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

, an eminent English historian, and the contemporary of William of Malmsbury, lived in the twelfth century. He both studied and taught the sciences, and particularly the mathematics at Oxford, and became precentor to the church of Durham. He died probably soon after the year 1130, where his history ends. He took great pains in collecting our ancient monuments, especially in the north of England, after they had been scattered by the Danes in their devastations of that country. From these he composed a history of the kings of England from the year 616 to 1130, with some smaller historical pieces. It was continued by John, prior of Hexham, to the year 1156. This work, and Simeon’s account of the church of Durham, are printed among Twisden’s “Decem Scriptores” but of the latter a separate edition was published in 1732, 8vo, by Thomas Bedford.

, surnamed Metaphrasfes, from his having written the lives of the saints in a diffuse manner, was born of noble parents at Constantinople, in the tenth century, and was well educated, and raised himself by his merit to very high trust under the reigns of Leo, the philosopher, and Constantine Pruphyrogenitus his son. It is said, that when sent on a certain occasion by the emperor to the island of Crete, which the Saracens were about to surprize, a contrary wind carried his ship to the isle of Pharos. There he nut with an anchorite, who advised him to write tho life of Theoctista, a female saint of Lesbos. With this he complied, and we may presume, found some pleasure in the undertaking, as be gradually extended his researches to the lives of an hundred and twenty other saints, which, with respect to style, are not disgraceful to a scholar, but, cardinal Bellarmin says, he describes his saints rather as what they ought to be, than as what they were. There are Latin translations of this work by Lipotian, Surius, and others, but no edition of the original Gveek; and iiis translators are accused of having added much of a fabulous nature. Some other religious tracts of Metaphrastes are extant, and some “Annals.” He died in 976 or 977.

, a learned divine of the sixteenth century, who co-operated in the reformation, was born Nov. 6, 1530, at Cappell, a village near Zurich in Swisserland. His father, Peter Simler, after having been for many years a member of, and afterwards prior of the L onastery there, embraced the reformed religion, became a preacher of it, and died in 1557. After being educated for some time in his father’s monastery, he went to Zurich in 1544, and studied for two years under the direction of the celebrated Bullinger, who was his god-father. He removed thence to Basil, where he studied rhetoric and mathematics, and afterwards to Strasburgh, where Sturmius, Martyr, Bucer, and others of the reformers resided; but as he had no thoughts at this time of divinity as a profession, he improved himself chiefly in other branches of learning. He continued here about two years, and passed three more in visiting various universities, and hearing the lectures of the most eminent professors. In 1549, he returned home, and with such visible improvement in learning, that Gesner often employed him to lecture to his scholars, both in geometry and astronomy. In 1552 he was appointed to expound in public the New Testament, which he did with so much ability as to be greatly admired by the learned of Zurich, as wt 11 as by the English who had taken refuge there from the Marian persecution. In 1557 he was made deacon; and when Bibliander, on account of his advanced age, was declared emeritus^ Simler was appointed to teach in his place, and was likewise colleague with Peter Martyr, who had a high opinion of him, and on his death in 1563, Simler succeeded him as professor of divinity. He filled this office with great reputation until his constitution became impaired by a hereditary gout, which in his latter years interrupted his studies, and shortened his useful life. He was only forty-five when he died, July 2, 1576. He is represented as a man of a meek, placid, and affectionate temper, and although never rich, always liberal, charitable, and hospitable.

His works are very numerous, some on subjects of divinity, commentaries on the scriptures, c. and some on the controversies most agitated in his time. He wrote also the lives of Peter Martyr, Gesner, and Bullinger, each in a thin 4io volume; published an epitome of Gesner’s “Bibliotheca,* 5 155-), fol. and was editor of some of the works of Martyr and Bullinger. To those we may add, 1.” Je­thici costtiographta, Antonini Itinerarimn, Rutiliani Numantiani hinerarium, et alia varia,“basil', 1575, 12mo, with valuable scholia. 2.” Helvetiorum Respublica,“often reprinted, and esteemed one of the best of that collection of little books called” Republics.“3.” Vallesise descriptionis libri duo, et de Alpibus commentarius,“1574, 8vo. 4.” Vocabularia rei nummarise ponderum et mensurarum, Gr. Lat. Heb Arab, ex diversis autoribus collecta," Tignri, 1584, 8vo, &c. &C.

, a late learned physician, and physician extraordinary to the king, was born March 17, 1750, at Sandwich, in Kent, where his father, who followed the profession of the law, was so respected, that, at the coronation of their present majesties, he was deputed by the cinque ports one of their barons to support the king’s canopy, according to ancient custom. His mother, whose maiden name was Foart, and whose family was likewise of Sandwich, died when he was an infant. He was educated at a seminary in France, where he not only improved himself in the learned languages, but acquired such a perfect knowledge of the French tongue, as to be able to write and speak it with the same facility as his own. He pursued his medical studies for nearly three years at Edinburgh, and afterwards went to Holland, and studied during a season at Leyden, where he was admitted to the degree of doctor of physic: he chose the measles for the subject of his inaugural discourse, which he inscribed to Cullen, and to Gaubius, both of whom hud shewn him particular regard. After taking his degree at Leyden, he visited and became acquainted with professor Camper in InesKuul, who had at that time one of the finest anatomical museums in Kurope. From thence he proceeded to Aix-lct-Chapelle and the Spa, and afterwards visited different parts of Germany; stopped for some time at the principal universities; and wherever he went cultivated the acquaintance of learned men, especially those of his own profession, in which he was ever anxious to impr >ve himself. At Berne, in Switzerland, he became known to the celebrated Haller, who afterwards ranked him among his friends and correspondents. He came to reside in London towards the close of 1778, being then in his 2Stii year, and was admitted a member of the College of Physicians, and was elected a fellow of the Royal Society 1779, and of the Society of Antiquaries 1791, as he had been before of different foreign academies at Nantz, Montpellier, and Madrid: he was afterwards admitted an honorary member of the Literary and Philosophical Society at Manchester, and of the Royal Society of Medicine at Paris, at which place he was elected one of the Associes Etrangers de l‘Ecole de Medicine; and in 1807, Correspondant de la Premiere Classe de I’Institut Imperial. Previous to 1778, he had written an elementary work on Anatomy, which was greatly enlarged and improved in its second edition, 1781: and he had communicated to the Royal Society the History of a curious case, which was afterwards published in their Transactions, “Phil. Trans.” vol. LXIV. He became also the sole editor of the London “Medical Journal;” a work which, after going through several volumes, was resumed under the title of “Medical Facts and Observations’.” these two works have ever been distinguished for their correctness, their judicious arrangement, and their candour. About this time he published an account of the Tape-worm, in which he made known the specific for this disease, purchased by the king of France. This account has been enlarged in a subsequent edition. — He likewise distinguished himself by a practical work on “Consumptions,” which, at the time, became the means of introducing him to considerable practice in pulmonary complaints. In 1780, he was elected physician to the Westminster General Dispensary; a situation he held for many years, and which afforded him ample scope for observation and experience in the knowledge of disease. These opportunities he did not neglect; and though, from his appointment soon after to St. Luke’s Hosr he was led to decline general practice, and to attach himself more particularly to the diseases of th mi-.;, continued to communicate to the publick such facts and remarks as he considered likely to promote the extension of any branch of professional science. With this view, he published some remarks on the treatment of Hydrocephalus internus (“Med. Comment, of Edinburgh, vol. V.”), and in the same work a case of Ulceration of the Œsophagus and Ossification of the Heart. He wrote also an account of a species of Hydrocephalus, which sometimes takes place in cases of Mania (London Med. Journal, vol. VI.) and an account of the Epidemic Catarrh of the year 1788, vol. IX. He had given an account also of the “Life of Dr. William Hunter,” with whom he was personally acquainted, a work abounding in interesting anecdote, and displaying an ingenuous and impartial review of the writings and discoveries of that illustrious anatomist. From the time of his being elected physician to St. Luke’s Hospital to the period of his death, he devoted himself, nearly exclusively, to the care and treatment of Insanity; and his skill in this melancholy department of human disease, became so generally acknowledged, that few, if any, could be considered his superiors. In the year 1803, it was deemed expedient to have recourse to Dr. Simmons, to alleviate the mournful malady of his sovereign, of whom he had the care for nearly six months, assisted by his son: the result was as favourable as the public could have wished; and on taking their leave, his majesty was pleased to confer a public testimony of his approbation, by appointing Dr. Simmons one of his physicians extraordinary, which took place in May 1804. — In the unfortunate relapse, which occurred in 1811, Dr. Simmons again attended; and, in conjunction with the other physicians, suggested those remedies and plans which seemed most likely to effect a cure. In February of that year he resigned the office of physician to St. Luke’s, in a very elegant letter, in which he assigned his age and state of health as the reasons for his resignation. The governors were so sensible of the value of his past services, and the respect due to him, as immediately to elect him a governor of the charity. They also proposed his being one of the committee; and, expressly on his account, created the office of Consulting Physician, in order to have the advantage of his opinion, not merely in the medical arrangement, but in the domestic ceconomy of the hospital. His last illness began on the evening of the 10th. of April, 1813, when he was seized with sickness, and a violent vomiting of bile, accompanied with a prostration of strength so sudden, and so severe, that on the second day of the attack he was barely able to stand; and a dissolution of the powers of life seeming to be rapidly coming on, he prepared for his departure with methodical accuracy, anticipated the event with great calmness, and, on the evening of the 23d of the same month, expired in the arms of his son. He was buried May 2, at Sandwich in Kent, and, according to the directions expressed in his will, his remains were deposited in a vault in the church-yard of St. Clement, next to those of his mother. In private life, Dr. Simmons was punctiliously correct in all his dealings; mild and unassuming in his manners, and of rather retired habits, passing Ins time chiefly in his study and in his professional avocations. He was one of the earliest proprietors of the Roy;d Institution and, in 1806, became an hereditary governor of the British Institution for the promotion of the Fine Arts. He has left one son, who is unmarried, and a widow, to deplore his loss.

, a French critic and divine of great learning, was born at Dieppe, May 13, 1638, and commenced his studies among the priests of the oratory, whom he quitted for some time, and went to Paris, where he applied himself to divinity, and made a great progress in Oriental learning, for which he had always a particular turn. About the end of 1662, he returned to the oratory and became a priest of it. On the death of father Bourgouin, general of this congregation, some cause of displeasure inclined him to leave them, and join the society of the Jesuits; but from this he was diverted by the persuasions of father Bertad, the superior of the oratory. He was then sent to the college of Juilly, in the diocese of Meaux, to teach philosophy; but other business occurring, he was ordered to go to Paris. In the library of the oratory there was a valuable collection of Oriental books, of which Simon was employed to make a catalogue, which he executed with great skill, and perused at the same time those treasures with great avidity. M. de Lamoignon, first president of the parliament of Paris, meeting with him one day in the library, was so pleased with his conversation, that he requested of Senault, the new general of the oratory, that he might be permitted to remain in Paris; but this being unaccompanied by any advantages, Simon, who had much of an independent spirit, petitioned to go back to Juilly, to teach philosophy, as before. He accordingly arrived there in 1668, and, in 1670, his first publication appeared, a defence of the Jews against the accusation of having murdered a Christian child, “Factum pour les Juifs de Metz,” &c. In the following year, with a view to shew that the opinion of the Greek church is not materially different from that of the church of Rome, with respect to the sacrament, he published “Fides Ecclesiae Orientalis, seu Gabrielis Metropolitae Philadelphiensis opuscula, cum interpretatione Latina et notis,” Paris, 1671, quarto, reprinted 16S6. When the first volume of the “Perpetuity of the faith respecting the Eucharist” appeared, our author, who from his youth was an original, if not always a just thinker, expressed some opinions on that work, and on the subject, which involved him in a controversy with the gentlemen of Port-Royal; and this seems to have laid the foundation of the opposition he afterwards met with from the learned of his own communion. His next publication came out under the name of Recared Simeon (for he often used fictitious names), and was a translation from Leo of Modena, entitled “Ceremonies et Coutumes qui s’observent aujourdui parmi les Juifs,” &c. 1674, 12mo. This was republished in 1681, under the name of the Sieur de Semonville; with the addition of a “Comparison between the ceremonies of the Jews and the discipline of the church.” In this edition, and perhaps in the subsequent ones of 1682 and 1684, the reader will find a great number of parentheses and crotchets, which Bayle thus accounts for: The work having been submitted in ms. to M. Perot, a doctor of the Sorbonne, for examination, he added some passages, which the author being obliged to retain, and yet unwilling that they should pass for his own, inclosed in crotchets; but had afterwards to complain, that the printers, who were not in the secret, had omitted some of these. In 1675, Simon published a “Voyage duMontLiban,” from the Italian of Dandini, with notes; and, about the same time, a “Factum du Prince de Neubourg, abbe de Feschamps, centre les religieux de cette abbay” and, as was usual with him, took an opportunity to attack the Benedictines.

But the first work of importance which he published, and that which rendered him most famous, was his “Critical History of the Old Testament,” which appeared in 1678, but was immediately suppressed by the Messieurs du Port Royal; who alleged, that it. contained things false and dangerous to religion and the church. It was reprinted the year after, and was so much admired for excellent learning and admirable criticism, that it became an object of attention to foreigners; and was published, in Latin, at Amsterdam 1681, and in English at London 1682, by R. H. i. e. R. Hampden (son of the celebrated John Harnpden), who, we are told, declared on his death-bed, that father Simon’s works had made him a sceptic.

After the publication of his “Critical History,” he left the congregation of the Oratory, and went to Bolleville, a village in the pais de Caux, of which he had been curate from 1676, but resigning this office in 1682, removed for a short time to Dieppe, and thence again to Paris, to renew his studies, and make arrangements for the publication of some other works. In the mean time, as the Paris edition of his “Critical History” had been suppressed, it was reprinted at Amsterdam, by the Elzevirs, but from a very incorrect transcript. One more correct, and indeed the best, was printed at Rotterdam in 1685, with a “General Apology,” &c. It then produced a controversy with many eminent protestant divines, Le Clerc, Jurieu, Isaac Vcssius, and others.

In 1684 he published, at Francfort, “Histoire de l'Origine et du Progres des Revenus Ecclesiastiques,” or, “The History of the Rise and Progress of Ecclesiastical Revenues,” under the name of Jerome a Costa. A second edition of it, with great additions, was printed at Francfort, 1709, in 2 vols. 12mo. In 1684 he published, at London, “Disquisitiones Criticae de variis per diversa loca et tempora Bibliorum Editionibus,” &c. and in the same year, at the same place, appeared an English translation of it, with this title, “Critical Enquiries into the various editions of the Bible, printed in divers places and at several times, together with animadversions upon a small treatise of Dr. Isaac Vossius concerning the oracles of the Sibyls.” There is his usual display of learning in this piece, which may be considered as an abridgment of his “Critical History of the Old Testament.” In 1686, he published an answer to Le Clerc, who had criticised his work the year before; and, upon Le Clerc’s replying in 1686, another in 1687, both under the name of the Prior of Bolleville, at which place he then resided,

In 1688 he published at Francfort, under the name of John Reuchlin, “Dissertation Critique sur la Nouvelle Bibliotheque des Auteurs Ecc'eYiastiques par Du Pin, &c.” in which he supports with great spirit some principles in his “Critical History of the Old Testament,” which had been controverted by Du Pin. In 1689 came out his “Histoire Critique du Texte du Nouveau Testament,” an English version of which was published the same year at London; in 1690, “Histoire Critique des versions du Nouveau Testament;” in 1693, “Histoire Critique des principaux Commentateurs du Nouveau Testament;” in all which, as indeed in every thing else he wrote, there appears great acuteness, and great learning, with, however, an unfortunate propensity to singularities and novelties of opinion, and too much contempt for those who differed from him, and in this last work he has perhaps unsettled more than he has settled. In 1702 he published a French translation of the New Testament, with critical remarks, in 2 vols. 8vo: which was censured by cardinal de Noailles, and Bossuet, bishop of Meaux. In 1714, was published at Amsterdam, in 2 vols. 12mo, “Nouvelle Bibliotheque Choisie,” or, “A new select library, which points out the good books in various kinds of literature, and tht? use to be made of them;” but this must be reckoned a posthumous work; for Simon died at Dieppe in April 1712, in his seventy-fourth year, and was buried in St. James’s church.

He was the author and editor of other things, but they were less considerable: it is sufficient to have mentioned his principal works. He bequeathed to the library of the cathedral of Rouen a great number of his manuscript works, many printed books enriched by his manuscript notes, and a valuable collection of books in all the learned languages. He was unquestionably a man of great learning and acuteness; but a love of controversy, in all its bitterness, rendered him almost equally obnoxious to protestants and papists, yet there is evidence enough in his works to prove that he contributed in no small degree to weaken the authorityand pretensions of his own church, and to strengthen the opinions of its adversaries.

, a Grecian poet, wit, and somewhat of a philosopher, uas born in the 35th olympiad, or 558 B.C. and is said to have died in his ninetieth year. He was a native of Ceos, one of the Cyclades, in the neighbourhood of Attica, and became the preceptor of Pindar. Both Plato and Cicero speak of him, not only as a good poet ana musician, but also as a man of wisdom and virtue. His lengthened life gave him an opportunity of knowing a great number of the first characters in antiquity, with whom he was in some measure connected. Fabncius informs us that he was contemporary, and in friendship with Pittacus of Mitylene, Hipparchus, tyrant of Athens, Pausanias, king of Sparta; Hiero, tyrant of Syracuse also with Themistocles, and with Alcuudes, king of Thessaly. X uophon, in his dialogue upon tyranny, makes him one of the interlocutors. His famous answer to Hiero. as recorded by Cicero, has been often quoted as a proof, not only of his wisdom, hut his piety. When Hiero asked of him a definition of God, he requested a day to consider of it; when this was expired, he doubled the time, and thus he did repeatedly, till the monarch desired to know his reason for this proceeding “It is,” said he,“because the longer I reflect on the question, the more difficult it appears to be.”

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

He obtained the prize in poetry at the public games when he was eighty years old. According to Suidas, he added four letters to the Greek alphabet: and Pliny assigns to him the eighth string of the lyre; but these claims are disputed by the learned. Among the numerous poetical productions, of which, according to Fabricius, antiquity has made him the author, were his many songs of victory and triumph, for athletic conquerors at the public games. He is likewise said to have gained there, himself, the prize in elegiac poetry, when ^schylus was his competitor. His poetry was so tender and plaintive, that he acquired the cognomen of Meliceutes, i. e. sweet as honey, and the tearful eye of his muse was proverbial. Dr. Warton, who has an elegant paper in the Adventurer (No. 89) partly on the merits of this poet, remarks that he was celebrated by the ancients for the sweetness, correctness, and purity of his style, and his irresistible skill in moving the passions. Dionysius places him among those polished writers, who excel in a smooth volubility, and flow on, like plenteous and perennial rivers, in a course of even and uninterrupted harmony. Addison has an ingenious paper on Simonides’ “Characters of Women,” in the Spectator (No. 209). This considerable fragment of Simonides, preserved by Stobaius, was published in Greek by Kohler, at Gottingen, 1781, 8vo, and he also published the Latin only, in 1789, to which professor Heyne prefixed a letter on the condition of women in ancient Greece. Simonides’s fragments of poetry are in Stephens’s Pindar, 1560, and other editions of the ancient lyric poets.

, an ancient philosopher of the sixth century, was a native of Cihcia, a disciple of Ammonias, the peripatetic, and endeavoured to unite the Platonic and Stoic doctrines with the peripatetic. Distrusting his situation under the emperor Justinian, he went to Cosroes king of the Persians: but returned to Athens, after it had been stipulated in a truce between the Persians and the Romans, A. D. 549, that he and his friends should live quietly and securely upon what was their own, and not be compelled by the Christians to depart from the religion of their ancestors. From his wish to unite discordant sects, he is called by a modern (Peter Petit) “omnium veterum philosophorurn coagulum.” He wrote commentaries upon several of Aristotle’s works, once thought to be valuable in themselves, but now consulted only for some curious fragments of ancient philosophers preserved in them. Of these there are three Aldine editions, 152b and 1527. But, of all his productions, some of which are lost, at least unpublished, his “Commentary upon Epictetus” has obtained most reputation. Fabricius is of opinion, that there is nothing in Pagan antiquity better calculated to form the manners, or to give juster ideas of a Divine Providence. It has been several times printed in Greek and Latin, particularly at Ley den, 1639, in 4to, and at London, in 1670, in 8vo. Dacier published a French translation of it at Paris, 1715, 12mo; and Dr. George Stanhope an English one at London, 1704, 8vo.

, a learned English divine, the son of Edward Simpson, rector of Tottenham, was born tli ere in May 1573. His father taught him the rudiments of Latin, and when he had attained the age of fourteen, placed him at Westminster school, where he was under the celebrated Camden for four years, at the expiration of which, in 1596, he was elected to Trinity-college, Cambridge. In 1600 he took his degree of A. B. and next year was admitted fellow of his college. In 1603 he was ado

mitted to his master’s degree, and in 1610 to that of bachelor of divinity. In 1611 he went into the family of sir Moyle Finch, knt. of Kent, as chaplain, and remained four years in that station, until the death of his patron, whose funeral sermon he preached. He then returned to the university, and had a church in Cambridge for three years, and in 1618, by the interest of the viscountess Maidstone, relict of -ir Moyle Finch, he was presented to the rectory of Eastling. He then took his degree of doctor of divinity, and was made prebendary of Coringharn. Being now at his ease, he devoted much of his time to study, and published at Cambridge, his “Mosaiea; sive Chronici historiam Catholicam complectentis, Pars Prima, in qua res antiquissimu} ab orbe condito ad Mosis obitum chronologice digests: continentur,” 1G36, 4t.o. This, although his first, is the least polished of all his works. Afterwards he undertook his “Chronicon Catholicum ab exordio mundi,” but did not live to publish it. He died in 1651, aged seventy-three, without any apparent disorder, his departure more resembling the quietness of falling asleep. He is represented as a man of an erect and comely appearance, and of a healthful, though not robust constitution. He was twice married.

His “Chronicon, &c.” was published at Oxford in 1652, with a Latin life prefixed, and was reprinted by the eminent critic Peter Wesseling. Dr. Reynolds, afterwards bishop of Norwich, in his license for the press, speaks of it as “egregtum et absolutissimum opus, summa industria, omniuenaerui ditione, magno judicio, et multorum annoru'n vigiliis productum.” His other works were, 1 “Positive divinity in three parts, containing an exposition of the Creed, Lord’s Prayer, an. 1 decalogue, &c.” 2. “The knowledge of Christ, in two Treatises.” 3. “A Treatise concerning God’s Providence in regard of Evil or Sin.” 4. “The Doctrine of Regeneration, delivered in a Sermon on John iii. 6,” and defended in a “Declaration.” 5. “Tractatus de Justificatione.” 6. “Notce selectiores in Horatium.” 7. “Prselectiones in Ptrsii Satyras.” 8. “Anglicanae linguae vocabuiarium Etymologicum.” 9. “Sanctas linguce soboles.” 10. “Dii gentium, sive nominurn, quibus deos suos Ethnic! appellabant explicatio.”

, professor of mathematics in the king’s academy at Woolwich, fellow of the Royal Society, and member of the royal academy at Stockholm, was born at Market-Bosworth, in Leicestershire, Aug. 20, 1710. His father was a stuff-weaver in that town: and, though in tolerable circumstances, yet, intending to bring up his son to his own business, he took so little care of his education, that he was only taught English. But nature had furnished him with talents and a genius for far other pursuits, which led him afterwards to tut: highest rank in the mathematical and philosophical sciences.

Young Simpson very soon gave indications of his turn for study in general, by ragerly reading all books he could meet with, teaching himself to write, and embracing every opportunity he could find of deriving knowledge from other persons. His father observing him thus to neglect his business, by spending his time in reading what he thought useless books, and following other such like pursuits, used all his endeavours to check his proceedings, and to induce him to follow his profession with steadiness and better effect. But after many struggles for this purpose, the differences thus produced between them at length rose to such a height, that our author quitted his father’s house entirely.

Upon this occasion he repaired to Nuneaton, a town at a small distance from Bosworth, where he went to lodge at the house of a taylor’s widow, of the name of Swinfield, who had been left with two children, a daughter and a son, by her husband, of whom the son, who was the younger, being but about two years older than Simpson, had become his intimate friend and companion. And here he continued some time, working at his trade, and improving his knowledge by reading such books as he could procure.

Among several other circumstances which, long before this, gave occasion to shew our author’s early thirst for knowledge, as well as proving a fresh incitement to acquire it, was that of a large solar eclipse, which took place on the llth day of May, 1724. This phenomenon, so awful to many who are ignorant of the cause of it, struck the mind of young Simpson with a strong curiosity to discover the reason of it, and to be able to predict the like surprising events. It was, however, several years before he could obtain his desire, which at length was gratified by the following accident. After he been some time at Mrs. Swinfield’s, at Nuneaton., a travelling pedlar came that way, and took a lodging at the same house, according to his usual custom. This man, to his profession of an itinerant merchant, had joined the more profitable one of a fortuneteller, which he performed by means of judicial astrology. Every one knows with what regard persons of such a cast are treated by the inhabitants of country villages; it cannot be surprising therefore that an untutored lad of nineteen should look upon this man as a prodigy, and, regardin^ him in this lignt, should endeavour to ingratiate himself into his favour; in which he succeeded so well, that the sage was no less taken with the quick natural parts and genius of his new acquaintance. The pedlar, intending a journey to Bristol fair, left in the hands of young Simpson a i oK! edition of Cocker’s Arithmetic, to which was subjo i.ed a short Appendix on Algebra, and a book tipoa Gemtim s, by Partridge the almanac maker. These books h 11 “‘ perused to so good purpose during the absence of his f’ri<-nd, as to excite his amazement upon his return in consequence of which he set himself about erecting a genethliacal type, in order to a presage of Thomas’s future fortune. The position of the heavens the wizard having very maturely considered,” secundum artem,“pronounced with much confidence, that” within two years time Simpson would turn out a greater man than himself!"

