that, regardless as he had been in early life of providing those resourses for old age which prudence would suggest, yet so high were his principles, that the most celebrated dealers in virtu, auctioneers, and others, never hesitated to deliver lots to any amount purchased by him; and we may venture to assert, that he never abused their confidence. But the talents of Tresham were not confined to objects immediately connected with his profession; he had considerable taste for poetry, and his published performances in that art display a lively fancy, and powers of versification, of no ordinary kind. In society, which he loved and enjoyed to the last, he was always considered as an acquisition by his friends; and amongst those friends were included many of the most elevated and estimable characters of the time. In conversation, he was fluent, humourous, and animated, abounding in anecdote, and ready of reply. During the latter years of his life, the contrast exhibited between the playful vivacity of his manners and the occasional exclamations of agony, produced by the spasmodic affections with which he was so long afflicted, gave an interest to his appearance that enhanced the entertainment which his colloquial powers afforded. His existence seemed to hang upon so slight a thread that those who enjoyed his society were commonly under an impression that the pleasure derived from it might not be again renewed, and that a frame so feeble could scarcely survive the exertion which the vigour of his spirit for a moment sustained. The principle of life, however, was in him so strong, as to contradict all ordinary indications; and he lived on, through many years of infirmity, as much to the surprise as the gratification of his friends: his spirits unsubdued by pain, and his mind uninfluenced by the decay of his body. Though partaking, in some degree, of the proverbial irritability of the poet and the painter, no man was more free from envious and malignant feelings, or could be more ready to do justice to the claims of his competitors. So true a relish had he for the sallies of wit -and humour, that he could enjoy them even at his own expense: and he has been frequently known to repeat, with unaffected glee, the jest that has been pointed against himself. By his death, which took place June 17, 1814, the Royal Academy was deprived of one of its most enlightened members, and his profession of a liberal and accomplished artist.

, an eminent naturalist, and liberal patpon of that science, was the son and grandson of two men of considerable note in the medical profession, and was born at Lauffen in Franconia in 1695. He studied medicine at Nuremberg with so much reputation, that hre was appointed director of the academy of the “Naturae Curiosorum,” and, in conjunction with some of the members of the society, began a periodical work at Nuremberg in 1731, called “Commercium Litterarium ad rei Medicae et Scientisc naturalis incrementum institutum.” In this he inserted many useful papers, as far as the fifteenth volume, which appeared in 1745, and published from time to time some splendid botanical works. He died in 1769.

His principal works are, 1. “De vasis linguee salivalibus,” in a letter addressed to Haller, Nuremberg, 1734, 4to. 2. “Dissertauo de differentiis quibusdam inter hominem natum et nascendum intercedentibus,” ibid. 1736, 4to. 3. “Icones posthurnse Gesnerianae,” ibid. 1748, fol. These plates of Gesner came to him by purchase, as we have already noticed in our account of that celebrated botanist. 4. “Selectarum Plantaruin Decades,” Vienna, 1750, fol. 5. “Librorum Botanicorum libri duo, quorum prior recentiores quosdam, posterior plerosque antiques ad annum 1550 usque excuses recenset,” Nuremberg, 1752, fol. 6. “Plantae selectas qnarum imagines ad exemplaria naturalia Londini in hortis curiosorum nutrita, manu artificiosa pinxit Georgius Dionysius Ehret, &c.” 1754, fol. His liberality to Ehret we have already recorded. (See Ehret.) 7. “Cedrorum Libani historia,” Nuremberg, 1757, 4to. In 1750 he engaged an artist to copy Mrs. Blackwell’s plates, and himself supplied several defects in the drawings. He also substituted some entirely new figures in the room of the originals, very considerably reformed and amplified the text, translated it into German and Latin; and planned the addition of a sixth century of plates, but he did not live to finish this. The fifth century was published in 1765, and Dr. Trew dying in 1769, the supplemental volume, exhibiting plants omitted by Mrs. Blackwell, articles newly introduced into practice, and figures of the poisonous species, was conducted by Ludwig, Bose, and Boehmer, and printed in 1773. Thus reformed, Trew’s edition surpasses any other work of the same design.

, an eminent Roman lawyer, and the object of equal praise and censure, was a native of Side in Pamphylia, and esteemed a man of extensive learning. He is said to have written, both in prose and verse, on many subjects of philosophy, politics, astronomy, &c. but none of his writings nave descended to us. From the bar of the praetorian praefects, he raised himself to the honours of questor, consul, and master of the offices. His knowledge of the Roman law induced Justinian the emperor to place him at the head of a committee of seventeen lawyers, who were to exercise an absolute jurisdiction over the works of their predecessors, from which they compiled the Digest or Pandects, which go by that emperor’s name. Tribonianus has been represented by some writers as an infidel, and by others as extremely avaricious, and tampering with the laws to gratify this propensity. The former of these charges Mr. Gibbon very naturally wishes to impute to bigotry, but the latter is generally admitted. His oppressions were at one time so much the subject of complaint as to procure a sentence of banishment, but he was soon recalled, and remained in favour with Justinian for above twenty years. Tribonianus is supposed to have died about the year 546.

, a learned divine, was born May 8, 1652, at Harlem. He acquired great skill in the Oriental languages, and the Holy Scriptures, of which he was professor at Leyden, in the place of Anthony Hulsius, and died in that' city, September 22, 1705, aged fifty-four, after having been twice rector of the university there. He left several works and “Dissertations on the sect of the Caraites,” and other curious and important subjects. He also published the “Tribus Judaeorum” of Serarius, Drusius, and Scaliger, or a dissertation on the three remarkable sects, the Pharisees, Sadducees, and Essenes, Delphis, 1703, 2 vols. 4to.

, a very ingenious lady, and a zealous promoter of religious education, was the daughter of Joshua and Sarah Kirby, and was born at Ipswich, Jan. 6, 1741. Her father, known in the literary world as the author of Taylor’s “Method of Perspective made easy,” and “The Perspective of Architecture,” was a man of an excellent understanding, and of great piety and so high was his reputation for knowledge of divinity, and so exemplary his moral conduct, that, as an exception to their general rule, which admitted no layman, he was chosen member of a clerical club in the town in which he resided. Under the care of such a parent it may be supposed she was early instructed in those principles of Christianity, upon which her future life and labours were formed. She was educated in English and French, and other customary accomplishments, at a boarding-school near Ipswich; but at the age of fourteen she left Ipswich, with her father and mother, to settle in London, where Mr. Kirby had the honour of teaching perspective to the present king, then prince of Wales, and afterwards to her majesty.

Miss Kirby, being removed from the companions of her childhood, passed her time during her residence in London in the society of people more advanced in life, and some of thtfm persons of eminence in the literary world. Among these may be numbered, Dr. Johnson, Dr. Gregory Sharpe, Mr. Gainsborough, Mr. Hogarth, &c. By Dr. Johnson she was favoured with particular notice. The circumstance which first attracted his attention, was a literary dispute at the house of sir Joshua Reynolds, respecting a passage in the “Paradise Lost,” which could not be decided. Mr. Kirby, who, as well as his daughter, was present, inquired if she had not the book in her pocket, it being a great fatourite of hers, and he probably knowing that it then made a part of her daily studies. The book was accordingly produced, and opened at the disputed part. Dr. Johnson was so struck with a girl of that age making this work her pocket companion, and likewise with the modesty of her behaviour upon the occasion, that he invited her the next day to his house, presented her with a copy of his “Rambler,” and afterwards treated her with great consideration.

As the society in which she lived whilst in London was of rather too grave a cast for so young a person, she naturally had recourse to her favourite employment for recreation, and spent much time in reading. In this pursuit she was directed by her father, and from his conversation and instruction her mind acquired a thirst after knowledge, and was gradually opened and enlarged. Drawing was another occupation of her leisure hours: to this, however, she applied rather in compliance with the wishes of her father, than to gratify any inclination she felt tqr it. At his desire ^e went occasionally, under the care of a female friend, wit other young people, to the society for promoting Artv and once obtained a prize for the second-best drawing. Two or three miniatures, copies from larger pictures, are remaining of her painting, which, though not in the first style, are sufficiently good to show, that in this art she might have excelled, had her taste prompted her to pursue it. The knowledge of drawing, which she had acquired while young, became very useful to her when she was a mother, as it enabled her to amuse her children when in their infancy, and likewise to direct them afterwards in the exercise of their talents in that way.

