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

, an eminent bookseller, who began business at Leyden about the year 1682, and devoted his attention principally to geographical works and the construction of maps. A catalogue appeared at Amsterdam in 1729 of his publications, which are very numerous. Those in highest esteem are: 1. “A collection of Travels in France, Italy, England, Holland, and Russia,” Leyden, 1706, 30 vols. 12mo. 2. “A collection of Voyages in the two Indies,” Leyden, 1706, 8 vols. fol.; another edition, 29 vols. 8 vo, 1707-1710. This consists chiefly of an abridgment of De Bry’s collection, with some additions. 3. “A collection of Voyages in the Indies by the Portuguese, the English, the French, and the Italians,” 4 vols. fol. Leyden. These three works are in Dutch. 4. An “Atlas of two hundred Maps,” not in much estimation. 5. “A Gallery of the World,” containing an immense quantity of maps, topographical and historical plates, but without letter-press, in 66 vols. fol. which are usually bound in 35. He also continued Graevius’ “Thesaurus,” or, an account of the modern Italian writers, with the “Thesaurus Antiquitatum Siciliæ.” He died about 1730.

, an eminent bookseller at Paris, is well known to the learned throughout Europe for the able assistance he has afforded to the study of bibliography. Of his personal history very little is related by his countrymen, unless that he was a man of high character in trade; and, as appears from his works, more intimately acquainted with the history of books and editions than perhaps any man of his time in any country. He died July 15, 1782. He first published his “Museum Typographicum,” Paris, 1755, 12mo, a small edition of only twelve copies, which he gave away among his friends. It was published under the name of G. F. Rebude, and according to the Dict. Hist, was reprinted in 1775. Afterwards appeared the “Bibliographic Instructive,” 1763 68, 7 vols. 8vo, succeeded by a small volume of a catalogue of the anonymous publications, and an “Essay upon Bibliography.” The merits of this work are universally acknowledged. The abbe Rive having attacked this work with considerable asperity, De Bure replied in “Appel aux Savans,” 1763, 8vo, and “Reponse a une Critique de la Bibliographic Instructive,” 1763, 8vo. In 1769 he published the catalogue of Gaignat’s library, 2 vols. 8vo, which completely established his reputation as a bibliographer. He was succeeded in these labours by his cousin William, who, with Mons. Van Praet, ^prepared the catalogue of the duke de la Valliere’s library in 1783, and published other valuable catalogues as late as the year 1801.

, an eminent bookseller, and a striking instance of the effects of a strong understanding united with industry and integrity, was born in Wine-street, Bristol, on the 27th of October, 1742, O. S. After being educated in his native city, he was apprenticed, in 1758, to Mr. Andrew Millar, at that time at the head of his profession in London, anil the steady patron of Thomson, Fielding, and many other celebrated writers. In Mr. Cadell he soon discovered a taste for business, a love of industry, and an understanding uncommonly acute, which embraced all the concerns of a trade that necessarily requires more than mere mechanical talents; and Mr. Millar being Dow advanced in life readily admitted Mr. Cadell into partnership in 1765, and in 1767, a year before his death, relinquished the whole to him. Mr. Cadell thus became, at a very early period, at the head of his profession, and by associating with himself the late William Strahan, esq. secured the advice and assistance of a printer of corresponding liberality and taste. Introduced at the same time by Mr. Millar to writers of the first rank in literature, to Johnson, Hume, Robertson, Warburton, Hurd, &c, he pursued the same commendable track, iind acting upon the liberal principles of his predecessor in respect to authors, enlarged upon it to an extent, which, at the same time that it did honour to his spirit, was well suited to the more enlightened period in which he carried on business. In conjunction with Mr. Strahan, already noticed, and afterwards with his son Andrew Strahan, esq. the present member for Aldborough, munificent remunerations were held out to writers of the most eminent talents, and, as Dr. Johnson was accustomed to aay, “the price of literature was raised.” The names of some of the writers whose works were brought forward under Mr. Cadell’s auspices have already been mentioned; nor was he less fortunate in the judicious connexions formed, upon the most liberal principles, with Blackstone, Burn, Henry, Gibbon, and many others whose works are to be found in every library. Although in success such as Mr. Cadell experienced, and which must depend ultimately on the pleasure of the public, chance may be supposed to have some influence, yet it is but justice to add that Mr. Cadell had acquired, by whatever means, an uncommon discernment in the value of books, which led him with apparent facility, and almost always with success, to predict the future fate of what was submitted to him; and when any plan of republication was discussed in conjunction with his brethren, we have the testimony of some yet living, and of many now off the stage, that no man could see more clearly than Mr. Cadell into the disposition and bias of the reading world, or display more judgment in every arrangement of editions, &c calculated to gratify public taste. Hence, in his individual capacity, it was universally remarked that he gave the largest prices for the most successful works, and that at a time when their success could be only in his own contemplation; and when that success seemed to be delayed beyond all reasonable hope, even in such cases the final issue justified his original opinion, and proved that he had formed it upon substantial grounds.