It was not long after this, that Simpson, being pretty well qualified to erect a figure himself by the advice of his friend, make an open profession of casting nativities, and was so successful, that he quite neglected weaving, and soon became the oracle of Bosworth and its environs. Scarcely a courtship advanced to. a match, or a bargain to a sale, without the parties previously consulting the infallible Simpson about the consequences. Helping persons to stolen goods he always declared above his match; and that, as to life and death, he had no power. Together witii his astrologv, he had furnished himself with arithmetic, algebra, and geometry, sufficient to qualify him for looking into the “Ladies Diary-” (of which he had afterwards the direction), by which he came to understand, that there was still a higher branch of mathematical knowledge than any he had been yet acquainted with; and this was the method of fluxions. But he was altogether at a loss to discover any English author who had written on the subject, except Mr. Hayes; and his work, being a folio and rather scarce, exceeded his ability of purchasing. An acquaintance, however, lent him Stone’s Fluxions, which is a translation of De l'Hospital’s “Analyse des infinitement petits” and by this one book, and his own penetrn<:; tJents, he was enabled, in a very few years, to compose a much more accurate treatise on that subject tnan any that had before appeared in our language. In the mean time an unfortunate event involved him in a deal of trouble. Having undertaken to raise the devil, in order to answer certain questions to a joung woman, who consulted him respecting her sweetheart, then absent at sea, the credulous girl was so frightened on the appearance of a man from beneath some straw, who represented the devil, that she fell into violent fits, from which she was with difficulty recovered, and which for a considerable time threatened insanity or fatuity. In consequence of this exertion of his art, he was obliged to leave the place, and he removed to Derby, where he remained a few years, working at his trade by day, and instructing pupils in the evening. It would seem that Simpson had an early turn for versifying, both from the circumstance of a song written here in favour of the Cavendish family, on occasion of the parliamentary election at that place, in 1733; and from his first two mathematical questions that were published in the “Ladies Diary,” which were both in a set of verses, not ill written for the occasion. These were printed in the Diary for 1736, and therefore must at latest have been written in 1735. These two questions, being at that time pretty difficult ones, shew the great progress he had even then made in the mathematics; and from an expression in the first of them, viz. where he mentions his residence as being in latitude 52, it appears he was not then come up to London, though he must have done so very soon after.

After, however, he took leave of astrology and its emoluments, he was driven to hardships for the subsistence of his family, having married the taylor’s widow with two children, who soon brought him two more. He, therefore, came up to London in 1735 or 1736, and for some time wrought at his business in Spitalfields, and taught mathematics when he had any spare time. His industry soon became so productive, that he was enabled to bring up his wife and children to settle in London. The number of his scholars increasing, and his abilities becoming in some measure known to the public, he issued proposals for publishing, by subscription, “A new Treatise of Fluxions, wherein the Direct and Inverse Method are demonstrated after a new, clear, and concise manner; with their application to Physics and Astronomy. Also the Doctrine of infinite Series and reverting Senes universally and amply explained; fluxionary and exponential Equations solved,” &c. When he first proposed his intentions of publishing such a work, he did not know of any English book founded on the true principles of fluxions, that contained any thing material, especially the practical part; and, though some progress had been made by several learned and ingenious gentlemen, the principles were nevertheless left obscure and defective, and all that had been done by nny of them in “infinite series” very inconsiderable. The book was not published till 1737, 4to; the author having been frequently interrupted from furnishing the press so fast as he could have wished, through his unavoidable attention to his pupils for his immediate support. In 1740 he published “A Treatise on the Nature and Laws of Chance,” in 4to; to which are annexed full and clear Investigati ns of two important Problems added in the second edition of Mr. De Moivre’s “Book on Chances, and two new Methods for summing of Series.” His next performance was, “Essays on several curious and useful subjects in speculative and mixed Mathematics. Dedicated to Francis Blake, esq. since fellow of the Royal Society, and his very good Friend and Patron,” 174-0, 4to. Soon after the publication of this book he was chosen a member of the Royal Academy at Stockholm. Our author’s next work appeared in 1742, 8vo, “The Doctrine of Annuities and Reversions deduced from general and evident Principles: with useful Tables, shewing the values of single and joint lives, &c. at different rates of interest,” &c. This, in 1743, was followed by “An Appendix, containing some Remarks on a late Book on the same subject (by Mr. Abr. De Moivre, F. R. S.) with answers to some personal and malignant representations in the Preface thereof.” To this De Moivre never thought fit to reply. In 1743 he published also “Mathematical Dissertations on a variety of Physical and Analytical subjects,” 4to. This work he dedicated to Martin Folkes, esq. president of the Royal Society. His next book was, “A Treatise of Algebra, wherein the fundamental principles are fully and clearly demonstrated, and applied to the solution of a variety of problems.” To which he added, “The Construction of a great number of geometrical Problems, with the method of resolving them numerically.” This work was designed for the use of young beginners; inscribed to William Jones, esq. F. R. S. and printed in 1745, 8vo. A new edition appeared in 1755, with additions and improvements. This is dedicated to James earl of Morton, F. R. S. Mr. Jones being dead; and there was a sixth edition in 1790. His next work was, “Elements of Geometry, with their application to Mensuration of Superficies and Solids, to the determination of Maxima and Minima, and to the construction of a great variety of Geometrical Problems,” 1747, 8vo, reprinted in 1760, with large alterations and additions, designed for young beginners; particularly for the gentlemen at the king’s academy at Woolwich, and dedicated to Charles Frederick, esq. surveyor-general of the ordnance; and other editions have appeared since*. In 1748 came out his “Trigonometry, Plane and Spherical, with the construction and application of Logarithms,” 8vo. This little book contains several things new and useful. In 1750 appeared in 2 vols. 8vo, “The doctrine and application of Fluxions, containing, besides what is common on the subject, a number of new improvements in the Theory,and the solution of a variety of new and very interesting Problems, in different branches of the Mathematics.” In the preface the author offers this to the world as a new book rather than a second edition of that published in 1737; in which he acknowledges, that, besides errors of the press, there are several obscurities and defects, for want of experience, in his first attempt. This work is dedicated to George earl of Mat-clesfield. In 1752 appeared in 8vo, “Select Exercises for young proficients in Mathematics,” dedicated to John Bacon, esq. F. R. S. His “Miscellaneous Tracts,” printed in 1757, 4to, was his last legacy to the public; a most valuable bequest, whether we consider the dignity and importance of the subjects, or his sublime and accurate manner of treating them. These are inscribed to the earl of Macclesfield, and are ably analyzed in Dr. Hutton’s Dictionary.

hie and vexation in consequence of the of Euclid. Thf second was by an

from some reflections made upon it, Elements from Mr. Muller, the pr<­as to the accuracy of certain parts of fessor of fortification and artillery at

versity of Glasgow, in the notes sub- and mathematics. This charge was

bimson again replied in his notes on Geometry. he wrote several papers which were read at the meetings of the Royal Society, and printed in their Transactions; but as most, if not all of them, were afterwards inserted, with alterations or additions, in his printed volumes, it is needless to take any farther notice of them here. He also proposed, and resolved many questions in the “Ladies Diaries,” &c.; sometimes under his own name, as in 1735 and 1736; and sometimes under feigned or fictitious names; such as, it is thought, Hurlothrumbo, Kubernetes, Patrick O'Cavenah, Marmaduke Hodgson, Anthony Shallow, esq. and probably several others; see the Diaries for 1735, 36, 42, 43, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, and 60. Mr. Simpson was also the editor or compiler of the Diaries from 1754 till 1760, both inclusive, during which time he raised that work to the highest degree of respect. He was succeeded in the editorship by Mr. Edw. Rollinson.

It has also been commonly supposed that he was the real editor of, or had a principal share in, two other periodical works of a miscellaneous mathematical nature; viz. the “Mathematician,” and “Turner’s Mathematical Exercises,” two volumes, in 8vo, which came out in periodical numbers, in 1750 and 1751, &c. The latter of these seems especially to have been set on foot to afford a proper place for exposing the errors and absurdities of Mr. Robert Heath, the then conductor of the “Ladies Diary” and the “Palladium;” and which controversy between them ended in the disgrace of Mr. Heath, and expulsion from his office of editor to the “Ladies Diary,” and the substitution of Mr. Simpson in his stead, in 1753.

In 1760, when the plans proposed for erecting a new bridge at Blackfriars were in agitation, Mr. Simpson, among other gentlemen, was consulted upon the best form for the arches, by the New-bridge Committee. Upon this occasion he gave a preference to the semicircular form; and, besides his report to the Committee, some letters also appeared, by himself and others, on the same subject, in the public newspapers, particularly in the Daily Advertiser, and in Lloyd’s Evening Post, which were collected in the Gentleman’s Magazine for that year. It is probable that this reference to him, induced him to turn his thoughts more seriously to this subject, so as to form the design of composing a regular treatise upon it; for his family- often informed Dr. Hutton, that he laboured hard upon this work for some time before his death, and was very anxious to have completed it, frequently remarking to them, that when published, it would nre him more credit than

any of his Cornier publications. But he lived not to put the finishing hand to it. Whatever he wrote upon this subject, probably fell, together with all his other remaining papers, into the hands of major Henry Watson, of the engineers, in the service of the India company, being in all a large chest full of papers. This gentleman had been a pupil of Mr. Simpson’s, and had lodge ' in his house. After Mr. Simpson’s death, Mr. Watson prevailed upon the widow to let him have the papers, promising either to give her a sum of money for them, or else to print and publish them for her benefit. But neither of these was ever done; this gentleman always declaring, when urged on this point by Dr, Hutton and others, that no use could be made of any of the papers, owing to the very imperfect state in which he said they were left. And yet he persisted in his refusal to give them up again.

Through the interest and solicitations of William Jones, esq. he was, in 1743, appointed professor of mathematics, then vacant by the death of Mr. Derham, in the Royal academy at Woolwich; his warrant bearing date August 25th. And in 1745 he was admitted a fellow of the Royal Society, having been proposed as a candidate by Martin Folkes, esq. president, William Jones, esq. Mr. George Graham, and Mr. John Machiu, secretary; all very eminent mathematicians. The president and council, in consideration of his very moderate circumstances, were pleased to excuse his admission fees, and likewise his giving bond for the settled future payments.

At the academy he exerted his faculties to the utmost, in instructing the pupils who were the immediate objects of his duty, as well as others, whom the superior officers of the ordnance permitted to be boarded and lodged in hi$ house. In his manner of teaching, he had a peculiar and happy address; a certain dignity and perspicuity, tempered with such a degree of mildness, as engaged both the attention, esteem, and friendship of his scholars; of which the good of the service, as well as of the community, was a necessary consequence.

In the latter stage of his existence, when his life was in danger, exercise and a proper regimen were prescribed him, but to little purpose for he sunk gradually into such a lowness of spirits as seemed to injure his mental faculties, and at last rendered him incapable of performing his duty, or even of reading the letters of his friends; and so trifling an accident as the dropping of a tea-cup would flurry him as much as if a house had tumbled down. The physicians advised his native air for his recovery; and, Feb. 1761, he set out, with much reluctance (believing he should never return), for Bosworth, along with some relations. The journey fatigued him to such a degree, that upon his arrival, he betook himself to his chamber, where he died, May 14, in his fifty-first year.

He left a widow and a son and a daughter; the former an officer in the royal regiment of artillery. The king, at the instance of lord Ligonier, in consideration of Mr. Simpson’s great merits, granted a pension to his widow, together with handsome apartments adjoining to the academy; a favour never conferred on any before. His widow died at Woolwich Dec. 19, 1782, aged one hundred and two.

, an eminent mathematician, was the eldest son of Mr. John Simson, of Kirton-hall in Ayrshire, and was born Oct. 14, 1687. Being intended for the church, he was sent to the university of Glasgow in 1701, where he made great progress in classical learning and the sciences, and also contracted a fondness for the study of geometry, although at this time, from a temporary cause, no mathematical lectures were given in the college. Having procured a copy of Euclid’s Elements, with the aid only of a few preliminary explanations from some more advanced students, he soon came to understand them, and laid the foundation of his future eminence. He did not, however, neglect the other sciences then taught in college, but in proceeding through the regular course of academic study, acquired that variety of knowledge which was visible in his conversation throughout life. In the mean time his reputation as a mathematician became so high, that in 1710, when only twenty-two years of age, themembersof the college voluntarily made him an offer of the mathematical chair, in which a vacancy in a short time was expected to take place. From his natural modesty, however, he felt much reluctance, at so early an age to advance abruptly from the state of a student, to that of a professor in the same college, and therefore solicited permission to spend one year at least in London. Being indulged in this, he proceeded to the metropolis, and there diligently employed himself in improving his mathematical knowledge. He also enjoyed the opportunity of forming an acquaintance with some eminent mathematicians of that day, particularly Mr. Jones, Mr. Caswell, Dr. Jurin, and Mr. Ditton. With the latter, indeed, who was then mathematical master of Christ’s Hospital, and well esteemed for his learning, &c. he was more particularly connected. It appears from Mr. Simson’s own account, in his letter, dated London, Nov. 1710, that he expected to have had an assistant in his studies chosen by Mr. Caswell; but, from some mistake, it was omitted, and Mr. Simson himself applied to Mr. Ditton. He went to him not as a scholar (his own words), but to have general information and advice about his mathematical studies. Mr. Caswell afterwards mentioned to Mr. Simson that he meant to have procured Mr. Jones’s assistance, if he had not been engaged.

When the vacancy in the professorship of mathematics at Glasgow did occur, in the following year, by the resignation of Dr. Robert Sinclair, or Sinclare (a descendant or other relative probably of Mr. George Sinclare, who died in that office in 1696), the university, while Mr. Simson was still in London, appointed him to fill it; and the minute of election, which is dated March 11, 1711, concluded with this very proper condition, “That they will admit the said Mr. Robert Simson, providing always, that he give satisfactory proof of his skill in mathematics, previous to his admission.” He returned to Glasgow before the ensuing session of the college, and having gone through the form of a trial, by resolving a geometrical problem proposed to him, and also by giving “a satisfactory specimen of his skill in mathematics, and dexterity in reaching geometry and algebra;” having produced also respectable certificates of his knowledge of the science, from Mr. Caswell and others, he was duly admitted professor of mathematics, on the 20th of November of that year.

Mr. Simson, immediately after his admission, entered on the duties of his office; and his first occupation necessarily was the arrangement of a proper course of instruction for the students who attended his lectures, in two distinct classes. Accordingly he prepared elementary sketches of some branches on which there were not suitable treatises in general use. Both from a sense of duty and from inclination, he now directed the whole of his attention to the study of mathematics; and though he had a decided preference for geometry, which continued through life, yet he did not devote himself to it to the exclusion of the other branches of mathematical science, in most of which there is sufficient evidence of his being well skilled. From 1711, he continued near fifty years to teach mathematics to two separate classes, at different hours, five days in the week, during a continued session of seven months. His manner of teaching was uncommonly clear and successful; and among his scholars, several rose to distinction as mathematicians; among which may be mentioned the celebrated names of Dr. Matthew Stewart, professor of mathematics at Edinburgh; the two Rev. Dr. Williamsons, one of whom succeeded Dr. Simson at Glasgow; the Rev. Dr. Trail, formerly professor of mathematics at Aberdeen; Dr. James Moor, Greek professor at Glasgow: and professor Robison, of Edinburgh, with many others of distinguished merit. In 17.58, Dr. Simson, being then seventy-one years of age, found it necessary to employ an assistant in teaching; and in 1761, on his recommendation, the Rev. Dr. Williamson was appointed his assistant and successor.

During the remaining ten years of his life, he enjoyed a pretty equal share of good health; and continued to occupy himself in correcting and arranging some of his mathematical papers, and occasionally for amusement, in the solution of problems, and demonstration of theorems, which occurred from his own studies, or from the suggestions of others. His conversation on mathematical and other subjects continued to be clear and accurate; yet he had some strong impressions of the decline of his memory, of which he frequently complained; and this probably protracted, and finally prevented his undertaking the publication of some of his works, which were in so advanced a state, that with little trouble they might have been completed for the press. So that his only publication, after resigning his office, was a new and improved edition of Euclid’s Data, which in 1762 was annexed to the 2d edition of the Elements. But from that period, though much solicited to bring forward some of his other works on the ancient geometry, though he knew well how much it was desired, and though he was fully apprised of the universal curiosity excited respecting his discovery of Euclid’s Por-> isms, he resisted every importunity on the subject. A life like Dr. Simson’s, purely academical and perfectly uniform, seldom contains occurrences, the recording of which could be either interesting or useful. But his mathematical labours and inventions form the important part of his character; and with respect to them, there are abundant materials of information in his printed works; and some circumstances also may be gathered from a number of ms papers which he left; and which, by the direction of his executor, are deposited in the library of the college of Glasgow. It is to be regretted, that, of the extensive correspondence which he carried on through life, with many distinguished mathematicians, a small portion only is preserved. Through Dr. Jurin, then Secretary of the Royal Society, he had some intercourse with Dr. Halley, and other distinguished members of that Society. And both about the same time, and afterwards, he had frequent correspondence with Mr. Maciaurin, with Mr. James Stirling, Dr. James Moor, Dr. Matthew Stewart, Dr. Wm. Trail, and Mr. Williamson of Lisbon. In the latter part of his life, his mathematical correspondence was chiefly with that eminent geometer the late earl Stanhope, and with George Lewis Scott, esq.

As to his character, Dr. Simson was originally possessed of great intellectual powers, an accurate and distinguishing understanding, an inventive genius, and a retentive memory: and these powers, being excited by an ardent curiosity, produced a singular capacity for investigating the truths of mathematical science. By such talents, with a correct taste, formed by the study of the Greek geometers, he was also peculiarly qualified for communicating his knowledge, both in his lectures and in his writings, with perspicuity and elegance. He was at the same time modest and unassuming; and. though not indifferent to literary fame, he was cautious, and even reserved, in bringing forward his own discoveries, but always ready to do justice to the merits and inventions of others. Though his powers of investigation, in the early part of life, were admirable, yet befoiv any decline of his health appeared, he felt strong impressions of the decay both of his memory and other faculties; occasioned probably by the continued exertion of his mind, in those severe studies, which for a number of years he pursued with unremitting ardour.

Besides his mathematical attainments, from his liberal education he acquired a considerable knowledge of other sciences, which he preserved through life, by occasional reading, and, in some degree, by his constant intercourse with many learned men in his college. He was esteemed a good classical scholar; and, though the simplicity of geometrical demonstration does not admit of much variety of style, yet in his works a good taste in that respect may be distinguished. In his Latin prefaces also, in which there is some history and discussion, the purity of language has been generally approved. It is to be regretted, indeed, that he had not had an opportunity of employing, in early life, his Greek and mathematical learning, in giving an edition of Pappus in the original language.

Dr. Simson never was married; and the uniform regularity of a long life, spent within the walls of his college, naturally produced fixed and peculiar habits, which, however, with the sincerity of his manners, were unoffending, and became even interesting to those with whom he lived. The strictness of these habits, which indeed pervaded all his occupations, probably had an influence also on the direction and success of some of his scientific pursuits. His hours of study, of amusement, and of exercise, were all regulated with uniform precision. The walks even in the squares or garden of the college were all measured by his steps, and he took his exercises by the hundreds of paces, according to his time or inclination.

It has been mentioned, that an ardent curiosity was an eminent feature in his character. It contributed essentially to his success in the mathematical investigations, and it displayed itself in the small and even trifling occurrences of common life. Almost every object and event excited it, and suggested some problem which he was impatient to resolve. This disposition, when opposed, as it often necessarily was, to his natural modesty, and to the formal civility of his manners, occasionally produced an embarrassment, which was amusing to his friends, and sometimes a little distressing to himself.

In his disposition, Dr. Simson was both cheerful and sociable; and his conversation, when he was at ease among his friends, was animated and various, enriched with much anecdote, especially of the literary kind, but always unaffected. It was enlivened also by a certain degree of natural humour; and even the slight fits of absence, to which in company he was occasionally liable, contributed to the entertainment of his friends, without diminishing their affection and respect, which his excellent qualities were calculated to inspire. One evening (Friday) in the week he devoted to c!nb, chiefly of his own selection, which met in a tavern in-ar the college. The first p; rr of the evening was employed in playing the game o which he was particularly fond; but, though he tool all trouble in estimatng chances, it was remarki h;it he was often Uimh ces ml. The rest of the evening ua> spent in cheerful conversation and, as he had some taste for music, he did not scruple to amuse his party with a song and it is said that he was rather fond of singing some Greek odes, to which modern music had been adapted. On Saturdays he usually dined in the village of Anderston, then about a mile distant from Glasgow, with some oi tie members of his regular club, and with a variety of other respectable visitors, who wished to cultivate the acquaintance, and enjoy the society of so eminent a person. In the progress of time, from his age and character, it became the wish of his company that every thing in these meetings should be directed by him; and though his authority, growing with his years, was somewhat absolute, yet the good humour with which it was administered, rendered it pleasing to even body He had his own chair and place at table; he gave instructions about the entertainment, regulated the time of break.ng up, and adjusted the expense. These parties, in the years of his severe study, were a desirable and useful relaxation to his mind, and they continued to amuse him till within a few months of his death.

Strict integrity and private worth, with corresponding purity of morals, gave the highest value to a character, which, from other qualities and attainments, was much respected and esteemed. On all occasions, even in the gayest hours of social intercourse, the doctor maintained a constant attention to propriety. He had serious and just impressions of religion; but he was uniformly reserved in expressing particular opinions about it; and, from his sentiments of decorum, he never introduced religion as a subject of conversation in mixed society, and all attempts to do so in his lubs were checked with gravity and decision.

In his person, Dr. Sunson was tall and erect; and his countetance, which was handsome, conveyed a pleasing expression of the superior character of his mind. His manner had always somewhat of the fashion which prevailed in the early part of his life, but was uncommonly graceful. He was seriously indisposed only for a few weeks before his death, and through a very long life had enjoyed a uniform state of good health. He died October I, 1768, when his eighty-first year was almost completed; having bequeathed his small paternal estate in Ayrshire to the eldest son of his next brother, probably of his brother Thomas, who was professor of medicine in the university of St Andrew’s, and who is known by some works of reputation, particularly a “Dissertation on the Nervous System, occasioned by the Dissection of a Brain completely Ossified.”

The writings and publications of Dr. Simson were almost exclusively of the pure geometrical kind, after the genuine manner of the ancients. He has only two pieces printed in the volumes of the Philosophical Transactions: viz.

1. Two general propositions of Pappus, in which many of Euclid’s Porisms are included, vol. Xxxij. ann. 1723. These two propositions were afterwards incorporated into the author’s large posthumous works, published by earl Stanhope. 2. On the Extraction of the Approximate Roots of Numbers by Infinite Series, vol.XLVIII. ann. 1753. The separate publications in his life-time, were, 3. “Conic Sections,” 1735, 4to. 4. “The Loci Plani of Apollonius, restored,” 1749, 4to. 5. “Euclid’s Elements,” 1756, 4to, of which there have been since many editions in octavo, with the additions of Euclid’s Data. In 1776, earl Stanhope printed, at his own expence, several of Dr. Simson’s posthumous pieces: 1. Apollonius’s determinate section. 2. A treatise on Porisms. 3. A tract on Logarithms. 4. On the limits of quantities and ratios; and, 5. Some geometrical problems. Besides these. Dr. Simson’s Mss. contained a great variety of geometrical propositions and other interesting observations on different parts of the mathematics: though not in a state fit for publication. Among other designs, was an edition of the works of Pappus, in a state of considerable advancement, and which, had he lived, he might perhaps have published. What he wrote is in the library of the college of Glasgow, and a transcript was obtained by the delegates of the Clarendon press.

, professor of philosophy in the university of Glasgow in the seventeenth century, was the author of several works on mathematical and physical subjects. He was dismissed from his professorship soon after the restoration, on account of his principles, being a strict adherent to the presbyterian form of church government. During the period of his ejectment, he resided about the soutnern and border counties, collecting and affording useful information on the subjects of mining, engineering, &c. and was in particular employed by tue magistrates of Edinburgh on the then new plan for supplying that city with water, &c. Considerable attention seems to have been paid by him to such branches of hydrostatics as were of a practical nature: and it has been said he was the first person who suggested the proper method of draining the water from the numerous coal mines in the south-west of Scotland. When the revolution took place in 1688, and the presbyterian became the established religion of Scotland, Mr. Sinclare was recalled to his professorship, which he held until his death in 1696.

He published, 1. “Tyrocinia mathematica,” Glas. 1661, 12nto. 2. “Ars Nova et Magna Gravitatis et Levitatis,” Rotterd. 1669, 4to. 3. “Hydrostatics,” Eclin. 1672, 4to. 4. “Hydrostatical Experiments, with a Discourse on Coal,” Edin. 1680, 8vo. 5. “Principles of Astronomy and Navigation,” Edin. 1688, 12mo. Mr. Sinclare’s writings, in the opinion of a very able judge, are not destitute of ingenuity and research, though they may contain some erroneous and eccentric views. His work on Hydrostatics, and his “Ars Nova et Magna,” and perhaps also his political principles, provoked the indignation of some persons; on which occasion Mr. James Gregory, then professor of mathematics at St. Andrew’s, animadverted on him rather severely in a treatise entitled, “The great and new art of weighing Vanity,” &c. (See Gregory, vol. XVI. p. 278). Besides the works above mentioned, a publication in defence of witchcraft, entitled “Satan’s Invisible World,” has been ascribed to him: it bears the initials G. S. of his name; and witchcraft was a standard article of belief in Scotland at that time. He also translated and published under the same initials Dickson’s “Truth’s Victory over Error,” suppressing the author’s name (see David Dickson), for which he is censured by Wodrow, the ecclesiastical historian and biographer of professor Dickson, while he allows him the merit of some good intention.

, an Italian annalist, was born in 1613, and was a monk of Parma, where he employed the leisure hours which a monastic life afforded, in writing- the history of his times. The confidence placed in him by political men, and the correspondence to which he had access, enabled him to penetrate into the secret motives and causes of actions and events, and gave an air of authenticity and consequence to his public communications. He is said to have been the first, in Italy at least, who published a kind of political journal under the name of “Memorie recondite,” afterwards collected into volumes. The first two having found their way into France, induced cardinal Mazarine to entertain a very high opinion of the author, and by his persuasion, Louis XIV. invited Siri to Paris. On his arrival, he was preferred to a secular abbey, and quitting his ecclesiastical functions, lived at court in great intimacy and confidence with the king and his ministers, and was made almoner and historiographer to his majesty. There, in 1677, he published the 3d and 4th volumes of his journal, and continued it as far as the eighth, 4to. This, says Baretti, is as valuable a history as any in Italian, though the style and language are but indifferent, and it is very difficult to find all the volumes. The period of time they include is from 1601 to 1640. He published also another work of a similar kind, called “11 Mercurio, owero istoria de' correnti Tempi,” from 1647 to 1682, which extends to fifteen 4to volumes, the two last of which are more difficult to be found than all the rest. The former work, however, is in most estimation on account of the historical documents it contains, which are always useful, whatever colouring an editor may please to give. Siri has not escaped the imputation of venality, especially in his attachment to the French court, yet Le Cierc observes (Bibl. Choisie, vol. IV.) that no French writer dared to speak so freely of the public men of that nation as Siri has done. There is a French translation of the “Memorie recondite,” under the title of “Memoires secrets,” which, Landi says, might have been much improved from Siri’s extensive correspondence with almost all the ministers of Europe, now extant in the Benedictine library of Parma, and among the private archives of Modena. Siri died in 1683, in the seventieth year of his age.