About 1759, Mr. Kirby removed to Kew, upon being appointed clerk of the works in that palace, and there his daughter became acquainted with Mr. Trimmer, and at the age of twenty-one, she was united to him, with the approbation of the friends on both sides. Mr. Trimmer was a man of an agreeable person, pleasing manners, and exemplary virtues; and was about two years older than herself. In the course of their union, she had twelve children, six sons and six daughters. From the time of her marriage t?ll she became an author, she was almost constantly occupied with domestic duties; devoting herself to the nursing and educating of her children. She used to say, that as soon as she became a mother, her thoughts were turned so entirely to the subject of education, that she scarcely read a book upon any other topic, and believed she almost wearied her friends by making it so frequently the subject of conversation. Having experienced the greatest success in her plan of educating her own family, she naturally wished to extend that blessing to others, and this probably first induced her to become an author. Soon after the publication of Mrs. Barbauld’s “Easy Lessons for Children,” about 1780, Mrs. Trimmer was very much urged by a friend to write something of the same kind, from an opinion that she would be successful in that style of composition. Encouraged by this opinion, she began her “Easy Introduction to the knowledge of Nature,” which was soon completed, printed, became very popular, and still keeps its place in schools and private families. The design of it was to open the minds of children to a variety of information, to induce them to make observations on the works of nature, and to lead them up to the universal parent, the creator of this world and of all things in it. This was followed by a very valuable series of publications, some of the higher order, which met with the cordial approbation of that part of the public who considered religion as the only basis of morality. Into the notions of a lax education, independent of the history and truths of revelation, whether imported from the French or German writers, or the production of some of our own authors, misled by the vanity of being thought philosophers, Mrs. Trimmer could not for a moment enter; and therefore in some of her later publications, endeavoured with great zeal to stop that torrent of infidelity which at one time threatened to sweep away every vestige of Christianity. She was also an early supporter and promoter of Sunday-schools, and at one time had a long conference with her majesty, who wished to be made acquainted with the history, nature, and probable utility of those schools. But the fame she derived from her meritorious writings was not confined to schools. She had the happiness of hearing that her books were approved by many of our ablest divines, and that some of them were admitted on the list of publications dispersed by the Society for promoting Christian knowledge. One of her best performances was rendered very necessary by the circumstances of the times. It was a periodical work, which she continued for some years, under the title of “The Guardian of Education.” She was led to this by observing the mischief that had crept into various publications for the use of children, which occasioned her much alarm, and she feared, if something were not done to open the eyes of the public to this growing evil, the minds of youth would be poisoned, and irreparable injury be sustained. There was indeed just cause for alarm, when it was known that the two principal marts for insidious publications of this kind, were under the management of men who had only avarice to prompt them, and were notorious for their avowed contempt for religion.

This estimable woman died suddenly, in the sixty-ninth year of her age, Dec. 15, 1810. As she was sitting in her study, in the chair in which she was accustomed to write, she bowed her head upon her bosom, and expired. Her children, who were accustomed to see her occasionally take repose in this manner, could scarcely persuade themselves that she was not sunk in sleep: and it was not till after some time that they could be made to believe that it was the sleep of death. Her remains were deposited at the family vault at Ealing. She had survived her husband some years.

The following, we believe, is a correct list of her various publications, although we are not certain if in strict chronological order. 1. “A little Spelling-book for young Children;” 2. “Easy Lessons; a Sequel to the above;” 3. “LXIV Prints taken from the Old Testament; with a Description, in a Set of easy Lessons;” 4. “LXIV Prints from the New Testament, and Description;” 5. “LXIV Prints of Roman History, with Description;” 6. “LXIV Prints of English History, with Description;” 7. “A Comment on Dr. Watts’s Divine Songs for Children;” 8. “An easy Introduction to the Knowledge of Nature, and Reading the Holy Scriptures;” 9. “An Abridgment of Scripture History; consisting of Lessons from the Old Testament;” 10. “An Abridgment of the New Testament consisting of Lessons composed chiefly from the Gospels;” 11. “A Scripture Catechism; containing an Explanation of the above Lessons in the Style of Familiar Conversation,” in 2 vols. The four last articles were written originally for children in the lower classes of life; but they have been adopted into many schools and families, for the instruction of those of superior condition. 12. “An Attempt to familiarise the Catechism of the Church of England;” 13. “An Explanation of the Office of Baptism, and of the Order of Confirmation in the Common Prayer-book;” 14. The same, with “Questions for the Use of Teachers” 15. “A Companion to the Book of Common Prayer containing a Practical Comment on the Liturgy, Epistles, and Gospels.” This work, though principally intended for young persons, has proved satisfactory to persons of maturer years. 16. The same in 2 vols. with “Questions for the Use of Teachers;” 17. “Sacred History, selected from the Scriptures, with Annotations and Reflections.” This work is executed upon a peculiar plan, and was composed with a view of exciting in young minds an early taste for divine subjects, and of furnishing persons of maturer years, who have not leisure for the works of more voluminous commentators, with assistance in the study of the Scriptures. The historical events are collected from the various books of which the Sacred Volume is composed, and arranged in a regular series; many passages of the Prophetic writings, and of the Psalms, are interwoven with the respective parts of the history to which they relate; and the whole illustrated by annotations and reflections, founded on the best authorities. 18. “Fabulous Histories; designed to teach the proper Treatment of Animals;” 19. “The Guardian of Education;” in 5 vols. 20. “Sermons for Familyreading, abridged from the works of eminent divines;” 21. “The Family Magazine,” 3 vols. 12ino. Her character, her train of study and occupations, and her sentiments on many interesting topics, are amply illustrated in a work published since her death, and to Wi; we are indebted for the above particulars, entitled “fe ie Account of the Life and Writings of Mrs. Trimmer, with Original Letters, and Meditations and Prayers, selected from her Journal,” 2 vols. 1814.

, successively bishop of Norwich and Winchester, was the son of the rev. Charles Trimnell, sometime fellow of New college, Oxford, whence he was ejected in 1648 by the parliamentary visitors, and was afterwards rector of Ripton Abbots in Huntingdonshire, where he died in 1702. Of a family of fourteen children, there survived him, ). Charles, bi>hop of Winchester; 2. William, dean of Winchester 3. Hugh, apothecary to the king’s household 4. David, archdeacon of Leicester, and chantor of Lincoln 5 Mary, married to Mr. John Sturges, archdeacon of Huntingdon 6. Anne, married to Mr. Alured Clarke of Godmanchester, in the county of Huntingdon; 7. Elizabeth, married to Dr. Henry Downes, bishop of Derry in Ireland; and 8. Catherine, married to Dr. Thomas Green, bishop of Ely.

Charles, the subject of this memoir, was born at RiptonAbbots, Dec. 27, 1663, and in 1675 was admitted on the foundation at Winchester college, where his learning, morals, and respectful behaviour, recommended him to the notice of his superiors. In 1681 he removed from Winchester to New college, Oxford, to which, as the preacher of his funeral sermon says, he “brought more meekness and patience in the study of philosophy, than the generality of philosophers carry from it.” In Jan. 1688 he was admitted master of arts, and in the same year appointed preacher at the Rolls chapel by sir John Trevor, master of the Rolls. In August 1689, he attended the earl of Sunderland and his lady in their journey to Holland; and, after their return home, continued with them at Althorp, as their domestic chaplain. In Dec. 1691 he was installed prebendary of Norwich. In 1694, he was presented by the earl of Sunderland to the rectory of Bodington in Northamptonshire, which he resigned two years after on being instituted to Brington, in which parish Althorp stands, a living of no greater value than Bodington, although he was desired to keep both. In 1698 he was installed archdeacon of Norfolk, and procured leave of his noble patron to resign the rectory of Brington (at a time, when the remainder of his income did not exceed two hundred pounds per ann.) in favour of Mr. Downes (afterwards bishop of Derry in Ireland) who had married one of his sisters. On July the 4th, 1699, he was admitted doctor in divinity. In 1701 and 1702, during the controversy that was carried on in the Lower House of Convocation, he wrote some pieces in defence of the rights of the crown, and the archbishop; as, l. “A Vindication of the Proceedings of some Members of the Lower House of Convocation,” 1701, 4to. 2. “The Pretence to enter the Parliament-Writ considered,” 1701, 4to. 3. “An Answer to a third Letter to a Clergyman in defence of the entry of the Parliament- Writ,” 1702, 4to. 4. “Partiality detected,” c. a large pamphlet.

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

In 1705, having had no parochial duty for some years, he undertook the charge of St. Giles’s parish, in the city of Norwich; and in October 1706 was instituted to St. James’s, Westminster, on the promotion of Dr. William Wake to the bishopric of Lincoln. In January 1707, he was elected bishop of Norwich in the room of Dr. John Moore, translated to Ely, and was permitted to keep the rectory of St. James’s with his bishopric for one year. In 1709 he published a charge to the clergy at his primary visitation, in which he spoke with great freedom against some prevailing opinions and practices, which he thought prejudicial to the true interest of the church of England in particular, and of religion in general. These opinions were, the “independence of the church upon the state; the” power of offering sacrifice,“properly so called; and the” power of forgiving sins: “all of them,” he says, “I am persuaded, erroneous, in the manner they have been urged, and no way agreeable to the doctrine of the church of England about them. The making more things follow our sacred function, than can fairly and plainly be grounded upon it, will never advance our character with wise and considering men, such as we should desire all men to be; but must be a real prejudice to us. Our, pretending to an independent power in things within the compass of human authority; and a right to offer sacrifice properly speaking; and a commission to forgive sins directly and immediately; may, and will weaken the grounds and occasions of the reformation; and give our adversaries of the church of Rome, as well as others, great advantage against us; but can never, I am persuaded, advance the interest of the Christian religion in general, or of our church in particular.” He added an Appendix to the charge in answer to some authorities that had been produced from ancient writers in favour of the independence of the church upon the state; which, he says, he did the rather, because he “thought the peace both of church and state more immediately concerned in it, and could not but apprehend mischief coming to both from a pretension so new among those who call themselves members of the church of England: a church that has hitherto been as much distinguished, as it has been supported, by rejecting that claim.” In a sermon preached in 1707 before the sons of the clergy, he had expressed himself in as strong a manner upon this subject, viz. “Let us take care that, while we maintain the distinction and dignity of our order, we do not suffer ourselves to be carried into a separate interest from that of those who are not of our order, or from that of the state For we cannot pretend to be a separate body, without making the worst kind of schism, and the nearest to that which is condemned in scripture, that can be imagined: nor can any thing give greater advantage to those other schisms that disturb the peace of the church, than our dividing ourselves, in any degree, from the true interest of that government to which we belong.” In his charge he censured a pa*sage in favour of a proper sacrifice from Mr. Johnson’s second part of the “Clergyman’s Vade Mecum” (in the note upon the second apostolical canon), which Mr. Johnson defended in a postscript to a pamphlet called “The Propitiatory Oblation.” The bishop replied, in vindication of what he had said on that subject; and afterwards inserted the substance of his Reply in the body of the second edition of his charge.

