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

In the immaculate conception, which has been more than a thousand times a subject for painters, Batoni succeeded so well for the church of the Philippines at Chiari near Brescia, as to excite the attention and admiration of all good judges. His next piece was the story of Simon the magician for the church of St. Peter at Rome; and among his other most admired pictures we may notice the two great altar-pieces which he executed for the city of Brescia, whereof one represents St. Johannes Nepomucenus with Mary; and the other the offering of the latter; two others for the city of Lucca, one of St. Catherine of Siena, and the other of St. Bartholomew; another for Messina, of the apostle James; and for Parma, John preaching in the wilderness; as also the many scriptural pieces, and especially those which are so much admired in the summer-house in the papal gardens of Monte Cavallo; the chaste Susanna, in the possession of his heirs; the Hagar, in the collection of an English gentleman; the Prodigal son, in that of the cardinal duke of York; to which may be added, a multitude of pictures of the Virgin, of the holy family, and saints of both sexes, which he executed for private persons. He likewise acquired great fame by his Choice of Hercules, which he painted at first in the natural size, and afterwards smaller, for the Florentine Marchese Ginosi, as a companion to the Infant Hercules strangling the serpents. Not less animated and expressive is another picture of the same kind, in which, at the request of an English gentleman, he has depicted Bacchus and Ariadne. Another poetical fiction, which he has superiorly expressed, is in a painting that is still with his heirs. His intention was to delineate the cares and solicitudes of a blooming beauty. She lies sleeping on a magnificent couch: but her sleep is not so profound as to break off all correspondence between the mind and the senses; it is soft and benign, as usual when a pleasing dream employs the imagination. The effigies of Peace and War was one of his finest performances, and which he executed towards the latter end of his life. Mars, in complete armour, is rushing to the combat, sword in hand; an exceedingly beautiful virgin, who casts on him a look of sweetness and intreaty, at the same time presenting him with a branch of palm, places herself directly in his way.

, father to the preceding, and a considerable writer in the last century, was descended from a very ancient and honourable family, and born December 15, 1602, at his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount’s, seat at Tittenhanger, in Hertfordshire. He received the first tincture of letters in the free-school of St. Alban’s, where he manifested an unusual quickness of parts, and having qualified himself for the university, was removed to Trinity-college, in Oxford, and entered a gentleman commoner there in 1616, before he was full fourteen years of age. Some years he spent in that learned society, with great reputation and universal respect, not so much on account of his family, by which he was nearly related to the founder, sir Thomas Pope, as from his personal merit. For in his youth he was of a cheerful disposition, a sprightly wit, an easy address, and frank and entertaining in conversation, charmed all who were of his acquaintance, and was justly esteemed as promising a genius as any in the university. In the year 1618 he took the degree of B.A. and soon after left Oxford for Gray’s-inn, where for some time he applied himself to the study of the law, and set out on his travels in the spring of the year 1634, being then lately become of age. He made first the tour of France, part of Spain and Italy, and then passing to Venice, he there contracted an acquaintance with a Janizary, with whom he resolved to pass into the Turkish dominions. With this view he embarked on the 7th of May, 1634, on board a Venetian galley, in which he sailed to Spalatro, and thence continued his journey by land to Constantinople. There he was very kindly received by sir Peter Wich, then our ambassador at the Port. His stay at Constantinople was short, because, having an earnest desire to see Grand Cairo, and meeting with a sudden opportunity, he readily embraced it, and after a peregrination of near two years, returned safely into England, where, in 1636, he printed an account of his travels, London, 1636, 4to, which soon after came to a second edition, and in 1638 to a third, in the same size. It was then printed in 12mo, and reached many editions the title of the eighth runs thus “A Voyage into the Levant, being a brief relation of a Journey lately performed from England by the way of Venice, into Dalmatia, Sclavonia, Bosnia, Hungary, Macedonia, Thessaly, Thrace, Rhodes, and Egypt, unto Grand Cairo; with particular observations concerning the modern condition of the Turks, and other people under that empire. By sir Henry Blount, knight.” This book made him known to the world, and so much noticed, that shortly after, king Charles I. who desired to fill his court with men of parts, appointed him one of the band of pensioners, then composed of gentlemen of the first families in the kingdom. In 1638, his father, sir Thomas Pope Blount, died, and left him the ancient seat of Blount’s hall, in Staffordshire, and a very considerable fortune. On the 21st of March in the succeeding year, the king conferred on him the honour of knighthood. At the first breaking out of the civil war, he, following the example of the elder branches of his illustrious family, who were eminently loyal, attended the king at York, at Oxford, and other places, was present at the battle of Edgehill, and had there (according to a tradition in the family) the honour of taking care of the young princes. Afterwards he quitted his majesty’s service, and returned to London, where he was questioned for his adhering to the king but he being now grown a very wary and dexterous speaker, so well excused himself, by alleging his duty on account of his post, that he escaped all censure, and was thenceforward well received. It appears, however, that he had not the courage to be faithful, or that Ije had seriously repented his loyalty to the king, for he complied with the usurping government so implicitly, that in 1651 he was named on a committee of twenty persons, for inspecting the practice of the law, and remedying its abuses. He declared himself very warmly against tithes, and would willingly have reduced the income of parish ministers to one hundred pounds a year. A man of this opinion must have been very acceptable at that time. His next appearance, however, was more to his credit. He sat with Dr. Hichard Zouch, Dr. William Clarke, Dr. William Turner, civilians, and with several other eminent persons in the court of king’s (then called the upper) bench, in Westminster hall, on the 5th of July, 1654, by virtue of a commission from Oliver Cromwell, for trying Don Pantalion Saa, brother to the Portuguese ambassador, for murder, of which, being found guilty, he was, much to the honour of the justice of this nation, by sentence of that court, adjudged to suffer death, and was executed accordingly, Jn, the same year, by the death of his elder brother Thomas Pope Blount, esq. the estate of Tittenhanger descended to him. His great reputation for general knowledge and uncommon sagacity was the reason that his name was inserted in the list of twenty-one commissioners appointed, November 1, 1655, to consider of the trade and navigation of the commonwealth, and how it might be best encouraged and promoted, in which station he did his country eminent service. But whatever his compliances with the forms of government set up between 1650 and 1660, he was received into favour and confidence on the ling’s restoration, and appointed high sheriff of the county of Hertford, in 1661. He lived after that as an English gentleman, satisfied with the honours he had acquired, and the large estate he possessed, and having passed upwards uf twenty years in this independent state, be died on the 9th of October, 1682, when he wanted but four months of four-score, and was two days afterwards interred in the vault of his family, at Ridge in Hertfordshire. As to what appears from his writings, he seems to have had strong parts, a lively imagination, and, in consequence of these, some very singular opinions. His style was manly, flowing, and less affected than could be expected, considering the times in, and the subjects on, which he wrote. A Latin fragment, published by his son, in his “Oracles of Reason,” better explains his sentiments than all the rest of his works, and demonstrates that he was a man of an irregular way of thinking.