At what period he made the first experiment of his poetical talents is not known. He had, in conjunction with Lloyd, the care of the poetical department in the “The Library,” a kind of magazine, of which Dr. Kippis was editor, and he probably wrote some small pieces in that work, but they cannot now be distinguished. About the year 1759 or 1760, he wrote a poem of some length, entitled “The Bard,” which was rejected by an eminent bookseller, perhaps justly, as the author did not publish it afterwards, when it might have had the protection of his name. He wrote also “The Conclave,” a satire levelled at the dean and chapter of Westminster, which his friends prevailed upon him to suppress. Thus disappointed in his first two productions, his constant attendance at the theatres suggested a third, levelled at the players. This was his celebrated “Hosciad,” in which the professional characters of the performers of Drury Lane and Co vent Garden theatres were examined with a severity, yet with an acuteness of criticism, and easy flow of humour and sarcasm, which rendered what he probably considered as a temporary trifle, a publication of uncommon popularity; He had, however, so little encouragement in bringing this poem forward, that five guineas were refused as the price he valued it at; and he printed it at his own risk when he had scarcely ready money enough to pay for the necessary advertisements. It was published in March 1761, and its sale exceeded all expectation, but as his name did not appear to the first edition, and Lloyd had not long before published “The Actor,” a poem on the same subject, the Rosciad was generally supposed to be the production of the same writer; while, by others, it was attributed to those confederate wits, Colman and Thornton. Churchill, however, soon avowed a poem which promised so much fame and profit, and as it had been not only severely handled in the Critical Review, but positively attributed to another pen, he published “The Apology: addressed to the Critical Reviewers,” 1761. In this he retaliated with great bitterness of personal satire.

Such were his occupations till 1660, when upon the king’s restoration he quitted the country, and came up to London. He was at Salisbury-house with his patron, when the king passing by one day accidentally saw him. He sent for him, gave Kim his hand to kiss, inquired kindly after his health and circumstances; and some time after directed Cooper, the celebrated miniature-painter, to take his portrait. His majesty likewise afforded him another private audience, spoke to him very kindly, assured him of his protection, and settled a pension upon him of lOOl. per annum out of his privy purse. Yet this did not render him entirely safe; for, in 1666, his “Leviathan,” and treatise “De Give,” were censured by parliament, which alarmed him much; as did also the bringing of a bill into the Hou^e of commons to punish atheism and profaneness. When this-stonn was a little blown over, he began to think of procuring a beautiful edition of his pieces that were in Latin; but finding this impracticable in England, he caused it to be undertaken abroad, where they were published in 1668, 4to, from the press of John Bleau. In 1669, he was visited by Cosmo de Medicis, then prince, afterwards duke of Tuscany, who gave him ample marks of his esteem; and having received his picture, and a complete collection of his writings, caused them to be deposited, the former among his curiosities, the latter in his library at Florence. Similar visits he received from several foreign ambassadors, and other strangers of distinction; who were curious to see a person, whose singular opinions and numerous writings had made so much noise all over Europe. In 1672, he wrote his own Life in Latin verse, when, as he observes, he had completed his eighty-fourth year: and, in 1674, he published in English verse four books of Homer’s “Odyssey,” which were so well received, that it encouraged him to undertake the whole “Iliad” and “Odyssey,” which he likewise performed, and published in 1675. These were not the first specimens of his poetic genius which he had given to the public: he had published many years before, about 1637, a Latin poem, entitled “De Mirabilibus Pecci, or, Of the Wonders of the Peak.” But his poetry is below criticism, and has been long exploded. In 1674, he took his leave of London, and went to spend the remainder of his days in Derbyshire; where, however, he did not remain inactive, notwithstanding his advanced age, but published from time to time several pieces to be found in the collection of his works, namely, in 1676, his “Dispute with Laney bishop of Ely, concerning Liberty and. Necessity;” in 1678, his “Decameron Physiologicum, or, Ten Dialogues of Natural Philosophy;” to which he added a book, entitled “A Dialogue between a Philosopher and a Student of the Common Law of England.” June 1679, he eent another book, entitled “Behemoth, or, A History of the Civil Wars from 1640 to 1660,” to an eminent bookseller, with a letter setting forth the reasons for his communication of it, as well as for the request he then made, that he would not publish it till a proper occasion