In 1710 he printed a speech made in the House of Lords in support of the second article of the impeachment of Dr. Sacheverel, for “suggesting and maintaining that the toleration granted by law is unreasonable, and unwarrantable, &c.” Bishop Trimnell was considered as of whig principles, and when he preached the 30th of January sermon in 1711, before the House of Lords, his sentiments, which are said to have been more moderate than usual at that time, gave so much offence, that no motion was made in the House for the usual compliment of thanks. This occasioning much animadversion, and affording many conjectures which were unfavourable to him, he printed the discourse. He published also, from 1697 to 1715, fourteen other occasional sermons.

Soon after the accession of George I. he was made clerk of the closet to his majesty, in which office he continued until his death. In August 1721 he was translated to the bishopric of Winchester; and in the same year elected president of the corporation of the sons of the clergy. After suffering long by a weak constitution, he died at Farnham castle, Aug. 15, 1723, leaving no issue. By his first wife, Henrietta Maria, daughter of Dr. William Talbot, then bishop of Oxford, and afterwards of Durham, he had two sons, who died in their infancy. This lady died in 1716 ti and in 1719 he married Mrs. Elizabeth Taylor, widow of Joseph Taylor, of the Temple, esq. and sister of sir Rowland Wynne, of Nosteil, in Yorkshire, hart, who survived him. He was interred in Winchester cathedral, under a black marble stone, with a Latin inscription.

Mr. Archdeacon Stephens, rector of Drokinsford, in Hampshire, preached his funeral sermon in Winchester cathedral. In that sermon, and other authorities, his character is thus given: “He had a very serious and devout turn of mind, and performed the duty of every station with the greatest exactness, notwithstanding the weakness of a constitution broken, in the early part of life, by long ant! frequent fastings, and too diligent an application to his studies. But this had no effect upon his mind, which was calm and composed at all times. The uneasiness he suffered from an ill habit of body, never made him uneasy to others. He was of a very affectionate, meek, and gentle nature; and though he had a good deal of warmth in his temper, he subdued it so effectually by reflection and habit, that he was hardly ever seen in a pas*, siott^ but behaved in all the private, as well as public circumstances of life, with great moderation and firmness of. spirit. He was a lover of peace and order, both from judgment and inclination; and, being a most sincere friend to the church of England, he constantly avowed those principles” of toleration and indulgence, which make that church the glory of the reformation. "There are letters extant, by which it appears, that he was very diligent in examining the arguments urged on both sides, before he took the oaths to king William and queen Mary, which he religiously observed by a steady and uniform attachment to the Revolution-interest, as longas he lived. No man ever supported the character of a bishop with greater dignity and authority, and yet no one was ever more beloved by the clergy of both his dioceses; for he was very courteous and obliging, and easy of access to all, and had a strict regard to those parts of behaviour which are most suitable to the profession of a minister of the gospel. His rebukes were conveyed in few words, and those delivered with a sort of uneasiness for the necessity of them: but although they were few, and smoother than oil, yet were they very swords; for to an understanding heart they seemed to receive an aggravation of anger, from that very meekness which endeavoured to soften them. He was of a temper incapable of soliciting favours for himself, or his nearest friends, though he had the tei/derest affection for them. He was very much displeased at the appearance of an importunate application in others, and always avoided it in his own conduct. And notwithstanding all his relations have prospered very much in the world by his means, their success has been owing rather to the credit and influence of his character, than any direct applications made by him. The nobleness of his mind appeared in many other instances; in his candour and generosity of spirit, and contempt of money; of which he left so many marks in every place where he lived, that he had neither ability, nor occasion, 1 to perpetuate his memcry by any posthumous charities. He did not consider his revenue as designed for the private advantage of a family; but as a trust or stewardship, that was to be employed for the honour of his station; the maintenance of hospitality; the relief of the poor; the promoting a good example amongst his clergy; and the general encouragement of religion and learning.

“He was not less qualified for his high station by his abilities than his conduct; for he had an excellent turn for business, and a quick apprehension. He was very well versed in the divinity controversies, and immediately discerned the point on which the dispute turned, and pared oil” all the luxuriancies or writing. He had read the ancients with great exactness; and, without quoting, ofieu mingled their finest notions with his own discourse, and had a particular easiness and beauty in his manner of conversing, and expressing his sentiments upon every occasion. With his other excellencies he had acquired a thorough knowledge of mankind; which, being adorned by an affable and polite behaviour, gained him the general esteem of the nobility and gentry. His known penetration and judgment recommended him so strongly to the favour and confidence of those who were at the head of affairs in the latter part of his life, that he was chiefly, if not solely, advised with, and entrusted by them, in matters which related to the filling up the principal offices in the church. And, though he enjoyed as much of this power as any clergyman has had since the reformation, he raised no public odium or enmity against himself on that account; because his silence, moderation, and prudence made it impossible for any one to discover the influence he had, from his conversation, or conduct; a circumstance almost peculiar to him. He was too wise a man to increase the envy, which naturally attends power, by an insolent and haughty behaviour; and too good a man to encourage any one with false hopes. For he was as cautious in making promises, as he was just in performing them; and always endeavoured to soften the disappointments of those he could not gratify, by the good-nature and humanity, with which he treated them. These separate characters (rarely blended together) of an excellent scholar, and a polite, well-bred man; a wise and honest statesman, and a devout, exemplary Christian, were all happily reconciled in this most amiable person; and placed him so high in the opinion of the world, that no one ever passed through life with more esteem and regard from men of all dispositions, parties, and denominations."

, an eminent physician, but principally deserving notice as the editor of some of the first editions of the classics, was born at Venice in 1496. He began his medical studies at Padua, and went afterwards to Bologna, where he became so distinguished for his knowledge of the Greek language, that the professors of the university would often consult him on difficult passages, and he was honoured by the name of the “Greek scholar.” After remaining seven years at Bologna, he returned to Padua to take his doctor’s degree, and then to Venice, where, his character preceding him, he was appointed successor to Sebastian Fuscareni in the chair of philosophy. His time was tehn divided between his lectures, his private studies, and his practice as a physician. The latter was so extensive as to bring him annually about three thousand crowns of gold. In 1551 he was appointed successor to John Baptist Monti, in the medical professorship at Padua, and exchanged the profits of his practice for a salary of 950 crowns, which the senate afterwards increased to 1600. While professor here, he was the first who lectured on Hippocrates in the original language. Finding the infirmities of age approach, he resigned his office, and returned to Venice, where he died in 1568, in the seventy-second year of his age.

His medical writings, most of which had been published separately, were printed together in 2 vols. fol. at Leyden, in 1586 and 1592, and at Venice in 1599. He was editor of the following principes etiitiones; 1. “Themistii Orationes,” 1534, fol. 2. “Joannes Grammaticus Philoponus,” 1534, fol. 3. “Epicteti Enchiridion, cum Arriaiii comment,” 1535, 8vo. This was the first edition with Arriari. 4. “Hes.iod,” 153-6, 4to. The scholia and text of this edition have formed the basis of every subsequent one. Trincavelli also published editions of Stobeeus and other Greek writers.

, an Italian poet, who endeavoured to reform the style of his country, was born at Vicenza, July 3, 1478, and was descended from one of the most ancient families of that place. It has been said that it was late in life before he began his studies, but as the same writer who gives us this information, adds that upon his father’s death, when he was only seven years old, he applied to them with spirit, it is evident he could not have lost much time. He was first educated at Vicenza, under a priest named Francis Gragnuola, and afterwards at Milan under the celebrated Demetrius Cbalcondylcs. To the memory of this last master, who died in 1511, Trissino erected a monument in the church of St. Mary at Milan, or us others say, in that of San Salvador, with an inscription. From the Greek and Latin language, he proceeded to the' study of mathematics, architecture, natural philosophy, and other branches which form a liberal education. In 1503 he married; and with a view to domestic happiness and literary retirement, went to reside on one of his estates, for he was left very opulent, at Criccoli on the Astego. Herv he built a magnificent house, from his own design, on which he employed one of his pupils in architecture, the afterwards justly celebrated Paliadio.

Trissino lived very happily in this retreat, cultivating the arts and sciences, and especially poetry, for which he had an early taste, until his tranquillity was disturbed by the death of his wife, who left him two sons, Francis and Julius. He now left Criccoli, and to dissipate ins grief by change of scene, went to Rome. It was perhaps with the same view that he endeavoured to amuse himself by writing his “Sophonisba,” the first tragedy of modern times in which appeared some traces of ancient style and manner. Leo X. who had received Trissino with respect, and even friendship, intended to have this tragedy represented with great magnificence, but it does not sevm certain that it was so acted In the mean time Leo perceived in the author talents of a graver kind, which he might employ with advantage. He accordingly sent him on some important diplomatic business to the king of Denmark, the emperor Maximilian, and the republic of Venice about 1516. In these respective courts, Trissino gained great credit, and during the intervals of his employments, formed connexions with the eminent men of all ranks who adorned the court of Leo.