After the restoration, and the marriage of king Charles II. queen Catharine appointed our author, who was then become one of the mission in England, her chaplain, and from that time he resided in Somerset-house, in the Strand. The great regularity of his life, his sincere and unaffected piety, his modest and mild behaviour, his respectful deportment to persons of distinction, with whom he was formerly acquainted when a protestant, and the care he took to avoid all concern in political affairs or intrigues of state, preserved him in quiet and safety, even in the most troublesome times- He was, however, a very zealous champion in the cause of the church of Rome, and was continually writing in defence of her doctrines, or in answer to the books of controversy written by protestants of distinguished learning or figure; and as this engaged him in a variety of disputes, he had the good fortune to acquire great reputation with both parties, the papists looking upon him to be one of their ablest advocates, and the protestants allowing that he was a grave, a sensible, and a candid writer. Among the works he published after his return to England, were: 1. “A non est inventus returned to Mr. Edward Bagshaw’s enquiry and vainly boasted discovery of weakness in the Grounds of the Church’s Infallibility,” 1662, 8vo. 2. “A Letter to an English gentleman, dated July 6th, 1662, wherein bishop Morley is concerned, printed amongst some of the treatises of that reverend prelate,” 3. “Roman Catholic Doctrines no Novelties; or, an answer to Dr. Pierce’s court-sermon, miscalled The primitive rule of Reformation,” 1663, 8vo; answered by Dr. Daniel Whitby. But that which contributed to make him most known, was his large and copious ecclesiastical history, entitled “The Church History of Britanny,” Roan, 1668, fol. which was indeed a work of great pains and labour, and executed with much accuracy and diligence. He had observed that nothing made a greater impression upon the people in general of his communion, than the reputation of the great antiquity of their church, and the fame of the old saints of both sexes, that had flourished in this island; and therefore he judged that nothing could be more serviceable in promoting what he styled the catholic interest, than to write such a history as might set these points in the fairest and fullest light possible. He had before him the example of a famous Jesuit, Michael Alford, alias Griffith, who had adjusted the same history under the years in which the principal events happened, in four large volumes, collected from our ancient historians; but, as this was written in Latin, he judged that it was less suited to the wants of common readers, and therefore he translated what suited his purpose into English, with such helps and improvements as he thought necessary. His history was very much approved by the most learned of his countrymen of the same religion, as appears by the testimonies prefixed to it. Much indeed may be said in favour of the order, regularity, and coherence of the facts, and the care and punctuality shewn in citing his authorities. On the other hand, he has too frequently adopted the superstitious notions of many of our old writers; transcribing from them such fabulous passages as have been long ago exploded by the inquisitive and impartial critics of his own faith. The book, however, long maintained its credit among the Romanists, as a most authentic ecclesiastical chronicle, and is frequently cited by their most considerable authors. He proposed to have published another volume of this history, which was to have carried it as low as the dissolution of monasteries by king Henry VIII. but he died before he had proceeded full three hundred years lower than the Norman conquest. Dodd, however, informs us that a considerable part of the second volume was preserved in ms. in the Benedictine monastery at Douay, and that it was never published “upon account of some nice controversies between the see of Rome, and some of our English kings, which might give offence.” While engaged on this work, he found leisure to interfere in all the controversies of the times, as will presently be noticed. His last dispute was in reference to a book written by the learned Dr. Stillingfleet, afterwards bishop of Worcester, to which, though several answers were given by the ablest of the popish writers, there was none that seemed to merit reply, excepting that penned by father Cressey, and this procured him the honour of a very illustrious antagonist, his old friend and acquaintance at Oxford, Edward earl of Clarendon. Being now grown far in years, and having no very promising scene before his eyes, from the warm spirit that appeared against popery amongst all ranks of people, and the many excellent books written to confute it by the most learned of the clergy, he was the more willing to seek for peace in the silence of a country retirement; and accordingly withdrew for some time to the house of Richard Caryll, esq. a gentleman of an ancient family and affluent fortune, at East Grinstead, co. Sussex, and dying upon the 10th of August 1674, being then near the seventieth year of his age, was buried in the parish church there. His loss was much regretted by those of his communion, as being one of their ablest champions, ready to draw his pen in their defence on every occasion, and sure of having his pieces read with singular favour and attention. His memory also was revered by the protestants, as well on account of the purity of his manners, and his mild and humble deportment, as for the plainness, candour, and decency with which he had managed all the controversies that he had been engaged in, and which had procured him, in return, much more of kindness and respect, than almost any other of his party had met with, or indeed deserved. It is very remarkable, however, that he thought it necessary to apologize to his popish readers for the respectful mention he made of the prelates of our church. Why this should require an apology, we shall not Inquire, but that his candour and politeness deserve the highest commendation will appear from what he says of archbishop Usher: “As for B. Usher, his admirable abilities in ‘chronological and historical erudition,’ as also his faithfulness and ingenuous sincerity in delivering without any provoking reflection*, what with great labour he has observed, ought certainly at least to exempt him from being treated by any one rudely and contemptuously, especially by me, who am moreover always obliged to preserve a just remembrance of very many kind effects of friendship, which I received from, him.” We have already taken notice of his inclination to the mystic divinity, which led him to take so much pains about the works of father Baker, and from the same disposition he also published “Sixteen revelations of divine love, shewed to a devout servant of our Lord, called mother Juliana, an anchorete of Norwich, who lived in the days of king Edward Hi.” He left also in ms. “An Abridgment of the book called The cloud of unknowing, and of the counsel referring to the same.” His next performance, was in answer to a famous treatise, written by Dr. Stillingfleet, against the church of Rome, which made a very great noise in those days, and put for some time a stop to the encroachments their missionaries were daily making, which highly provoked those of the Roman communion. This was entitled “Answer to part of Dr. Stillingfleet’s book, entitled Idolatry practised in the church of Rome,” 1672, 8vo, and was followed by “Fanaticism fanatically imputed to the Catholic Church by Dr. Stillingfleet, and the imputation refuted and retorted,” &c. 1672, 8vo, and “Question, Why are you a Catholic? Question, Why are you a Protestant?” 1673, 8vo. In support of Dr. Stillingfleet, the earl of Clarendon wrote “Animadversions” upon our author’s answer; in which he very plainly tells him and the world, that it was not devotion, but necessity and want of a subsistence, which drove him first out of the church of England, and then into a monastery. As this noble peer knew him well at Oxford, it may be very easily imagined that what he said made a very strong impression, and it was to efface this, that our author thought tit to send abroad an answer under the title of “Epistle apologetical to a person of honour, touching his vindication of Dr. Stillingfleet,' 1 1674, 8vo. In this work he gives a large relation of the state and condition of his affairs, at the time of what he styles his conversion, in order to remove the imputation of quitting his faith to obtain bread. The last work that he published was entitled” Remarks upon the Oath of Supremacy."