offered. The book, however, was published as soon as he was dead, and the letter along with it; of which we shall give a curious extract: “I would fain have published my Dialogue of the Civil Wars of England long ago, and to that end I presented it to his majesty; and some days after, vrhen I thought he had read it, I humbly besought him to let me print it. But his majesty, though he heard me graciously, yet he flatly refused to have it published: therefore I brought away the book, and gave you leave to take a copy of it; which when you had done, I gave the original to an honourable and learned friend, who about a. year after died. The king knows better, and is more concerned in publishing of books than lam; and therefore I dare not venture to appear in the business, lest I should offend him. Therefore I pray you not to meddle in the business. Rather than to be thought any way to further or countenance the printing, I would be content to lose twenty times the value of what you can expect to gain by it. I pray do not take it ill; it may be I may live to send you somewhat else as vendible as that, and without offence. J am, &c.” However he did not live to send his bookseller any thing more, this being his last piece. It is in dialogue, and full of paradoxes, like all his other writings. More philosophical, political, says Warburton, or any thing rather than historical, yet full of shrewd observations. In October following, he was afflicted with a suppression of urine; and his physician plainly told him, that he had little hopes of curing him. In November, the earl of Devonshire removing from Chatsvvorth to another seat called Hardwick, Hobbes obstinately persisted in desiring that he might be carried too, though this could no way be done but by laying him upon a feather-bed. He was not much discomposed with his journey, yet within a week after lost, by a stroke of the palsy, the use of his speech, and of his right side entirely; in which condition he remained for some days, taking little nourishment, and sleeping much, sometimes endeavouring to speak, but not being able. He died Dec. 4, 1679, in his ninety-second year. Wood tells us, that after his physician gave him no hopes of a cure, he said, “Then I shall be glad to find a hole to creep out of the world at.” He observes also, that his not desiring a minister, to receive the sacrament before he died, ought in charity to be imputed to his being so suddenly seized, and afterwards deprived of his senses; the rather, because the earl of Devonshire’s chaplain declared, that within the two last years of his life he had often received the sacrament from his hands with seeming devotion. His character and manners are thus described by Dr. White Kennet, in his “Memoirs of the Cavendish Family;” “The earl of Devonshire,” says he, “for his whole life entertained Mr. Hobbes in his family, as his old tutor rather than as his friend or confidant. He let him live under his roof in ease and plenty, and in his own way, without making use of him in any public, or so much as domestic affairs. He would often express an abhorrence of some of his principles in policy and religion; and both he and his lady would frequently put off the mention of his name, and say, ‘ he was a humourist, and nobody could account for him.’ There is a tradition in the family of the manners and customs of Mr. Hobbes somewhat observable. His professed rule of health was to dedicate the morning to his exercise, and the afternoon to his studies. At his first rising, therefore, he walked out, and climbed any hill within his reach; or, if the weather was not dry, he fatigued himself within doors by some exercise or other, to be in a sweat: recommending that practice tfpon this opinion, that an old man had more moisture than heat, and therefore by such motion heat was to be acquired, and moisture expelled. After this he took a comfortable breakfast; and then went round the lodgings to wait upon the earl, the countess, and the children, and any considerable strangers, paying some short addresses to all of them. He kept these rounds till about twelve o‘clock, when he had a little dinner provided for him, which he eat always by himself without ceremony. Soon after dinner he retired to his study, and had his candle with ten or twelve pipes of tobacco laid by him; then shutting his door, he fell to smoaking, thinking, and writing for several hours. He retained a friend or two at court, and especially the lord Arlington, to protect him if occasion should require. He used to say, that it was lawful to make use of ill instruments to do ourselves good: * If I were cast,’ says he, ‘ into a deep pit, and the devil should put down his cloven foot, I would take hold of it to be drawn out by it.’ Towards the end of his life he had very few books, and those he read but very little; thinking he was now able only to digest what he had formerly fed upon. If company came to visit him, he would be free in discourse till he was pressed or contradicted; and then he had the infirmities of being short and peevish, and referring to his writings for better satisfaction. His friends, who had the liberty of introducing strangers to him, made these terms with them before their admission, that they should not dispute with the old man, nor contradict him.” After mentioning the apprehensions Hobbes was under, when the parliament censured his book, and the methods he took to escape persecution, Dr. Kennet adds, “It isnot much to be doubted, that upon this occasion he began to make a more open shew of religion and church communion. He now frequented the chapel, joined in the service, and was generally a partaker of the holy sacrament: and whenever any strangers in conversation with him seemed to question his belief, he would always appeal to his conformity in divine services, and referred them to the chaplain for a testimony of it. Others thought it a mere compliance to the orders of the family, and observed, that in city and country he never went to any parish church; and even in the chapel upon Sundays, he went out after prayers, and turned his back upon the sermon; and when any friend asked the reason of it, he gave no other but this, ‘ they could teach him nothing, but what he knew.’ He did not cone‘al his hatred to the clergy but it was visible that the hatred was owing to his fear of their civil interest and power. He had often a jealousy, that the bishops would burn him: and of all the bench he was most afraid of the bishop of Sarum, because he had most offended him; thinking every man’s spirit to be remembrance and revenge. After the Restoration, he watched all opportunities to ingratiate himself with the king and his prime ministers; and looked upon his pension to be more valqable, as an earnest of favour and protection, than upon any other account. His following course of life was to be free from danger. He could not endure to be left in an empty house. Whenever the earl removed, he would go along with him, even to his last stage, from Chatsworth to Hardwick. When he was in a very weak condition, he dared not to be left behind, but made his way upon a feather-bed in a coach, though he survived the journey but a few days. He could not bear any discourse of death, and seemed to cast off all thoughts of it: he delighted to reckon upon longer life. The winter before he died, he made a warm coat, which he said must last him three years, and then he would have such another. In his last sickness his frequent questions were, Whether his disease was curable? and when intimations were given that he might have ease, but no remedy, he used this expression, ’ I shall be glad to find a hole to creep out of the world at;' which are reported to have been his last sensible words; and his lying. some days following in a silent stupefaction, did seem owing to his mind more than to his body. The only thought of death that he appeared to entertain in time of health, was to take care of some inscription on his grave. He would suffer some friends to dictate an epitaph, among which he was best pleased with this humour, * This is the philosopher’s stone'.” A pun very probably from the hand which wrote for Dr. Fuller, “Here lies Fuller’s earth.”

During the rebellion he was suffered to enjoy the studious retirement he had chosen, although he had made himself obnoxious, by constantly refusing to take the covenant. He saw and lamented the miseries of his country; but, in general, Archimedes like, he was so busy in his chamber as to mind very little what was doing without. He had a great esteem for Des Cartes, with whom he held a correspondence upon several points of his philosophy. He devoted his whole life to the writing of books; and it is certain, that his parts and learning were universally admired. On this account he was called into the Royal Society, with a view of giving reputation to it, before its establishment by the royal charter; for which purpose he was proposed as a candidate by Dr. Wilkins and Dr. Cudworth, June 4, 1661, and elected fellow soon after. His writings became so popular, that Mr. Chishull, an eminent bookseller, declared, that, for twenty years together, after the return of Charles II. the “Mystery of Godliness,” and Dr. More’s other works, ruled all the booksellers in Lon-. don; and a very remarkable testimony of their esteem was given by John Cockshuit of the Inner Temple, esq. who, I by his last will, left 300l. to have three of his principal I pieces translated into Latin. These were his “Mystery of Godliness,” “Mystery of Iniquity,” and his “Philosophical Collections.” This legacy induced our author to translate, together with these, the rest of his English works which he thought worth printing, into that language; and the whole collection was published in 1679, in three large volumes, folio. In undertaking the translation himself, his design was to appropriate Mr. Cock’shuitY legacy to the ifounding of three scholarships in Christ’s college; but as they could not be printed and published without consuming the greatest part of it, he made up this loss by other donations in his life-time, and by the perpetuity of the rectory of lngoldsby, which he left to the college by will. He died Sept. 1, 1687, in his seventy-third year and was buried in the chapel of his college, where lie also Mr. Mede and Dr. Cudworth, two other contemporary ornaments of that foundation.