After the death of this pontiff he returned to his own country, and married a relation, Blanche Trissina, by whom he had a third son, Ciro; but Leo’s successor, Clement VII. soon recalled him to Rome, and gave him equal proofs of his esteem a-nd confidence, by sending him as his ambassador to Charles V. and to the senate of Venice. Some of his biographers say that he was created a knight of the golden fleece, either by Charles V. or by Maximilian, but Tiraboschi thinks that he never was admitted into that order, although he might have permission to add the fleece to his arms, and even take the title of chevalier. Voltaire’s blunders about Trissino are wholly unaccountable. Hie makes him archbishop of Benevento at the time he wrote his tragedy; and having this probably pointed out to him, he endeavoured to correct the error by asserting in a subsequent publication that bishop Trissino, by the advice of the archbishop of Benevento, chose Sophonisba for a subject, although Trissino never was either bishop or archbishop, nor an ecclesiastic of any rank.

Trissino now retired to Vicenza in order to compose at more leisure a poem of which, many years before, he had laid the plan; but his peace was at this time interrupted by domestic dissentions, in consequence of which he had scarcely afterwards a happy moment. The eldest of his two sons by his first wife, died, and Julius, the second, had conceived an aversion to his step-mother on account of the preference which his father seemed to give to her son Giro. Mutual irritation ended in Trissino’s resolving to disinherit Julius and settle all upon Giro, and in Julius threatening to commence a suit at law for the recovery of his mother’s fortune. To add to Trissino’s distress, his wife Blanche died in 1540, on which he disposed of her son in marriage, and went again to Rome in hopes of tranquillity. There he remained some years, and finished and published his great poem, “Italia liberata da Gothi.” In the mean time his son Julius was carrying on the law-suit at Venice, and was supported in it by his mother’s relations. This obliged Trissino to go thither in 1548, although so much afflicted by the gout, as to travel on a litter. From Venice he went to Vicenza, where he found that Julius had begun to take possession of all his property, and he was so much enraged at this conduct, as to make a will in which he totally disinherited his unnatural son. Julius, more irritated than ever, carried on his law-suit, and having obtained a decision in his favour, without ceremony took possession of his father’s house and the greater part of his goods. Trissino now returned to Home, bidding an eternal adieu to his country, in some Latin verses, in which he said, “he would go to some country under another climate, as he had been defrauded of his paternal mansion, and as the Venetians had encouraged that fraud by a cruel sentence,” &c. &c. He did not, however, long survive this latter disappointment, but died at Rome about the end of 1550, in the seventy-second year of his age.

Trissino has the credit of having first discarded the shackles of rhyme, and employed the versi scwlti, or blank verse of the Italians. This he first tried in his “Sophonisba,” and afterwards in his “Italia liberata,” the subject of which was the liberation of Italy from the Goths by Belisarius’^ and it was his design to exhibit in this poem, which consists of twenty-seven books, a specimen of the true epic, as founded on the example of Homer, and confirmed by the authority of Aristotle: but into the merits of this poem it is not necessary to enter so minutely as Ginguene has done, since it seems universally acknowledged that of all the attempts at epic poetry which had hitherto appeared, the “Italia liberata” may be considered as the most insipid and uninteresting; nor from the time it first appeared, in 1547-8, was it ever reprinted until the Abbate Aniouini gave an edition of it in 1729, 3 vols. 8vo, and in the same year it appeared in the collected works of the author, Verona, 2 vols. folio. In this collection, besides his epic poem and the tragedy already mentioned, are, a comedy from Plautus, called “I Simillimi;” lyric poems, both Latin and Italian; and various prose treatises, almost all on grammar and on the Italian language. As most of the great poets of his time wrote an “Art of Poetry,” we find accordingly among Trissino’s works an attempt of this kind, “Delia Poetica,” which was originally published in 1529.

, a French poet and dramatic writer, was born in the castle of Souliers, in the province of la Marche, in 1601. When attached to the household of the marquis de Verncuil, natural son of Henry IV. he fought a duel, in which his antagonist, one of the guards, was killed, and fled for some time to England. Returning to Poitou, he found friends who obtained his pardon from Louis XIII.; and Gaston of Orleans made him one of his gentlemen in ordinary. His life became then divided between poetry, gallantry, and gaming, and he experienced all the reverses and vicissitudes to which such a life is exposed, many of which he had alluded to in his “Page disgracie,” a romance published in 16-13, 4to. He wrote much for the stage, and was seldom unsuccessful. His tragedy of “Mariamne” still keeps his reputation alive, although it was fatal to the actor, Mondori, who performed the character of Herod, and died of violent exertion. Tristan was admitted into the French academy in 1649, but always lived poor. He died Sept. 7, 1655, in the fifty-fourth year of his age. His dramas and other poems were primed in '') vols. 4to. There were two others of this name: John Baptist Tristan L'Hermite Souliers, who was gentleman of his majesty’s bedchamber, and brother to the preceding. He was author of the genealogies of several families; “L'Histoire geneologique cle la Noblesse de Touraine,” 1669, fol.; “La Toscane Francoise,” 1661, 4to; “Les Corses Francoise,” 1662, 12mo; “Naples Francoise,” 1663, 4to, &c. containing the history of such persons in those countries as have been attached to France. There was also John Tristan, son of Charles Tristan, auditor of accounts at Paris. He attached himself to Gaston of France, duke of Orleans, was well skilled in antiquity and medals, and published a “Historical Commentary on the Lives of the Emperors,” 1644, 3 vols. fol. a work full of curious observations; but Angeloni and father Sirmond found several faults in it, which Tristan answered with great asperity. He was living in 1656.

, a celebrated abbot of the Benedictine order, and one of the most learned men in the fifteenth century, was born February 1, 1462, at Tritenheim, in the diocese of Treves. After finishing his studies he took the Benedictine habit, and was made abbot of Spanheim in the diocese of Mentz, in 1483, which abbey ke governed till 1506, and resigned it to be abbot of St. James at Wirtzberg. He died Dec. 13, 1516. Trithemius was well acquainted both with sacred and profane literature, and left various works, historical and biographical, among which the principal are, a treatise “On the illustrious ecclesiastical Writers,” Cologn, 1546, 4to; in this book he gives some account of 870 authors; another “On the illustrious Men of Germany;” and a third on those of the “Benedictine Order,” 1606, 4to, translated into French, 1625, 4to; six books “On Polygraphy,” 1601, fol. translated into French; a treatise “On Steganography,” i.e. the various methods of writing in cyphers, 1621, 4to, Nuremberg, 1721. There is a scarce book on this work, attributed to Augustus, duke of Brunswick, entitled “Gustavi Seleni Enodatio Steganographiæ J. Trithemii,” 1624, fol. There are also various “Chronicles,” in “Trithemii Opera historica,” 1701, fol. 2 vols, published by Freher, to which we may add his works on religious subjects, 1605, fol. “Annales Hirsaugienses,” 2 vols. folio, a carious and important work, and others.

, a Dominican friar, son of sir Thomas Trivet, lord chief justice, was author of the “Annales 6. Regurn Anglise,” published by Mr. Ant. Hall, of Queen’s college, Oxford, in 1719, 2 vols. 8vo. He lived in the reigns of Edward I. II. III. and died in 1328. Bishop Nicolson says that an excellent copy of his history, which John Pits subdivides into three several treatises, was in his time in the library of Merton college, Oxford, “whence several of our most eminent antiquaries have had very remarkable observations.” It is in French, and bears the title of “Les Gestes des Apostoiles, or the popes, empereurs, et rois;” but this must be a different work from the former. Trivet left many other Mss. on various subjects of philosophy and theology, a commentary on Seneca’s Tragedies, &c. He was educated at Oxford, and esteemed one of the ornaments of the university in his time.

, a Latin historian, was born in the country of the Vocontian Gauls, in Gallia Narbonensis, and lived in the reign of Augustus, about the beginning of the Christian sera. His father enjoyed a situation under the emperor. We know, however, nothing of the personal character of Trogus, nor should have heard of his name had not Jnstin made an abridgment of his “Universal History,” comprized in for ty- four books the editions of which are noticed in our account of that classic.

, a learned protestant divine, was born at Groningen in 1633, and studied the classics, belles lettres, philosophy, and theology in that university, under Desmarets, Alting, and other eminent professors. He travelled afterwards through Germany and Switzerland, and studied Hebrew under Buxtorf. He then visited France and England, and on his return was appointed curate or minister, in the village of Haren, where he remained until 1671, when he was invited to be pastor at Groningen. In this office he continued forty-eight years, and died in 1719, aged eighty-six. In his eightieth year he was created doctor in theology at Groningen, as a testimony of respect on the part of the university. John Martinius, of Dantzick, having begun a Concordance of the Old Testament, in Flemish, Trommius completed it, and published it at Amsterdam, 1685 — 1692, 2 vols, folio. He also published a Greek Concordance of the Septusgint. He had made preparations and corrections for a second edition of the Flemish Concordance, but did not, we presume, finish it, as it has never been printed.