, an English gentleman, memorable for the share he had in the powder-plot, and his suffering on that account, was descended from an ancient family, and born some time in 1581. His father, Everard Digby, of Drystoke in Rutlandshire, esq. a person of great worth and learning, was educated in St. John’s college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of M. A. and published several treatises, some on learned, others on curious subjects: as, 1. “Theoria analytica viam ad mouarchiam scientiarum demonstrans,” 1579, 4to. 2. “De duplici methodo libri duo, Rami methodum refutantes,” 1580, 8vo. 3. “De arte natandi, libri duo,” 1587. 4. “A dissuasive from taking away the goods and livings of the church,” 4to. His son, the subject of this article, was educated with great care, but unfortunately under the tuition of some popish priests, who gave him those impressions which his father, if he had lived, might probably have prevented; but he died when his son was only eleven years of age. He was introduced very early to the court of queen Elizabeth, where he was much noticed, and received several marks of her majesty’s favour. On the accession of king James, he went likewise to pay his duty, as others of his religion did; was very graciously received; and had the honour of knighthood conferred upon him, being looked on as a man of a fair fortune, pregnant abilities, and a court-like behaviour. He married Mary, daughter and sole heiress of William Mulsho, esq. of Gothurst, in Buckinghamshire, with whom he had a great fortune, which, with his own estate, was settled upon the children of that marriage. One would have imagined that, considering his mild temper and happy situation in the world, this gentleman might have spent his days in honour and peace, without running the smallest hazard of meeting that disgraceful death, which has introduced his name into all our histories: but it happened far otherwise. He was drawn in by the artifices and persuasions of sir Thomas Tresham, a zealous papist, and probably also by those of the notorious Catesby, with whom he was intimate, to be privy to the gunpowder-plot; and though he was not a principal actor in this dreadful affair, or indeed an actor at all, yet he offered 1500l. towards defraying the expences of it; entertained Guy Fawkes, who was to have executed it, in his house; and was taken in open rebellion with other papists after the plot was detected and miscarried. The means by which sir Everard was persuaded to engage in this affair, according to his own account, were these: first, he was told that king James had broke his promises to the catholics; secondly, that severer laws against popery would be made in the next parliament, that husbands would be made obnoxious for their wives’ otte/iees and that it would be made a praemunire only to be a catholic; but the main point was, thirdly, that the restoring of the catholic religion was the duty of every member and that, in consideration of this, he was not to regard any favonjr* received from the crown, the tranquillity of his country, or the hazards that might be run in respect to his life, his family, or his fortune. Upon his commitment to the Tower, he persisted steadily in maintaining his own innocence as to the powder-plot, and refused to discover any who were concerned in it; but when he was brought to his trial at Westminster, Jan. 27, 1606, and indicted for being acquainted with and concealing the powder-treason, taking the double oath of secrecy and constancy, and acting openly with other traitors in rebellion, he pleaded guilty. After this, he endeavoured to extenuate his offence, by explaining the motives before mentioned; and then requested that, as he had been alone in the crime, he might alone bear the punishment, without extending it to his family; and that his debts might be paid, and himself beheaded. When sentence of death was passed, he seemed to be very much affected: for, making a low bow to those on the bench, he said, “If I could hear any of your lordships say you forgave me, I should go the more cheerfully to the gallows.” To this all the lords answered, “God forgive you, and we do.” He was, with other conspirators, upon the 30th of the same month, hanged, drawn, and quartered at the west end of St. Paul’s church in London, where he asked forgiveness of God, the king, the queen, the prince, and all the parliament; and protested, that if he had known this act at first to have been so foul a treason, he would not have concealed it to have gained a world, requiring the people to witness, that he died penitent and sorrowful for it. Wood mentions a most extraordinary circumstance at his death, as a thing generally Itnown, or rather generally reported; namely, that when the executioner plucked out his heart, and according to form held it up, saying, “Here is the heart of a traitor,” sir Everard made answer, “Thou lyest;” a story which will scarcely now obtain belief; yet it is told by Bacon in his “Historia vitae et mortis,” although he does not mention sir Everard’s name.

