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

, duchess of Newcastle, and second wife of the preceding, was born at St. John’s, near Colchester in Essex, about the latter end of the reign of James I. Her father, of whom she was the youngest daughter, was sir Charles Lucas, a gentleman of a very ancient and honourable family, and who was himself a man of great spirit and fortune. Dying young, he left the care of his children to his widow, a lady of exquisite beauty and admirable accomplishments, who took upon herself the education of her daughters, and instructed them in needlework, dancing, music, the French tongue, and other things that were proper for women of fashion. As, however, she had from her infancy an inclination for literature, and spent much of her time in study and writing, her biographers have lamented that she had not the advantage of an acquaintance with the learned languages, which might have improved her judgment, and have been of infinite service to her in the numerous productions of her pen. In 1643 she obtained permission from her mother to go to Oxford, where the court then resided, and where she could not fail of meeting with a favourable reception, on account of the distinguished loyalty of her family, as well as of her own accomplishments. Accordingly, she was appointed one of the maids of honour to Henrietta Maria, the royal consort of Charles I.; and in that capacity accompanied her majesty to France, when the queen was obliged by the civil war to quit England. At Paris Miss Lucas first saw the marquis of Newcastle, then a widower, who admiring her person, disposition, and ingenuity, was married to her at that place, in 1645. The marquis had heard of the lady’s character before he met with her in France; for having been a friend and patron of her gallant brother lord Lucas, he took occasion one day to ask his lordship in what respect he could promote his interest. To this his lordship replied, that he was not solicitous about his own affairs, as being prepared to suffer either exile or death in the royal cause; but that he was chiefly concerned for his sister, on whom he could bestow no fortune, and whose beauty exposed her to danger. At the same time, he represented her other amiable qualities in so striking a light, as raised the marquis’s curiosity to see her. After their marriage, the marquis and marchioness of Newcastle went from Paris to Rotterdam, where they resided six months, and from that to Antwerp, which they fixed upon as the place of their residence during the time of their exile. In this city they enjoyed as quiet and pleasant a retirement as their ruined fortunes would permit. Though the marquis had much respect paid him by all men, as well foreigners as those of his own country, he principally confined himself to the society of his lady, who, both by her writings and her conversation, proved a most agreeable companion to him during his melancholy recess. The exigency of their affairs obliged the marchioness once to come over to England. Her view was to obtain some of the marquis’s rents, in order to supply their pressing necessities, and pay the debts they had contracted; but she could not procure a grant from the rulers of those times, to receive one penny out of her noble husband’s vast inheritance: and had it not been for the seasonable generosity of sir Charles Cavendish, she and her lord must have been exposed to extreme poverty. At length, however, having obtained a considerable sum from her own and the marquis’s relations, she returned to Antwerp, where she continued with him till the restoration, and employed herself in writing several of her works.

But though the duchess’s literary character and works are now treated with general disregard, this was by no means the case during her own life. The most extravagant compliments were paid her not only by persons whose applauses might be deemed of little estimation, but by learned bodies, and by men of great eminence in literature. They were probably dazzled, and almost blinded by the high rank and solemn pomp of the duke and duchess of Newcastle. Absurd, however, as were her grace’s pretensions to philosophical knowledge, and extravagant as are her other compositions, it cannot, we apprehend, be denied that she had considerable powers of imagination and invention; and if her fancy had been enriched by information, restrained by judgment, and regulated by correctness of taste, she might probably have risen to considerable excellence. A very elegant writer in the Connoisseur has paid a much higher compliment to her genius and poetical merit than has been customary with modern authors, insinuating that even Milton might have borrowed from her. The duchess of Newcastle departed this life at London, in the close of 1673, and was buried in Westminster-abbey, on the 7th of January, 1673-4. Her person is reported to have been very graceful. With regard to her character, her temper was naturally reserved; so tha$ she seldom said much in company, and especially among strangers. In her studies, contemplations, and writings, she was most indefatigable. She was truly pious, charitable, and generous very kind to her servants an excellent Œconomist and a complete pattern of conjugal affection and duty. It hath been thought surprising, that she who devoted her time so greatly to writing, cuuld acquit herself with so much propriety in the several duties and relations of life.