, a celebrated Dutch admiral, who is mentioned in our account of De Ruyter, was born at the Brille, in Holland. He rose in the naval service by his merit, after having distinguished himself on many occasions, especially at the famous engagement near Gibraltar in 1607. He was accounted one of the greatest seamen that had till that time appeared in the world; and was declared admiral of Holland, by the advice of the prince of Orange. He in that character defeated a large Spanish fleet in 1630, and gained upwards of thirty victories, of more or less importance, at sea; but was killed when under deck in an engagement with the English, in 1653. The States General caused medals to be struck to his honour, and lamented him as one or the greatest heroes of their republic. It is said that in the midst of his greatest glory, he was modest and unassuming, and never arrogated a higher character than that of a burgher, and that of being the father of the sailors. His second son, Cornelius, who died in 1691, was also a brave officer, and signalized himself in various naval engagements.

, the first of a considerable family of learned men in Geneva and France, was born at Geneva, April 17, 1582, whither his father had fled on account of religion, and narrowly escaped from the massacre of the protestants in 1572. He was then at Troyes, in Champagne, and escaped by means of a priest, his friend and neighbour, who concealed him in his house. He intended to go into Germany, and only to pass through Geneva; but he remained there by the advice of an acquaintance, obtained the freedom of the city, and soon after was admitted into the council of two hundred in acknowledgment of 'some services which he had done the State during the war with the Duke of Savoy.

His son, Theodore, was educated, by the advice of Beza^ who was his godfather, and he made a vast progress in learning. The testimony which was given him in 1600, when he went to see foreign universities, represents him as a person of very great hopes. He confirmed this character + all the learned men under whom he studied, or with whom hee became acquainted during the course of his travels, and these comprized most of the eminent men on the contii w > in England. He returned to Geneva in 1606, and gave such proofs of his learning that he was the same year chosen professor of the Hebrew language. In 1607 he married Theodora Rocca, a woman of great merit in all respects, sister to the first syndic of the commonwealth, and grand-daughter to the wife of Theodore Beza, at whose house she had been educated, and whose goddaughter she was. He was chosen minister in December 1605, and created rector of the university in 1610. In 1614 he was requested to read some lectures in divinity besides those on the Hebrew language, on account of the indisposition of one of the professors; and when the professorship of divinity became vacant in 1618, he was promoted to it, and resigned that of Hebrew. The same year he was appointed by the assembly of pastors and professors to answer the Jesuit Colon, who had attacked the French version of the Bible in a book entitled “Geneve Plagiaire.'” This he did in his “Coton Plagiaire,” which was extremely well received by the public. At the same time he was sent with Diodati from the church of Geneva to the synod of Dorr.,' where he displayed his great knowledge in divinity, and a moderation which was highly applauded. He had permission to go to the duke of Rohan for some months in 1632, and fully answered the expectation of that nobleman, who shewed him afterwards great esteem, which he returned by honouring the duke’s memory with an oration, whicij he pronounced some days after the funeral of that great man in 1638. He carried on a very extensive correspondence in the reformed countries, where he gained the friendship of the most learned men, and of several princes and great lords. He had much facility in composing oration:* and Latin verses, and his conversation was highly instructive, for he had joined to the study of divinity and of several languages, the knowledge of the law, and of other sciences, and of sacred and profane history, especially with regard to the two last centuries, particulars of which he frequently introduced, and applied when in company. In 1655 he was appointed by the assembly of pastors to confer and concur with John Dury in the affair of the rennion between the Lutherans and the reformed, on which subject he wrote several pieces. He died of a fever on the 19th. of November, 1657, having survived all the foreign divines who were present at the synod of Don. He was an open and sincere man, zealous for religion and the service of the churches, a great enemy to vices, though very mild towards persons. His advice was highly esteemed both for the civil government, and in the two ecclesiastical bodies, and by strangers, a great number of whom consulted him. He left, among other children, Lewis Tronchin, who was a minister of the church of Lyons, and was chosen four years after to fill his place in the church and professorship of divinity at Geneva. He died in 1705. He was esteemed one of the ablest divines of his time, and a man of great liberality of senti ment. He was well known to, and corresponded with our archbishops Tillotson and Tenison, and the bishops Compton, Lloyd, and Burnet, who gives him a very high character in his Tour through Switzerland.

, a celebrated physician, was apparently the grandson of Lewis Troncbin, and was born at Geneva in 1709. His father, John Robert Tronchin, having lost his property in the fatal Mississippi speculation, Theodore left home at the age of eighteen, and came to England to lord Bolingbroke, to whom he is said to have been related, we know not in what degree; but Bolingbroke had it not in his power to do much for him, and he went to Holland to study chemistry under Boerhaave, whose work on that subject had engaged his attention, and made him desiror.s of seeing the author. Boerhaave is said to have soon distinguished Tronchin from the general mass of his pupils, and in 1731 advised him to settle at Amsterdam, where he introduced him to practice, and in a, short time Tronchin was at the head of the physicians of Amsterdam. But having married a young lady of the family of the celebrated patriot De Witt, he fancied that the name would be disgraced by his accepting a place at court, and therefore he refused that of first physician to the stadtholder, and quitting Amsterdam when the stadtholderate was made hereditary, returned to Geneva, where he could live in a pure republic. Here the council gave him the title of honorary professor of medicine, but no duties were attached to it. It was not his intention, however, to be idle, and he gave lectures on the general principles of medicine, in which he endeavoured to free the science from rooted prejudices and false theories. In 1756 he was called to Paris to inoculate the children of the duke of Orleans. He bad introduced this practice both in Holland and at Geneva, and, in the former at least, without almost any opposition; and the success he had in his Hrst trial in France, on these princes of the blood, having contributed not a little to his celebrity, he rose to the highest honours of his profession, and acquired great wealth. In 1765 he was invited to Parma to inoculate the royal children of that court. Although averse to accept any situations which might form a restraint upon his time or studies, he consented to the title of first physician to the duke of Orleans, and in 1766 fixed his residence at Paris. The arrival of an eminent physician in Paris is always accompanied by a revolution in practice. Tronchin brought with him a new regimen, new medicines, and new methods of cure, and many of them certainly of great importance, particularly the admission and change of air in sick rooms, and a more hardy method of bringing up children; he also recommend-ed to the ladies more exercise and less effeminacy in thair modes of living and in diet. His prescriptions were generally simple; but perhaps his fame was chiefly owing to his introducing the practice of inoculation, which he pursued upon the most rational plan. In all this he had to encounter long established prejudices, and being a stranger, had to contend with the illiberality of some of the faculty, obstacles which he removed by a steady, humane course, and his frequent success completed his triumph. He was in person a fine figure; there was a mixture of sweetness and dignity in his countenance; his air and external demeanour inspired affection, and commanded respect; his dress, voice, and manner, were graceful and pleasing: all which no doubt gave an additional luslre to his reputation, and perhaps an efficacy to his prescriptions. His extensive practice prevented his writing or publishing more than a few papers on some medical cases, one “De colica pictorum,” 1757, 8vo. He also prefixed a judicious preface to an edition of “Oeuvres de Baillou,” 1762. This eminent practitioner died Nov. 30, 1781. He was at that time a citizen of Geneva, a title of which he was very proud, a member of the nobility of Parma, first physician to the duke of Orleans, and to the infant duke of Parma, doctor of medicine cf the universities of' Ley Jen, Geneva, and Montpellier, and a member of the academy of sciences of Paris, of that of surgery, of the Royal Society of London (elected 1762), and of the academies or colleges of Petersburgh, Edinburgh, and Berlin.

, celebrated for his learned translations, was born in 1508. He was first a canon of Laybach, and began in 1531 to preach publicly in the cathedral of that city Luther’s doctrine concerning the sacrament in both kinds; and to approve the marriage of priests; so that he embraced Luther’s party, and left Carniola to retire into the empire, where the town of Kempson chose him for their pastor. He preached there for fourteen years, and acquired much fame by his translations. He translated into the Carniolan tongue, in Latin characters, not onlv the Gospels, according to the version of Luther, with his catechism, but also the whole New Testament, and the Psalms of David in 1553. At length the States of Carniola recalled him home. He translated also into his mother tongue the confession of Augsburgb, and Luther’s German sermons. Herman Fabricius Mosemannus thus notices Truber’s translation, with the addition of some other particulars: “John Ungnad baron of Sonneck in Croatia, at the time of the Augsburgh confession, caused the Bible to be translated into the Sclavonian language at Aurach in the duchy of Wirternbergh. In this translation he employed three learned Sclavonians; the first was named Primus Truber, the second Anthony Dalmata, and the third Stephen Consul. But these books were seized on the road, and are still shut up in casks at Newstad in Austria. The character is altogether singular, almost resembling an Asiatic or Syriac character, with pretty large and square letters. A copy of this Bible may be seen in the library of the landgrave of Hesse. There are also some copies of it to be met with in Sclavonia.” These Bibles are without doubt printed in Cyrillic characters. Truber was banished Carniola a second time, and died June 29, 1586. The same year, in a letter he wrote to the deputies of Carniola, he Mjbscribes himself “Primus Truber, formerly canon in ordinary, called and confirmed at Laybach, pastor at Lack, at Tuffer near Ratschach, and at St. Bartholomew’s field, chaplain at S. Maximilian of Cilly, Sclavonian preacher at Trieste, and after the first persecution preacher at Rosemburgh on the Tauber, pastor at Kempten and at Aurais, afterwards preacher to the States of Carniola, and at Rubia in the county of Goergh, and after the second persecution pastor at CauHFen, and now at Deredingen near Tubingen.”