In 1748 our author published a work of yet greater popularity and acknowledged value in the instruction of youth, feis “Preceptor,” to which some of the parties just mentioned contributed. Dr. Johnson furnished the Preface, and “The Vision of Theodore the Hermit.” In the be ginning of the following year, Dodsley purchased Johnson’s “Vanity of Human Wishes,” for the small sum of fifteen guineas, but Johnson reserved the right of printing one edition. It is a better proof of Dodsley’s enterprising Spirit that he was the first who suggested the scheme of the English Dictionary, upon which Dr. Johnson was at this time employed; and is supposed to have procured some hints from Pope, among whose friends a scheme of this kind had been long entertained. Pope, however, did not live to see the excellent Prospectus which Johnson published in 1747. In 1748, Dodsley collected together in one volume his dramatic pieces, under the modest title of “Trifles.” On the peace of Aix-la-Chapelle, he wrote the “Triumph of Peace,” a masque, which was set to music by Dr. Arne, and performed at Drury-lane in 1748-9. In 1750 he published a small volume, unlike any of his former attempts, entitled “The Œconomy of Human Life, translated from an Indian manuscript, written by an ancient Bramin; to which is prefixed, an account of the manner in which the said manuscript was discovered. In a letter from an English Gentleman, now residing in China, to the earl of *****.” Whether from modesty, fear, or merely a trick of trade, Dodsley affected to be only the publisher of this work, and persisted in his disguise for some time. Conjecture gave it to the earl of Chesterfield, and not quite so absurdly as Mrs. Teresa Constantia Phillips complimented that nobleman on being author of the “Whole Duty of Man.” Chesterfield had a friendship for Dodsley, and would not contradict a report which rendered the sale of the “Œconomy” both rapid. and extensive. The critics, however, in the Monthly Keview, and Gentleman’s Magazine, were not to be deceived.

, an English gentleman of considerable learning and genius, of the seventeenth century, was a teacher of poetry and rhetoric in the English college at Doway, in 1618. He was invited thither by Dr. Kellison, the president, who was then providing professors to teach such young men as had been drawn from the protestant religion in England, and had hitherto been educated in the schools of the Jesuits. Drury was for some time a prisoner in England, on account of his religion, but about 1616 was released at the intercession of count Gondemar, the Spanish ambassador in England, to whom he dedicated his Latin plays. These plays, three in number, entitled “Aluredus sive Alfretius,” a tragi-comedy “Mors,” a comedy; and “Reparatus sive depositum,” a tragi-comedy, were printed together at Doway, in 1628, 12mo, and often reprinted. There is a copy of his “Aluredus” in the British Museum, printed separately, of the date 1620, 16mo. These plays, Dodd informs us, were exhibited with great applause, first privately, in the refectory of the college of Doway, and afterwards in the open court or quadrangle in the presence of the principal persons of the town and university.

