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

, a dissenting divine of great learning and amiable character, was born at Sudbury, on March 29, O. S. 1741, of parents in a humble walk of life, but of very respectable characters. His amiable disposition and promising talents early recommended him to the rev. Mr. Hextall, the dissenting minister of that place, who took great care of his education, and infused into hi young mind that taste for elegance in composition, which ever afterwards distinguished him. In his seventeenth year, he was sent to the academy at Daventry, then under the direction of the rev. Dr. Ashworth, where he passed through the usual course of instruction preparatory to the office of the ministry; and with such success did he cultivate his talents, that, on leaving the academy, he was at once chosen, in 1763, minister of the congregation of Benri’s Garden, in Liverpool, where he passed seven of the happiest years of life, very generally beloved and esteemed. He manned, in 1767, the daughter of Mr. Holland, draper, in Liverpool, with whom he passed all the rest of his days in most cordial union. His literary reputation was extended, during his residence in this place, by the publication of two volumes of sermons, which were very well received, and were followed by “A Collection of Hymns and of Family Prayers.”

About 1770, he was invited to take a share in the conduct of the dissenting academy at Warrington, and also to occupy the place of minister to the congregation, there, both vacant by the death of the rev. Mr. Seddon. His acceptance of this honourable invitation was a source of a variety of mixed sensations and events to him, of which anxiety and vexation composed too large a share for his happiness. No assiduity on his part was wanting in the performance of his various duties but the diseases of the institution were radical and incurable and perhaps his gentleness of temper was ill adapted to contend with the difficulties in Blatter of discipline, which seem entailed on all dissenting academies, and which, in that situation, fell upon him, as the domestic resident, with peculiar weight. He always, however, possessed the respect and affection of the hestdisposed of the students; and there was no reason to suppose that any other person, in his place, could have prevented that dissolution which the academy underwent in 1783. During the period of his engagement there, his indefatigable industry was exerted in the composition of a number of works, mostly, indeed, of the class of useful compilations, but containing valuable displays ofhis powers of thinking and writing. The most considerable was his “Institutes of Natural Philosophy,” 1783, 4to, a clear and well-arranged compendium of the leading principles, theoretical and experimental, of the sciences comprized under that head. And it may be mentioned as an extraordinary proof of his diligence and power of comprehension, that, on a vacancy in the mathematical department of the academy, which the state of the institution rendered it impossible to supply by a new tutor, he prepared himself at a short warning to fill it up; and did till it with credit and utility, though this abstruse branch of science had never before been a particular object of his study. He continued at Warrington two years after the academy had broken up, taking a few private pupils. In 1785, receiving an invitation from the principal dissenting congregation at Norwich, he accepted it, and first fixed his residence at Thorpe, a pleasant village near the city, where he pursued his plan of taking a limited number of pupils to board in his house. He afterwards removed to Norwich itself, and at length, fatigued with the long cares of education, entirely ceased to receive boarders, and only gave private instructions to two or three select pupils a few hours in the morning. This too he at last discontinued, and devoted himself solely to the duties of his congregation, and the retired and independent occupations of literature. Yet, in a private way and small circle, few men had been more successful in education, of which many striking examples might be mentioned, and none more so than the members of his own family. Never, indeed, was a father more deservedly happy in his children; but the eldest, whom he had trained with uncommon care, and who had already, when just of age, advanced in his professional, career so far as to be chosen town-clerk of Nottingham, was most unfortunately snatched away by a fever, a few years since. This fatal event produced effects on the doctor’s health which alarmed his friends. The symptoms were those of angina pectoris, and they continued till the usual serenity of his mind was restored by time and employment. Some of the last years of his life were the most comfortable; employed only in occupations which, were agreeable to him, and which left him master of his own time witnessing the happy settlement of two of his daughters contracted in his living within the domestic privacy which he loved and connected with some of the most agreeable literary companions, and with a set of cordial and kind-hearted friends, he seemed fully to enjoy life as it flowed, and indulged himself in pleasing prospects for futurity. But an unsuspected and incurable disease was preparing a sad and sudden change; a schirrous contraction of the rectum, the symptoms of which were mistaken by himself for a common laxity of the bowels, brought on a total stoppage, which, after a week’s struggle, ended in death. Its gradual approach gave him opportunity to display all the tenderness, and more than the usual firmness of his nature. He died amidst the kind offices of mourning friends at Norwich, Nov. 3, 1797. Besides the literary performances already mentioned, Dr. Enfielcl completed in 1791, the laborious task of an abridgment of “Brucker’s History of Philosophy,” which he Comprized in two volumes, 4to. It may be truly said, that the tenets of philosophy and the lives of its professors were never before displayed in so pleasing a form, and with such clearness and elegance of language. Indeed it was his peculiar excellence to arrange and express other men’s ideas to the utmost advantage; but it has been objected that in this work he has been sometimes betrayed into inaccuracies by giving what he thought the sense of the ancients in cases where accuracy required their very words to be given. Yet a more useful or elegant work upon the subject has never appeared in our language, and in our present undertaking we have taken frequent opportunities to acknowledge our obligations to it. Among Dr. Enfield’s publications not noticed above, were his “Speaker,” a selection of pieces for the purpose of recital “Exercises on Elocution,” a sequel to the preceding “The Preacher’s Directory,” an arrangement of topics and texts “The English Preacher,” a collection of short sermons from various authors, 9 vols. 12mo; “Biographical Sermons on the principal characters in the Old and New Testament.” After his death a selection of his “Sermons” was published in 3 vols. 8vo, with a life by Dr. Aikin. As a divine, Dr. Enfield ranks among the Socinians, and his endeavours in these sermons are to reduce Christianity to a mere system of ethics.