The following is a list of her works, almost all of which are now very scarce, and in considerable demand by the collectors of literary curiosities: 1. “The World’s Olio,” Lond. 1655, folio. 2. “Nature Picture, drawn by fancy’s pencil to the life. In this volume there are several feigned stories of natural descriptions, as comical, tragical, and tragicomical, poetical, romancical, philosophical, and historical, both in prose and verse, some all verse, some all prose, some mixt, partly prose and partly verse. Also there are some morals, and some dialogues; but they are as the advantage loaf of bread to the baker.'s dozen, and a true story at the latter end, wherein there is no feigning,” London, 1656, folio. To this book was prefixed a curious print of the duke and duchess sitting at a table with their children, to whom the duchess is telling stories; and at the end is a very curious account of her birth, education, and life; the same, if we mistake not, which sir William Musgrave transcribed into his copy of the life of the duke, now in the British Museum, and from which Mr. Park has given an extract. 3. “Orations of divers sorts, accommodated to divers places,” Lond. 1662, fol. 4. “Plays,” Lond. 1662. 5. “Philosophical and Physical Opinions,” Lond. 1663, fol. 6. “Observations upon Experimental Philosophy: to which is added, the Description of a new World,” Lond. 1666, fol. Mr. James Bristow began to translate some of these philosophical discourses into the Latin tongue, but found it impossible to understand them. 7. “Philosophical Letters or Modest Reflections upon some opinions in Natural Philosophy, maintained by several famous and learned authors of this age, expressed by way of letters,” Lond. 1664, fol. 8. “Poems and Phancies,” Lond. 1653, and 1664, fol. 9. “CCXI Sociable Letters,” Lond. 1664, fol. 10. “The Life of the thrice noble, high, and puissant Prince William Cavendishe, duke, marquiss, and earl of Newcastle, &c.” Lond. 1667, fol. This work (which Mr. Langbaine styles the crown of her labours) was translated into Latin, and printed with the following title “De Vita & rebus gestis nobilissimi illustrissimique Principis Gulielmi, Ducis Novo-Castrensis, commentarii: Ab excellentissima principe Margareta, ipsius Uxore sanctissima conscripti, et ex Anglico in Latinum conversi,” Lond. 1668, folio. 11. “Plays, never before printed,” Lond. 1668. To one of these plays are added twenty-nine supernumerary scenes, and in another, entitled “The unnatural Tragedy,” is a whole scene written against Camden’s Britannia! Three more volumes in folio, of her poems, are preserved in manuscript, which Gibber says were once in the possession of Mr. Thomas Richardson and bishop Willis. In 1676, a folio volume was printed containing “letters and poems in honour of the incomparable princess Margaret duchess of Newcastle.” These, says Mr. Park, consist of such inflated eulogies on her grace’s parts, from the rector magnificus of Leyden, and the academical caputof Cambridge, to the puffs of Tom Shadwell, that it must have been enough to turn any brain previously diseased with a cacocthes scribendi.

, an English poet and dramatic writer in the reign of Charles II. whose productions, although not without some proportion of merit, would not have preserved his name so long as the satire of Dryden, entitled “Mac Flecnoe,” is said to have been originally a Jesuit, and to have had connections with some persons of high distinction in London, who were of the Roman catholic persuasion. What was the cause of Dryden’s aversion is not determined. Some have said that when the revolution was completed, Dryden, having some time before turned papist, became disqualified for holding his place of poet-laurcat. It was accordingly taken from him, and conferred on Flecknoe, a man to whom Dryden is said to have had already a confirmed aversion; and this produced the famous satire, called from him Mac Flecknoe, one of the most spirited and amusing of Dryden' s poems; and, in some degree, the model of the Dunciad. That this is a spirited poem is as certain, as that all the preceding account from Cihber and his copiers is ridiculous. Shadwell was the successor of Dryden, as laureat, and in this poem is ridiculed as the poetical son of Flecknoe. However con.­temptibly Dryden treated Flecknoe, the latter at one time wrote an epigram in his praise, which, with his religion, might have conciliated both Dryden and Pope. Perhaps Dryden, says a modern critic, was offended at his invectives against the obscenity of the stage, knowing how much he had contributed to it. Be this as it may, Flecknoe himself wrote some plays, but not more than one of them was acted. His comedy, called “Damoiselles a la mode,” was printed in 1667, and addressed to the duke and duchess of Newcastle; the author had designed it for the theatre, and was not a little chagrined at the players for refusing it; He said upon this occasion: “For the acting this comedy, those who have the government of the stage have their humours, and would.be in treated and I have mine, and won't intreat them and were all dramatic writers of my mind, tljeyshould wear their old plays thread-bare, ere they should have any new,till they better understood their own interest, and how todistinguish between good *nd bad.”