, an eminent physician, born at Montauban in Lano-uedoc in 1649, was the son of Dr. Peter Duncan, professor of physic in that city, and grandson to William Duncan, an English gentleman, of Scottish original, who removed from London to the south of France about the beginning of the last century. Having lost both his parents while yet in his cradle, he was indebted, for the care of his infancy and education, to the guardianship of his mother’s brother, Mr. Daniel Paul, a leading counsellor of the parliament of Toulouse, though a firm and professed protestant. Mr. Duncan received the first elements of grammar, polite literature, and philosophy, at Puy Laurens, whither the magistracy of Montauban had transferred their university for a time, to put an end to some disputes between the students and the citizens. The masters newly established there, finding their credit much raised by his uncommon proficiency, redoubled their attention to him; so that he went from that academy with a distinguished character to Montpellier, when removed thither by his guardian, with a view to qualify him for a profession which had been for three generations hereditary in his family . His ingenuity and application recommended him to the esteem and friendship of his principal instructor there, the celebrated Dr. Charles Barbeyrac (uncle to John Barbeyrac the famous civilian), whose medical lectures and practice were in high reputation. Having taken his favourite pupil into his own house, the professor impressed and turned to use his public and private instruction by an efficacious method, admitting him, at every visit he paid to his patients, to consult and reason with him, upon ocular inspection, concerning the effect of his prescriptions. When he had studied eight years under the friendly care of so excellent a master, and had just attained the age of twenty-four, he was admitted to the degree of M. D. in that university. From Montpellier he went to Paris, where he resided nearly seven years. Here he published his first work, upon the principle of motion in the constituent parts of animal bodies, entitled: “Explication nouvelle & mechanique des actions an i males, Paris, 1678.” It was in the year following that he went for the first time to London, to dispose of some houses there, which had descended to him from his ancestors. He had, besides, some other motives to the journey; and among the rest, to get information relative to the effects of the plague in London in 1665. Having dispatched his other business, he printed in London a Latin edition of his “Theory of the principle of motion in animal bodies.” His stay in London, at this time, was little more than two years; and he was much disposed to settle there entirely. But in 1681 he was recalled to Paris to attend a consultation on the health of his patron Colbert, which was then beginning to decline. Soon after his return he produced the first part of a new work, entitled, “La chymie naturelle, ou explication chymique & mechanique de la Tiourriture de Tanimal,” which was much read, but rather raised than satisfied the curiosity of the learned; to answer which he added afterwards two other parts, which were received with a general applause. A second edition of the whole was published at Paris in 1687. In that year likewise came out his “Histoire de l'animal, ou la connoissance du corps animé par la méchanique & par la chymie.” He left Paris in 1683, upon the much-lamented death of Colbert, the kind effect of whose esteem he gratefully acknowledged, though in a much smaller degree than he might have enjoyed, if he had been less bold in avowing his zeal for protestantism, and his abhorrence of popery. He had some property in land adjoining to the city of Montauban, with a handsome house upon it, pleasantly situated near the skirts of the town. It was with the purpose of selling these, and settling finally in England, that he went thither from Paris. But the honourable and friendly reception he met with there determined his stay some years in his native city. In 1690, the persecution which began to rage with great fury against protestants made him suddenly relinquish all thoughts of a longer abode in France. Having disposed of his house and land for less than half their value, he retired first to Geneva, intending to return to England through Germany; an intention generally kept in petto, but for many years unexpectedly thwarted by a variety of events. Great numbers of his persuasion, encouraged by his liberality in defraying their expences on the road to Geneva, had followed him thither. Unwilling to abandon them in distress, he spent several months in that city and Berne, whither great numbers had likewise taken refuge, in doing them all the service in his power. The harsh and gloomy aspect which reformation at that time wore in Geneva, ill agreeing with a temper naturally mild and cheerful, and the sullen treatment he met with from those of his profession, whose ignorance and selfishness his conduct and method of practice tended to bring into disrepute, occasioned his stay there to be very short. He listened therefore with pleasure to the persuasion of a chief magistrate of Berne, who invited him to a residence more suited to his mind. He passed about 8 or 9 years at Berne, where to his constant practice of physic was added the charge of a professorship of anatomy and chemistry. In 1699, Philip landgave of Hesse sent for him to Cassel. The princess, who lay dangerously ill, was restored to life, but recovered strength very slowly. Dr. Duncan was entertained for three years with great respect, in the palace of the landgrave, as his domestic physician. During his stay at that court, he wrote his treatise upon the abuse of hot liquors. The use of tea, which had not long been introduced into Germany, and in the houses of only the most opulent, was already at the landgrave’s become improper and immoderate, as well as that of coffee and chocolate. The princess of Hesse, with a weak habit of body inclining to a consumption, had been accustomed to drink these liquors to excess, and extremely hot. He thought fit, therefore, to write something against the abuse of them, especially the most common one last mentioned. Their prudent use, to persons chiefly of a phlegmatic constitution, he allowed. He even recommended them, in that case, by his own example, to be taken moderately warm early in the morning, and soon after dinner; but never late in the evening, their natural tendency not agreeing with the posture of a body at rest. He wrote this treatise in a popular style, as intended for the benefit of all ranks of people; the abuse he condemned growing daily more and more epidemical. Though he deemed it too superficial for publication, he permitted it to be much circulated in manuscript. It was not till five years after that he was persuaded by his friend Dr. Boerhaave to print it, first in French, under the title of “Avis salutaire a tout le monde, contre Tabus cles liqueurs chaudes, & particulierement du caffe, du chocolat, & du the.” Rotterdam, J 705. He printed it the year following in English.