All we know of this curious artist is, that she lived single to the age of about forty, and then married Mr. Bartholomew Kello, a North Briton; that she had a son who was educated at Oxford, and was minister of Speckshall. in Suffolk. His son was sword-bearer of Norwich, and died in 1709. Joseph Hall, bishop of Norwich, when dean of Worcester, 1617, is styled by her, “My very singulaf friend,” in a manuscript dedicated to him, now in the Bodleian library.

Here he was ordained in 1610, and made minister of the village of Bleyswyck, which was dependent upon Rotterdam. He was one of the deputies in the conference held at the Hague in 1611, before the states of Holland, between six anti-remonstrant and six remonstrant ministers; and here he displayed his wit and learning to the greatest advantage. In 1612 he was chosen divinity-professor at Leyden, in the room of Gomarus, who had voluntarily resigned; and lived in peace with Polyander his colleague, though they held contrary opinions about predestination. The functions, however, of his post and his private studies were a light burden to him, compared with the difficulties he had to sustain on account of the Arminian controversy; which, though it began in the universities, soon extended to the pulpits, and from them to the people, and none were more unpopular than Episcopius and the most eminent men of the Arminian party. The second year of his professorship at Leyden, he was abused at Amsterdam at church and in the street; because, being godfather to one of his nieces, he had taken upon him to reply to the minister who officiated. The minister asked him whether the doctrine of the church there was not the true and perfect doctrine of salvation Episcopius answered, that he admitted it only, with certain limitations which provoked the minister to call him a presumptuous young man and this altercation exposed Episcopius to the rage of the populace, from which he narrowly ercaped. Curcellaeus informs us, that in February 1617, the house of Episcopius’s eldest brother was plundered by the mob at Amsterdam under this false pretence, that a great many Arminians used to meet there to hear sermons.