, a French abb of temporary fame, but who is upon the whole rather faintly praised by his countrymen, was born at St. Malo in Dec. 1697. He was related to the celebrated Maupertuis, who dedicated the third volume of his works to him. His first appearance as an author was in 1717, in his twentieth year, when he published in the French “Mercure,” his “Reflections on Telemachus,” which served to introduce him to La Motte and Fontenelle, who became afterwards not only the objects of his constant esteem, but of a species of idolatry which exposed him to the ridicule of the wits of his day. There are no memoirs of his education and early progress, but it appears that he was treasurer of the church of Nantes, and afterwards archdeacon and canon of St. Malo. For some time he lived in intimacy with cardinal Tencin, and visited Rome with him, but having no inclination to a life of dependence, whatever advantages it might bring, he returned to Paris, and employed his time in literary pursuits. His irreproachable conduct and agreeable manners procured him very general esteem as a man, but as a writer he never ranked high in the public opinion, and although very ambitious of a seat in the French academy, he did not reach that honour until 1761. About six years afterwards he retired to his native place, where he died in March 1770. His principal works were, I. “Essais de litterature et de morale,” 4 vols. 12mo, which have been often reprinted and translated into other languages. These essays, although the author was neither gifted with the elegance of La Bruyere, nor with the penetration of La Rochefoucault, contain much good sense and knowledge of books and men. 2. “Panegyriques ties Saints,” a work feebly written, but to which he prefixed some valuable reflections on eloquence. It was in this work he incurred the displeasure of Voltaire. He in general disliked the poetry of his country, and had not only the courage and imprudence to say that he thought it in general monotonous, but that he was unable to read even the “Henriade” of Voltaire without yawning. Voltaire resented this in a satire, entitled “Le Pauvre Diable,” but afterwards became reconciled to the abbe. 3. “Memoires pour servir a l'histoire de Messieurs de la Motte et de Fontenelle,” Amst. 1761. He was a contributor also to the “Journal des Savans,” and to the “Journal Chretien,” which was established in defence of religion against the infidel writers of that time.

, an estimable and upright statesman, was born at Easthampsted in Berkshire in August 1638. He was the eldest son of William Trumbull, esq. a justice of peace in Berkshire, and grandson of another William Trumbull, who was agent and envoy from James I. to the archduke Albert at Brussels, from 1609 to the end of 1625. This great man, for such he appears to have been, made a large collection of letters, memoirs, minutes, and negociations, of all the men of note in iiis time, with whom he entertained a constant and familiar correspondence. These documents, which are, or were lately, in the gallery at Easthampsted park, sufficiently show his care, industry, vigilance, and sufficiency, in the employment he served; and he appears to have been the family pattern and model which sir William Trumbull, the subject of our memoir, had in his eye, and spurred him on to an imitation of those virtues which, if they appeared so bright in the grandfather, shone forth in much greater lustre and perfection in the grandson.

Mr. Trumbull was educated partly at home and partly at Oafcingham school, to which he was sent in 1649. Jn 1654 he was admitted a gentleman commoner, under Mr. T. Wyat, in St. John’s college, Oxford, but removed three years after to Ah Souls, on being chosen a fellow. In 1659, he went out bachelor of laws. In 1664- he began his travels through France and Italy, and lived there with the lords Sunderland, Godolphin, and the bishop of London, Dr. Compton. In 1666 he returned to college, and the following year practised as a civilian in the vice-chancellor’s court. From some ms memorandums of his life written by himself, it appears that about this time he conducted an appeal to the lord chancellor Clarendon, and carried a point respecting the non-payment ojf fees for his doctor’s degree, by which he gained great credit, and all the business of the vice-chancellor’s court. In July of this year, 1667, he took the degree of LL. D. and in Michaelmas term, 1668, was admitted of Doctors’ Commons, after which he says he attended diligently the courts, and took notes.

In 1670 he married a daughter, of sir Charles Cotterell, and the same year his father settled upon him the yearly sum of 350l. which, he adds, sharpened his industry in his profession. In 1672, some deaths and promotions contributed to increase his practice, now worth 500l. per ann.; and about the same time he got the reversion of the place of clerk of the signet on sir Philip Warwick’s death, which happened in 1682. In the following year, began his career of public employment, by his accompanying lord Dartmouth to Tangiers. In this expedition he was appointed judge advocate of the fleet, and commissioner for settling the properties of the leases of houses, &c. at Tan* giers, between the king and the inhabitants. For this service we should suppose he was not very amply remunerated, as he makes here a remark on “the great difference between the value of assistance when wanted, and after it is given and done with.” In November he returned, and resumed his profession in Doctors Commons; and about the same time, refused the place of secretary of war in Ireland.

In 1684, he was presented to the king by lord Rochester, and received the honour of knighthood; and was also made clerk of the deliveries of the ordnance stores, a place worth 300l. a year. In 1685, he was appointed envoy extraordinary at the court of France, against his inclination; but the king (James II.) insisted upon it, and gave him a pension of 200l. a year, in lieu of his place of clerk of the deliveries, which he could not hold with his appointment as envoy. His conduct in this office does him much credit. Being in France when the Protestants were persecuted in consequence of the revocation of the edict of Nantz, he remonstrated against it, and spoke his opinion with a freedom which was not very acceptable, either at the court where he was, or that from which he came; and when he found his remonstrances in vain, he took every method he could, by his privilege, to harbour many of the persecuted Protestants, and assisted them in recovering their effects, and conveying them to England. It was probably on this account that he was recalled in 1636, and, as his services were too valuable to be laid aside, the king appointed him ambassador extraordinary to the Ottoman Porte; and before he embarked, the Turkey-company presented him with a gold cup, value sixty pounds. He was continued in this embassy by William III. and remained there until 1691. He then returned from Constantinople, principally by land. In 1694 and 1695 he was advanced to be one of the lords of the treasury, a member of the privy-council, and principal secretary of state. He was also governor of the Turkeycompany: and had been several times member of parliament, and once represented the university of Oxford. His opportunities to acquire diplomatic knowledge, and to understand the intrigues of negotiation, induced him once to say to king William, “Do not, Sir, send embassies to Italy, but a fleet into the Mediterranean.”

In 1697, he resigned all his employments, and retired to East Hampsted, where he died December 14, 1716, and was buried in East Hampsted church. It was in this retirement that, in 1705, he became acquainted with Pope , who then lived at Binfield. Pope informed Mr. Spence, that he “loved very much to read and talk of the classics in his retirement. We used to take a ride out together three or four days in the week, and at last almost every day.” His letters to Pope breathe'an air of uncommon good temper, good sense, candour, and tranquillity of mind. They evince the scholar, the man of taste, and the gentleman, mixed with the clearest sense of propriety. It appears that sir William was the very first person that urged Pope to undertake a translation of the Iliad. Besides these letters in Pope’s Works, several written by him while he was ambassador in France, are preserved in the paperoffice, and extracts from others have been printed by sir John Dalrymple. His well-written character of air William Dolben, archbishop of York, we have already given in our account of that prelate. We ought not to omit, that he had been a friend and patron to Dryden, who, in the postscript to his Virgil, pays him a very elegant compliment: "If the last Æneid shine among its fellows, it is. owing to the commands of sir William Trumbull, one of the principal secretaries of state, who recommended it as his favourite to my care; and for his sake particularly I have made it mine. For who would confess weariness when he. enjoined a fresh labour? I could not but invoke the assistance of a muse for this last office:

Sir William Trumbull’s first wife dying in 1704, he married Judith, daughter of Henry Alexander, fourth earl of Sterling, by whom he had a son of his own names who died in 1760, and whose daughter and sole heir married the hon. colonel Martin Sandys. Sir William had a brother, the rev. Dr. Charles Trumbull, who died Jan. 8, 1724. He was rector of Stystead in Essex, and Hadley in Suffolk, and chaplain to archbishop Sancroft, but quitted these livings at the Revolution.