, a very learned French Jesuit, was the son of a magistrate, and born at Riom, Oct. 12, 1559. At ten years of age he was sent to the college of Billon, in Lower Auvergne, the first seminary which the Jesuits had in France. He entered into the society in 1576, and two years after took the vows. His superiors, discovering his uncommon talents, sent him to Paris; where he taught classical literature two years, and rhetoric three. Two of his pupils were Charles of Valois, duke D‘Angouleme, the natural son of Charles IX., and Francis de Sales. During this time, he acquired a perfect knowledge of the Greek and Latin languages; and formed that style which has been so much esteemed by the learned. It is said that he took Muretus for his model, and never passed a day without reading some pages in his writings; and it is certain that by this, or his natural taste, he became one of the purest Latin writers of his time. In 1586, he began his course of divinity, which lasted four years. He undertook to translate into Latin the works of the Greek fathers, and began to write notes upon Sidonius Apollinaris. In 1590, he was sent for to Rome by the general of the order, Aquaviva, to take upon him the office of his secretary; which he discharged for sixteen years with success, and clothed the sentiments of his employer in very superior language. The study of antiquity was at that time his principal object: he visited libraries, and consulted manuscripts: he contemplated antiques, medals, and inscriptions: and the Italians, though jealous of the honour of their nation, acknowledged his acuteness as an antiquary, and consulted him in many cases of difficulty. At Rome he formed a friendship with the most eminent men of the time, particularly with Bellarmine and Tolet, who were of his own society, and with the cardinal Baronius, D’Ossat, and Du Perron. Baronius was much assisted by him in his “Ecclesiastical Annals,” especially in affairs relating to the Greek history upon which he furnished him with a great number of works, translated from Greek into Latin.

Sirmond returned to Paris in 1606; and from that time did not cease to enrich the public with a great number of works, particularly editions of the authors of the middle age, printed by him with great care from original manuscripts discovered by him in the public libraries. Much of his life was employed, and the better part of his reputation depends, on his labours as an editor, which produced correct copies of Geoffrey de Vendome, Ennodius, Flocloard, Fulgentius, Valerian, Sidonius Apollinaris, one of his most valuable editions, Paschasius Radbert, Eugene of Toledo, Jdacius, AJarcellinus, and many others When his reputation> came more generally known, pop.- Urban VIII. had a desire to draw him again to Rome and caused a letter for that purpose 10 be sent to him by fattier Vittelleschi, general of their order: but Louis XIII. would not suffer a person who did so much honour to his kingdom, to leave it; and, in 1637, appointed him his confessor, in the room of father Caussin, which delicate office he accepted with great reluctance, yet demeaned himself with the utmost caution and prudence, never meddling with political affairs, or employing his interest in enriching his relations. In 1643, however, after the death of Louis XIII. he left the court, and resumed his ordinary occupations with the same tranquillity as if he had never quitted his retirement. In 1645, he went to Rome, notwithstanding his great age, for the sake of assisting at the election of a general, upon the death of Vittelleschi, as he had done thirty years before upon the death of Aquaviva; and, after his return to France, resumed his studies. But having engaged in a warm dispute in the college of the Jesuits, the exertion brought on a disorder which carried him off in a few days. He died Oct. 7, 1651, aged ninety- two.

The works of which he was author and editor amount to fifteen volumes in folio; five of which, containing his original productions, many of them on controversial points, were printed at the royal printing-house at Paris in 1696, under this title: “Jacobi Sirmondi Opera Varia, nunc primum coilecta, ex ipsius schedis emendatiora, Notis posthumis, Epistolis. et Opusculis aliquibus auctiora.” The following character is given of him by Du Pin “Father Sirmond knew how to join a great delicacy of understanding and the jnstest discernment to a profound and extensive erudition. He understood Greek and Latin in perfection, all the profane authors, history, and whatever goes under the name of belles lettres. He had a very extensive knowledge in ecclesiastical antiquity, and had studied with care all the authors ~A the middle -ige His style is pure, concise, and nervous: yet he affects too much certain expressions of the comic poets. He meditated very much upon what he wrote, and had a particular art of reducing into a note what comprehended a great many things in a very few words. He is exact, judicious, simple; yet never omits any thing that is necessary. His dissertations have passed for a model; by which it were to be wished that every one who writes would form himself. When he treated of one subject, he never said immediately all that he knew of it; but reserved some new arguments always for a reply, like auxiliary troops, to come up and assist, in case of need, the grand body of the battle. He was disinterested, equitable, sincere, moderate, modest, laborious; and by these qualities drew to himself the esteem, not only of the learned, but of all mankind. He has left behind him a reputation which will last for many ages.”

, originally called Francis Albisola Della Rovera, is said by some writers to have been the son of a fisherman at Celles, a village live leagues from Savona in the territory of Genoa, but others derive him from a branch of a noble family. He was born in 1413, entered the Franciscan order, took a doctor’s degree at Padua, and taught with reputation in the universities of Bologna, Pavia, Sienna, Florence, and Perugia. After this he became general of the Franciscans, then cardinal through the interest of cardinal Bessarion, and at length pope, August 9, 1471, on the death of Paul II. He immediately armed a fleet against the Turks, and displayed great magnificence and liberality during his whole pontificate. He was almost the founder of, and certainly greatly enriched the Vatican library, and entrusted the care of it to the learned Platina. He published a bull, March 1, 1746, granting indulgences to those who should celebrate the festival of the Immaculate Conception of the Holy Virgin; the first decree of the Roman church concerning that festival. The establishment of the feast of St. Joseph, for which Gerson had taken great pains, is also ascribed to this pope. Historians have reproached him with conniving at the vices of his nephews, being too violent against the Medici family and the Venetians, and having joined in the conspiracy of the Pazzi at Florence. There seems upon the whole to have been little in his character to command the respect of posterity, except his patronage of literature. He died August 13, 1484, aged 71. Before his election to the pontificate, he wrote the following treatises “De Sanguine Christi,” Rome, 1473, fol. scarce “De futuris contigentibus” “De potentia Dei;” “De Conceptione beatse V.irginis,” &c.; a very scarce work is also attributed to him, entitled “Regulne Cuncellariae,” 1471, 4to, translated into French by Dupinet, 1564, 8vo, and reprinted under the title of “La Banque Romaine,” 1700, 12mo.

, whose proper names were Felix Peretti, was born in 1521, in the signiory of Montalto his father, Francis Peretti, for his faithful service to a country gentleman, with whom he lived as a gardener, was rewarded with his master’s favourite servant-maid for a wife. These were the parents of that pontiff, who, from the instant of his accession to the papacy, even to the hour of his death, made himself obeyed and feared, not only by his own subjects, but by all who had any concern with him. Though he very early discovered talents and inclination for learning, the poverty of his parents prevented their indulging it; for which reason, at about nine years of age, his father hired him to an inhabitant of the town, to look after his sheep: but his master, being on some occasion disobliged, removed him to a less honourable employment, and gave him the care of his hogs. He was soon released, however, from this degrading occupation: for, in 1531, falling accidentally under the cognizance of father Michael Angelo Selleri, a Franciscan friar, who was going to preach during the Lent season at Ascoli, the friar was so exceedingly struck with his conversation and behaviour, as to recommend him to the fraternity whither he was going. Accordingly, with the unanimous approbation of the community, he was received among them, invested with the habit of a lay -brother, and placed under ft the sacristan, to assist in sweeping the church, lighting the candles, and such little offices; who, in return for his services, was to teach him the responses, and rudiments of grammar."

With no other tutor, his education commenced, and by a quick comprehension, strong memory, and unwearied application, he made such a surprising progress, that in 1534 he was thought fit to receive the cowl, and enter upon his noviciate; and, in 1535, was admitted to make his profession, being no more than fourteen. He pursued his studies with so much assiduity, that, in 1539, he was accounted equal to the best disputants, and was soon admitted to deacon’s orders. In 1545 he was ordained priest, and assumed the name of father Montalto: the same year, he took his bachelor’s degree, and two years after, his doctor’s; and was appointed to keep a divinity act before the whole chapter of the order, at which time he so effectually recommended himself to cardinal de Carpi, and cultivated so close an intimacy with Bossius his secretary, that they were both of them ever after his steady friends; and, indeed, he had frequent occasions for their interposition on his behalf; for the impetuosity of his temper, and his impatience of contradiction, had already subjected him to several inconveniencies, and in the subsequent part of his life involved him in many more difficulties. While all Italy was delighted with his eloquence, he was perpetuallyembroiled in quarrels with his monastic brethren: he, however, formed two new friendships at Rome, which were afterwards of signal service to him one with the Colonna family, who thereby became his protectors the other with father Ghisilieri, by whose recommendation he was appointed inquisitor-general at Venice, by Paul IV. soon after his accession to the papacy in 1555. But the severity with which he executed his office, was so offensive to a people jealous of their liberties, as the Venetians were, that he was obliged to owe his preservation to a precipitate flight from that city.

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

Being now in possession of the purple, he began to aspire to the papacy. With this view “he became humble, patient, and affable; so artfully concealing the natural impetuosity of his temper, that one would have sworn this gentleness and moderation was born with him. There was such a change in his dress, his air, his words, and all his actions, that his nearest friends and acquaintance said, he was not the same man. A greater alteration, or a more absolute victory over his passions, was never seen in any one; nor is there an instance, perhaps, in all history, of a person supporting a fictitious character in so uniform and consistent a manner, or so artfully disguising his foibles and imperfections for such a number of years.” To which may be added, that, while he endeavoured to court the friendship of the ambassadors of every foreign power, he very carefully avoided attaching himself to the interest of any one; nor would he accept favours, that might be presumed to lay him under peculiar obligations. He was not less singular in his conduct to his relations, to whom he had heretofore expressed himself with the utmost tenderness; but now he behaved very differently, “knowing that disinterestedness in that point was one of the keys to the papacy. So that when his brother Antony came to see him at Rome, he lodged him in an inn, and sent him back again the next day with only a present of sixty crowns; strictly charging him to return immediately to his family, and tell them, ‘That his spiritual cares increased upon’him, and he was now dead to his relations and the world; but as he found old age and infirmities begin to approach, he might, perhaps, in a while, send for one of his nephews to wait on him',” Upon the death of Pius V. which happened in 1572, Montalto entered the conclave with the rest of the cardinals; but, appearing to give himself no trouble about the election, kept altogether in his apartment, without ever stirring from it, except to his devotions. He affected a total ignorance of the intrigues of the several factions; and, if he was asked to engage in any party, would reply, with seeming indifference, “that for his part he was of no manner of consequence; that, as he had never been in the conclave before, he was afraid of making some false step, and should leave the affair to be conducted wholly by people of greater knowledge and experience.” The election being determined in favour of cardinal Buon Compagnon, who assumed the name of Gregory XIII. Montalto did not neglect to assure him, “that he had never wished for any thing so much in his life, and that be should always remember his goodness, and the favours he received from him in Spain.” The new pope, however, not only shewed very little regard to his compliment, but during his pontificate, treated him with the utmost contempt, and deprived him of the pension which had been granted to him by Pins V. Nor was he held in greater esteem by the generality of the cardinals, who considered him as a poor, old, doting fellow, incapable of doing either good or harm; and who, by way of ridicule, they were used frequently to style, “the ass of La Marca.” He seldom interfered in> or was present at any public transactions; the chief part of his time was employed in works of piety and devotion; and his benevolence to the indigent was so remarkable, that, when a terrible famine prevailed at Pome, the poor said openly of him, “that cardinal Montalto, who lived upon charity himself, gave with one hand what he received with the other; while the rest of the cardinals, who wallowed in abundance, contented themselves with shewing them the way to the hospital.”

Notwithstanding this affected indifference to what passed in the world, he was never without able spies, who informed him from time to time of every the most minute particular. He had assumed great appearance of imbecility and all the infirmities of old age, for some years before the death of Gregory XIII. in 1585; when it was not without much seeming reluctance, that Montalto accompanied the rest of the cardinals into the conclave, where he maintained the same uniformity of behaviour in which he had so long persisted. “He kept himself close shut up in his chamber, and was no more thought or spoken of, than if he had not been there. He very seldom stirred out, and when he went to mass, or any of the scrutinies, appeared so little concerned, that one would have thought he had no manner of interest in any thing that happened within those walls;” and, without promising any thing, he flattered everybody. This method of proceeding was judiciously calculated to serve his ambition. He was early apprised, that there would be great contests or divisions in the conclave; and he knew it was no uncommon case, that when the chiefs of the respective parties met with opposition to the person they were desirous of electing, they would all willingly concur in the choice of some very old and infirm cardinal, whose life would last only long enough to prepare themselves with more strength against another vacancy. These views directed his conduct, nor was he mistaken in his expectations of success. Three cardinals, who were the heads of potent factions, finding themselves unable to choose the persons they respectively favoured, all concurred to elect Montalto. As it was not yet necessary for him to discover himself, when they came to acquaint him with their intention, “he fell into such a violent fit of coughing, that they thought he would have expired upon the spot.” When he recovered himself, he told them, “that his reign would be but for a few days that, besides the continual difficulty of breathing, he had not strength enough to support such a weight; and that his small experience in affairs made him altogether unfit for a charge of so important a nature.” Nor would he be prevailed on to accept it on any other terms, than that “they should all three promise not to abandon him, but take the greatest part of the weight off his shoulders, as he was neither able, nor could in conscience pretend, to take the whole upon himself.” The cardinals giving a ready assent to his proposal, he added, “If you are resolved to make me pope, it will be only placing yourselves on the throne; we must share the pontificate. For my part, I shall be content with the bare title; let them call me pope, and you are heartily welcome to the power and authority.” This artifice succeeded; and, in confidence of engrossing the administration, they exerted their joint interests so effectually, that Montalto was elected. He now immediately pulled off the mask which be had worn for fourteen years, with an amazing steadiness and uniformity. As soon as ever he found a sufficient number of votes to secure his election, he threw the staff with which he used to support himself into the middle of the chapel; and appeared taller by almost a foot than he had done for several years. Being asked according to custom, “Whether he would please to accept of the papacy,” he replied somewhat sharply, “It is trifling and impertinent to ask whether I will accept what I have already accepted: however, to satisfy any scruple that may arise, I tell you, that I accept it with great pleasure; and would accept another, if I could get it; for I find myself strong enough, by the divine assistance, to manage two papacies.” Nor was the change in his manners less remarkable than in his person: he immediately divested himself of the humility he had so long professed; and, laying aside his accustomed civility and complaisance, treated every body with reserve and haughtiness.

The lenity of Gregory’s government had introduced a general licentiousness among all ranks of people; which, though somewhat restrained while he lived, broke out into open violence the very day after his death. Riots, rapes, robberies, and murders, were, during the vacancy of the see, claily committed in every part of the ecclesiastical state; so that the reformation of abuses, in the church as well as the state, was the first and principal care of Sixtus V. for such was the title Montalto assumed. The first days of his pontificate were employed in receiving the congratulations of the Roman nobility, and in giving audience to foreign ministers; and though he received them with seeming cheerfulness and complaisance, yet he soon dismissed them, desiring to be excused, “for he had something else to do than to attend to compliments.” It having been customary with preceding popes to release prisoners on the day of their coronation, delinquents used to surrender themselves after the pope was chosen; and several offenders, judging of Montalto’s disposition by his behaviour while a cardinal, came voluntarily to the prisons, not making the least doubt of a pardon: but they were fatally disappointed; for when the governor of Rome and the keeper of St. Angelo’s castle waited on his holiness to know his intention upon this matter, Sixtus replied, “You certainly do not either know your proper distance, or are very impertinent. What have you to do with pardons and acts of grace, and releasing of prisoners? Don't you think it sufficient, that our predecessor has suffered the judges to lie idle and unemployed these thirteen years? Would you have us likewise stain our pontificate with the same neglect of justice? We have too long seen, with inexpressible concern, the prodigious degree of wickedness that reigns in the ecclesiastical state, to think of granting any pardon. God forbid we should entertain such a design! So far from releasing any prisoners, it is our express command, that they be more closely confined. Let them be brought to a speedy trial, and punished as they deserve, that the prisons may be emptied, and room made for others; and that the world may see, that Divine Providence has called us to the chair of St. Peter to reward the good, and to chastise the wicked; that we bear not the sword in vain, but are the minister of God, and a revenger to execute wrath upon them that do evil.”

In the place of such judges as were inclined to lenity, he substituted others of a more austere disposition, and appointed commissaries to examine not only their conduct, but also that of other governors and judges for many years past; promising rewards to those who could convict them of corruption, or of having denied justice to any one at the instance or request of men in power. All the nobility, and persons of the highest quality, were strictly forbidden, on pain of displeasure, to ask the judges any thing in behalf of their nearest friends or dependants; at the same time the judges were to be fined in case they listened to any solicitation. He further commanded every body, “on pain of death, not to terrify witnesses by threats, or tempt them by hopes or promises. He ordered the syndics and mayors of every town and signiory, as well those that were actually in office, as those who had been for the last ten years, to send him a list of all the vagrants, common debauchees, loose and disorderly people in their districts, threatening them with the strappado and imprisonment, if they omitted or concealed any one.” In consequence of this ordinance, the syndic of Albano, leaving his nephew, who was an incorrigible libertine, out of the list, underwent the strappado in the public market-place, though the Spanish ambassador interceded strongly for him. He par ticularly directed the legates and governors of the ecclesiastical state to be expeditious in carrying on all criminal processes; declaring, “he had rather have the gibbets and gallies full, than the prisons.” He aUo intended to have shortened all other proceedings in law. It had been usual, and was pleasing to the people, as often as his holiness passed by, to cry out, “Long live the pope:” but Sixtus, having a mind to go often unexpectedly to the tribunals of justice, convents, and other public places, forbade this custom in regard to himself; and punished two persons who were ignorant of this edict, with imprisonment, for crying out, “Long live pope Sixtus.” Adultery he punished with death: nor was he less severe to those who voluntarily permitted a prostitution of their wives; a custom at that time very common in Rome. The female sex, especially the younger part, attracted, in a very particular manner, the attention of Sixtus; not only the debauching of any of them, whether by force or artifice, but even the attempting of it, or offering the least offence against modesty, was very severely punished. For the more effectual prevention, as well of private assassinations, as public quarrels, he forbade all persons, on pain of death, to draw a sword, or to carry arms specified in the edict; nor would he be prevailed on to spare any who transgressed this order: even to threaten another with an intended injury was sufficient to entitle the menacer to a whipping and the gallies; especially if the nature of their profession furnished the means of carrying their threats into execution. The banditti, who were numerous when Sixtus was advanced to the papacy, were rendered still more so by the junction of many loose and disorderly people; who, conscious of their demerits, and terrified at the severities they daily saw practised, had fled from justice. Their insolence increased with their numbers; insomuch, that no one could live in the ecclesiastical state with saiety to his person or fortune, nor could strangers travel without imminent danger of being robbed or murdered. The public security more especially required the extirpation of these plunderers, which, by the prudence, vigilance, and resolution of this pope, was effectually performed in less than six months. He obliged the nobility of Rome, and the country round it, to an exact payment of their debts. He abolished all protections and other immunities, in the houses of ambassadors, cardinals, nobles, or prelates. To this purpose, he sent for all the ambassadors, and ordered them to acquaint their respective masters, “that he was determined nobody should reign in Rome but himself; that there should be no privilege or immunity of any kind there, but what belonged to the pope; nor any sanctuary or asylum but the churches, anil that only at such times, and upon such occasions, as he should think proper.”

Thus far we have heheld Sixtus acting in his civil capacity; and if we take a view of his conduct as a politician, in his transactions with foreign powers, we find him maintaining the same degree of firmness as in his treatment of his own subjects. Before he had been pope two months he quarrelled with Philip II. of Spain, Henry III. of France, and Henry king of Navarre. His intrigues in some measure may be said to have influenced, in his day, all the councils of Europe. Sixtus had caused the Vulgate Latin edition of the Bible to be published, which occasioned a good deal of clamour; but far less than his printing an Italian version of it, which excited the in lignation of all the Roman Catholic part of Christendom. Count Olivares, and some of the cardinals, ventured to expostulate with him freely upon it; and said, “It was a scandalous as well as a dangerous thing, and bordered very nearly upon heresy,” But he treated them with contempt, and only said, “We do it for the benefit of you that do not understand Latin.” Though this pope’s behaviour may not command universal applause, yet it is certain the Roman see was under very great obligations to him. His impartial, though rigorous, administration of justice, had a very happy effect; he strenuously defended the rights of the poor, the widow, and the orphan; he refused audience to nobody, ordering his masters of the ceremonies to introduce the poorest to him first; but was more particularly ready to hear any accusation against the magistrates: the same conduct he observed between the clergy and their superiors, always applying quick and effectual, though mostly severe, remedies. In short, he had wrought such a reformation, that the governor told him one day, the place of a judge was now become a perfect sinecure. At his accession to the papacy, he found the apostolic clia.-nber, or treasury, not only exhausted, but in debt: he lei't it, not only clear, but enriched itwith five millions of gold; he also augmented the revenue to double its former amount. To him the city of Rome was obliged for several of its greatest embellishments, particularly the Vatican library, began by Sixtus IV.; and to him its citizens were indebted for the introduction of trade into the ecclesiastical state. Though he was naturally an enemy to profusion, he was never sparing in expence to relieve such as were really necessitous; and, among many other noble charities, his appropriation of three thousand crowns a year, for the redemption of Christian slaves out of the hands of the infidels, will hardly be reckoned the least meritorious.

In respect to his private character, it appears, from several instances, that he was, as well in his habit as diet, generally temperate and frugal; that he remembered, and greatly rewarded, every service that was conferred upon him when he was in an inferior station. Nor did his elevation make him unmindful of his former poverty: his sister once intimating, that it was unbecoming his dignity to wear patched linen, he said to her, “Though we are exalted, through the Divine Providence, to this high station, we ought not to forget, that shreds and patches are the only coat of arms our family has any title to.” The behaviour of Sixtus to his relations, previous to his exaltation, has been already noted: soon after his accession to the pontificate, he sent for his family to Rome, with express orders, that they should appear in a decent and modest manner. Accordingly, his sister Camilla, accompanied by her daughter and two grandsons, and a niece, came thither. The pope’s reception of them was as singular as any other part of his conduct; for some of the cardinals, to ingratiate themselves with his holiness, went out to meet her, dressed them all in a very superb manner, and introduced them with great ceremony to the Vatican. When Sixtus saw Camilla, he pretended not to know her, and asked two or three times who she was; upon which one of the cardinals, who handed her in, said, “It is your sister, holy father.” “My sister!” replied Sixtus, with a frown, “I have but one sister, and she is a poor woman at Le Grotte: if you have introduced her in this disguise, I declare 1 do not know her; and yet I think I should know her again, if I was to see her in such clothes as she used to wear.” Their conductors then thought it expedient to send them to a common inn, where they were disrobed of their finery. When this was done, Sixtus sent two of his ordinary coaches for them; and being introduced a second time, the pope embraced them tenderly, and said to Camilla, “Now we see it is our sister indeed: nobody shall make a princess of you but ourselves.” The terms Sixtus stipulated with his sister, as the conditions of her advancement, were, “not to ask any favour in matters of government, or make the least intercession for criminals, or otherwise interfere in the administration of justice;” assuring her that every suit of that kind would meet with a refusal not less mortifying to her than painful to himself. This being settled, he made, indeed, a princely provision, not only for his sister, who took care punctually to obey his orders, but also for all the family.

The pope’s severity could not exempt him from several poignant satires, though we have only one instance wherein he thought them worth his resentment; and that related to his sister. Pasquin was dressed one morning in a very dirty shirt; and being askedby Marforio, why he wore such dirty linen answered, “He could get no other, for the pope had made his washer-woman a princess;” meaning Camilla, who had formerly been a laundress. The pope ordered strict search to be made for the author, and promised to give him a thousand pistoles, and his life, provided he would discover himself; but threatened to hang him, if he was found out by any body else. The author, though he had trusted no person with the secret, was so tempted with the offer, that he was simple enough to make a full confession of it to the pope; demanding the money, and to have his life spared. Sixtus was so astonished at his folly and impudence, that he could not speak for some time; and at last said, “It is true we did make such a promise, and we shall not be worse than our word; we give you your life, and you shall have the money immediately; but we reserved to ourselves the power of cutting off your hands, and boring your tongue through to prevent your being so witty for the future:” which was directly executed, Sixtus declaring, that he did not deserve the punishment so much for the pasquinade, as for being so audacious to avow it.

, an old English poet, descended from an ancient family in Cumberland, was born towards the latter part of the fifteenth century, and appears to have studied in both universities. Wood claims him for Oxford, although without conceiving that he was a very honourable addition to his list of worthies. The late Mr. Cole, in his collections for the Athenae Cantabrigienses, is of opinion, that he belongs to Cambridge, partly because he alludes to his being curate of Trompington in 1507, and mentions Svvaffam and Soham, two towns in Cambridgeshire, and partly because there occurs the name of one Skelton, M. A. of Cambridge, in the year 1484. On the other hand, Wood reckons him of Oxford, from the authority of Bale in a manuscript in the Bodleian library and in the preface of Caxton’s Translation of the Æneids he is said to have been “lately created Poet Laureate in the Unyversite of Oxenforde,” and to have been the translator of some of the Latin classics.

And past in schoels ye knoe."

This honour appears to have been conferred on him about 1489, and if our author was the Schelton discovered by Mr. Cole, he had now left Cambridge for Oxford; but Mr. Malone says that, a few years after this, he was permitted to wear the laurel publicly at Cambridge, and had been previously honoured by Henry VII. with a grant to wear either some peculiar dress, or some additional ornament in his ordinary apparel. In addition to this, it may be inferred from the titles of some of his works, that he was poet laureate to king Henry VIII.; but Mr. Malone has not been able to discover whether he received any salary in consequence of this office. The origin of the royal laureat is somewhat obscure. According to Mr. Warton, he was only a graduated rhetorician employed in the service of the king, and all his productions were in Latin, until the time of the reformation, which, among other advantages, opened the way to the cultivation of the English tongue.