, an English gentleman, clerk of the house of commons in the reign of Charles I. was born at Battersea in Surrey, in 1598; being the eldest son of Henry Elsynge, esq. who was clerk of the house of lords, and a person of great abilities. He was educated at Westminster school; and thence, in 1621, removed to Christ Church, in Oxford, where he took the degree of B. A. 1625. Then he travelled abroad, and spent at several times above seven years in foreign countries; by which he became a very accomplished person, and was greatly esteemed by men of the highestquality and bestjudgment. He was in particular so much valued by archbishop Laud, that his grace procured him the place of clerk of the house of commons, to which he proved of excellent use, as well as a singular ornament. For he was very dextrous in taking and expressing the sense of the house; and also so great a help to the speaker and to the house in stating the questions, and drawing up the orders free from exceptions, that it much conduced to the dispatch of business, and the service of the parliament. His discretion also and prudence were such, that though the long parliament was by faction kept in continual disorder, yet his fair and temperate carriage made him commended and esteemed by all parties, how furious and opposite soever they were among themselves. And therefore for these his abilities and good conduct) more reverence was paid to his stool, than to the speaker Lenthall’s chair; who, being obtioxious, timorous, and interested, was often much confused in collecting the sense of the house, and drawing the debates into a fair question; in which Elsynge was always observed to be so ready and just, that the house generally acquiesced in what he did of that nature. At length, when he saw that the greater part of the house were imprisoned and secluded, and that the remainder would bring the king to a trial for his life, he desired, the 26th Dec. 1648, to resign his place. He alleged for this his bad state of health; but most people understood his reason to be, and he acknowledged it to Wbitelock and other friends, because he would have no hand in the business against the king. After which, quitting his advantageous employment, he retired to his house at Hounslow, in Middlesex, where he presently contracted many bodily infirmities, of which he died in 1654. He was a man of very great parts, and very learned, especially in the Latin, French, and Italian languages he was, what was far above all these accomplishments, a very just and honest man and Whitelock relates, that the great Selden was particularly fond of him, which is no small circumstance to his honour.

, an English gentleman of extraordinary talents and attainments, was the son of William Falconer, esq. one of the magistrates of Chester, by his wife Elizabeth, the daughter of Ralph Wilbraham, esq. of Townsend in Cheshire, and was born in 1736. That his education had not been neglected appears evidently from the uncommon progress he made in classical learning and antiquities, to which he appears to have been early attached, and in the study of which he persevered during a long and painful course of years. He had a permanent indisposition, which lasted thirty-two years, and which he bore with pious resignation. Such was his thirst of knowledge during this period, that he used to read in a kneeling posture, the only one in which he had a temporary respite from internal uneasiness, from which he was never entirely free. He was a man of taste and science, of extraordinary memory, and pqwers of application, and singularly comprehensive in his reading, and judicious and communicative. He was particularly acquainted with voyages and travels, and retained a fondness for both to the last. His latter days, when indisposition permitted him, were chiefly dedicated to the preparation of an edition of Strabo, in which he had made a considerable progress at the time of his death, Sept. 4, 1792. He was buried in St. Michael’s church, within the city of Chester, where he died, but there is a marble tablet to his memory in St. John’s church, in which parish he resided until within a few years of his death. On this tablet is a just and elegant inscription to his memory from the pen of his brother Dr. William Falconer of Bath.

, an English gentleman of considerable learning and ingenuity, of great personal worth, and at the same time an enthusiast of a singular description, was the third son of Nicholas Ferrar, a merchant in London, and was born Feb. 22, 1592, in the parish of St. Mary Stayning, in Mark-lane, London. His lather traded very extensively to the East and West Indies, and to all the celebrated seats of commerce. He* lived in high repute in the city, where he joined in commercial matters with sir Thomas and sir Hugh Middleton, and Mr. Bateman. He was a man of liberal hospitality, but governed his house with great order. He kept a good table, at which he frequently received persons of the greatest eminence, sir John Hawkins, sir Francis Drake, sir Walter Raleigh, and others with whom he was an adventurer; and in all their expeditions he was ever in the highest degree attentive to the planting the Christian Religion in the New World. At home also he was a zealous friend to the established church, and always ready to supply his prince with what was required of him. He lent 300l. at once upon a privy-seal a sum at that time notinconsiderable. He had the honour of being written Esq. by queen Elizabeth.