, a learned surgeon, and senior surgeon of the county-infirmary, Gloucester, was descended from the ancient family of Trye, of Hardwick, co. Gloucester, and was born Aug. 21, 1757. He married Mary, elder daughter of the rev. Samuel Lysons, rector of Rodmarton, by whom he left three sons and five daughters; and was consequently related to the two celebrated antiquaries. In 1797, he succeeded to a considerable estate; consisting of the manor, advowson, and chief landed property in the parish of Leckhampton, near Cheltenham, under the will of his cousin, Henry Norwood, esq whose family had possessed them for many generations. This gentleman will be long regretted, not only as a surgeon, but as a man extremely useful in various undertakings of national concern, such as rail-roads, canals, &c. in the planning of which he evinced great genius. As a surgeon, his practice was extensive, and his success great. Many arduous and difficult operations he performed, which ended in perfect cures, after others of eminence had shrunk from the undertakings. His operations were conceived and executed from a perfect knowledge of the structure of the human body, attained by a well-grounded education, and constant intense study through life. He was educated under the eminent surgeon, Mr. Russell, of Worcester; then studied under John Hunter; was house-surgeon“to the Westminster Infirmary, and afterwards assistant to the very ingenious and scientific Sheldon. He was for some time house-surgeon and apothecary to the infirmary in Gloucester. Shortly after he quitted that situation, he was elected surgeon to that charity, an office which he filled for near thirty years, discharging its duties with great credit to himself; while those placed under his care were sensible of the advantages they possessed from his assiduous attention to their sufferings. He trained up several surgeons, many of whom are exercising the medical profession in various parts of the kingdom, with credit to their preceptor, honour to themselves, and utility to mankind. As an author he was well known to the literary part of the medical world, and published: 1.” Remarks on Morbid Retentions of Urine,“1784. 2.” Review of Jesse Foot’s Observations on the Venereal Disease,“(being an answer to his attack on John Hunter,) 1787. 3.” An Essay on the swelling of the lower Extremities incident to Lying-in Women,“1792. 4.” Illustrations of some of the Injuries to which the lower Limbs are exposed,“(with plates), 1802. 5.” Essay on some of the Stages of the Operation of Cutting for the Stone,“1811. 6.” An Essay on Aneurisms," in Latin, was far advanced in the press several years ago, but was laid aside, and not quite completed at the author’s death. He has left several interesting cases, and other observations, in manuscript; and many of his papers of a miscellaneous nature, connected with the profession, are to be found in various periodical publications. He was a steady friend and promoter of the Vaccine inoculation.

, an ancient Greek poet, as we learn from Suidas, was an Egyptian; but nothing can be determined concerning his age. Some have fancied him older than Virgil, but without the least colour of probability. Others have made him a contemporary with Quintus Calaber, Nonnus, Coluthus, and Musæus, who wrote the poem on Hero and Leander, because they fancied a resemblance between his style and theirs; but this is a precarious argument, nor is it better known when these authors lived. All therefore that can be reasonably supposed concerning the age of Tryphiodorus is, that he lived between the reigns of Severus and Anastasius; the former of whom died at the beginning of the third century, and the latter at the beginning of the sixth.

His reputation among the ancients, if we may judge from their having given him the title of grammarian, was very considerable; for, though the word grammarian be now applied to persons altogether attentive to the minutiae of language, yet it was anciently a title of honour, and particularly bestowed on such as wrote well and politely in every way. The writings of this author were extremely numerous, as we learn from their titles preserved by Suidas yet none of them are come down to us, except his “Destruction of Troy,” which he calls “A Sequel to the Iliad.” He also wrote a new Odyssey, which Addison has described with equal truth and humour. After having proposed to speak of the several species of false wit among the ancients, he says, “The first I shall produce are the Lipogrammatists, or Letter-droppers, of antiquity, that would take an exception, without any reason, against some particular letter in the alphabet, so as not to admit it once into a whole poem. One Tryphiodorus was a great master in this kind of writing. He composed an Odyssey, or epic poem on the adventures of Ulysses, consisting of four and twenty books, having entirely banished the letter A from his first book, which was called ‘ Alpha,’ as lucus a non lucendo, because there was not an Alpha in it. His second book was inscribed * Beta' for the same reason: in short, the poet excluded the whole four and twenty letters in their turns, and shewed them, one after another, that he could do his business without them. It must have been very pleasant to have seen this poet avoiding the reprobate letter, as much as another would a false quantity; and making his escape from it through the several Greek dialects, when he was pressed with it in any particular syllable. For, the most apt and elegant word in the whole language was rejected, like a diamond with a flaw in it, if it appeared blemished with a wrong letter. I shall only observe upon this head, that if the work I have here mentioned had been now extant, the Odyssey of Tryphiodorus in all probability would have been oftener quoted by our learned pedants than the Odyssey of Homer. What a perpetual fund would it have been of obsolete words and phrases, unusual barbarisms and rusticities, absurd spellings and complicated dialects! I make no question, but it would have been looked upon as one of the most valuable trcasures of the Greek tongue.” It may be necessary to add that this singular composition does not exist, and that some have good-naturedly doubted whether it was written by our Tryphiodorus.

The first edition of Tryphiodorus’s “Destruction of Troy” was published at Venice by Aldus, together with Quintus Calaber’s “Paralipomena,” and Coluthus’s Poem on the rape of Helen. It was afterwards reprinted at several places, particularly at Francfort in 1588, by Frischlinus, who not only restored many corrupted passages in the original, but added two Latin versions, one in prose, the other in verse. That in verse was reprinted with the Greek at Oxford, 1742, in 8vo, with an English translation in verse; and notes upon both the Greek and the English by J. Merrick of Trinity-college. There is another good edition more recently published by Mr. Northmore, Oxford, 1791, 8vo; and one was printed at Leipsic in 1809, in fol. amounting only to twenty-five copies.

, an ingenious mathematician, lord of Killingswald and of Stolzenberg in Lusatia, was born April 10, 1651.After having served as a volunteer in the army of Holland in 1672, be travelled into most parts of Europe, as England, Germany, Italy, France, &c. He went to Paris for the third time in 1682; where he communicated to the Academy of Sciences, the discovery of the curves called from him Tschirnhausen’s Caustics; and the academy in consequence elected the inventor one of its foreign members. On returning to Italy, he was desirous of perfecting the science of optics; for which purpose he established two glass-works, from whence resulted many new improvements in dioptrics and physics, particularly the noted burning-glass which he presented to the regent. It was to him too that Saxony owed its porcelain manufactory.

Content with the enjovment of literary fame, Tschirnhausen refused all other honours that were offered him. Learning was his sole delight. He searched out men of talents, and gave them encouragement. He was often at the expence of printing the useful works of other men, for the benefit of the public; and died, beloved and regretted, the llth of September, 1708.

, one of a family of Swiss writers, and laudanum of the canton of Glarus, was born in 1505. He devoted much of his time to historical researches, and produced, among other works of less note, a “Chronicle,” which, whatever its merits, remained in manuscript until 1734, when it was published at Basle in 2 vols. fol. He died in 1572. Another of the family, Dominick Tscudi, who died in 1654, wrote in Latin, on the “Constitution of the Benedictine congregation in Switzerland,” and an account of the founders of that abbey, which was printed in 1651, 8vo. A third, John Henry Tscudi, who died in 1729, and was a zealous protestant, his predecessors being equally zealous catholics, was the author of an account of the abbes of St. Gall, 1711, 4to; a “Chronicle” of the canton of Claris, 1714, 8vo, both in German. He also conducted a literary journal from 1714 to 1726, which was ordered to be burnt by the public executioner in consequence of the freedoms he took with popery. There was also a John Peter Tscudi, who wrote in German a “History of Werdenberg,” published in 1126.

, an ingenious English writer, was born in London Sept. 2, 1705, of a Somersetshire family; his father was a merchant, his mother was Judith, daughter of Abraham Tillard, esq. Both his parents died before he was two years old, and left him under the care of his grandmother Tillard and his maternal uncle sir Isaac Tillard, a man of strict piety and morality, of whose memory Mr. Tucker always spoke with the highest veneration and regard, and who took the utmost pains to give his nephew principles of integrity, benevolence, and candour, with a disposition to unwearied application and industry in his pursuits. He was educated at Bishop’s Stortford, and in 1721 was entered as a gentleman commoner in Merlon-college, Oxford, where his favourite studies were metaphysics and the mathematics. He there engaged masters to teach him French, Italian, and music, of which last he was very fond. In 1726 he was entered of the Inner Temple. Soon afterwards, and just before he came of age, he lost his guardian sir Isaac. He studied enough of the law to be useful to himself and his friends; but his fortune not requiring it, and his constitution not being strong, he was never called to the bar. He usually spent the summer vacations in tours through different parts of England, Wales, and Scotland, and once passed six weeks in France and Flanders. In 1727 he purchased Betchworth-castle with its estate. He then turned his attention more to rural affairs, and with his usual industry wrote down numberless observations which he collected in discourses with his farmers, or extracted from various authors on the subject. On the 3d of February, 1736, he married Dorothy, daughter of Edward Barker, esq. afterwards cursitor baron of the exchequer, and receiver of the tenths. By her he had three daughters, Dorothy, who died under three years old, Judith, and Dorothea- Maria, who, on the 27th of October, 1763, married sir Henry Paulett St. John, bart. and died on the 5th of May, 1768, leaving one son. Mrs. Tucker died the 7th of May, 1754, aged 48. As they had lived together in the tenderest harmony, the loss was a very severe stroke to Mr. Tucker. His first amusement was. to collect all the letters which had passed between them whenever they happened to be absent from each other, which he copied out in books twice over, under the title of “The Picture of artless Love;” one copy he gave to her father, who survived her five years, and the other he kept to read over to his daughters frequently. His principal attention then was to instruct his daughters; he taught them French and Italian, and whatever else he thought might be useful to them to know. In 1755, at the request of a friend in the west of England, he worked up some materials which he sent him into the form of a pamphlet, then published under the title of “The Country Gentleman’s Advice to his Son on the Subject of Party Clubs,” printed by Owen, Temple-bar; and he soon after began writing “The Light of Nature pursued,” of which he not only formed and wrote over several sketches before he fixed on the method he determined to pursue, but wrote the complete copy twice with his own hand; but thinking his style was naturally still and laboured, in order to improve it, he had employed much time in studying the most elegant writers and orators, and translating many orations of Cicero, Demosthenes, &c. and, twice over, “Cicero de Oratore.” After this he composed a little treatise called “Vocal Sounds,” printed, but never published; contriving, with a few additional letters, to fix the pronunciation to the whole alphabet in such manner, that the sound of any word may be conveyed on puper as exactly as by the voice. His usual method of spending his time was to rise very early to his studies, in winter bu ‘ning a lamp in order to light his own fire before his servants were stirring. After breakfast he returned to his studies for two or three hours, and then took a ride on horseback, or walked. The evenings in summer he often spent in walking over his farms and setting down his remarks; and in the winter, while in the country, reading to his wife, and afterwards to his daughters. In London, where he passed some months every winter and spring, he passed much time in the same manner, only that his evenings were more frequently spent in friendly parties with some of his relations who lived near, and with some of his old fellow collegiates or Temple friends. His walks there were chiefly to transact any business he had in town, always preferring to walk on all his own errands, to sending orders by a servant, and frequently when he found no other, would walk, he said, to the Bank to see what it was o’clock. Besides his knowledge in the classics and the sciences, he was perfectly skilled in merchant’s accompts, and kept all his books with the exactness of an accompting-house; and he was ready to serve his neighbours by acting as justice of peace. His close application to his studies, and writing latterly much by candle and lamp-light, weakened his sight, and hrought on cataracts, which grew so much worse after a fever in the spring, 1771, that he could no longer amuse himself with reading or writing, and at last could not walk, except in his own garden, without leading. This was a great trial on his philosophy, yet it did not fail him i he not only bore it with patience, but cheerfulness, frequently being much diverted with the mistakes his infirmity occasioned him to make. His last illness carried him off on the 20th of November, 1774, perfectly sensible, and as he had lived, easy and resigned, to the last. He published a pamphlet entitled a Man in quest of himself,“in reply to some strictures on a note to his” Free Will.“He had no turn for politics or public life, and never could be induced to become a candidate to represent the county of Surrey, to which his fortune, abilities, and character gave him full pretensions.” My thoughts,“says Mr. Tucker of himself,” have taken a turn, from my earliest youth, towards searching into the foundations and measures of right and wrong; my love for retirement has furnished me with continual leisure; and the exercise of my reason has been my daily employment." He once, however, was induced to attend a public meeting at Epsom in the beginning of the present reign, when party ran very high, and when sir Joseph Mawbey began to exercise his talent for poetry by a ballad on the occasion, in which he introduced Mr. Tucker and other gentlemen who differed from him in their opinions. So far from being hurt by this, Mr. Tucker was highly amused at the representation given of himself, and actually set the ballad to music.