In the page where Skelton mentions his being curate of Trompington, he informs us that he was at the same time (1507) rector of Diss in Norfolk, and probably had held this living long before. Tradition informs us, that his frequent buffooneries in the pulpit excited general censure. Of what nature those buffooneries were, we cannot now determine, but it is certain that at a much later period the pulpit was frequently debased by irreverent allusions and personal scurrilities. There appear to have been three subjects at which Skeltori delighted to aim his satire; these were, the mendicant friars, Lilly the grammarian, and cardinal Wolsey. From what we find in his works, his treatment of these subjects was coarse enough in style, and perhaps illiberal in sentiment; and there is some reason to think that he did not preserve a due reverence for the forms and pomp of the established religion, which above all other faults would naturally tend to bring him into disgrace and danger. Those who felt his satire would be glad to excite a clamour against his impiety; and it must be allowed that the vices of his age are frequently represented in such indelicate language, as to furnish his enemies with the very plausible reproach, that he was not one of those reformers who begin with themselves.

But although we can now have very little sympathy with the injured feelings of the begging friars, it is not improbable that some of his poems or ballads might very justly rouse the vigilance of his diocesan, the bishop of Norwich, who, Mr. Warton thinks, suspended him from his functions. Anthony Wood asserts, that he was punished by the bishop for “having been guilty of certain crimes, as most poets are.” According to Fuller, the crime of “most poets” in Skelton’s case, was his keeping of a concubine, which yet was at that time a less crime in a clergyman than marriage. Skelton, on his death-bed, declared that he conscientiously considered his concubine as his wife, but was afraid to own her in that light; and from this confession, and the occasional liberties he has taken with his pen, in lashing the vices of the clergy, it is not improbable that he had imbibed some of the principles of the reformation, but had not the courage to avow them, unless under the mask of such satire as might pass without judicial censure.

With respect, however, to Wolsey, his prudence appears to have deserted him, as he felt bold enough to Stigmatize the personal character of that statesman, then irt the plenitude of his power. Whether such attacks were made in any small poems or ballads, or only in his poem of “Why come ye not to Court?” is not certain, but the latter does not appear to have been printed until 1555, and was too long to have been easily circulated in manuscript. Wolsey, however, by some means or other, discovered the abuse and the author, and ordered him to be apprehended. Skelton took refuge in the sanctuary of Westminster-abbey, where the abbot, Islip, afforded him protection until his death, which took place June 21, 1529, not long before the downfall of his illustrious persecutor. He was interred in St. Margaret’s church-yard, with the inscription,

“J. Sceltonus Vates Pierius hie situs est.” Skelton appears to have been a more considerable personage, at one time at least, than his contemporaries would have us to believe. It is certain that he was esteemed a scholar, and that his classical learning recommended him to the office of tutor to prince Henry, afterwards king Henry VIII., who, at his accession, made him royal orator, an office so called by himself, the nature of which is doubtful, unless it was blended with that of laureat. As to his general reputation, Erasmus, in a letter to Henry VIII. styles him “Britannicarum literarum decus et lumen,” a character which must have either been inferred from common opinion, or derived from personal knowledge. Whatever provocation he gave to the clergy, he was not without patrons who overlooked his errors and extravagancies for the sake of his genius, and during the reign of Henry VII. he had the enviable distinction of being almost the only professed poet of the age. Henry Algernon Percy, fifth earl of Northumberland, one of the very few patrons of learned men and artists at that time, appears to have entertained a high regard for our author. In a collection of poems magnificently engrossed on vellum for the use of this nobleman, is an elegy on the death of the earl’s father, written by Skelton. This volume is now in the Bullish Museum, but the elegy may be seen in Skelton’s works, and in Dr. Percy’s Relics.

When a favourite author betrays grossnessand indecency, it is usual to inquire how much of this is his own, and how much may be referred 19 the licentiousness of his age? Warton observes, that it is in vain to apologize for the coarseness, obscenity, and scurrility of Skelton, by saying-, that his poetry is tinctured with the manners of his age, and adds, that Skelton would have been a writer without decorum at any period. This decision, however, is not more justly passed on Skelton than it ought to be on others, whom it has been the fashion to vindicate by an appeal to the manners of their age. The manners of no age can apologize for the licentiousness of the writer who descends to copy them. There are always enough in an age that has a court, a clergy, and a people, to support the dignity of virtue, and to assert the respect due to public decency. If we knew more minutely of the manners of our country in these remote periods, it would probably be found that licentiousness has, upon the whole, been more discouraged than patronized by the public voice.

Although it is impossible to lessen the censure which Skelton incurred among his contemporaries, and immediate successors, it is but fair to say that his indelicacies are of no very seductive kind, that they are obscured by cant words and phrases no longer intelligible, or intelligible but to few, and that the removal of them is a matter of less trouble and less injury to an edition of his works than his biographers, who have copied one another, would insinuate. As to his poetry, Mr. Warton’s character may in general be followed with safety, and ought to be preserved with the respect due to so excellent a critic.

“Skelton’s characteristic vein of humour is capricious and grotesque. If his whimsical extravagancies ever move our laughter, at the same time they shock our sensibility. His festive levities are not only vulgar and indelicate, but frequently want truth and propriety. His subjects are often as ridiculous as his metres: but he sometimes debases his matter by his versification. On the whole, his genius seems better suited to low burlesque, than to liberal and manljr satire. It is supposed by Caxton, that he improved our language; but he sometimes affects obscurity, and sometimes adopts the most familiar phraseology of the common people.” After quoting some lines from the “Boke of Colin Cloute,” Mr. Warton remarks, that these are in the best manner of his petty measure, which is made still more disgusting by the repetition of the rhymes, but allows that in the poem called “The Bouge of Court,” or the Rewards of a Court, the author, by “adopting the more grave and stately movement of the seven-lined stanza, has shewn himself not alwajs incapable of exhibiting allegorical imagery with spirit and dignity.”

Skelton, however, is very unequal, although his natural bias, and what he seems most anxious to revert to, is comic buffoonery. That the author of the “Prayers to the Trinity,” and the lines on the death of Lord Percie, could have written the “Tunning of Elinour Humming,” is almost incredible. His multiplied repetition of rhymes, arbitrary abbreviations -of the verse, cant expressions, hard and sounding words newly coined, and patches of Latin and French, Warton supposes to be peculiar, though not exclusively to our author; but his new-coined words, and Latin and French phrases, occur so often, that other critics appear to have been too hasty in asserting that he wrote only for the mob. There is occasionally much sound sense, and, it is to be feared, much just satire on the conduct of the clergy, which we know was such as to justify the plunder of the church by Henry VIII. in the eyes of the people at large. As a poet, however, Skeltou contributed very little to the improvement of the poetical style, and seems more disposed to render versification ridiculous. His vein of humour is often copious and original, and had it been directed to subjects of legitimate satire, and regulated by some degree of taste, more credit would have been given to what he insinuates, that he was disliked and reviled for having honestly, though bluntly, exposed the reigning follies of his day. Mrs. Cooper calls him, with some degree of truth, “the restorer of invention in English poetry;” and by Bradshavv, a very indifferent poet of the fifteenth century, he is complimented as the inventive Skelton.

His works have hitherto been ushered into the world without much care. It yet remains to explain his obscurities, translate his vulgarisms, and point, his verses. The task would require much time and labour, with perhaps no very inviting prospect of recompense. Besides the works published in the late edition of the English poets, Mr. Kitson has given a list of pieces, the most of which are easily accessible, and would have been added to the late collection, had they appeared to throw any important light on the character of the author, or of his age. But Mr. Ritson thinks it utterly incredible that the “Nigramansii,” described by Warton, as printed by Wynkin de Worde in 1504, ever existed.

. a worthy and learned clergyman of Ireland, and author of some valuable works on divinity, was born in the parish of Berriaghly, near Lisburn, Feb. 1707. His family was originally English; his grandfather, an engineer, having been sent over by Charles I. to inspect the Irish fortifications, settled in that country, and suffered many hardships in Cromwell’s time. His father, Richard Skelton, appears to have been, in the reign of William III. a gunsmith, and afterwards a farmer and a tanner. He was a man of great sense, a strict observer of religion, and a careful instructor of his children. He died in his fiftieth. year, leaving a widow and ten children. Philip, when about ten years of age, was sent to Lisburn school, where "being at first negligent, his father cured him by sending him into the fields and treating him as a menial. After this he applied with diligence, and soon displayed an ardent desire for learning. On the death of his father, which happened when he was at school, his mother had many difficulties in bringing up her numerous family, and he began to think it his duty to relieve her from the expence of one, at least, by a still more close application to his studies. From school, he entered as a sizer in the university of Dublin, in June 1724, where Dr. Delany was his tutor, and ever after his friend.

Here he soon obtained the reputation of a scholar, and also distinguished himself by his skill in fencing, cudgelling, and other manly feats, as well as in some college frolics from which he did not always escape uncensured. His temper was warm, and he entertained that irritable sense of honour which frequently involved him in quarrels. On one occasion he had a quarrel with a fellow-student, who happened to be connected with Dr. Baldwin, the provost, and who insinuated that Skelton was a Jacobite, an accusation which he repelled by the most solemn declaration of his adherence to the Hanover family. Baldwin, however, was prejudiced against him, and endeavoured to keep him out of a scholarship, but, mistaking him for another of the same name, his malice was disappointed, and Skelton received this reward of merit in 1726. Baldwin, however, on other occasions did every thing in his power to make a college life uneasy to him; and Skelton, finding it impossible to gain his favour without disgraceful compliances, resolved to take his degree at the statutable period, and quit the college. This, however, his enemy still endeavoured to prevent, and, on some idle pretence, stopped his degree.

Skelton’s only remedy was now to wait patiently till the next commencement, which would take place in about half a year. As the time approached, he contrived to foil the provost at his own weapons, and knowing his tyrannical and capricious temper, played him a trick, which his biographer relates in the following manner. A few days before the commencement, he waited on the provost, “and after paying his humble submission, said, ‘Mr. Provost, I am extremely obliged to you for stopping me of my degree last time, because it was what I wished for above all thipgs, and I be and beseech you may also stop me now, as my friends are forcing me to take it, and quit the college, contrary to my desire.’ ‘ Ah, you dog,’ he replied, * what do you mean? do you wish to stay here contrary to your friends 1 consent? Take your degree, sirrah, and quit the college, or I Ml make you smart for it.‘ Skelton then began to cry, and whine, and sob, saying how greatly distressed he was at getting this unfavourable answer. * Don’t be growling here, sir,‘ he said, ’ but go about your business, I ‘11 not agree to your request, you shall take your degree in spite of you, sirrah.’ Upon this Skelton, with sorrowful countenance, though with joy at his heart, walked grumblingly out of the room.” The consequence of this was, that he commenced B. A. in July 1728, and had his name taken out of the college books, May 31st following, two years before the natural expiration of his scholarship. Notwithstanding this treatment, he always spoke of Dr. Baldwin as in many respects an excellent provost.

Soon after leaving college, he resided with his brother John, a clergyman, and schoolmaster of Dundalk, and took on himself the management of the school, which by his efforts rose to high reputation. He had been here but a short time, when he obtained abomination to the curacy of Newtown-Butler, in the county of Fermanagh, from Dr. Madden (see Madden), and was ordained deacon for this cure by Dr. Sterne, bishop of Clogher, about 1729. He was afterwards ordained priest by the same bishop, and used to relate that he and the other candidates were examined by Dr. Sterne and his assistant for a whole week in Latin, and that they were not allowed, during the whole of this trial, to speak a word of English.

During his holding this curacy he resided in Dr. Madden’s house, called Manor-waterhouse, about three miles from Newtovm- Butler, as private tutor; and had three or four boys to instruct in English and the rudiments of the Latin and Greek languages. This left him little time for the composition of his sermons, and such as he wrote at this time, he afterwards very much disliked. Here, however, he exhibited that active benevolence which always formed a striking feature in his character, and although the salary derived both from his curacy and his teaching was very small, he gave at least the half away in charitable purposes. Here likewise it would appear that he wrote his first publication, an anonymous pamphlet, printed at Dublin, recommending Dr. Madderi'a scheme for establishing premiums in Trinity college; but Madden, although he admired this pamphlet, and solicited the publisher for the name of its author, never made the discovery: Skelton judging it for his advantage to keep the secret. In the mean time, his situation being rendered extremely irksome by the vulgar mind and parsimonious disposition of Mrs. Madden, he resigned both the curacy and his tutorship in about two years.

On leaving Dr. Madden, he repaired to his brother’s, in Dundalk, until, in 1732, he was nominated to the curacy of Monaghan, in the diocese of Cloghet, by the hon. and rev. Francis Hamilton, the rector. This situation was for some years permanent, and afforded him leisure to pursue his favourite study of diunity, and to execute the duties of a parish priest. “His inclinations,” says his biographer, “were all spiritual, and he only desired an opportunity of being more extensively useful for long before, he had fixed his thoughts on the rewards of a better world than the present.” His life was accordingly most exemplary, and his preaching efficacious. It was said that the very children of Monaghan, whom he carefully instructed, knew more of religion at that time, than the grown people of any of the neighbouring parishes, and the manners of his flock were soon greatly improved, and vice and ignorance retreated before so powerful an opponent. His charities were extraordinary, for all he derived from his curacy was 40l. of which he gave 10l. a year to his mother, and for some years a like sum to his tutor, Dr. Delany, to pay some debts he had contracted at college. The rest were for his maintenance and his charities, and when the pittance he could give was insufficient for the relief of the poor, he solicited the aid of people of fortune, who usually contributed according to his desire, and could not indeed refuse a man who first gave his own before he would ask any of theirs. His visits to the jails were also attended with the happiest effects. On one remarkable occasion, when a convict at Monaghan, of whose innocence he was well assured, was condemned to be hanged within five days, he set off for Dublin, and on his arrival was admitted to the privy council, which then was sitting. Here he pleaded lor the poor man with such eloquence, as to obtain his pardon, and returned with it to Monaghan in time to save his life. In order to be of the more use to his poor parishioners, he studied physic, and was very successful in his gratuitous practice, as well as by his spiritual advice, and was the means of removing many prejudices and superstitions which he found very deeply rooted in their minds.

Mr. Skelton set out in his ministry in the character of an avowed champion of the orthodox faith. Deriving his religious principles from the pure source of information, the holy Scriptures themselves, he could find in these no real ground for modern refinements. Consequently he declared open war against all Arians, Socinians, c. and published several anonymous pieces against them. In 1736, he published “A Vindication of the Right Rev. the Lord Bishop of Winchester,” an ironical attack on Hoadly’s “Plain account of the nature and end of the Lord’s Supper.” When bishop Sterne read it, he sent for Skelton, and asked if he had written it? Skelton gave him an evasive answer. “Well, well,” said the bishop,“” 'tis a clever thing you are a young man of no fortune; take these ten guineas, you may want them.“” I took the money,“Skelton told his biographer,” and said nothing, for I was then a poor curate."

He published the same year, “Some proposals for the revival of Christianity,” another piece of irony against the enemies of the church, which was imputed to Swift, who, as usual, neither affirmed nor denied; but only observed, that the author “had not continued the irony to the end.” In 1737, he published a “Dissertation on the constitution and effects of a Petty Jury.” In this, among other things, ^eems to object to locking up a jury without food, until they agree upon their opinion. The attorney general called at his bookseller’s, who refused to give up the name of the author. “Well,” said the attorney general, “give my compliments to the author, and inform him from me, that I do not think there is virtue enough in the people of this country ever to put his scheme into practice.”

His fame, however, both as a preacher and writer, his extraordinary care as an instructor of a parish, and his wonderful acts of charity and goodness, began, about 1737, to be the subject of conversation, not only in the diocese of Clogher, and other parts of the North, but also in the metropolis; but still no notice was taken of him in the way of preferment. Dr. Sterne, the bishop of Clogher, usually sent for him, after he had bestowed a good preferment upon another, and gave him, “by way of a sop,” ten guineas, which Mr. Skelton frequently presented to a Mr. Arbuthnot, a poor cast-off curate, who was unable to serve through age and infirmity. At length Dr. Delany, who had been his tutor at college, perceiving him thus neglected, procured for him an appointment to the curacy of St. Werburgh’s in Dublin. This would have been highly acceptable to Mr. Skelton, and Dr. Delany would have been much gratified to place such a man in a situation where his merits were likely to be duly appreciated: it is painful to relate in what manner both were disappointed. When he was on the point of leaving the diocese of Clogher, bishop Sterne perceiving that it would be to his discredit if a person of such abilities should leave his diocese for want of due encouragement, sent a clergyman to inform him, “that if he staid in his diocese he would give him the first living that should fall.” Relying on this, he wrote to Dr. Delany, and the curacy of St. Werburgh’s was otherwise disposed of. The first living that fell vacant was Monaghan, where he had so long officiated, which the bishop immediately gave to his nephew Mr. Hawkshaw, a young gentleman that had lately entered into orders! It would even appear that he had made his promise with a determination to break it, for when he bestowed the preferment on his nephew, he is reported to have said, “I give you now a living worth 300l. a year, and have kept the best curate in the diocese for you, who was going to leave it: be sure take his advice, and follow his directions, for he is a man of worth and sense.” But Skelton, with all his “worth and sense,” was not superior to the infirmities of his nature. He felt this treacherous indignity very acutely, and never attended a visitation during the remainder of the bishop’s life, which continued for a series of years; nor did the bishop ever ask for him, or express any surprize at his absence. Under Mr. Hawkshaw, however, he Jived not unhappily. Mr. Hawkshaw submitted to his instructions, and followed his example, and there was often an amicable contest in the performance of their acts of duty and charity.

In 1741, he resumed his useful publications, “The Necessity of Tillage and Granaries, in a letter to a member of parliament,” and a paper published in the Philosophical Transactions, entitled “A curious production of Nature,” giving an account of a species of caterpillar which appeared on the trees at Monaghan. In 1742 he accepted the office of tutor to the late earl of Charlemout; but, owing to a difference with his lordship’s guardian, soon resigned this charge, and returned to his curacy. He had, however, a very high opinion of lord Chariemont, and, in 1743, dedicated to him his “Truth in a Mask,” a pamphlet in which he professes to “give religious truth such a dress and mask as may perhaps procure it admittance to a conference with some of its opposers and contemners:” his biographer, however, does not think he has been very successful in this attempt.

After he returned to his curacy, he was offered a school xvorth 500l. a year, arising from the benefit of the scholars, but refused it as interfering with the plan of literary improvement and labour which he had marked out for himself; and when told that he might employ ushers, he said he could not in conscience take the money, without giving up his whole time and attention to his scholars. In 1744, he published “The Candid Reader, addressed to his terraqueous majesty, the WorUl.” The objects of his ridicule in this are Hill, the mathematician, who proposed making verses by an arithmetical table, lord Shaftesbury, and Johnson, the author of a play called “Hurlothrumbo,” with a parallel between Hurlothrumbo and the rhapsody of Shaftesbury. In the same year he also published “A Letter to the authors of Divine Analogy and the Minute Philosopher, from an old officer,” a plain, sensible letter, advising the two polemics to turn their arms from one another against the common enemies of the Christian faith. During the rebellion in 1745, he published a very seasonable and shrewd pamphlet, entitled the “Chevalier’s hopes.” On the death of Dr. Sterne, the see of Clogher was filled by Dr. Clayton, author of the “Essay on Spirit,” a decided Arian; and between him and Skelton there could consequently be no coincidence of opinion, or mutuality of respect. In 1748, Mr. Skelton having prepared for the press his valuable work entitled “Deism revealed,” he conceived it too important to be published in Ireland, and therefore determined to go to London, and dispose of it there. On his arrival, he submitted his manuscript to Andrew Millar, the bookseller, to know if he would purchase it, and have it printed at his own expence. The bookseller desired him, as is usual, to leave it with him for a day or two, until he could get a certain gentleman of great abilities to examine it. Hume is said to have come in accidentally into the shop, and Millar shewed him the ms. Hume took it into a room adjoining the shop, examined it here and there for about an hour, and then said to Andrew, print. By this work Skelton made about 200l. The bookseller allowed him for the manuscript a great many copies, which he disposed of among the citizens of London, with whom, on account of his preaching, he was a great favourite. He always spake with high approbation of the kindness with which he was received by many eminent merchants. When in London he spent a great part of his time in going through the city, purchasing books at a cheap rate, with the greater part of the money he got by his “Deism revealed,” and formed a good library. This work was published in 1749, in two volumes, large octavo, and a second edition was called for in 1751, which waacomprized in two volumes 12mo. It has ever been considered as a masterly answer to the cavils of deists; but the style in this, as in some other of his works, is not uniform, and his attempts at wit are rather too frequent, and certainly not very successful. A few months after its publication the bishop of Clogher, Dr. Clayton, was asked by Sherlock, bishop of London, if he knew the author. “O yes, he has been a curate in my diocese near these twenty years.” “More shame for your lordship,” answered Sherlock, “to let a man of his merit continue so long a curate in your diocese.”

After a residence at London of about six months, during which he preached some of the sermons since published in his works, Mr. Skelton returned to his curacy in Ireland, and in 1750, a large living became vacant in the diocese of Clogher. Dr. Delany and another bishop immediately waited on bishop Clayton, and told him, that if he did not give Skehon a living now, after disappointing them so often, they would take him out of his diocese. This, however, was not entirely effectual: Clayton could not refuse the request, hut made several removals on purpose to place Skelton in the living of Pettigo, in a wild part of the county of Donegal, worth about 200l. a year, the people uncultivated, disorderly, fond of drinking and quarrelling, and, in a word, sunk in profound ignorance. He used to say, he was a missionary sent to convert them to Christianity, and that he was banished from all civilised society. He often declared that he was obliged to ride seven miles before he could meet with a person of common sense to converse with. With such difficulties, however, Skeltou was born to contend. He always had a conscientious feeling of the wants of his flock, with a strong impelling sense of duty. His biographer has given a very interesting account of the means, pious and charitable, which he took to meliorate the condition of his parish, which, for the sake of brevity, we must omit; suffice it to say, they were effectual; but his situation affected his mind in some degree, and he became liable to occasional fits of the hypochondriac kind, which recurred more or less in the alterpart of his life.

Jn this lonely situation he found sometime for study, and besides an excellent visitation sermon on the “Dignity of the Christian Ministry,” he published in 1753 “The Consultation, or a Dialogue of the Gods, in the manner of Lucian,” intended to ridicule the Arians; and in this, or the following year, went again to London to publish his discourses, two volumes of which appeared in 1754, under the title of “Discourses Controversial and Practical, on various subjects, proper for the consideration of the present times. By the author of ' Deism revealed 1”

In 1757 a remarkable dearth prevailed in Ireland, and no where more than in Mr. Skelton’s parish. The scenes of distress which he witnessed would now appear scarcely credible. He immediately set himself to alleviate the wants of his flock, by purchases of meal, &c. at other markets, until he had exhausted all his money, and then he had recourse to a sacrifice which every man of learning will duly appreciate. He resolved to sell his books, almost the only comfort he had in this dreary solitude, and relieve his indigent parishioners with the money. Watson, a bookseller in Dublin, who had advertised then: for sale without success, at last bought them himself for 80l. and immediately paid the money. Soon after they were advertised, two ladies, lady Barrymore and a Miss Leslie, who guessed at Skelton’s reason for selling his hooks, sent him So/, requesting him to keep his books, and relieve his poor with the money; but Skelton, with many expressions of gratitude, told them he had dedicated his books to God, and he must sell them; and accordingly both sums were applied to the relief of his parishioners. Every heart warms at the recital of such an act of benevolence, and all reflections on it would lessen the impression. One other circumstance may be added. The bookseller sold only a part of the books in the course of trade, and those that remained, Mr. Skelton, when he could allord it, took from him at the price he sold them for, but insisted on paying interest for the sum they amounted to, for the time Mr. Watson had them in his possession.

About 1758, a pamphlet appeared in Dublin, entitled “An Appeal to the common sense of all Christian people,” an artful defence of Arianism, an answer to which was written by Mr. Skelton, in the opinion of his biographer, in a masterly manner and style, exceeding any of hi* former compositions. But as the “Appeal” sunk into obscurity, the answer was not inserted in the edition of his works published in 1770. Here, however, maybe found a description of Longh-Derg, which he wrote about this time, a place much visited by the superstitious. In 1758, Dr. Clayton, bishop of Clogher, died, and was succeeded by Dr. Garnet, who treated Mr. Skelton with the respect he deserved, and in 1759 gave him the living of Devenish, in the county of Fermanagh, near Enniskillen, worth about 300l. a year, and thus he was brought once more into civilized society. When leaving Pettigo, he said to the poor, “Give me your blessing now before I go, and God’s blessing be with you. When you are in great distress, come to me, and I '11 strive to relieve you.” In this new charge, he exerted the same zeal to instruct his flock both in public and private, and the same benevolence toward the poor which had made him so great a benefit to his former people. W r e must refer to his biographer for numerous proofs, for which his memory continues still to be held in high veneration. In 17oG, the bishop of Clogher removed him from Devenish to the living of Fintona, in the county of Tyrone, worth at least 100l. more than the other. He was now in the fifty-ninth year of his age. “God Almighty,” he used to say, “was very kind to me: when I began to advance in years and stood in need of a horse and servant, he gave me a living. Then he gave me two livings, one after another, each of which was worth a hundred a year more than the preceding. I have therefore been rewarded by him, even in this world, far above my deserts.”

At Fintona, he shewed himself the same diligent, kind, and faithful pastor as when on his former livings; but two varieties occurred here very characteristic of the man. Having discovered that most of his protestant parishioners were dissenters, he invited their minister to dine with him, and asked his leave to preach in his meeting on the next Sunday; and consent being given, the people were so pleased with Mr. Skelton, that the greater number of them quitted their own teacher. After some time, Skelton asked him how much he had lost by the desertion of his hearers? He told him 40l. a year, on which he settled that sum on him annually. We mentioned in a former page that Mr. Skelton had studied physic with a view to assist the poor with advice and medicines. By this practice, at Fintona, he found that Dr. Gormly, the physician of the place, lost a great part of his business; on which Skelton settled also 40l. a year on him. In both these instances, his biographer observes, he not only took on him the toil of doing good, but also voluntarily paid for doing it.