It must have been as the last effort of a desperate cause when he sent a “Discourse” to James, persuading him to embrace the protestant religion, with a “Letter” to the same purpose, which was printed at London in 1690, 4to. His works have but few readers at this day; and Swift observes, that “MarvelPs remarks on Parker continued to be read when the book which occasioned them was long ago sunk.” He left a son of his own name, who was an excellent scholar, and a man of singular modesty. He never took the oaths after the revolution. He married a bookseller’s daughter at Oxford, where he resided with a numerous family of children to support which he published some books, particularly, 1 “An English Translation of Tully de finibus, 1702,” 8vo, in the preface to which he has some animadversions upon Locke’s Essay concerning Human Understanding. 2. “An abridgment of the Ecclesiastic Histories of Eusebius, Socrates, Sozornen, and Theotloret,” 1729. He also published a Latin manuscript of his father, containing the history of his own time, under this title, “Reverendi admodum in Christo patris Samuelis Parkeri episcopi de rebus sui temporis commentariorum libri quatuor,” 1726, 8vo, of which,' two English translations were afterwards published, one by the rev. Thomas Newlin, fellow of Magdalen college. But Mr. Parker’s last and greatest work was entitled “Bibliotheca Biblica,” printed at Oxford in 5 vols. 4to, the first of which appeared in two parts in 1720, and the fifth in 1735, with an account of the other writings of the author, and some particulars of his life, drawn up by Dr. Thomas Haywood, of St. John’s college, to whom were attributed most of the dissertations in the work. He describes it as “being a new Comment upon the five Books of Moses, extracted from the ancient fathers, and the most famous critics both ancient and modern, with occasional annotations or dissertations upon particular difficulties, as they were often called for.” Mr. Parker died July 14, 1730, in his fiftieth year, leaving a widow and children. The metrical paraphrase of Leviticus xi. 13, &c. in vol. Hi. was written by Mr. Warton, of Magdalen college, father to the late learned brothers, Joseph and Thomas Warton; and the “Fragment of Hyppolitus, taken out of two Arabic Mss. in the Bodleian,” in the fourth vol. was translated by the late Dr. Hunt. Mr. Parker never was in orders, as he could not reconcile his mind to the new government; but he associated much and was highly respected by many divines, particularly nonjurors, as Dr. Hickes, Mr. Collier, Mr. Dodwell, Mr. Leslie, Mr. Nelson, and Dr. Grabe, whose liberality lessened the difficulties which a very large family occasioned. He appears to have had a place in the Bodleian library, as Mr. Wheatly, in a letter to Dr. Rawlinson, dated Dec. 1739, says, “Sam. Parker’s son I had heard before was apprenticed to Mr. Clements: but the account you give me of his extraordinary proficiency is new. If it be true also, I hope some generous patron of learning will recall him from the bookseller’s shop, and place him in his father’s seat, the Bodleian library.” This son, Sackville Parker, was afterwards for many years an eminent bookseller at Oxford, and one of the four Octogenarian booksellers, who died in 1795 and 1796, namely, James Fletcher, at eighty-six; Sackville Parker, at eightynine; Stephen Fletcher, at eighty -two, and Daniel Prince, at eighty-five. They were all born at Oxford, except James Fletcher. The present worthy bookseller, Mr. Joseph Parker, is nephew and successor to Mr. Sackville Parker.

Whiston married, in 1 69y, Ruth, the daughter of the Rev. Mr. Antrobus, master of Tamworth-school, by whom he had several children, three of whom survived him. The eldest a daughter, Sarah, was married to Samuel Barker of Lyndon, in Rutlandshire, esq. at whose house he died. This lady died in 1791. His surviving sons were George and John, the latter an eminent bookseller, who died in 1780. Whiston had a younger brother, the Rev. Daniel Whiston, frequently mentioned in his “Memoirs,” and who appears to have entertained an equal aversion to the Athanasian Creed. He was curate at Somersham for fifty-two years; but his principles did not permit him to accept of any living. He died in 1759, leaving a son, the Rev. Thomas Whiston, who died in 1795. Of this Daniel Whiston, we have heard nothing more remarkable than that he left behind him several hundred manuscript sermons, which he had never preached.