His designs were, however, now interrupted by a visit to the continent, which, according to custom, his father thought necessary to complete the education of an English gentleman. Previous to his departure he obtained recommendatory letters from lady Hervey, Horace Walpole (the late lord Orford), Mallet, and the duke de Nivernois, to various persons of distinction in France. In acknowledging the duke’s services, he notes a circumstance which in some degree unfolds his own character, and exhibits that superiority of pretensions from which he never departed. “The duke received me civilly, but (perhaps through Maty’s fault) treated me more as a man of letters than as a man of fashion.” Congreve and Gray were weak enough to be offended on a similar account, but that Mr. Gibbon, whose sole ambition was to rise to literary fame, should have for a moment preferred the equivocal character of a man of fashion, is as unaccountable as it is wonderful that, at an advanced period of life, he should have recorded the incident.

, esq. an English gentleman of very uncommon parts and learning, was the eldest son of James Harris, esq. of the Close of Salisbury, by his second wife the lady Elizabeth Ashley, who was third daughter of Anthony earl of Shaftesbury, and sister to the celebrated author of the Characteristics, as well as to the Hon. Maurice Ashley Cooper, the elegant translator of Xenophon’s Cyropaedia. He was born July 20, 1709. The early part of his education was received at Salisbury, under the rev. Mr. Hele, master of the grammar-school, in the Close, who was long known and respected in the West of England as an instructor of youth. From Mr. Hele’s school, at the age of sixteen, he was removed to Oxford, where he passed the usual number of years as a gentleman commoner of Wadham college. His father, as soon as he had finished his academical studies, entered him at Lincoln’s-Inn, not intending him for the bar, but, as was then a common practice, meaning to make the study of the law a part of his education.

, an English gentleman of parts and learning, was the son of sir R ->bert Henley, of the Grange in Hampshire, descended from the Henleys of Henley in Somersetshire; of whom sir Andrew Henley was created a baronet in 1660. This sir Andrew had a son of the same name, famous for his frolics and profusion. His seat, called Bramesley, near Hartley-row, in the county of Southampton, was very large and magnifirent. He had a great estate in that and the other western counties, which was reduced by him to a very small one, or to nothing. Sir Robert Henley of the Grange, his uncle, was a man of good sense and osconomy. He held the master’s place of the King’s-bench court, on the pleas side, many years; and by the profits of it, and good management, left his son, Anthony Henley, of the Grange, of whom we now treat, possessed of a very fine fortune, above 3000l. a-year, part of which arose from the ground-rents of LincolnVinnfields. Anthony Henley was bred at Oxford, where he distinguished himself by an early relish for polite learning. He made a great proficiency in the study of the classics, and particularly the ancient poets, by which he formed a good taste for poetry, and wrote verses with success. Upon his coming to London, he was presently received into the friendship and familiarity of persons of the first rank for quality and wit, particularly the earls of Dorset and Sunclerland. The latter had especially a great esteem and affection for him; and as every one knew what a secret influence he had on affairs in king William’s court, it was thought strange that Mr. Henley, who had a genius for any thing great, as well as any thing gay, did not rise in the state, where he would have shone as a politician, no Jess than he did at Will’s and Tom’s as a wit. But the Muses and pleasure had engaged him. He had something of the character of Tibullus, and, except his extravagance, was possessed of all his other qualities; his indolence, his gallantry, his wit, his humanity, his. generosity, his learning, his taste for letters. There was hardly a contemporary author, who did not experience his bounty. They soon found him out, and attacked him with their dedications; which, though he knew how to value as they deserved, were always received as well as the addressers could wish; and his returns were made so handsomely, that the manner was as grateful as the present.

, an English gentleman of talents, was the son of John Potenger, D. D. who was appointed master of Winchester School Aug. 1, 1642, which he was obliged to resign, in order to preserve his loyalty and principles, and died in Dec. 1659. He was born in St. Swithin’s parish, Winchester, July 21, 1647, admitted on the foundation of the college in 1658, and thence removed to a scholarship of Corpus Christi college, Oxon, where he took the degree of B. A. and afterwards entered of the Temple, and was regularly called v to the bar. The office of comptroller of the pipe, which he held to the day of his death, he purchased, in 1676, of sir John Ernie, then chancellor of the Exchequer, whose daughter he married. Speaking of his father, in one of his writings, he expresses himself thus- “About the thirteenth year of my age, the Christmas before the return of king Charles the Second, I lost a loving father; I was not so young but I was deeply sensible of the misfortune, knowing at what an unseasonable time I was deprived of him, when he should have received a reward for his loyal sufferings. He would often discourse with me, though, young, about the unhappy times, amid lament the church’s and the king’s misfortunes, which made a great impression on me; and laid the foundation, I hope, of my being a true son of the church of England, and an obedient subject to my lawful prince.” In 1692 his wife died, leaving him only one daughter, who, in 1695, was married to Richard Bingham, esq. of Mtlcombe Bingham, in the county of Dorset. Thither he retired many years before his death, which happened on Dec. 18, 1733, in the 87th year of his age. He was buried by his wife in Blunsden church, in the parish of Highworth, Wilts. Mr. Potenger also published “A Pastoral Reflection on Death,” a poem, in 1691 and “The Life of Agricoia,” from Tacitus, and perhaps other select pieces but the far greater part of his works, consisting, of “Poems, Epistles, Translations, and Discourses,” both in prose and verse, was reserved only for the entertainment of his private friends, who often importuned him to make them public. Two original letters to him from Dr. South, are printed in Nichols’s Select Collection of Poems.