In 1770, he published his works by subscription, in 5 vols. 8vo, for the benefit of the Magdalen charity. The first volume contains “Deism revealed,” the second and third, the “Sermons” he published in England, the fourth an additional number of sermons not before printed; the fifth consisted of miscellanies, of which some had not been before published, as “Reasons for Inoculation,” an “Account of a Well or Pool” near Clovis, in the county of Monaghan, famous for curing the jaundice; “Observations on a late resignation,” that of the rev. William Robertson (see his life, vol. XXVI. p. 257.) “A Dream,” intended to expose the folly of fashion; and “Hilema,” a copse or shrubbery, consisting of observations and anecdotes.

In his latter days, when the air of Fintona became too keen for him, he passed some of his winters in Dublin, and there was highly valued for his preaching, which, in the case of charities, was remarkably successful. During a dearth, owing to the decline of the yarn manufactory at Fintona, he again exhausted his whole property in relieving the poor, and again sold his books for 100l. He said he was now too old to use them; but the real cause was, that he wanted the money to give to the poor, and the year after he bestowed on them 60l. It was one of his practices to distribute money, even in times of moderate plenty, among indigent housekeepers, who were struggling to preserve a decent appearance. He was also the kind and liberal patron of such of their children as had abilities, and could, by his urgent application and interest, be advanced in the world.

His infirmities increasing, after fifty years labour in the ministry with unexampled diligence, he now found himself incapable any longer of the discharge of his public duties, and in 1780 took his final leave of Fintona, and removed to Dublin, to end his days. Here he received great respect from many of the higher dignitaries of the church, and in 1781 the university offered him the degree of doctor of divinity, which he declined. In 1784 he published by subscription a sixth volume of his works, containing “An Appeal to common sense on the subject of Christianity,” &c. or a historical proof of the truth of Christianity, superior in style and arrangement to any of his former productions, and which shewed that his faculties were in full force at the age of seventy-six. In the same volume, are “Some Thoughts on Common Sense,” some hymns, and a Latin poem. In 1786 he published his seventh volume, entitled *' Senilia, or an Old Man’s Miscellany," In the same year he published a short answer to a catechism, written by an English clergyman, and used at Sunday schools, which he supposed to contain an erroneous doctrine with respect to the state of men after death, and sent a copy to all the bishops of England and Ireland. The archbishop of Dublin was so convinced by it, that he stopped the use of the catechism in his diocese.

Mr. Skelton died May 4, 1787, and was buried near the west door of St. Peter’s church-yard. His character has been in some degree displayed in the preceding sketch taken from his “Life,” by the rev. Samuel Burdy, 1792, 8vo. With the exception of some oddities of conduct and expression, in which he somewhat resembled Swift and Johnson, his life was truly exemplary in all its parts, and his writings deserve to be better known.

, an English antiquary, was born either in London, or in the county of Middlesex, about 1622. He was admitted on the royal foundation at Christ church in Oxford, 1638; but, the rebellion breaking out before he could take any degree, he travelled, and studied in several universities abroad. About 1646, he returned home; and going to Oxford, which at this time ceased to be a garrison, he took both the degrees in arts the same year. He then resumed his travels through France, Italy, Germany, the Spanish Netherlands, and other countries; visited the courts of several princes; frequented the principal universities; and established an acquaintance with the learned in different parts of Europe. On the restoration of the university of Heidelberg, by Charles Lewis, Elector Palatine, he was honoured with a doctor of physic’s degree; and, returning to England, was incorporated into the same at Oxford in 1654. About this time he settled at Lincoln; where, after practising physic with success, he died of a malignant fever, Sept. 5, 1667. Wood says, “He was a person well versed in most parts of learning, understood all books whether old or new, was most skilful in the Oriental tongues, an excellent Grecian, and, in short, a living library.”

He wrote “Prolegomena Etymologica;” “Etymologicon linguae Anglicanae;” “Etymologicon Botanicum;” “Etymologica Expositio vocum forensium;” “Etymoiogicon vocum omnium Anglicarum;” “Etymologicon Onomasticon.” After his death these works, which he had left unfinished, came into the hands of Thomas Henshaw, esq. of Kensington, near London, who corrected, digested, and added to them, his additions being marked with the letter H: and after this, prefixing an epistle to the reader, published them with this title, “Etymologicon Linguae Anglicanse,” &,c. 1671, folio.

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

, an excellent German historian, was born in 1506, at Sleiden, a small town upon the confines of the duchy of Juliers, whence he derived his name. His origin, according to Varillas, was so obscure, that not knowing the name of his father, he adopted that of his birth-place; but this is the report of an enemy, as his father’s name was Philip, and his family not of the lower order. He went through his first studies in his own country, together with the learned John Sturmius, who was born in the same town with himself; and afterwards removed, first to Paris, and then to Orleans, where he studied the law for three years. He took the degree of licentiate in this faculty, but, having always an aversion to the bar, he continued his pursuits chiefly in polite literature. Uporf his return to Paris, he was recommended by his friend Sturmius, in 1535, to John Du Bellay, archbishop and cardinal; who conceived such an affection for him, that he settled on him a pension, and communicated to him affairs of the greatest importance; for Sleidan had a turn for business, as well as letters. He accompanied the ambassador of France to the diet of Haguenan, but returned to Paris, and remained there till it was not safe for him to stay any longer, as he was inclined to the sentiments of the reformers. In 1542 he retired to Strasburg, where he acquired the esteem and friendship of the most considerable persons, and especially of James Sturmius; by whose counsel he undertook, and by whose assistance he was enabled, to write the history of his own time. He was employed in some uegociations both to France and England; and, in one of these journeys, he met with a lady whom he married in 1546. About the same time the princes of the league of Smalcald honoured him with the title of their historiographer, and granted him a pension, and when he lost this by the dissolution of the league in 1547, the republic of Strasburgh gave him another. In 1551, he went, on the part of the republic, to the council of Trent; but, the troops of Maurice, elector of Saxony, obliging that council to break up, he returned to Strasburgh without having transacted any business. He was employed in other affairs of state, when the death of his wife, in 1555, plunged him into a deep melancholy, with such a total loss of memory, as that he did not know his own children. Some imputed this to poison; and others to natural causes. It ended, however, in his death, at Strasburg, Oct. 31, 1556, in the fiftieth year of his age.

He was a learned man, and an excellent writer. In 1555, came out in folio, his “De Statu Religionis & lleipublicie, Carolo Quinto Cajsaie, Commentarii,” in twenty-five books, from 1517, when Luther began to preach, to 1555. This history was quickly translated into almost all the languages of Europe, and has been generally thought to be well and faithfully written, notwithstanding the attempts of Varillas and other popish authors to discredit it. It did not stand solely upon Sleidan’s own authority, which, however, must be of great weight, considering that he wrote of times in which he lived, and of transactions in which he had some concern; but was extracted from public acts and original records, which were in the archives of the town of Strasburg, and with which he was furnished by James Sturmius. Besides this history, which is his principal work, he wrote “De quatuor summis Imperils libri tres,” a compendious chronological account of the four great empires, which, on account of its singular utility, has been often printed. He epitomized and translated into Latin the Histories of Froissart and Philip de Comines, and was the author of some other works relating to history and politics, the principal of which are printed in a volume of “Opuscula,” Hanover, 1608, 8vo.

, a Dutch artist, eminent as a painter of portraits and conversations, was born at Leyden in 1640, and died in 1691. He was a disciple, and zealous imitator of Gerard Douw, whom he is thought in some respects to surpass. The exquisite neatness of his manner compelled him to work very slowly, and he is said to have employed three years in painting a family picture for Mr. Meermans. He imitated nature with exactness, but without taste or selection, yet he is esteemed one of the best of the Flemish painters.

, an eminent physician, naturalist, and benefactor to learning, was born at Killileagh, in the county of Down, in Ireland, April 16, 1660. He was of Scotch extraction, but his father, Alexander Sloane, being at the head of that colony of Scots which king James I. settled in the north of Ireland, removed to that country, and was collector of the taxes for the county of Down, both before and after the Irish rebellion. He died in 1666.

The younger years of sir Hans Sloane were marked by a strong attachment to the works of nature, in the contemplation of which he passed his leisure hours, until his studies of every kind were, in his sixteenth year, interrupted by a spitting of blood, which confined him to his room for three years. When, by strict regimen and abstinence, he had recovered, he studied the preliminary branches of physic in London, particularly chemistry, under Mr. Strafforth, an excellent chemist, who had been pupil to the celebrated Stahl. He also studied his favourite science of botany at Chelsea garden, which was then but just established, and, young as he was, contracted during that time an acquaintance with Boyie and Ray.

After four years thus employed, he visited France for improvement, in company with Mr. (afterwards sir) Tancred llobinson, M. D. (see his life, vol. XXVI.) and another student. At Paris he attended the lectures of Tournefort and Du Verney; and is supposed to have taken his degrees in medicine at Montpellierj some say at Orange. At Montpellier he was recommended by Tournefort to M. Chirac, then chancellor and professor of that university, and by his means to other learned men, particularly Magnol, whom he always accompanied in his botanical excursions, and derived much benefit from his instructions. He returned to London at the latter end of 1684, and immediately went to visit his illustrious friends Boyle and Ray. The latter was now retired and settled at Black Notley in Essex. Dr. Sloane sent him a great variety of plants and seeds, which Ray has described in his “Historia Plantartim,” with proper acknowledgments. At London Dr. Sloane became the favourite of Dr. Sydenham, who took him into his house, and zealously promoted his interest in the way of practice. On Jan. 21, 1685, he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and in April 1687, entered into the college of physicians. Such early advancements in his profession are the strongest presumptions in favour of his superior knowledge, and promising abilities. Yet these flattering prospects he relinquished, to gratify his ardour for natural knowledge.

On September 12, 1687, and in the twenty-eighth year of his age, he embarked for Jamaica, as physician to the duke of Alhemarle; and touched at Madeira, Barbadoes, Nevis, and Nt. Kitt’s. The duke dying Dec. 19th, soon after their arrival at Jamaica, Dr. Sleane’s stay on the island did noc exceed fifteen months. During this time, however, such was his application, that, in the language of his French eulogist, had he not converted, as it were, his minutes into hours, he could not have made those numerous acquisitions, which contributed so largely to extend the knowledge of nature; while they laid the foundation of his future fame and fortune. Dr. Pulteney remarks, that several circumstances concurred respecting Dr. Sloane’s voyage to Jamaica, which rendered it peculiarly successful to natural history. He was the first man of learning, whom the love of science alone had led from England, to that distant part of the globe, and, consequently, the field was wholly open to him. He was already well acquainted with the discoveries of the age. He had an enthusiasm for his object, and was at an age, when both activity of body, and ardour of mind, concur to vanquish difficulties. Under this happy coincidence of circumstances, it is not strange that Dr. Sloane returned home with a rich harvest. In fact, besides a proportional number of subjects from the animal kingdom, he brought from Jamaica, and the other islands they touched at, no fewer than eight hundred different species pf plants, a number very far beyond what had been imported by any individual into England before.

Dr. Sloane returned from his voyage, May 29, 1689, and fixing in London, soon became eminent. In 169-1 he was chosen physician to Christ’s hospital, which station he filled until age and infirmities obliged him to resign in 1730, and although he punctually received every year the emolument of his office, because he would not set a precedent that might be disadvantageous to his successor, he constantly applied the money to the relief of those belonging to the hospital who most wanted it. In the preceding year, 1693, he had been elected secretary to the Royal Society, and had revived the publication of the “Philosophical Transactions,” which had been interrupted from the year 1687. This office he held till 1712, when he was succeeded by Dr. Halley. About the same time, he became an active member of the college of physicians, in promoting the plan of a dispensary for the poor, which was at length carried into execution. The feuds excited on this occasion, by the apothecaries, gave rise to the once celebrated satire by Dr. Garth.

In 1696, Dr. Sloane published the Prodromus to his history of Jamaica plants, under the title of “Catalogus Plantarum quae in insula Jamaica sponte proveniunt,” 8vo. This volume, intrinsically valuable as it is, may yet be considered as only the nomenclature, or systematic index to his subsequent work. The arrangement of the subject is nearly that of Ray, vegetables being thrown into twenty-five large natural classes, or families. Among botanists of that time, generical characters had not attained any remarkable precision; and Sloane, like Plukenet, was little farther anxious, than to refer his new plants to some genus already established, without a minute attention to the parts of fructification, farther than as they formed part pf the character drawn from habit; yet, with this defect, the figures and descriptions of Sloane proved sufficiently accurate to enable his successors to refer almost all his species to the appropriate places in the system of the present clay.

Dr. Sloane began early to form a museum, and it was, by the collections mnde in his voyage, become considerable; but the rera of its celebrity was not until 1702, when it received the augmentation of Mr. Courten’s valuable stores (See Courten). In 1701, Dr. Sloane was incorporated doctor of physic at Oxford, and was associated member of several academies on the continent. In 1707, he published the first volume of his history, under the title of “A Voyage to the islands Madeira, Barbadoes, Nevis, St. Christopher’s, and Jamaica; with the Natural History of the Herbs and Trees, four-footed Beasts, Fishes, Birds,” &c. &c. fol. The introduction of this volume comprehends a general account of the discovery of the West-Indies, and of the island of Jamaica in particular. This is followed by the journal of the voyage. The second volume was not published till 1725, the reasons of which delay were principally the care, arrangement, and description of his museum; to this the collection of Petiver had been added in 1718, which, as it was not preserved with a care equal to the zeal with which Petiver acquired it, demanded extraordinary diligence to recover it from the injury it had sustained. It is in the introduction to this volume that sir Hans gives a general inventory of his library and museum, as it stood in 1725. by which it appears, that the subjects of natural history alone, exclusive of two hundred volumes of preserved plants, amounted to more than 26,200 articles. They were afterwards augmented to upwards of 36,600, as may be seen by “A general view of the contents,” published a year before his death. This second volume completed the vegetable part and the animal kingdom, and the plates are continued to the number of 274. The work was productive of much benefit to science, by exciting an emulation, both in Britain and on the continent.

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

In 1719, sir Hans was elected president of the college of physicians, which station he held sixteen years, and during that time he gave signal proofs of his zeal for the interests of that body. On the death cf sir Isaac Newton, in 1727, he was advanced to the presidency of the Royal Society of London, the interest of which no man had ever more uniformly promoted. He made the society a present of 100 guineas and a bust of the founder, Charles II. Thus, in, the zenith of prosperity, he presided, at the same time, over the two most illustrious scientific bodies in the kingdom; and, while he discharged the respective duties of each station with credit and honour, he also enjoyed the most extensive and dignified employment as a physician. He occupied these important stations from 1719 to 1733, when he resigned the presidency of the college of physicians; and, in 1740, at the age of eighty, that of the Royal Society, the members of which accepted his resignation with reluctance, and at a public meeting returned hira thanks for the great and eminent services he had done them, and requested his permission that his name might remain enrolled among the members of their council, as long as he should live.

Having thus resigned all his public employments, he left London in May 1741, and retired to his house at Chelsea, the manor of which he had purchased in 1712, and to which he removed his museum. Here he received, as in London, the visits of persons of rank, of all learned foreigners, of the royal family, who sometimes did him. that honour; and never refused admittance or advice to any, whether rich or poor, who came to consult him concerning their health. Hitherto his great temperance had preserved him from experiencing the infirmities of old age, but in his ninetieth year, he complained of frequent "pains, and was sensible of an universal decay, the progress of which he bore with complacency, and after an illness of only three days, expired Jan. 11, 1752. He was interred on the 18th at Chelsea, in the same vault with his lady, who died in 1724. She was the daughter of alderman Langley of London, and married to Dr. Sloane in 1695. Of this marriage two daughters only survived him, the eldest of whom was married to George Stanley, esq. of Hampshire, and the younger to lord Cadogan.

Sir Hans Sloane was tall and well made in his person; easy, polite, and engaging in his manners; sprightly in his conversation, and obliging to all. It appears by his correspondence in the British Museum that he was a man. of great benevolence, and from that character, was frequently solicited by distressed persons of all classes, and, as is usual in such cases, by many who abused his bounty. To foreigners he was extremely courteous, and ready to shew and explain his curiosities to all who gave him timely notice' of their visit. He kept an open table once a week for his learned friends, particularly those of the Royal Society. In the aggregation of his vast collection of books, he is said to have sent his duplicates, either to the royal college of physicians, or to the Bodleian library.

He was governor of almost every hospital in London; and to each, after having given 100l. in his life-time, he left a more considerable legacy at his death. He was ever a benefactor to the poor, who felt the consequences of his death severely. He was zealous in promoting the establishment of the colony of Georgia in 1732; and formed himself the plan for bringing up the children in the Foundling hospital in 1739. In 1721 he gave the freehold of the ground at Chelsea, near four acres, on which the botanical garden stood, to the company of apothecaries, on condition chat the demonstrator should, in the name of the company, deliver annually to the Royal Society, fifty new plants, till the number should amount to 2000, all specifically different from each other; the list of which was published yearly in the Philosophical Transactions. The first wa printed in 1722, and the catalogues were continued until 1773, at which time the number 2550 was completed. These specimens are duly preserved in the archives of the society, for the inspection of the curious.

In the exercise of his function as a physician, sir Hans Sloane is said to have been remarkable for the certainty of his prognostics; and the hand of the anatomist verified, in a signal manner, the truth of his predictions relating to the seat of diseases. By his practice he not only confirmed the efHcacy of the Peruvian bark in intermittents, but exied its use in favour of other denominations, in nervous disorders, and in gangrenes and hemorrhages. The sanction he gave to inoculation, by performing that operation on some of the royal family, encouraged, and much accelerated its progress throughout the kingdom. His ointment for the leucoma has not yet lost its credit with many reputable names in physic. He published only the works already mentioned, except his papers in the Philosophical Transactions, which are considerably numerous, and may be found in the volumes XVII to XLIX. His valuable museum, it is well known, formed the foundation of that vast national repository known by the name of the British Museum. Sir Hans was naturally very desirous to prevent his collection being dissipated after his death, and bequeathed it to the public on condition that 20,000l. should be paid by parliament to his family. Parliament accordingly passed an act, in 1753, for the purchase of sir Hans Sloane’s collection, and of the Harleian collection of Mss, and for procuring one general repository for their reception, along with the Cottonian collection, &c. Montague-house, in Russel- street Bloomsbury, was purchased as the repository, and statutes and rules having been formed for the use of the collection, and proper officers appointed, the British Museum was opened for the public in 1759. It were unnecessary to expatiate on the utility of an institution, so well known, so easily accessible, and so highly important to the interests of science and general literature. From the vast additions made of late years, however, it may be worthy of the parliament, as soon as the national finances will permit, to consider of the propriety of an entire new building for this immense collection, the present being much decayed, and, as a national ornament, bearing no proportion to its invaluable contents.

, a mathematician, was born in 1620, at Vise, a small town in the county of Liege. He became abbe of Amas, canon, councillor, and chancellor of Liege, and made his name famous for his knowledge in theology, physics, and mathematics. The Royal Society of London elected him one of their members, and inserted several of his compositions in their Transactions. This very ingenious and learned man died at Liege in 1683, at the age of sixty-three. Of his works there have been published, some learned letters, and a work entitled “Mesolabium et Problemata solida;” besides the following pieces in the Philosophical Transactions: viz. I. Short and easy Method of drawing Tangents to all Geometrical Curves; vol. VII. p. 5143. 2. Demonstration of the same; vol. VIII. pp. 6059, 6119. 3. On the Optic Angle of Alhaz, n vol. VIII. p. 6139.

, bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, was born at Birmingham, were a street bears the name of his family, in 1672, and studied at Magdalen-college, Oxford. Here he took his degrees of M. A. 1694, B. D. 1706, and D. D. in 1708. He was chaplain to archbishop Tenison, and appointed in 1712 treasurer of Landaff, and afterwards prebendary of Hereford. On Feb. 2, 1723, he was consecrated bishop of St. David’s, whence he was translated and confirmed bishop of Lichfield and Coventry Feb. 20, 1730. He entered with spirit into the controversies of his times, particularly against Dodwell and Whiston, the latter in “Reflections on Mr. Whiston’s conduct,” and “Animadversions on the New Arian reproved.” But his great work was “A Vindication of our Saviour’s miracles; in which Mr. Woolston’s Discourses on them are particularly examined; his pretended authority of the fathers against the truth of the literal sense are set in a just light; and his objections, in point of reason, answered,” Lond. 1729, 8vo. This involved him in a controversy with some anonymous writers, and in one or two respects he laid himself open to ridicule by an arithmetical calculation of the precise number of the devils which entered into the swine. Dr. Smalbroke also published eleven single Sermons between 1706 and 1732, and one or two “Charges,” and small controversial pieces to the amount of twenty-two. He died Dec. 22, 1749, in the seventyseventh year of his age, leaving three sons and four daughters. His sons, and other relations, he provided for in the church of Lichfield. His son Richard, the last representative of the family, died in 1805. He had been chancellor of the diocese of Lichfield and Coventry sixty-four years, and was at his death senior member of the college of civilians.

, a learned prelate, was born in 1663,at Lichfield in Staffordshire, where his father followed the business of a dyer, but appears not to have been in opulent circumstances, as he was unable to give his son a liberal education. For this our author was indebted to the celebrated antiquary Ashmole, also a native of Lichfield, who, discerning his capacity, sent him to Westminster-school in 1G78. Here he was soon distinguished as a young man of parts and application, and acquired particular notice by the classical turn of his exercises. Two years after, he wrote two elegies, one in Latin and the other in English, on the death of Lilly, the astrologer, out of gratitude, we are told, to his patron Ashmole, a great admirer of Lilly. Whatever the poetical merit of these elegies, we may say, in reference to the subject, that they would now be thought ironical.

In May 1682, Mr. Smalridge was elected from Westminster-school to Christ-cburcb, Oxford, where having taken his degree of 13. A. at the regular time, he became a tutor, and, what is no inconsiderable proof of the high opinion entertained of his talents, the associate of Aldrich and Atterbury in the controversy against Obadiah Walker, the popish master of University-college. In conjunction with them he published in 1687 “Animadversions on the eight Theses laid down, and the inferences deduced from them, in a discourse entitled ‘ Church Government, Part V.’ lately printed at Oxford.” The object on the part of Smalridge and his colleagues, was to defend the supremacy of the king, against papal usurpations. The discourse mentioned in the title of his performance was printed by Obadiah Walker at his private press, and has for its full title “Church government, Part V. a relation of the English Reformation, and the lawfulness thereof examined by the Theses delivered in the four former parts.” But as these four former parts never were published, Walker, or rather the real author, Abraham Woodhoad, afforded his antagonists just cause for censure, as well as ridicule, since here he was referring for authority to proofs and positions which had never appeared, nor were afterwards produced.

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

Dr. Smalridge, who had long been admired as a preacher, was chosen lecturer of St. Dunstan’s in the West, London, in Jan. 1708, and for some time quitted the university. His early acquaintance with Atterbury had now been improved into a great degree of intimacy and friendship, arising no doubt, from a similarity of sentiments and studies; and in 1710 Dr. Smalridge had an opportunity of giving a public testimony of his regard for Atterbury, by promoting his advancement to the prolocutor’s chair in the lower house of convocation, and presenting him to the upper house, in an elegant speech, which was much admired, and afterwards printed. In this speech he even touches on Atterbury’s warmth in controversy, with considerable delicacy indeed, but in a manner that became one who would not deceive the learned body he was addressing. Smalridge himself was not much of a party man, and studiously avoided an intemperate interference in disputed points respecting either church or state, unless where his principles might be called in question, or his silence misunderstood.

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

Dr. Smalridge, as we have already noticed, in general avoided party connections and party spirit, and amidst much political turbulence, was accounted, and deserved the character of, a man of candour and moderation. He appears to have been on friendly terms with Clarke and Whiston, and contributed to moderate the proceedings of the convention against both. With Clarke he held a dispute on the Trinity at the house of Thomas Cartwright, esq. of Aynho in Northamptonshire, which, however, did not produce the intended effect. Whiston assures us that “if any person in England was able to convince upon that head, it must have been Dr. Smalridge,” both from reading and talents; and therefore we must hesitate in believing what Whiston adds, that “the evidence on Dr. Clarke’s side was greatly superior to the other,” as well as other insinuations which Whiston throws out with great illiberality. His acquaintance, however, with him and Clarke, brought Dr. Smalridge under the suspicion of a fellowship in their Ariun sentiments; but Trelawney, bishop of Winchester, having informed him of this imputation, he vindicated himself in a letter dated from Christ-church, and most explicitly rescued his character from the charge. “I have,” says he, “from the chair (while I supplied Dr. Jane’s place), from the pulpit, in convocation, and upon all other proper occasions, expressed my sentiments about the divinity of our Lord and Saviour, in opposition both to the Socinians and Arians. I did on Sunday last ordain some clergymen, and I examined them particularly as to the points controverted betwixt the Catholic church and the Arians, and said what to me seemed proper to confirm them in the Catholic faith, and to arm them against the objections usually brought by the Arians. I have read over more than once, and, as well as I was able, have considered Dr. Waterland’s lute book, and have in conversation signified my approbation of it, and recommended it to my friends as a substantial vindication of the received doctrines and confutation of Arianism.”

These were almost the words of a dying man, for this letter is dated Sept. 23, 1719, and on the 27th he expired of an apoplexy at Christ-church, and was interred in the aile of the north-side of the choir of that cathedral, where some years afterwards, a handsome monument wns erected to his memory, with an elegant inscription in Latin, most probably by Dr. Freind, his brother-in-law, the bishop and he having married two sisters.

Of Dr. Stnalridge bishop Newton says, he was “truly ft worthy prelate, an excellent scholar, a sound divine, an eloquent preacher, and a good writer both in Latin and English, of great gravity and dignity in his whole deportment, and at the same time of as great complacency and sweetness of manners, a character at once both amiable and venerable. He was so noted for his good temper, that succeeding Dr. Atterbury in the deaneries of Carlisle and Christ-church, he was said to carry die bucket wherewith to extinguish the fires which the other had kindled.”

Newton says the Biographia Britannica is wrong about his family, and “that he left a widow and three children, a son named Philip and two daughters, both sensible clever women. Caroline princess of Wales procured a pension of 300l. a-year for the widow, and a prebend of Worcester for the son, who afterwards received the living of C bristleton near Chester, from sir Roger Mostyn, and had the chancellorship of Worcester conferred upon him by bishop Hough, out of regard to his father’s memory. A subscription too was opened, and nobly promoted for the publication of sixty of the Bishop’s Sermons; some of which, it must be confessed, are unequal to the rest, but it is some excuse that they were never designed for the press.”