Having before provided for his younger daughter, he left his estate at Betchworth to his eldest daughter, who was unmarried, and a more worthy successor could not have been found. With the strong understanding of her father, she inherited his good and amiable qualities; and though possessed of learning which is not often found in a lady, it was never obtruded in conversation. Friendly to her neighbours, kind to her tenants, benevolent to the poor, she died unmarried Nov. 26, 1794, respected and regretted by all who were acquainted with her, leaving sir Henry Paulet St. John Mildmay, her sister’s only son, heir to her estates, who, in 1798, sold the manor, mansion-house, &c. to Henry Peters, esq. banker in London, the present owner, who has made great improvements, and enlarged the estate by purchases.

Mr. Tucker’s “Light of Nature pursued,” a work not now much read, was published in 7 vols. 8vo, of which the first three were published by himself in 1768, under the assumed name of Edward Search, esq. and the four last, after his death, as “The posthumous work of Abraham Tucker, esq.” It consists of disquisitions on most disputed points and obscure theories in metaphysics, politics, divinity, &c. in which are many bold and original thoughts, but conveyed in a style and manner which has prevented the work from being much a favourite with the public. Although in general praised for liberality of sentiment, he has been by one party censured on account of his servile adherence to the doctrines of the established church, and by another has been claimed as a supporter of what is called unitarianism.

, a learned English divine, but more celebrated as a political writer, was born at Laugharn, in Carmarthenshire, in 1712. His father was a farmer, and having a small estate left him near Aberystwith, in Cardiganshire, he removed thither; and perceiving that his son had a turn for learning, he sent him to Ruthin school in Denbighshire, where he made so great progress in the classics that he obtained an exhibition at St. John’s college, Oxford. The journey from his native place to the university was long, and at that time very tedious, on account of the badness of the roads. He travelled therefore for some time on foot, until old Mr. Tucker, feeling for his son’s reputation, as well as for his ease, gave him his own horse. But upon his return, young Josiah, with true filial affection, considered that it was better for him to walk to Oxford than for his father to repair on foot to the neighbouring markets and fairs, which had been the case, owing to this new regulation. The horse was accordingly returned; and our student, for the remainder of the time he continued at the university, travelled on foot backward and forward with his baggage at his back.

At the age of twenty-three he entered into holy orders, and served a curacy for some time in Gloucestershire. About 1737 he became curate of St. Stephen’s church, Bristol, and was appointed minor canon in the cathedral of that city. Here he attracted the notice of Dr. Joseph Butler, then bishop of Bristol, and afterwards of Durham, who appointed Mr. Tucker his domestic chaplain. By the interest of this prelate Mr. Tucker obtained a prebendal stall in the cathedral of Bristol; and on the death of Mr. Catcott, well known by his treatise on the deluge, he became rector of St. Stephen. The inhabitants of that parish consist chiefly of merchants and tradesmen, a circumstance which greatly aided his natural inclination for commercial and political studies. When the famous bill was brought into the House of Commons for the naturalization of the Jews, Mr. Tucker took a decided part in favour of the measure, and was, indeed, its most able advocate; but for this he was severely attacked in pamphlets, newspapers, and magazines; and the people of Bristol burnt his effigy dressed in canonicals, together with his letters on. behalf of naturalization . In 1753 he published an able pamphlet on the “Turkey Trade,” in which he demonstrates the evils that result to trade in general from chartered companies. At this period lord Clare (afterwards Ccirl Nugent) was returned to parliament for Bristol, which honour he obtained chiefly through the strerruous exertions of Mr. Tucker, whose influence in his large and wealthy parish was almost decisive on such an occasion. In return for this favour the earl procured for him the deanery of Gloucester, in 1758, at which time he took his degree of D. D. So great was his reputation for commercial knowledge, that Dr. Thomas Hayter, afterwards bishop of London, who was then tutor to his present majesty, applied to Dr. Tucker to draw up a dissertation on this subject for the perusal of his royal pupil. It was accordingly done, and gave great satisfaction. This work, under the title of “The Elements of Commerce,” was printed in quarto, but never published. Dr. Warburton, however, who, after having been member of the same chapter with the dean, at Bristol, became bishop of Gloucester, thought very differently from the rest of mankind, in respect to his talents and favourite pursuits; and said once, in his coarse manner, that “his Dean’s trade was religion, and religion his trade.” The dean on being once asked concerning the coolness which subsisted between him and ^Varburton, his answer was to the following purpose: “The bishop affects to consider me with contempt; to which I say nothing. He has sometimes spoken coarsely of me; to which I replied nothing. He has said that religion is my trade, and trade is my religion. Commerce, and its connections have, it is true, been favourite objects of my attention, and where is jthe crime? And as for religion, I have attended carefully to the duties of my parish: nor have I neglected my cathedral. The world knows something of me as a writer on religious subjects; and I will add, which the world does not know, that I have written near three hundred sermons, preached them all, again and again. My heart is at ease on that score, and my conscience, thank God, does not accuse me.” The fact is, that although there is no possible connection between the business of commerce and the duties of a clergyman, he had studied theology in all its branches scientifically, and his various publications on moral and religious subjects show him to be deeply versed in theology.

In 1771, when a strong attempt was made to procure an abolition of subscription to the thirty-nine articles, Dr. Tucker came forward as an able advocate of the church of England, yet admitted that some reformation of the liturgy was wanted, and instanced particularly the Athanasian creed, which he considered as too scholastic and refined for a popular confession of faith. About this time he published “Directions for Travellers,” in which he lays down excellent rules, by which gentlemen who visit foreign countries may not only improve their own minds, but turn their observations to the benefit of their native country. This has become extremely scarce, but there is a part of it reprinted in Berohtold’s “Essay to direct the inquiries of Travellers,” an excellent work, published in 178i>, 2 vols.

When the dispute arose between Great Britain and the American colonies, the dean was an attentive observer of the contest, examining the affair with a very different eye from that of a party-man, or an interested merchant, and discovered, as he conceived, that both sides would be benefited by an absolute separation. The more he thought on this subject, the more he was persuaded that extensive colonies were an evil rather than an advantage to any commercial nation. On this principle, therefore, he published his “Thoughts upon the Dispute between the Mother Country and America.” He demonstrated, that the latter 1 could, not be conquered, and that, if it could, the purchase would be dearly bought. He warned this country against commencing a war with the colonies, and advised that they should be left to themselves. This advice startled all parties, and by all the dean was considered as a sort of madman, who had rambled out of the proper line of his profession to commence political quack. Our author, however, went on vindicating and enforcing his favourite system, in spite of all the obloquy with which it was treated both in the senate and from the press. As the war proceeded, some intelligent persons began to see more truth and reason in his sentiments, and time, perhaps, may be thought to have demonstrated that he was right. He printed several essays in the newspapers under the title of Cassandra.