He published a great number of tracts besides what have been mentioned. Among which are, 1. “A Blow at Modern Sadducism,” &c. 1668, to which was added, 2. “A Relation of the fancied Disturbances at the house of Mr. Mumpesson;” as also, 3. “Reflections on Drollery and Atheism.” 4. “Palpable Evidence of Spirits and Witchcraft,” &c. 1668. 5. “A Whip for the Droll Fidler to the Atheist,” 1668. 6. “Essays on several important subjects in Philosophy and Religion,” 1676, 4to. 7. “An Essuy concerning Preaching,” 1678, 8Vo, to which was added, 8. “A seasonable Defence of Preaching, -and the plain way of it.” 9. “Letters to the Duchess of Newcastle.” 10. Three single Sermons, besides four printed together, under the title of “Seasonable Reflections and Discourses, in order to the Conviction and Cure of the scoffing Infidelity of a degenerate age.” As he had a lively imagination, and a flowing style, these came from him very easily, and he continued the exercise of his pen to the last; the press having scarcely finished his piece entitled “The zealous and impartial Protestant,” &c. 1680, when he was attacked by a fever, which baffling the physician’s skill, cut him off in the vigour of his age. He died at Bath, Nov. 4th, 1680, about the age of forty-four. Mr. Joseph Pleydel, archdeacon of Chichester, preached his funeral sermon, when his corpse was interred in his own parish church, where a decent monument and inscription was afterwards dedicated to his memory by Margaret his widow, sprung from the Selwins of Gloucestershire. She was his second wife; but he had no issue by either. Soon after his decease, several of his sermons, and other pieces, were collected and published with the title of “Some Discourses, Sermons, and Remains,” 1681, 4to, by Dr. Henry Horneck, who tells us that death snatched him away, when the learned world expected some of his greatest attempts and enterprizes. Horneck gave a large, and apparently very just character of Glanvil, who was unquestionably a man of learning and genius, and although he retained the belief in witchcraft, surmounted many of the other prejudices of his time.

Greene had the honour, early in life, to teach the duchess of Newcastle, which, joined to his professional merit, and the propriety of his conduct, was the foundation of his favour with the prime minister and the nobility. In 1730, when the duke of Newcastle was installed chancellor of the university of Cambridge, he was appointed to set the ode, and then not only obtained his doctor’s degree, but, on the death of Dr. Tudway, he was honoured with the title of professor of music in that university. As an exercise for his degree, he set Pope’s ode for St. Cecilia’s day; having first had interest sufficient to prevail on the author to make new arrangements in the poem to render it more fit for music, and even to add an entire new stanza, between the second and third, which had never appeared in any of the printed editions.

When lord Hardwicke was called up to the house of lords in 1734, he was chosen to succeed him in representing the borough of Seatbrd in the Commons; and he represented this borough for the remainder of his life. He defended the measures of sir Robert Walpole in general, but was far from being subservient or indiscriminate in his approbation of public measures. In 1728 he published his 1 Essay on Civil Government;“in 1730 his poem entitled” Mount Caburn,“dedicated to the duchess of Newcastle, in which he celebrates the beauties of his native country, and the virtues of his friends. In 1735 he published” Remarks on the Laws relative to the Poor, with proposals for their better relief and employment; and at the same time brought in a bill for the purpose. He made another attempt of this kind, but without effect. In May 1738, he was appointed a commissioner of the victualling-office. In 1753 appeared “Religio Philosophi; or, the principles of morality and Christianity, illustrated from a view of che universe, and of man’s situation in it.” This was followed, in 1754, by his “Essay on Deformity;” in which he rallies his own imperfection in this respect with much liveliness and good humour. “Bodily deformity,” says he, “is very rare. Among 558 gentlemen in the House of commons, I am the only one that is so. Thanks to my worthy constituents, who never objected to my person, and I hope never to give them cause to object to my behaviour.” The same year he translated Hawkins Browne “De Immortalitati Animse.” In 1755 he translated and modernized some “Epigrams of Martial;” but survived this publication only a short time, dying June 22, the same year. A little time before, he had been appointed keeper of the records in the Tower; and it is said that his attention and assiduity, during the few months he held that office, were eminently serviceable to his successors.

, Duchess of Newcastle. See Cavendish.