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

To Dr. Smalridge’s publications, already mentioned, may be added a volume of twelve “Sermons” printed by himself in 1717, 8vo, and the “Sixty Sermons,” published by his widow in a folio volume, 1726, of which another edition appeared in 1727. The bishop’s widow died in May or June 1729.

, a poet of some, though not the highest celebrity, was born at Shipbourne, in Kent, April 11, 1722. His father was possessed of about three hundred pounds a year in that neighbourhood, and was originally intended for holy orders. Why he did not enter into holy orders, or what occupation he pursued, we are not told, except that at one time he had acted as steward of the Kentish estates of lord Barnard, afterwards earl of Darlington. His mother was a Miss Gilpin, of the family of the celebrated reformer, Bernard Gilpin; an ancestor, by the father’s side. Mr. Peter Smart had been a prebendary of Durham in the reign of Charles the First, and was accounted by the puritan party as the proto-martyr in their cause, having been degraded and deprived of all his ecclesiastical preferments, fined five hundred pounds, and imprisoned eleven years. When restored to liberty by the parliament, he appeared as a witness against archbishop Laud. The particular libel for which he suffered is written in Latin verse, and was published in 1643. This is probably what the author of the life prefixed to Smart’s poems (edit. 1791) calls “an interesting narrative in a pamphlet.” When our poet was at school his father died, and so much in debt, that his widow was obliged to sell the family estate at a considerable loss. As he had, however, received a liberal education, he is said to have communicated to his son a taste for literature, and probably that turn for pious reflection, which appears in many of hispoetical pieces, and was not interrupted with impunity by the irregularities of his life.

Smart was born earlier than the usual period of gestation, and to this circumstance his biographer ascribes that delicacy of constitution which rendered him unequal to the indulgences of men of vigour and gaiety. His taste for poetry is said to have appeared when he was only four years old, in an extempore effusion, which has not been preserved, but which is said to have indicated a relish for verse, and an ear for numbers. He was educated at Maidstone until he was eleven years old, at which time his father died, and his mother was induced to send him to Durham, where he might enjoy the advantages of a good school, change of air, and what in her circumstances became desirable, the notice and protection of his father’s relations. Who they were we are not told, but young Smart was very cordially received at Raby Castle, by lord Barnard, and in this family obtained the friendship of the hon. Mrs. Hope, and the more substantial patronage of the late duchess of Cleveland, who allowed him forty pounds a year until her death, in 1742. His gratitude to these noble personages is amply testified by his “Ode to lord Barnard,” whom he particularly acknowledges as one who encouraged his youthful studies. It was probably owing to the liberality of the same family that, after he had acquired very considerable reputation at Durham school, he was sent to Cambridge, in his seventeenth year, and admitted of Pembroke Hall, Oct. 30, 1739.

At college he was much more distinguished for his poetical efforts and classical taste than for an ambition to excel in the usual routine of academical studies, and soon became a general favourite with such of his contemporaries as were men of gaiety and vivacity. A convivial disposition led him at the same time to associate rather too frequently with men of superior fortune, while pride kept him from avowing his inability to support their expences. His only dependence was what he derived from his college, and the allowance made to him by the duchess of Cleveland. This imprudence involved him in difficulties, from which he probably might have been soon extricated, if it had not induced an habitual neglect of pecuniary matters, which adhered to him throughout life, and a love for convivial enjoyments, which afterwards formed the chief blot in his character. In all other respects, Smart was a man of strict principle, and of blameless conduct.

During the early part of his residence at Cambridge he wrote the Tripos poems, among his works, a species of composition of which it is not often that much notice is taken, but the merit of Smart’s verses was immediately and generally acknowledged. When afterwards, by the advice of his friends, he offered himself as a candidate for an university scholarship, he is said to have translated Pope’s Ode on St. Cecilia’s day into Latin. But this is doubted by his biographer, on account of the length and labour of the composition. He must, however, have executed that translation about this time, as the applause it received induced him to turn his mind to other translations from the same author, and to write to him for his advice or approbation, which produced a correspondence very flattering on both sides. Smart, as a young man, aiming at poetical honours, was gratified with the letters of Pope; and Pope, who was ever alive to extent of fame, was not sorry to find his works introduced on the continent in a classical form. Smart proceeded, accordingly, to translate the “Essay on Criticism,” of all Pope’s writings, perhaps the most unfit for the purpose; but it brought him into some reputation with scholars.

In 1743, he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of arts; and July 3, 1745, was elected a fellow of Pembroke hall. About this time, he wrote a comedy, of which a fevr songs only remain; and a ludicrous soliloquy of the Princess Periwinkle, preserved in the Old Woman’s Magazine. The play was called “A Trip to Cambridge, or the Grateful Fair.” The business of the drama, says his biographer, “was laid in bringing up an old country baronet to admit his nephew a fellow commoner at one of the colleges in, which expedition a daughter or niece attended. In their approach to the seat of the Muses, the waters from a heavy rain happened to be out at Fenstauton, which gave a youug student of Emmanuel an opportunity of shewing his gallantry as he was riding out, by jumping from his horse and plunging into the flood to rescue the distressed damsel, who was near perishing in the stream, into which she had fallen from her poney, as the party travelled on horseback. The swain being lucky enough to effect his purpose, of course gained an interest in the lady’s heart, and an acquaintance with the rest of the family, which he did not fail to cultivate on their arrival at Cambridge, with success as far as the fair one was concerned. To bring about the consent of the father (or guardian, fur my memory is not accurate), it was contrived to have a play acted, of which entertainment he was highly fond; and the Norwich company luckily came to Cambridge just at that time; only one of the actors had been detained on the road; and they could not perform the plav that night, unless the baronet would consent to take apart; which, rather than be disappointed of his favourite amusement, he was prevailed upon to do, especially as he was assured that it would amount to nothing more than sitting at a great table, and signing an instrument, as a justice of peace might sign a warrant: and having been some years of the quorum, he felt himself quite equal to the undertaking. The tinder-play to he acted by the Norwich company on this occasion, was the ‘ Bloody War of the King of Diamonds with the King of Spades;’ and the actors in it came on with their respective emblems on their shoulders, taken from the suits of the cards they represented. The baronet was the king of one of the parties, and in signing a declaration of war, signed his consent to the marriage of his niece or daughter, and a surrender of all her fortune.” This farce vvas acted at Pembroke-college-hall, the parlour of which made the green-room.

In 1747, Smart took the degree of master of arts, and became a candidate for the Seatonian prize, which was adjudged to himfor five years, four of them in succession. The Mibjects of his poems were, “The Eternity,” March 5, 1750. “The Immensity,” April 20, 1751. “The Omniscience,” Nov. 1, 1752. “The Power,” Dec. 5, 1753. and “The Goodness of the Supreme Being,” Oct. 28, 1755. It is probable he might have succeeded in the year 1754, but his thoughts were for some time diverted by an important change in his situation. In 1753 he quitted college. on his marriage with Miss Ann-Maria Carnan, the daughter by a former husband of Mary wife of the hue worthy Mr. John Newbery. He had been introduced to this gentleman’s family by Dr. Burney, the celebrated author of the History of Music, who composed several of Smart’s songs, and enriched the coilection of his works published in 1791 with some original compositions not generally known tobelong to our poet. Before this time, Smart had occasionally visited London, and had relinquished the prospects of any regular profession. In 1751 he published his Seatonian poem on the “Immensity of the Supreme Being:” and about the same time appears to have been engaged with Newbery in a general scheme of authorship. He had a ready turn for original composition, both in prose and verse, and as Newbery projected many works in the form of periodical miscellanies, must have been an useful coadjutor. During the years 1750 and 1751 he was a frequent contributor to the “Student, or Oxford and Cambridge Miscellany,” and carried on at the same time “The Midwife, or the Old Woman’s Magazine,” a small periodical pamphlet, which was published in three-penny numbers, and was afterwards collected into three volumes, 12mo. Smart and Newbery were almost the sole writers in this last work, which consists of short pieces in prose and verse, mostly of the humorous kind, and generally in a style of humour which in our more polished days would be reckoned somewhat coarse.

During the publication of the “Midwife,” he wrote the prologue and epilogue to Othello, when acted at Drurylane theatre by the Delaval family and their friends. Of the importance of this prologue and epilogue he had so high an opinion, that when he published them, in March 1751, he added a solemn notice of their being entered in the hallbook of the stationers’ company, and threatened to prosecute all persons who should pirate them, or any part of them. As he affected to conceal his share in the “Midwife,” he permits that old lady to copy these articles “because a work of merit printed in that Magazine is as a brilliant set in gold, and increased, not diminished, in its lustre.” He was now acquiring the various arts of puffing, and he ever preserved a much higher opinion of his works than even his best friends could allow to be just. Among other schemes, to which it is to be regretted a man of talents should descend, we find him about the beginning of 1752, endeavouring to amuse the town with a kind of farcical performance, called the “Old Woman’s Oratory,” intended partly to ridicule orator Henley’s buffooneries, and partly to promote the sale of the Old Woman’s Magazine. In neither of these was he very successful; the magazine was soon discontinued for want of encouragement, and Henley was a man whose absurdities could be heightened only by himself.

Notwithstanding these pursuits, Smart’s pleasing manners and generally inoffensive conduct procured him the friendship of Johnson, Garrick, Dr. James, Dr. Burney, and other men of literary eminence in that day. Garrick afterwards evinced his liberality, when Smart was in distress, by giving him the profits of a free benefit at Drury-lane theatre, and that it might be the more productive, introduced for the first time the short drama of the “Guardian,” in which he appeared in a principal character. Lord Delaval also, to whom Smart had been private tutor at Cambridge, and his brother, sir Francis, were among his friends, and it was at their request he wrote the prologue and epilogue to Othello. In 1752, he published a collection of his poems in 4to, in an elegant and rather expensive form, and although they not only received the praise due to them, but the very flattering decision that in point of genius he might rank with Gray and Mason, yet as this opinion was qualified by some objections, he immediately became the implacable enemy of reviews and reviewers. He supposed at the same time, what we believe is very improbable, that Dr. (afterwards sir) John Hill was the author of the criticism on his poems in the Monthly Review, and determined to take his fevenge for this and other offences committed by Hill, by publishing a poem which had been written previously to this affair, entitled “The Hilliad.” Of this, book first made its appearance accordingly in the beginning of the year 1753.

“The Hilliad,” which is perhaps one of the most bitter satires ever published, would afford a very unfavourable opinion of our author’s character, had it not been an attack on a man who had rendered himself ridiculous and contemptible by practising with unblushing effrontery every species of literary and medical quackery. According to Smart, Hill gave the first public provocation, in one of his “Inspectors,” where he accuses Smart of ingratitude. Hill alledged that he had been the cause of Smart’s being brought up to town; that he had been at all times his friend, and had supported his character; and, long before he appeared as “Inspector,” he spoke well of those pieces, on the merit of which Smart’s fortune at that time depended; he hints also among other favours, that he had been the means of introducing him to Newbery; and for all this, the only return Smart made was by an abusive poem, “a long elaborate work, which he has read at alehouses and cyder cellars, and if any bookseller will run the risk, will publish.” To this heavy accusation, Smart pleaded not guilty in totOy solemnly declaring in an advertisement in the Daily Gazetteer, that he never received the least favour from Hill, directly or indirectly, unless an invitation to dinner, which he never accepted, might be reckoned such. He denied at the same time having ever been in his company but twice, the first time at Mr. Newbery’s, the second at Vauxhall gardens; and asserts that Hill had been his enemy as much as it was in his power, particularly in the “Impertinent,” another of his papers, in which he abuses not only Smart, but Fielding, who was his particular friend. This declaration was corroborated by an advertisement from honest Newbery, who adds that he introduced Smart to Hill, six months after the former had engaged with himself (Newbery) in business, when they met as perfect strangers. With respect to Hill’s assertion that he had been the means of introducing Smart to Mr. Newbery, the latter declares it to be an absolute falsehood.

The truth was, that Hill pretended to take the part of our poet in the “Inspector,” which he was known to write, while he abused him in the “Impertinent,” the author of which, he flattered himself, was not known. But it was among the misfortunes of this arch-quack, although advantageous to the public, that whatever disguise he put on was always too thin to elude the penetration of his contemporaries. This trick in particular had been discovered by the reviewer of books in the Gentleman’s Magazine five months before the “Inspector” appeared in which he accused Smart of ingratitude. We are not therefore to wonder that the discovery of such malignant hypocrisy stimulated Smart to write “The Hilliad,” which, it appears, he first read or circulated in manuscript among his friends. But whatever praise they bestowed on the genius displayed in this satire, they were not pleased that he had involved himself in a war of obloquy with one whom to conquer was to exceed in the worst part of his character; and Smart probably listened to their opinions, for he published no more of the Hilliad. Hill had the credit of writing a Smartiad, which served no other purpose than to set off the merit of the other.

In 1754, Smart published the Seatonian prize poem ou the “Power,” and in 1756, that on the “Goodness of the Supreme Being; and in the same year, his” Hymn to the Supreme Being,“on recovery from, a dangerous, fit of illness, which illness seems to have filled up the space between the years 1754 and part of 1756.” Though the fortune,“says his hiographer,” as well as the constitution of Mr. Smart, required the utmost care, he was equally negligent in the management of both, and his various and repeated embarrassments acting upon an imagination uncommonly fervid, produced temporary alienations of mind; which at last were attended with paroxysms so violent and continued as to render confinement necessary. In this melancholy state, his family, for he had now two children, must have been much embarrassed in their circumstances, but for the kind friendship and assistance of Mr. Newbery. Many other of Mr. Smart’s acquaintance were likewise forward in their services; and particularly Dr. Samuel Johnson, who, on the first approaches of Mr Smart’s malady, wrote several papers for a periodical publication in which that gentleman was concerned, to secure his claim to a share in the profits of it."

The publication alluded to, was the “Universal Visitor and Memorialist,” published by Gardner, a bookseller in the Strand. Smart, and Holt, a political writer, are said to have entered into an engagement to write for this magazine, and for no other work whatever; for this they were to have a third of the profits, and the contract was to be binding for ninety-nine years. In Boswt-Il’s Life of Johnson, we find this contract discussed with more gravity than it seems to deserve. It was probably a contrivance of Gardner’s to secure the services of two irregular men for a certain period. Johnson, however, wrote a few papers for our poet, “not then,” he added, “knowing the terms on which Smart was engaged to write, and thinking I was doing him good. I hoped his wits would soon return to him. Mine returned to me, and I wrote in the Universal Visitor no longer.” The publication ceased in about two years from its commencement.

Smart’s madness, according to Dr. Johnson’s account, discovered itself chiefly in unnecessary deviations from the usual modes of the world, in things ibat are not improper in themselves. He would fall upon his knees and say his prayers in the street, or in any unusual place, and insisted on people praying with him. His habits were also remark, ably slovenly, but he had not often symptoms of dangerous lunacy, and the principal reason of his confinement was to give his constitution a chance of recovering from the eifr cts of intemperance. After his release, when his mind appeared to be in some measure restored, he took a pleasant lodging in the neighbourhood of St. James’s park, and conducted his affairs for some time with prudence. He was maintained partly by his literary occupations, and partly by the generosity of his friends, receiving-, among other benefactions, fifty pounds a year from the treasury, but by whose interest his biographer has not been able to discover. In 1757 he published a prose translation of the works of “Horace.” From this performance he could derive little fame. He professes, indeed, that he had been encouraged to think that such a translation would be useful to those who are desirous of acquiring or recovering a competent knowledge of the Latin tongue, but the injury done to learners by literal translations was at this time too generally acknowledged to allow him the full force of this apology.

In what manner he lived for some time after this, we are not told. It was in 1759 thatGarrick gave him the profits of a benefit before mentioned, when it appears that he was again involved in pecuniary distresses. In 1763, he published “A Soug to David,” in which there are some passages of more majestic animation than in any of his former pieces, and others in which the expression is mean, and the sentiments unworthy of the poet or the subject. These inequalities will not, however, surprize the reader when he is told that this piece was composed by him during his confinement, when he was debarred the use of pen, ink, and paper, and was obliged to indent his lines with the end of a key, upon the wainscot. This poem was not admitted into the edition of his works published in 1791, but a fragment has been printed in the late edition of the English Poets.

In the same year he published a small miscellany of “Poems on several occasions,” at the conclusion of which he complains again of the reviewers, and betrays that irritability of self-conceit which is frequently observed to precede, and sometimes to accompany derangement of mind. In other respects these poems added little to his fame, and, except one or two, have not been reprinted. In 1764, he published “Hannah,” an oratorio, the music of which was composed by Worgan, and -soon after in the same year, “An Ode to tht Earl of Northumberland,” on his bein<r appointed lord lieutenant of Ireland, with some other pieces. In all these his imagination, although occasionally fine, went often into wild excesses, and evinced that his iniiui had never recovered its sober tone. In his intervals of health and regularity, he still continued to write, and although he perhaps formed too high an opinion of his effusions, he spared no labour when employed by the booksellers, and formed, in conjunction with them, many schemes of literary industry which he did not live to accomplish. In 1765, he published “A Poetical Translation of the Fables of PliEedrus,” with the appendix of Gudius, and an accurate original text on the opposite page. This translation appears to be executed with neatness and fidelity, but has never become popular. His “Translation of the Psalms,” which followed in the same year, affords a melancholy proof of want of judgment and decay of powers. Many of his psalms scarcely rise above the level of Sternhold and Hopkins, and they had the additional disadvantage of appearing at the same time with Merrick’s more correct and chaste translation. In 1767, our poet republished his Horace, with a metrical translation, in which, although we find abundance of inaccuracies, irregular rhymes and redundancies, there are some passages conceived in the true spirit of the original.

His last publication, in 1768, exhibited a more striking proof of want of judgment than any of his late performances. It was entitled “The Parables of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. Done into familiar verse, with occasional applications for the use of younger minds,” This was dedicated to Master Bonnel George Thornton, a child of three years old, and is written in that species of verse which would be tolerated only in the nursery. In what manner he lived during his latter years, his biographer has not informed us; but at length he was confined for debt in the King’s-bench prison, the rules of which were obtaiued for him by his brother-in-law, Mr. Thomas Carnan. Here he died after a short illness occasioned by a disorder in his liver, May 18, 1770, leaving two daughters, who, with his widow, were long settled at Reading, and by their prudent management of the.bookselling trade, transferred to them by the late Mr. John Newbery, were enabled to maintain a very respectable rank in life.

In 1791, a collection of his poetical pieces was formed, to which were prefixed some memoirs of his life collected from his relations. Of these much use has been nade in the present sketch, but it has been found necessary to employ considerable research in supplying the want of proper dates, and other circumstances illustrative of the literary character of a man who, with all his failings, had many amiable qualities. Of his personal character, the following particulars yet remain to he added from the Memoirs.

"His piety was exemplary and fervent; it may not be uninteresting to the reader to be told, that Mr. Smart, in composing the religious poems, was frequently so impressed with the sentiment of devotion, as to write particular passages on his knees. He was friendly, affectionate, and liberal to excess; so as often to give that to others, of which he was in the utmost want himself; he was also particularly engaging in conversation, when his first shyness was worn away; which he had in common with literary men, but in a very remarkable degree. Having undertaken to introduce his wife to my lord Darlington, with whom he was well acquainted; he had no sooner mentioned her name to his lordship, than he retreated suddenly, as if stricken with a panic, from the room, and from the house, leaving her to follow overwhelmed with confusion. As an instance of the wit of his conversation, the following extemporary spondaic, descriptive of the three Bedels of the university, who were at that time all very fat men, is still remembered by his academical acquaintance.

As a poet, Smart exhibits indubitable proofs of genius, but few of a correct taste, and appears to have seldom exercised much labour, or employed cool judgment in preparing his works for the public. Upon the whole, therelore, he is most successful in his lighter pieces, his Odes, Songs, and Fables. His Fables are entitled to high praise, for ease of versification and delicacy of humour, and although he may have departed from the laws which some critics have imposed on this species of composition, by giving reason to inanimate objects, it will be difficult by any laws to convince the reader that he ought not to be delighted with the “Tea-pot and the Scrubbing Brush,” the “Bag-wig, and the Tobacco-pipe,” or the “Brocaded gown and the Linen rag.”

In his religious poems, written for the Seatonian prize, there is much to commend, and where we are most disposed to blame, the fault perhaps is in the expectation that such subjects can be treated with advantage. In the preface to his Ode to St. Cecilia, he allows that “the choosing too high subjects has been the ruin of many a tolerable genius;” and Dr. Johnson, with majestic energy, remarks, that “whatever is great, desirable, or tremendous, is comprized in the name of the Supreme Being. Omnipotence cannot be exalted; Infinity cannot be amplified; Perfection cannot be improved.” Of this Smart seems to have been aware, although ambition and interest, neither illaudable in his circumstances, prompted him to make an attempt, in which, whatever his success, he was allowed to excel his rivals.

, a very celebrated mechanic and civil engineer, was born May 28, 1724, at Austhorpe near Leeds, where his relations still reside. From his early childhood he discovered a strong propensity to the arts in which he afterwards excelled, was more delighted in talking with workmen than in playing with other boys; and surprised, or occasionally alarmed his friends by mechanical efforts disproportioned to his years; sometimes being at the summit of a building to erect a kind of mill, and sometimes at the side of a well, employed in the construction of a pump. When he was about fourteen or fifteen he had constructed a lathe to turn rose-woik, and presented many of his friends with specimens of its operation in wood and ivory. “In the year 1742,” says his biographer, “I spent a month at his father’s house, and being intended myself for a mechanical employment, and a few years younger than he was, J could not but view his works with astonishment. He forged his iron and steel, and melted his metal; he had tools of every sort for working in wood, ivory, and metals. He had made a lathe by which he had cut a perpetual screw in brass, a thing little known at that day, and which, I believe, was the invention of Mr. Henry Hindley of York, with whom I served my apprenticeship. Mr. Hindley was a man of the most communicative disposition, a great lover of mechanics, and of the most fertile genius. Mr. Srneaton soon became acquainted with him, and they spent many a night at Mr. Hindley ‘s house, ’till day-light, conversing on those subjects.”

The father of Mr. Stneaton was an attorney, and wished to bring him up to the same profession. Mr. Smeaton therefore, came up to London in 1742, and attended the courts in Westminster-hull; but, finding that the law did not suit the bent of his genius, he wrote a strong memorial on the subject to his father, who had the good sense to allow him from that time to pursue the path which nature pointed for him. Early in 1750 he had lodgings in Turnstile, Holborn, and was commencing the business of a mathematical-instrument-maker. In 1751 be invented a machine to measure a ship’s way at sea, and a compass of peculiar construction, touched by Dr. Knight’s artificial magnets: and made two voyages with Dr. Knight, to ascertain the merit of his contrivances. In 1753 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society, and the number of his papers inserted in the Transactions of that body sufficiently evinces how highly he deserved that distinction. In 1759 he received, by an unanimous vote, their gold medal, for his pape/ entitled “An Experimental Enquiry concerning the natural Powers of Wind and Water to turn Mills, and other MacJiines depending on a circular Motion.” This paper, he says, was the result of experiments made on working models, in 1752 and 1753, but not communicated to the society till 1759; before which time he had not an opportunity of putting the effect of these experiments into real practice, in a variety of cases, and for various purposes, so as to assure the society that he had found them to answer. These experiments discovered that wind and water could be made to do one-third more than was before known, and they were made, we may observe, in his 27th anil 28th years.

In 1754 he visited Holland, and travelling on foot, or in the trechschuyts, made himself acquainted with most of the works of art in the Low Countries. In December 1752 the Eddystone lighthouse was burned down, and Mr. Smeaton was recommended to the proprietor, by lord Macclesfield, then president of the Royal Society, as the person best qualified to rebuild it. This great work he undertook immediately, and completed it in the summer of 1759. An ample and most interesting account is given of the whole transaction in a folio volume, published by himself, in 1791, entitled “A narrative of the building and a description of the construction of the Eddystone Lighthouse with stone, to which is subjoined an Appendix, giving some account of the Lighthouse on the Spurn Point, built upon a sand. By John Smeaton, civil engineer, F. R. S.” This publication may be considered as containing an accurate history of four years of his life, in which the originality of his genius, with his great alacrity, industry, and perseverance, are fully displayed. It contains also an account of the former edifices constructed in that place, and is made, by the ingenuity of the writer, an entertaining, as well as an instructive work.

Indeed his building the Eddystone lighthouse, were there no other monument of his fame, would establish his character. The Eddystone rocks have obtained their name from the great variety of contrary sets of the tide or current in their vicinity. They are situated nearly S. S. W. from the middle of Plymouth Sound. Their distance from the port of Plymouth is about 14 miles. They are almost in the line which joins the Start and the Lizard points; and as they lie nearly in the direction of vessels coasting up and down the channel, they were unavoidably, before the establishment of a lighthouse there, very dangerous, and often fatal to ships. Their situation with regard to the Bay of Biscay and the Atlantic is such, that they lie open to the swells of the bay and ocean, from all the southwestern points of the compass; so that all the heavy seas from the south-west quarter come uncontrolled upon the Eddystone rocks, and break upon them with the utmost fury. Sometimes, xvhen the sea is to all appearance smooth and even, and its surface unruffled by the slightest breeze, the ground swell meeting the slope of the rocks, the sea beats upon them in a frightful manner, so as not only to obstruct any work being done on the rock, or even landing upon it, when, figuratively speaking, you might go to sea in a walnut-shell. That circumstances fraught with danger surrounding it should lead mariners to wish for a lighthouse, is not wonderful; but the danger attending the erection leads us to wonder that any one could be found hardy enough to undertake it. Such a man was first found in the person of Mr. H. Winstanley, who, in 3696, was furnished by the Trinity-house with the necessary powers. In 1700 it was finished; but in the great storm of November 1703, it was destroyed, and the projector perished in the ruins. In 1709 another, upon a different construction, was erected by a Mr. lludyerd, which, in 1755, was unfortunately consumed by fire. The next building was under the direction of Mr. Smeaton, who, having considered the errors of the former constructions, has judiciously guarded against them, and erected a building, the demolition of which seems little to be dreaded, unless the rock on which it is erected should perish with it. But although Mr. Saieaton completed the building of the Eddystone lighthouse in a manner that did him so much credit, it does not appear that he soon got into full business as a civil engineer; for in 17G4, while he was in Yorkshire, he offered himself a candidate for the place of one of the receivers of the Derwentvvater Restate. This place was conferred upon him at a full board in Greenwich hospital, the last day of the same year, notwithstanding a powerful opposition. He was very serviceable in it, by improving the mills, and the estates belonging to the hospital; but in 1775 his private business was so much increased that he wished to resign, though he was prevailed upon to hold it two years longer. He was now concerned in many important public works. He made the river Calcler navigable; a work that required great skill and judgment, on account of the very impetuous floods to which that river is liable. He planned and superintended the execution of the great canal in Scotland, which joins the two seas; and was supposed to prevent the falling of Londonbridge, when that event was apprehended, on the opening of the great arch. In 1771 he became joint proprietor, with his friend Mr. Holmes, of the works for supplying Greenwich and Deptford with water, an undertaking which they succeeded in making useful to the public and beneficial to the proprietors, which it had never been before. Mr. Smeaton, in the course of his employments, constructed a vast variety of mills, to the entire satisfaction and great advantage of the owners; and he improved whatever he took under his consideration, of the mechanical or philosophical kind. Among many instances of this, we may mention his improvements in the air-pump, the pyrometer, the hygrometer, and the steam engine. He was constantly consulted in parliament, and frequently in the courts of law on difficult questions of science; and his strength of judgment, perspicuity of expression, and strict integrity, always appeared on those occasions to the highest advantage. About 1785, finding his health begin to deciinej Mr. Smeaton wished as much as possible to withdraw himself from business, and to employ his leisure in drawing up and publishing an account of his principal inventions and works. His narrative of the Eddystone lighthouse, already mentioned, was a part of this design, and the only part which he was able to complete. Notwithstanding his wish to retire from business, he could not resist the solicitation of his frit'nd Mr. Aubert, then chairman of the trustees for Ram&gate harbour, to accept the place of engineer to that harbour; and the improvements actually made, as well as his report published by the trustees in 179l, evince the attention which he paid to that important business.