One consequence of this letter was very singular. Those who could not answer it, nor resist the conviction of its arguments, wreaked their vengeance on liaynal, by endeavouring to prove that he did not write the celebrated History of the Indies; and this became the cant of the day. To illustrate this, we shall give the following extract of a letter from an English gentleman then in Paris, addressed to the editor of one of the London newspapers.

, an English gentleman, author of the “Historical Collections,” was of an ancient family, and born in Northumberland about 1607. He was for a short time a student in the university of Oxford; but left it without being matriculated, and entered himself of Lincoln’s Inn, where he became a barrister. But, his inclination leading him more to state-affairs than the comfrion law, he began early to take down in short-hand, speeches and passages at conferences in parliament, and from the king’s own mouth what he spake to both houses; and contrived to be on all occasions an eye and ear witness of the most important public transactions. He also personally attended and observed all occurrences of moment, during eleven years interval of parliament from 1630 to 1640, in the star-chamber, court of honour, and exchequer-chamber, when the judges met there upon extraordinary cases; and at the council-table, when great causes were tried before the king and council. He also frequently travelled in pursuit of information to considerable distances, and was present, during the civil war, at the camp at Berwick, at the fight at Newborn, at the treaty of Rippon, and at the great council at York.

He spent his time like an English gentleman, with hospitality and without ostentation. In the winter he resided in London; and of late years, in the summer, he varied his place of abode. At one time he resided at Mr. Coxe’s house, near Salisbury; at another, near Reading; and the summer preceding his death, he made Richmond his residence. At all these places, and, indeed, wherever he came, he found acquaintances who respected and valued him for his amiable qualities. He bore a tedious illness with fortitude and resignation. Without expressing any impatience, he viewed the progress of his disorder, which he early discovered was a dangerous one; and continued his literary pursuits, and received his friends, until a few hours of his dissolution, which took place the 24th April 1799; and, a few days after, his remains were interred in the family vault at Finchley.

Soon after this disappointment, in 1737, he accompanied his pupil, Mr. Windham, to the Continent. The events of this tour, and the connexions to which it gave rise, fixed the future course, and formed the happiness of his life. Mr. Coxe’s account of it is highly amusing, and introduces us to the acquaintance of many persons, now, or lately, distinguished in the political or literary world. One of the results of this tour was, “A Letter from an English Gentleman to Mr. Arlaud, a celebrated painter at Geneva, giving an account of the Glacieres, or Ice Alps of Savoy, written in the year 1741.” This was written chiefly by Mr. Windham and Mr. Price (of Foxley in Herefordshire), with the assistance of Mr. Siillingfieet, and illustrated with the drawings of Mr. Price. They are said to have been the first travellers who penetrated into these Alpine recesses. In 1743 Mr. Stillingfleet returned with his pupil to England. His pupil’s father gave Mr. Stillingfleet an annuity of 100l. which for some time was his principal support. He now resided partly in London and partly with some friends in the country; and his leisure hours were dedicated to literary pursuits, some of which Mr. Coxe has specified, particularly an edition of Milton, illustrated by notes, in which he had made considerable progress when the appearance of Dr. Newton’s proposals induced him to relinquish his design. His M8S. however, which were in the possession of the late bishop Dampier, were obligingly lent to Mr. Todd, for his excellent edition of our great epic poet. About this time Mr. Stillingfleet composed some of his poems, particularly those on “Conversation,” and “Earthquakes.”

During his stay at Paris, his winning address and astonishing parts gained him the esteem and admiration of all the British subjects of both parties who happened to be there. The earl of Stair, then the English ambassador there, notwithstanding all the reports to the marquis’s disadvantage, thought proper to shew some respect to the representative of so great a family. His excellency never failed to lay hold of every opportunity to give some admonitions, which were not always agreeable to the vivacity of his temper, and sometimes provoked him to great indiscretions. Once in particular, the ambassador, extolling the merit and noble behaviour of the marquis’s father, added, that he hoped he would follow so illustrious an example of fidelity to his prince and love to his country: on which the marquis immediately answered, that “he thanked his excellency for his good advice, and, as his excellency had also a worthy and deserving father, he hoped he would likewise copy so bright an original, and tread in his steps.” This was a severe sarcasm, as the ambassador’s father had betrayed his master in a manner that was not very creditable. Before he left France, an English gentleman expostulating with him for swerving so much from the principles of his father and whole family, his lordship answered, that “he had pawned his principles to Gordon, the Pretender’s banker, for a considerable sum, and, till he could repay him, he must be a Jacobite; but, when that was done, he would again return to the Whigs.”