On the 16th of September 1792, Mr. Smeaton was suddenly struck with paralysis, as he was walking in his garden at Austhorpe, and remaining in a very infirm state, though in full possession of his faculties, died on the 28th of the ensuing month. The character of this celebrated engineer may properly be given in the words of his friend Mr. Holmes. “Mr. Smeaton had a warmth of expression, that might appear to those who did not know him to border on harshness, but those more intimately acquainted with him, knew it arose from the intense application of his mind, which was always in the pursuit of truth, or engaged in investigating difficult subjects. He would sometimes break out hastily, when any thing was said that did not tally with his ideas; and he would not give up any tiling he argued for, till his mind was convinced by sound reasoning. In all the social duties of life, he was exemplary; he was a most affectionate husband, a good father, a warm, zealous, and sincere friend, always ready to assist those he respected, and often before it was pointed out to him in what way he could serve them. He was a lover and encourager of merit, wherever he found it; and many men are in a great measure indebted for their present situation to his assistance and advice. As a companion he was always entertaining and instructive; and none could spend their time in his company without improvement.” As a man,“adds Mr. H.” I always admired and respected him, and his memory will ever be most dear to me." A second edition of his narrative of the Eddystone, was published in 1793, under the revisal of his friend Mr. Aubert: but without any addition. The papers of Mr. Smeaton were purchased of his executors by sir Joseph Banks, under the voluntary promise of accounting to them, for the profits of whatever should be published. Accordingly under the inspection of a society of civil engineers, founded originally by Mr. Smeaton, three 4to volumes of his reports have been published 1797, &c. with a life prefixed. During many years of his life, Mr. Smeaton was a constant attendant on parliament, his opinion being continually called for. And here his natural strength of judgment and perspicuity of expression had their full display. It was his constant practice, when applied to, to plan or support any measure, to make himself fully acquainted with it, and be convinced of its merits, before he would be concerned in it. By this caution, joined to the clearness of his description, and the integrity of his heart, he seldom failed having the bill he supported carried into an ad of parliameut. No person was heard with more attention, nor had any one ever more confidence placed in his testimony. In the courts of law he had several compliments paid to him from the bench, by the late lord Mansfield and others, on account of the new light he threw upon difficult subjects.

, M. D. an eminent accoucheur, was a native of Scotland, and after some practice in his country, settled in the early part of the last century in London. He was principally celebrated as a teacher, having instructed, as he informs us in his practice, nearly a thousand pupils, who assisted, whilst attending his lectures, eleven hundred and fifty poor women. The women were supported, by a subscription among the pupils, during their lying-in. Dr. Smellie was the first writer who considered the shape and size of the female pelvis, as adapted to the head of the foetus, and who ascertained the position of the latter during the period of gestation; and his opinion has been confirmed by later writers, particularly by Dr. Hunter, who had several opportunities of dissecting women who died undelivered, at different periods of their pregnancy. He also introduced many improvements in delivery and in the use of instruments, and abolished many superstitious notions, and erroneous customs, that prevailed in the management of women in labour, and of the children; and he had the satisfaction to see the greater part of his maxims adopted, not only in this island, but by the most respectable practitioners in the greater part of Europe.

In 1752 he published his lectures; having spent, as he says, six years in digesting and improving them, under the title of a “Treatise of Midwifery,” in one volume, 8vo. This was followed in 1754, by a volume of cases, intended to illustrate the method of practice recommended in the treatise. These were very soon translated into French by Mons. Preville, who assigns as a motive for the undertaking, the high character the author enjoyed on the continent. Smellie mentions, in the preface to his volume of cases, his intention of publishing a second volume, to contain a collection of cases in preternatural Jabours, which would complete his plan. This volume did not appear until about five years after his death, namely, in 17G8. “Some years ago,” the editor says, “the author retired from business in London, to his native country, where he employed his leisure hours in methodizing and revising his papers, and in finishing his collection of cases for this publication. The manuscript was transmitted to the person who prepared the two former volumes for the press, and even delivered to the printer, when the doctor died advanced in years, in 1763, at his own house near Lanerk in North Britain. This, with the two former volumes,” the editor continues to say, “we may venture to call a complete system of midwifery. It is the fruit of forty years experience, enriched with an incredible variety of practice, and contains directions and rules of conduct to be observed in every case that can possibly occur in the exercise of the obstetric art; rules that have not been deduced from the theory of a heated imagination, but founded on solid observation, confirmed by mature reflection, and reiterated experience.” This opinion of the merit of the author, and his work, has been confirmed by the general suffrage of the public.

In 1754, this author published a set of “Anatomical tables,” with explanations, and an abridgment of his practice of midwifery, with a view to illustrate still farther his treatise on that subject. The plates are thirty-six in number, large folio. The figures are of the size of nature, and principally taken from subjects prepared for the purpose. Twenty-five of them were drawn and engraved by M. Rymsdyke. In forming the remaining eleven, the author acknowledges he received considerable assistance from the late professor Camper.

This author had the fate of almost all ingenious men, to excite the indignation of some of his contemporaries. The most formidable of these wasDr. William Burton, practitioner of midwifery at York, who- attacked him with great acrimony; and Dr. William Douglas, who styles himself physician extraordinary to the prince of Wales, and manmidwife, addressed two letters to Dr. Smellie, in 1748, accusing him of degrading the profession, by teaching midwifery at a very low price, and giving certificates to pupils who had only attended him a few weeks, by which means the number of practitioners was enormously multiplied, and many improper persons admitted. Apothecaries, he says, resorted to the doctor, from various parts of the country, and at the end of two or three weeks, returned to their shops, armed with diplomas signed by the professor, attesting their proficiency in the art. These were framed and hung up in the most conspicuous parts of their houses, and were, without doubt, surveyed with veneration by their patients. “In your bills,” he says, “you set forth that you give a universal lecture in midwifery for half a guinea, or four lectures for a guinea.” In these universal lectures, the whole mystery of the art was to be unfolded. He charges him also with hanging out a paper lanthorn, with the words “Midwifery taught here for five shillings,” each lecture, we presume. This was certainly an humiliating situation for a man of so much real merit. Dr. Douglas relates these cases, in which he contends that Smellie had acted unscientifically; and particularly says, that he suffered one of the women to die by not giving timely assistance. To the charges of mal-practice, Dr. Smellie answered, by giving a full recital of the cases, and referred to Dr. Sands, and other practitioners, who attended with him. His answer was so satisfactory, that Dr. Douglas retracted his charges in his second letter. On the other points, Smellie was silent. It is probable, that, having practised the first nineteen years at a small town in Scotland, where medical fees may be supposed to be low, he might not think the price he demanded for his instructions so insignificant and inadequate as it really was. Smellie is said to have been coarse in his penron, and aukward and unpleasing in his manners, so that he never rose into any great estimation among persons of rank. On the other hand, he appears to have had an active and ingenious mind, with a solid understanding and judgment. He had a peculiar turn to mechanics, which was evinced by the alterations he made in the forceps, crotchets, and scissors, which all received considerable improvements under his hands; but this was more particularly shewn by the elegant construction of his phantoms, or machines, on which he demonstrated the various positions of the foetus in utero, and the different species of labour. That he was candid and modest appears through every page of his works; ready on all occasions to acknowledge the merit of others, and when correcting their errors assuming no superiority over them. We will conclude this account with the words of one of his pupils, who appears to have been well acquainted with his disposition and manners. “No man was more ready than Dr. Smellie to crave advice and assistance when danger or difficulty occurred, and no man was more communicative, without the least self-sufficiency or ostentation. He never officiously intermeddled in the concerns of others, or strove to insinuate himself into practice by depreciating the character of his neighbour; but made his way into business by the dint of merit alone, and maintained his reputation by the most benelicent and disinterested behaviour.”

, a naturalist of some eminence, was born in the Pleasaunce, one of the suburbs of the city of Edinburgh, in 1740. His father, Alexander Smellie, was a master-builder and stone-mason, and a good classical scholar. William was educated at a school in the village of Duddingstone, near his paternal residence, and, when about twelve years old, was bound apprentice to Messrs. Hamilton, Balfour, and Neil, printers in Edinburgh, for the term of six years and a half. Such was his diligence and attention to the business, tHat, two years before the expiration of his apprenticeship, he was intrusted with the correction of the press, and during this time he attended some of the classes of the university. Tn 1757 the Edinburgh Philosophical Society having offered a prize for the most accurate edition of a Latin classic, Mr. Smellie, his biographer says, printed an edition of Terence, to which the prize was adjudged. It was published in 1758, and is mentioned by Dr. Harvvood and his successors in Classical Bibliography, as an immaculate edition; but they mention it as printed by Messrs. Hamilton, Balfour, and Neil, without any notice of Smellie. His biographer’s account is, that when the prize was offered, “Mr. Smellie, in the name of his masters, became a competitor, and produced an edition of Terence, in duodecimo, the whole of which he set up and corrected himself, and for which the prize (a silver medal) was awarded to his masters I” The fact we suspect to be, tlut his masters procured a correct text of Ten nee, prepared for the press by some scholar, and employed their apprentice to execute the mechanical part of composing and correcting the errors of the press. The ediiion itself is certainly a very beautiful piece of typography.

In April 1759, when Mr. Smellie’s apprenticeship expired, he entered into an engagement with Messrs. Murray and Cochrane, printers in Edinburgh, to correct the press, and collect articles for the “Scots Magazine,” printed by them, &e. In this employment he continued until 1765, when he entered into business as a printer on his own account. While in the service of Messrs. Murray, he employed his leisure time in attending the university lectures, on literature in general, and on medicine, botany, chemistry, &c. To the study of natural history he became early attached: and in 1760 had collected an extensive series of plants, which he presented to Dr. Hope, then professor of botany. He afterwards, in 1764, gained a prize medal for a “Dissertation on the sexes of Plants,” in opposition to the opinions of Linnæus. The substance of this he published in the first volume of his “Philosophy of Natural History.” While he attended the bojtanical lectures, they were interrupted by Dr. Hope’s confinement in consequence of a hurt; and on this occasion the doctor was so sensible of Mr. Smellie’s abilities, that he requested him ts> continue the lectures during his absence, which Mr. Smellie did for about, six weeks, to the entire satisfaction of his fellow-students.

An honour like this, for an honour it certainly was, could not fail to make his abilities known and his friends began now to solicit him to follow one of the learned professions-, but this he declined. He had indeed gone through a complete course o; studies connected with medicine, but the only result of his labour was the assistance he gave Dr. Buchan in the compilation of that very popular work, “Domestic Medicine,” first published in 1770. In 1765, as before noticed, he commenced business as a printer with Messrs. William and Robert Auld; and about two years after Mr. John Balfour was added to the firm, but before 1771 the Messrs. Auld had quitted it.

One of Mr. Sinellie’s earliest literary schemes was the first edition of the “Encyclopaedia Britannica,” 3 vols. 4to, published in 1771. Of this he composed, or compiled, the principal articles, and superintended the whole; for which he received the sum of 2007. from the proprietors; but he declined taking any concern in the second or subsequent editions. In 1773, in conjunction with Dr. Gilbert Stuart, he engaged in a new monthly work, entitled “The Edinburgh Magazine and Review,” which, says his biographer, “would have succeeded, if the management had been entirely committed to the calm, judicious, and conciliatory controul of Mr. Smellie. But owing to the harsh irritability of temper, and the severe and almost indiscriminate satire in which Dr. Stuart indulged, several of the Reviews gave great offence to many leading characters of the day, which occasioned the sale to be so much diminished as to render it a losing concern to the adventurers, insomuch that it was discontinued in 1776, after the production of forty-seven numbers,” &c. It appears, however, from the long account given of this Review, by his biographer, that Mr. Smellie partook largely in the arrogance, gross levity, and want of feeling, which distinguished Dr. Stuart’s writings. The wonder is, that they should not succeed in a mode of reviewing, now so popular. In 1781, Mr. Smellie published his translation of Buffon’s Natural History, in 8 vols. 8vo, which became a favourite, and has often been reprinted.

In 1790, Mr. Smellie published the first volume of the only work, except his translation of Buffon, for which he is likely to be remembered, “The Philosophy of Natural History,” 4to. This alone, says his biographer, would have amply sufficed to establish the fame of Mr. Smellie as a man of learning and talents, if his name had never been, conjoined with any other literary enterprize. A second volume was left by him in manuscript, which was published after his death by his son, in 1799. Mr. Smellie proposed to have undertaken the composition of a series of biographical memoirs of the lives and writings of such authors as bad employed him to print their works. In this he had made some progress; and his lives of Hume, Smith, Monro, and Kames, have been since published, in one volume octavo; and although we are far from thinking them models in that species of composition, and consider the author as rather partial, we should have been happy to have the list completed which his biographer gives of intended lives. The Scotch literati have been too neglectful of their eraihent men; but some excellent specimens have lately appeared, as Forbes’s Life of Beattie, and lord Woodhouslee’s Life of Kames; and we hope for more from men of equal talents.

Mr. Smellie died June 24-, 1795; and from the elaborate character given of him by his biographer we should have little inclination to make any deductions, if he had not too often presented us with traits of character by no means of the amiable kind, and if we did not find in his works certain impious levities which are unpardonable. Mr. Smellie’s memory will be best preserved by his “Philosophy of Natural History,” and his translation of Buffon; but he cannot be elevated to the rank of a hero in literature.

, a learned Scotch divine, and principal of the college of Glasgow, was born at Cask, near Perth, in 1536. He was educated at the university of St. Andrew’s, and afterwards studied for some time at Paris. He then went to Rome, and during a residence of three years there, entered into the society of the Jesuits. After returning to Scotland, on account of some private business, he again visited Paris, where he remained until 1571. At this time Mr. Thomas Maitland, a younger brother of Lrtoington’s, prevailed on Mr. Smeton to accompany him to Italy, where Maitland died. After his death, Smeton went to Geneva, and by conversing with the reformers, was confirmed in an intention he had before meditated, of quitting the church of R<me. From Geneva he travelled to Paris, where he narrowly escaped the massacre, and came home with the English ambassador, sir Thomas Walsingham. Immediately on his arrival, he publicly renounced popery, and settled at Colchester in Essex, as a school-master. In 1578, he returned to Scotland, joined Knox and the other reformers, was appointed minister of Paisley, and member of the general assembly which met at Edinburgh in the same year, and was chosen moderator in the assembly of 1579. He was soon after made principal of the college of Glasgow, and died in 1583, Archbishop Spotswood says, he was a man “learned in the languages, and well seen in the ancient fathers.” His only publication is entitled “Responsio ad Hamiltonii dialogum,” Edinb. 1579, 8vo, a defence of the presbyterians; to which is added, his “Eximii viri Joannis Knoxii, Scoticanae ecclesiae instauratoris, vera extremse vitac et obitus historia.”

, a learned Jesuit, was a native of Poland, and born in 1562. He entered among the Jesuits at Rome in 1581, and made great progress in his studies. Being sent back to Poland, he taught philosophy at Wilna for four years, and divinity for ten. He became, from his reputation for learning, rector of several colleges, and superior of the convent at Cracow. He died July 26, 1618, at the age of fifty-six. He published many works against the Protestants, and particularly against the Socinians, but merits notice chiefly for his system of “Logic,” printed at Ingolstadt, 1618, 2 vols. 4to. Rapin styles this a noble work, and it certainly once had considerable reputation.

, the celebrated author of the “Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,” was the only son of Adam Smith, comptroller of the customs at Kirkaldy, in Scotland, where he was born June 5, 1723, a few months after the death of his father. He was originally of an infirm and sickly constitution, and being thus precluded from more active amusements, had his natural turn for books and studious pleasures very early confirmed in his mind. At three years of age he was stolen by vagrants, but was happily recovered, and preserved to be one of the ornaments of the learned world, and the great improver of commercial science. His education was begun at a school in Kirkaldy, and continued at the university of Glasgow, to which he went in 1737, and remained there till 1740, when he removed to Baliol college, Oxford, as an exhibitioner, on Snell’s foundation. The studies to which he first attached himself at Glasgow, were mathematics and natural philosophy; these, however, did not long divert him from pursuits more congenial to his mind. The study of human nature in all its branches, more particularly of the political history of mankind, opened a boundless field to his curiosity and ambition; and while it afforded scope to all the various powers of his versatile and comprehensive genius, gratified his ruling passion of contributing to the happiness and improvement of society, To this study, diversified by polite literature, he seems to have devoted himself after his removal from Oxford. It may be presumed, that the lectures of the profound and eloquent Dr. Hutcheson, which he attended before he left Glasgow, had a considerable effect in directing his talents to their proper objects. It was also at this period of his life that he cultivated with the greatest care the study of languages. He had been originally destined for the church of England, and with that view was seat to Oxford, but, after seven years’ residence there, not finding an inclination for that profession, he returned to Scotland and to his mother.

In 1751 Mr. Smith was elected professor of logic in the university of Glasgow; and the year following, upon the death of Mr. Cragie, the immediate successor of Dr. Hutcheson, he was removed to the professorship of moral philosophy in that university. His lectures in both these professorships were of the most masterly kind, but no part of them has been preserved, except what he himself published in his two principal works. A general sketch of his lectures has indeed been given by his biographer, in the words of one of his pupils, from which it appears that his lectures on logic were at once original and profound. His course of moral philosophy consisted of four parts; the first contained natural theology, or the proofs of the Being and Attributes of God; the second comprehended ethics, strictly so called, and consisted chiefly of the doctrines which he published afterwards in his “Theory of Moral Sentiments.” In the third part he treated more at length of that branch of morality which relates to justice. This also he intended to give to the public; but this intention, which is mentioned in the conclusion of the “Theory of Moral Sentiments,” he did not live to fulfil. In the fourth and last part of his lectures he examined those political regulations which are founded, not upon the principle of justice, but of expediency. Under this view he considered the political institutions relating to commerce, to finances, to ecclesiastical and military establishments. What he delivered on these subjects formed the substance of the work which he afterwards published under the title of *' An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of tue Wealth of Nations." There was no situation in which his abilities appeared to greater advantage than that of a professor. In, delivering his lectures he trusted almost entirely to extemporary elocution. His manner, though not graceful, was plain and unaffected; and, as he seemed to be always interested in his subject, he never failed to interest his hearers. His reputation was accordingly raised very high, and a multitude of students from a great distance resorted to the university of Glasgow merely on his account.

It does not appear that he made any public trial of his powers as a writer before the year 1755, when he furnished some criticisms on Johnson’s Dictionary, to a periodical work called “The Edinburgh Review,” which was then begun, but was not carried on beyond two numbers. In 1759 he first published his “Theory of Moral Sentiments,” to which he afterwards subjoined “a Dissertation on the Origin of Languages, and on the different Genius of those which are original and compounded.”

After the publication of this work, Dr. Smith remained four years at Glasgow, discharging his official duties with increasing reputation. Towards the end of 1763 he received an invitation from Mr. Charles Townsend to accompany the duke of Buccieugh on his travels; and the liberal terms of the proposal, added to a strong desire of visiting the continent of Europe, induced him to resign his professorship at Glasgow. Early in the year 1764 he joined the duke of Buccieugh in London, and in March set out with him for the continent. Sir James Macdonald, afterwards so justly lamented by Dr. Smith and many other distinguished persons, as a young man of the highest accomplishments and virtues, met them at Dover. After a fevr days passed at Paris, they settled for eighteen months at Thou louse, and then took a tour through the south of France to Geneva, where they passed two months. About Christmas 1765 they returned to Paris, and there remained till the October following. By the recommendations of David Hume, with whom Dr. Smith had been united in. strict friendship from the year 1752, they were introduced to the society of the first wits in France, but who were also unhappily the most notorious deists. The biographer of Dr. A. Smith has told us, in the words of the duke of Buccleugh himself, that he and his noble pupil lived together in the most uninterrupted harmony during the thres years of their travels; and that their friendship continued to the end of Dr. Smith’s life, whose loss was then sincerely regretted by the survivor. The next ten years of Dr. A. Smith’s life were passed in a retirement which formed a striking contrast to his late migrations. With the exception of a few visits to Edinburgh and London, he passed the whole of this period with his mother at Kirkaldy, occupied habitually in intense study. His friend Hume, who considered a town as the true scene for a man of letters, in vain attempted to seduce him from his retirement; till at length, in the beginning of 1776, he accounted for his long retreat by the publication of his “Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations,” 2 vols. 4to. This book is well known as the most profound and perspicuous dissertation of its kind that the world has ever seen. About two years after the publication of this work the author was appointed one of the commissioners of the customs in Scotland. The greater part of these two years he passed in London, in a society too extensive and varied to allow him much time for study. In consequence of his new appointment, he returned in 1778 to Edinburgh, where he enjoyed the last twelve years of his life in affluence, and among the companions of his youth. “During the first years of his residence in Edinburgh,” says his biographer, “his studies seemed to be entirely suspended; and his passion for letters served only to amuse his leisure and to animate his conversation. The infirmities of age, of which he very early began to feel the approaches, reminded him at last, when it was too late, of what he yet owed to the public and to his own fame. The principal materials of the works which he had announced had long ago been collected, and little probably was wanting, but a few years of health and retirement, to bestow on them that systematical arrangement in which he delighted; and the ornaments of that flowing, and apparently artless style, which he had studiously cultivated, but which, after all his experience and composition, he adjusted with extreme difficulty to his own taste.” The death of his mother in 1784, who, to an extreme old age, had possessed her faculties unimpaired, with a considerable degree of health, and that of a cousin, who had assisted in superintending his household, in 1788, contributed to frustrate his projects. Though he bore his losses with firmness, his health and spirits gradually declined, and, in July 1790, he died of a chronic obstruction in his bowels, which had been lingering and painful. A few days before his death he gave orders to destroy all his manuscripts, with the exception of some detached essays, which he left to the care of his executors, and which have since been published in one volume 4to, in 1795.

Of his intellectual gifts and attainments, of the originality and comprehensiveness of his views, the extent, variety, and correctness of his information, the fertility of his invention, anil the ornaments which his rich imagination had borrowed from classical culture, Dr. A. Smith has left behind him lasting monuments. To his private worth the most certain of all testimonies may be found in that confidence, respect, and attachment, which followed him through the various relations of life. With all his talents, however, he is acknowledged not to have been fitted for the general commerce of the world, or the business of active life. His habitual abstraction of thought rendered him inattentive to common objects, and he frequently exhibited instances of absence, which have scarcely been surpassed by the fancy of Addison or La Bruyere. Even in his childhood this habit began to shew itself. In his external form and appearance there was nothing uncommon. He never sat for his picture; but a medallion, executed by Tassie, conveys an exact idea of his profile, and of the general expression of his countenance. The valuable library which he had collected was bequeathed, with the rest of his property, to his cousin, Mr. David Douglas.

One thing, however, is much to be regretted, in the life of Dr. A. Smith, of which his biographer has not thought fit to take the smallest notice; and that is his infidelity. “When his friend Hume died, he published the life which that celebrated sceptic had written of himself; with such remarks as proved, but too plainly, that his sentiments on the subject of religion were nearly the same with those of the deceased. This publication, which apparently was intended to strike a powerful blow against Christianity, and to give proportionable support to the cause of deism, produced an anonymous letter to Dr. A. Smith from the Clarendon press; which was afterwards known to have proceeded from the pen of Dr. Home In this celebrated letter, the argument is so clear, and the humour so easy and natural, that it produces an effect which no one but a determined infidel can resist or resent. Dr. A. Smith had assumed an air of great solemnity in his defence of his friend Hume; but the author of the letter treats them both with a jocularity which has wonderlui force. He alludes to certain anecdotes coneerning Hume, which are very inconsistent with the account given ii> his life for at the very period when he is reported to have been in the utmost tranquillity of spirits, none of his tiu n;is could venture to mention Dr. Beattie in his presence,” lest it shoul.l throw him into a fit of passion and sweariri“-” From whatever unfortunate cause this bias in Dr. Adam Smith’s mind arose, whether from his intimacy with Hume, from his too earnest desire to account for every thing metaphysically, or from a subsequent intercourse with the infidel wits and phdosophers of France, it is much to be regretted, as the only material stain upon a character of much excellence.

, an able writer on the subject of the corn-trade, was horn at Stepney, in 1713. His father was Charles Smith, who occupied several mills by descent, and erected those great establishments of the kind at Barking in Essex, from which he retired to Croydon, where he died in 1761. Our author succeeded, on his father’s retirement, to the occupation of his predecessors: but, having a competent fortune, left the active management to his partner and relation, while he found leisure to pursue his inquiries at Barking, and discharge the duties of a country magistrate. In 1748, he married Judith, daughter of Isaac Lefevre, brother to Peter Lefevre, who had established the largest malt-distillery in England; and from henceforth he resided among his wife’s relations at Stratford in Essex. Here, inquisitive and industrious, he turned his attention to the operations of the corn-trade, and policy of the corn-laws, and was induced by the scarcity of 1757, to lay the result of his labours on this subject before the public, in three valuable tracts published in 1758 and 1759. These were well received, and the author lived to see an edition of them published by the city of London; to hear his work quoted with approbation by Dr. Adam Smith, in his “Wealth of Nations;” and to observe his recommendations adopted by parliament. But in the midst of these enjoyments he died by a fall from his horse, Feb. 8, 1777, aged sixtythree. His only son, Charles Smith, esq. was lately member of parliament for Westbury in Wiltshire. Mr. Smith’s tracts on corn had become very scarce, when in 1804 they were re-published by George Chalmers, esq. with a memoir of the author.

, an elegant poetess, was born in 1749. She was the daughter of Nicholas Turner, esq. a gentleman of Sussex, whose seat was at Stoke, near GuiU ibrd; but he had another house at Bignor Park, on the banks of the Aru.n, where she passed many of her earliest years, amidst scenery which had nursed the fancies of Otway and Collins, and where every charm of nature seems to have left the most lively and distinct impression on her mind. She discovered from a very early age an insatiable thirst for reading, which was checked by an aunt, who had the care of her education; for she had lost her mother almost in her infancy. From her twelfth to her fifteenth year, her father resided occasionally in London, and she was introduced into various society. It is said that before she was sixteen, bhe married Mr. Smith, a partner in his father’s house, who was a West India merchant, and also an East India director; an ill-assorted match, and the prime source of all her future misfortunes. After she had resided some time in London, and partly in the vicinity, Mr. Smith’s father, who could never persuade his son to give his time or care sufficiently to the business in which he was engaged, allowed him to retire into the country, and purchased for him Lyss farm in Hampshire.

In this situation, Mrs. Smith, who had now eight children, passed several anxious and important years. Her husband was imprudent, kept a larger establishment than suited his fortune, and engaged in injudicious and wild speculations in agriculture. She foresaw the storm that was gathering over her; but she had no power to prevent it; and she endeavoured to console her uneasiness by recurring to the muse, whose first visitings had added force to the pleasures of her childhood. “When in the beech woods of Hampshire,” she says, “I first struck the chords of the melancholy lyre: its notes were never intended for the public ear: it was unaffected sorrow drew them forth I wrote mournfully, because I was unhappy.”

In 1776, Mr. Smith’s father died; in four or five years afterwards Mr. Smith served the office of high sheriff for Hampshire, a-xl immediately afterwards, his affairs were brought to a crisis, and hevxas confined in the King’s-bench. prison. There Mrs. Smith accompanied him, and passed with him the greater part of his confinement, which lasted seven months, and it was by her exertions principally, that he was liberated. At this unhappy period, she had recourse to those talents, which had hitherto been cultivated only for her own private gratification. She collected together a few of those poems, which had hitherto been confined to the sight of one or two friends, and had them printed at Chichester in 1784, 4to, with the title “Elegiac Sonnets and other Essays.” A second edition was eagerly called for in the same year.

The little happiness she enjoyed from Mr. Smith’s liberation was soon clouded, and he was obliged to fly to France to avoid the importunity of his creditors. Thither likewise Mrs. Smith accompanied him; and after immediately returning with the vain hope of settling his affairs, again passed over to the continent, where having hired a dreary chateau in Normandy, they spent an anxious, forlorn, and expensive winter, which it required all her fortitude, surrounded by so many children and so many cares, to survive. The next year she was called on again to try her efforts in England. In this she so far succeeded as to enable her husband to return; soon after which they hired the old mansion of the Mill family at Wolbeding in Sussex.

It now became necessary to exert her faculties again as a means of support; and she translated a little novel of abbe Prevost; and made a selection of extraordinary stories from “Les Causes Celebres” of the French, which she entitled “The Romance of Real Life.” Soon after this she was once more left to herself by a second flight of her husband abroad; and she removed with her children to a small cottage in another part of Sussex, whence she published a new edition of her “Sonnets,” with many additions, which afforded her a temporary relief. In this retirement, stimulated by necessity, she ventured to try her powers of original composition in a novel called “Emmeline, or the Orphan of the Castle,” 1788. This, says her biographer, *' displayed such a simple energy of language, such an accurate and lively delineation of character, such a purity of sentiment, and such exquisite scenery of a picturesque and rich, yet most unaffected imagination, as gave it a hold upon all readers of true taste, of a new and captivating kind “The success of this novel encouraged her to produce others for some successive years,” with equal felicity, with an imagination still unexhausted, and a command of language, and a variety of character, which have not yet received their due commendation.“” Ethelinde“appeared in 178!;” Celestina“in 1791;” Desmond“in 1792; and” r \ ht- Old Manor House“in 1793. To these succeeded” The Wanderings of Warwick“the” Banished Man;“”Momalbert;“”Marchmont;“” The young Philosopher,“and the” Solitary Wanderer," making in all 38 volumes. They weie not, however, all equally successful. She was led by indignant feelings to intersperse much of her private history and her law-suits; and this again involved her sometimes in a train of political sentiment, which was by no means popular, and had it been just, was out of place in a moral fiction.

Besides these, Mrs. Smith wrote several beautiful little volumes for young persons, entitled “Rural Walks;” “Rambles Farther;” “Minor Morals,” and “Conversations;” and a poem in blank verse, called “The Emigrant,” in addition to a second volume of“Sonnets.”

During this long period of constant literary exertion, which alone seemed sufficient to have occupied all her time, Mrs. Smith had both family griefs and family business of the most perplexing and overwhelming nature to contend with. Her eldest son had been many years absent as a writer in Bengal; her second surviving son died of a rapid and violent fever; her third son lost his leg at Dunkirk, as an ensign in the 24th regiment, and her eldest daughter expired within two years after her marriage. The grandfather of her children had left his property, which lay in the West Indies, in the hands of trustees and agents, and it was long unproductive to her family. Some arrangements are said to have been attempted before her death which promised success, but it does not appear that these were completed. Her husband, who seems never to have conquered his habits of imprudence, died, it is said, in legal confinement, in March 1806; and on Oct. 28 following, Mrs. Smith died at Telford, nearFarnham, in Surrey, after a lingering and painful illness, which she bore with the utmost patience.

The year following her death an additional volume of her poetry was published under the title of “Beachy Head and other Poems,” which certainly did not diminish her wellearned and acknowledged reputation as a genuine child of genius. Her novels ma,y be forgotten, and, we believe, are in a great measure so at present; but we agree with her kind eulogist, that of her poetry it is not easy to speak in terms too high. “There is so much unaffected elegance: so much pathos and harmony in it: the images are so soothing, and so delightful; and the sentiments so touching, so consonant to the best movements of the heart, that no readt-r of pure tasir can grow weary of perusing them.” It was reported that her family intended to publish memoirs of her life, and a collection of her letters; but as at the distance of almost ten years nothing of this kind has appeared, we presume that the design, for whatever reason, has been abandoned.

, one of those writers who, without much labour have attained high reputation, and who are mentioned with reverence rather for the possession than the exertion of uncommon abilities, was the only son of Mr. Neale, an eminent merchant, by a daughter of the famous baron Lechmere; and born in 1668. Some misfortunes of his father, which were soon after followed by his death, occasioned the son to be left very young in the hands of Mr. S nith, who had married his father’s sister. This gentleman treated him with as much tenderness as if he had been his own cnild; and placed him at Westminster-school under the care of Dr. Busby. After the death of his generous guardian, young Neale, in gratitude, thought proper to assume the name of Smith. He was elected from Westminster to Cambridge, but, being offered a studentship, voluntarily removed to Christ-church in Oxford; and was there by his aunt handsomely maintained as long as she lived; alter which, he continued a member of that society till within five years of his own death. Some time before he left Christ church, he was sent for by his mother to Worcester, and acknowledged by her as a legitimate son; which his friend Oldisworth mentions, he says, to wipe off the aspersions that some had ignorantly cast on his birth. He passed through the exercises of the college and university with unusual applause; and acquired a great reputation in the schools both for his knowledge and skill in disputation. He had a long and perfect intimacy with all the Greek and Latin classics; with whom he had carefully compared whatever was worth perusing in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages, and in all the celebrated writers of his own country. He considered the ancients and moderns, not as parties or rivals for fame, but as architects upon one and the same plan, the art of poetry.

His works are not many, and those scattered up and down in miscellaneous collections. His celebrated tragedy, called “Phaedra and Hippolitus,” was acted at the theatre royal in 1707. This play was introduced upon the stage at a time when the Italian opera so much engrossed the polite world, that sense was thought to be sacrificed to sound: and this occasioned Addison, who wrote the prologue, to satirize the vitiated taste of the public. The chief excellence of this play, which has been praised far beyond its merits, is the versification. It is not destitute of the pathetic; but is so wonderfully inferior, not only to the Hippolytus of Euripides, but even to the Phédre of Racine, and is so full of glaring faults, that it is astonishing how Addison could tolerate it, or how it could be made even a temporary fashion to admire it. It is now as little thought of as it deserves. This tragedy, with “A Poem to the Memory of Mr. John Phillips,” his most intimate friend, three or four odes, and a Latin oration spoken publicly at Oxford, “in laudem Thomas Bodleii,” were publhhed in 1719, under the name of his Works, by his friend Oldisworth, who prefixed a character of Smith.

He died in 1710, in his forty-second year, at the seat of George Ducket, esq. called Hartham, in Wiltshire; and was buried in the parish church there. Some time before his death, he engaged in considerable undertakings; and raised expectations in the world, which he did not live to gratify. Oldisworth observes, that he had seen of his about ten sheets of Pindar, translated into English; which, he says, exceeded any thing in that kind he could ever hope for in our language. He had drawn out a plan for a tragedy of Lady Jane Grey, and had written several scenes of it; a subject afterwards nobly executed by Mr. Rowe. But his greatest undertaking was a translation of Longinus, to which he proposed a large addition of notes and observations of his own, with an entire system of the art of poetry in three books, under the titles of “thoughts, diction, and figure.” He intended also to make remarks upon all the ancients and moderns, the Greek, Latin, French, Spanish, Italian, and English poets; and to animadvert upon their several beauties and defects. Oldisworth has represented Smith as a man abounding with qualities both good and great; and that may perhaps be true, in some degree, though amplified by the partiality of friendship. He had, nevertheless, some defects in his conduct one was an extreme carelessness in the particular of dress which singularity procured him the name of “Captain Rag.” The ladies, it is said, at once commended and reproved him, by the name of the “handsome sloven.” It is acknowledged also, that he was much inclined to intemperance which was caused perhaps by disappointments, but led to that indolence and loss of character, which has been frequently destructive to genius, even of a higher order than he appears to have possessed. Dr. Johnson thus draws up his character: “As his years advanced, he advanced in reputation; for he continued to cultivate his mind; but he did not amend his irregularities, by which, he gave so much offence, that, April 24, 1700, the dean and chapter declared ' the place of Mr. Smith void, he having been convicted of riotous misbehaviour in the house of Mr. Cole, an apothecary; but it was referred to the dean when and upon what occasion the sentence should be put in execution. Thus tenderly was he treated; the governors of his college could hardly keep him, and yet wished that he would not force them to drive him away. Some time afterwards he assumed an appearance of decency; in his own phrase, he whitened himself, having a desire to obtain the censorship, an office of honour and some profit in the college; but when the election came, the preference was given to Mr. Foulkes, his junior; the same, I suppose, that joined with Freind in an edition of part of Demosthenes; it not being thought proper to trust the superintendance of others to a man who took so little care of himself. From this time Smith employed his malice and his wit against the dean, Dr. Aldrich, whom he considered as the opponent of his claim. Of his lampoon upon him, I once heard a single line too gross to be repeated. But he was still a genius and a scholar, and OxtV-rd was unwilling to lose him: he was endured, with all his pranks and his vices, two years longer; but on December 20, 1705, at the instance of all the canons, the sentence declared five years before was put in execution. The execution was, I believe, silent and tender; for one of his friends, from whom I learned much of his life, appeared not to know it. He was now driven to London, where he associated himself with the whigs, whether because they were in power, or because the tories had expelled him, or because he was a whig by principle, may perhaps be doubted. He was, however, caressed by tnen of great abilities, whatever were their party, and was supported by the liberality of those who delighted in his conversation. There was once a design, hinted at by Oldisvvorih, to have made him useful. One evening, as he was sitting with a friend at a tavern, he was called down by the waiter, and, having stayed some time below, came up thoughtful. After a pause, said he to his friend, ‘ He that wanted me below was Addison, whose business was to tell me that a history of the revolution was intended, and to propose that I should undertake it. I said, ’ What shall I do with the character of lord Sunderland?‘ And Addison immediately returned, ’ When, Rag, were you drunk last?' and went away. Captain Rag was a name that he got at Oxford by his negligence of dress. This story I heard from the late Mr. Clark, of Lincoln’s Inn, to whom it was told by the friend of Smith. Such scruples might debar him from some profitable employments; but as they could not deprive him of any real esteem, they left him many friends; and no man was ever better introduced to the theatre than he, who, in that violent conflict of parties, had a prologue and epilogue from the first wits on either side. But learning and nature will now-and-then take different courses. His play pleased the critics, and the critics only. It was, as Addison has recorded, hardly heard the third night. Smith had, indeed, trusted entirely to his merit; had insured no band of applauders, nor used any artifice to force success, and found that naked excellence was not sufficient for its own support. The play, however, was bought by Lintot, who advanced the price from fifty guineas, the current rate, to sixty; and Halifax, the general patron, accepted the dedication. Smith’s indolence kept him from writing the dedication, till Lintot, after fruitless importunity, gave notice that he would publish the play without it. Now, therefore, it was written; and Halifax expected the author with his book, and had prepared to reward him with a place of three hundred pounds a year. Smith, by pride, or caprice, or indolence, or bashful ness, neglected to attend him, though doubtless warned and pressed by his friends, and at last missed his reward by not going to solicit it. In 1709, a year after the exhibition of Phaedra, died John Philips, the friend and fellow-collegian of Smith, who, on that occasion, wrote a poem, which justice must place among the best elegies which our language can shew, an elegant mixture of fondness and admiration, of dignity and softness. There are some passages too ludicrous; but every human performance has its faults. This elegy it was the mode among his friends to purchase fora guinea-, and, as his acquaintance was numerous, it was a very profitable poem. Of his ‘ Pindar,’ mentioned by Oldisworth, I have never otherwise heard. His ‘ Longinus’ he intended to accompany with some illustrations, and had selected his instances of * the false Sublime,’ from the works of Blackmore. He resolved to try again the fortune of the stage, with the story of * Lady Jane Grey.' It is not unlikely that his experience of the inefficacy and incredibility of a mythological tale might determine him to choose an action from English history, at no great distance from our own times, which was to end in a real event, produced by the operation of known characters. Having formed his plan, and collected materials, he declared that a few months would complete his design; and, that he might pursue his work with fewer avocations, he was, in June, 1710, invited by Mr. George Ducket, to his house at Hartham in Wiltshire. Here he found such opportunities of indulgence as did not much forward his studies, and particularly some strong ale, too delicious to be resisted. He ate and drank till he found himself plethoric: and then, resolving to ease himself by evacuation, he wrote to an apothecary in the neighbourhood a prescription of a purge so forcible, that the apothecary thought it his duty to delay it till he had given notice of its danger. Smith, not pleased with the contradiction of a shopman, and boastful of his own knowledge, treated the notice with rude contempt, and swallowed his own medicine, which, in July 1710, brought him to the grave. He was buried at Hartham. Many years afterwards, Ducket communicated to Oldmixon, the historian, an account, pretended to have been received from Smith, that Clarendon’s History was, in its publication, corrupted by Aldrich, Smalridge, and Atterbury; and that Smith was employed to forge and insert the alterations. This story was published triumphantly by Oldmixon, and may be supposed to have been eagerly received: but its progress was soon checked for, finding its way into the journal of Trevoux, it fell under the eye of Atterbury, then an exile in France, who immediately denied the charge, with this remarkable particular, that he never in his whole life had once spoken to Smith; hrs company being, as must be inferred, not accepted by those who attended to their characters. The charge was afterwards very diligently refuted by Dr< Burton of Eton a man eminent for literature, and, though not of the same party with Aldrich and Atterbury, too studious of truth to leave them burthened with a false charge. The testimonies which he has collected have convinced mankind that either Smith or Ducket were guilty of wilful and malicious falsehood. This controversy brought into view those parts of Smith’s life which with more honour to his name might have been concealed. Of Smith I can yet say a little more. He was a man of such estimation among his companions, that the casual censures or praises which he dropped in conversation were considered, like those of Scaliger, as worthy of preservation. He had great readiness and exactness of criticism, and by a cursory glance over a new composition would exactly tell all its faults and beauties. He was remarkable for the power of reading with great rapidity, and of retaining with great fidelity what he so easily collected. He therefore always knew what the present question required; and, when his friends expressed their wonder at his acquisitions, made in a state of apparent negligence and drunkenness, he never discovered his hours of reading or method of study, but involved himself in affected silence, and fed his own vanity with their admiration and conjectures. One practice he had, which was easily observed: if any thought or image was presented to his mind that he could use or improve, he did not suffer it to be lost; but, amidst the jollity of a tavern, or in the warmth of conversation, very diligently committed to paper. Thus it was that he had gathered two quires of hints for his new tragedy; of which Howe, when they were put into his hands, could make, as he says, very little use, but which the collector considered as a valuable stock of materials. When he came to London, his way of life connected him with the licentious and dissolute; and he affected the airs and gaiety of a man of pleasure; but his dress was always deficient: scholastic cloudiness still hung about him, and his merriment was sure to produce the scorn of his companions. With all his carelessness, and all his vices, he was one of the murmurers at form tie; and wondered why he was suffered to be poor, when Addison was caressed and preferred: nor would a very little have contented him; for he estimated his wants at six hundred pounds a year. In his course of reading it was particular, that he had diligently perused, and accurately remembered, the old romances of knight-errantry. He had a high opinion of his own merit, and something contemptuous in his treatment of those whom he considered as not qualified to oppose or contradict him. He had many frailties; yet it cannot but be supposed that he had great merit, who could obtain to the same play a prologue from Addison, and an epilogue from Prior; and who could have at once the patronage of Halifax, and the praise of Oldisworth.”

, bishop of Down and Connor, a learned divine and philosopher, was born at Lisburn in the county of Antrim, in 1665, and was educated in the university of Dublin, of which he was elected a fellow in 1684, in the nineteenth year of his age. He afterwards took his degree of doctor of divinity. During the troublesome times in 1689, he retired for safety to England, where he was recommended to the Smyrna company, and made chaplain to their factories at Constantinople and Smyrna. Here he remained four years, and, probably by engaging in trade, very much advanced his private fortune. In 16U3 he returned to England, and was made chaplain to king William III. whom he attended four years in Flanders, and became a great favourite with his majesty. His first promotion was to the deanery of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, in 1695, whence he was advanced to the bishopric of Down and Connor in 1699, and was soon after admitted into the privy. council. He died at Bath in October 1720, leaving large property to his family. He printed four sermons, one preached at London before the Turkey company, the others at Dublin, upon public occasions. While at the university, he was a member of the philosophical society of Dublin, and for some time their secretary. In 1695 he was elected a fellow of the Royal Society of London, and contributed to the “Philosophical Transactions,” papers on the follow subjects: “Answers to Queries about LoughNeagh;” “A relation of an extraordinary effect of the power of imagination;” “Account of soap earth near Smyrna;” “Of Rusma, a black earth;” and of “The Use of Opium among the Turks.”

, of Ch'uhester, the second, but most known, of three brothers, all distinguished as painters, was born in 1714. George is celebrated as a painter of landscape, but it was expected by the connoisseurs of the time, that his younger brother John would have surpassed him in that syle of painting. In the contests for prizes, at the society for the encouragement of arts, John’s landscapes were frequently preferred to those of George; but he died at an earlier period, and all memory of his works, as well as of the artist himself, has been nearly obliterated. William, the eldest brother, was a painter of portraits, but produced also some good landscapes. He is said, however, by some who remember him, to have been more remarkable for painting fruit and flowers, than for the other branches of his art. William was deformed, and his countenance was thought by many to resemble that of the celebrated John Locke. John died July 29, 1764, at the age of forty- seven, William on the 27th of the ensuing September, at the age of fifty -seven. George survived till Sept. 7, 1776, when he died, at the age of sixty-two. Their remains are deposited in the church-yard of St. Paneras at Chichester, and distinguished only by a plain stone, containing their names and the profession of each, with the dates above recited. Mr. W. Pether, an ingenious painter and engraver in mezzotinto, who was intimate with these brothers, published several years ago an admirable print, with fine likenesses of the three, represented in a groupe; the eldest is reading a lecture upon landscape to the two younger, who are listening with great attention.

, an English divine of popular fame in the sixteenth century, was born in 1550 of a good family at Withcock in Leicestershire, and after purstuing his studies at Oxford, entered into the church. Wood thinks he took the degree of M. A. as a member of Hart-hall, in 1583; and adds, that “he was then esteemed the miracle and wonder of his age, for his prodigious memory, and for his fluent, eloquent, and practical way of preaching.” His scruples, however, as to subscription and ceremonies were such, that being loth, as his biographer Fuller informs us, “to make a rent either in his own conscience or in the church,” he resolved not to undertake a pastoral charge, but accepted the office of lecturer of the church of St. Clement Danes, London. Here he was patronized by William Cecil, lord Burleigh, to whom he dedicated his sermons, and who prevented the prosecutions to which the other scrupulous puritans were at that time exposed. He appears to have been one of the most popular preachers of his age. Fuller informs us, as an instance, that after his preaching a sermon on Sarah’s nursing of Isaac, in which he maintained the doctrine that it was the duty of all mothers to nurse their own children, “ladies and great gentlewomen presently remanded their children from the vicinage round about London, and endeavoured to discharge the second moietie of a mother, and to nurse them, whom they had brought into the world.” Their compliance with his instructions on this point was the more condescending 1 as Mr. Smith was a bachelor.

Of his death we have no certain account. Fuller, who gives him the highest character, and whose principles would not have permitted him to pay this respect to a puritan, unless of very extraordinary worth or talents, after making every inquiry, concludes that he died about 1600. Wood says that he was “in great renown among men in 1593,” in which year he thinks he died.

His sermons and treatises were published at sundry times about the close of the sixteenth century, but were collected into one volume 4to, in 1675, to which Fuller prefixed the life of the author. This volume consists of “A preparative to marriage a Treatise on die Lord’s Supper Examination of Usury Be-nefit of Contentation, &c.” and other practical pieces. His treatise on “Atheism” was, soon after its first publication, translated into Latin, and published at Oppenheim, 1614, 8vo. Granger says, “he was called the silver-tongued preacher,” as though he were second to Chrysostom, to whom the epithet of golden is appropriated.

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

, commonly called Capt. John Smith, or Smyth, was born at Willoughby in the county of Lincoln, but descended from the Smyths of Cuerdley. He ranks with the greatest travellers and adventurers of his age, and was distinguished by his many achievements in the fpur quarters of the globe. In the wars of Hungary about 1602, in three single combats he overcame three Turks, and cut off their heads, for which and other gallant exploits Sigismund, duke of Transylvania, under whom he served, gave him his picture set in gold, with a pension of three hundred ducats: and allowed him to bear three Turks heads proper as his shield of arms. He afterwards went to America, where he was taken prisoner by the Indians, from whom he found means to escape. He often hazarded his life in naval engagements with pirates, Spanish men of war, and in other adventures, and had a considerable hand in reducing New-England to the obedience of Great Britain, and in reclaiming the inhabitants from barbarism. If the same, which is very probable, who is mentioned in Stow’s “Survey of London,” under the name of “Capt. John Smith, some time governor of Virginia and admiral of New-England,” he died June 21, 1631, and was buried at St. Sepulchre’s church, London. There is a ms life of him, by Henry Wharton in the Lambeth library, but his exploits may be seen in his “History of Virginia, NewEngland, and the Summer Isles,” written by himself, and published at London in 1624, fol. Wood also attributes to him, l. “A Map of Virginia, with a description of the country, the commodities, people, government, and religion,” Oxon. 1612, 4to. 2. “New-England’s Tryals, &c.” Lond. 1620, 4to. 3. “Travels in Europe, &c.” ibid. 1630, reprinted in Churchill’s Voyages, vol. II.

, an English divine, was born in Warwickshire in 1563, and elected a scholar of St. John’s college, Oxford, in 1577, where he also obtained a fellowship; and Wood informs us, was “highly valued in the university for piety and parts, especially by those that excelled in both.” He succeeded Dr. Lancelot Andrews as lecturer in St. Paul’s cathedral, London, and was much admired as a preacher. He was presented to the vicarage of Clavering in Essex, in Sept. 1592, where “he shined as a star in its proper sphere, antl was much reverenced for his religion, learning, humility, and holiness oi 'ife.” Wood also speaks of him as being skilled in the original languages, and well acquainted with the writings of the ablest divines. He died Nov. 1616, and was buried in the church of Clavering. He left several books to the library of St. John’s college, and a singular bequest “to ten faithful and good ministers, that have been deprived upon that unhappy contention about the ceremonies in question, 20l. i. e. 40s. to each; and hopes that none will attempt to defeat those parties of this his gilt, considering God in his own law hath provided that the priests of Aaron, deposed for idolatry, should be maintained; and that the canonlaw saith, Si quis excommunicatis in sustentationem dare aiiquid voluerit, non prohibemus.” Mr. Smith’s works are,

2. “Exposition on the Creed, and Explanation of the Articles of our Christian faith, in 73 sermons, &c.” 1632, folio.

, an English divine of distinguished learning, was descended of an ancient family originally seated at Durham, and was the eldest son of the rev. William Smith, rector of Lowther in Westmoreland, by Elizabeth, his wife, daughter of Giles Wetherali of Stockton near Durham. His grandfather, Matthew Smith, was a barrister, and of much reputation for his skill in the law, and for some valuable annotations which he left in ms. on Littleton’s tenures. He wrote also some poetical pieces and two dramas, for which he is commemorated in Gibber’s “Lives of the Poets.” During the rebellion he took up arms in defence of Charles I. and served under prince Rupert, particularly at the battle of Marston-moor in 1644, for which he and his family were plundered and sequestered.

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

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

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

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

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

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