In 1614, he began his comment upon the first epistle of St. John, which gave occasion to various rumours, all of them tending to prove him a Socinian. The year taking the opportunity of the vacation, he went to Paris, for the sake of seeing that city; but his object was immediately misrepresented, and on his return home, his adversaries published, that he had had secret conferences with father Cotton, in order to concert the ruin of the protestant church and the United Provinces that he avoided all conversation with Peter du Moulin, minister at Paris or, as others say, that the latter declined all conference with him, seeing him so intimate with the enemies of his country, and of the protestant religion; and although there was little truth in these reports, it was not easy for Episcopius to prove his innocence. The states of Holland having invited him to come to the synod of Dort, that he might take his place in that assembly, as well as the other professors of the Seven United Provinces, he was one of the first that went thither, and was accompanied by some remonstrant ministers. But the synod would not suffer them to sit in that assembly as judges, nor admit them but as persons summoned to appear. They were obliged to submit, and appear before the synod. Episcopius made a speech, in which he declared, that they were all ready to enter into a conference with the synod; but was answered, that the synod did not meet to confer, but to judge. They excepted against the synod, and refused to submit to the order made by that assembly: which was, that the remonstrants should neither explain nor maintain their opinions, but as far as the synod should judge it necessary. Upon their refusing to submit to this order, they were expelled the synod and measures were taken to judge them by their writings. They defended their cause with the pen and Episcopius composed most of the pieces they presented on this occasion, and which were published some time after. The synod then deposed them from their functions; and because they refused to subscribe a writing, which contained a promise not to perform privately any of their ministerial functions, they were banished out of the territories of the commonwealth in 1618, and took up their residence at Antwerp: as thinking themselves there in the best situation to take care of their churches and families. Episcopius was not now so much taken up with the affairs of his party, as not to find time to write against the church of Rome in defence of those truths which all the protestants in general maintain. When the war between tho Spaniards and United Provinces began again in 1621, he went to France; and there laboured by his writings, as much as lay in his power, to strengthen and comfort his brethren. He not only composed, in common with them, “A confession of faith;” and published, soon after, his “Antidote against the canons of the synod of Dort,” but he also disputed with great strength of argument against Wadingus, a Jesuit; who treated him very kindly, and, taking an advantage of the difficulties he saw him under, endeavoured to persuade him to enter into the pale of his church. The times being grown more favourable, he returned to Holland in 1620; and was made a minister of the church of the remonstrants at Rotterdam. He married the year after, but never had any children by his wife, who died in 1641. In 1634 he removed to Amsterdam, being chosen rector of the college which those of his sect had founded there, and continued in that post till his death, which was preceded by a tedious and gradual decline. August 1640, hiring a vessel, he went with his wife to Rotterdam but in the afternoon, while he was yet upon Ins voyage, a fever seized him and, to add to his indisposition, about evening came on such a storm of thunder and fain as had not been known for many years. All these hindrances made them arrive so late at Rotterdam, that the gates of the city were shut: and the long time he was obliged to wait, before he could get them opened, increased his disorder so much, that he was confined to his bed for the four following months. He recovered; yet perceived the effects of this illness, in the stone and other complaints, as long as he lived. He died the 4th of April, 1643, having lost his sight some weeks before. Limborch, with the partiality of a friendly biographer, tells us, that the moon was under an eclipse at the hour of his death; and that some considered it as a fit emblem of the church, as being then deprived of much light by the disappearing of such a luminary as Episcopius. He tells us also, with more truth, that Episcopius’s friends and relations had some medals struck with the images of Truth and Liberty upon them, in remembrance of him. Yet Episcopius did not always write with that moderation 'which becomes the patience and humility of a Christian; and his friends who have defended him against this charge, have not been very successful.

Theology, however, was his favourite study; and his predilection for the ministerial function increasing, he persevered, notwithstanding the opposition of his relations, in the necessary preparatory studies; which being completed, he obtained a licence from the presbytery of Dumblane, in 1742. In May 174-4, he was ordained minister of Kirkintillock, in the presbytery of Glasgow. In 1751 he was removed to the borough of Culross, in the presbytery of Dumfermline. In June 1758, he was invited to Edinburgh, and settled in the New Grey-friars’ church there; and in July 1759, he and Dr. Itobertson were admitted joint ministers of the Old Grey-friars’ church. His unaffected piety, attention to pastoral duties, and useful instructions in public and private, his sympathy with the distressed, and the blamelessness of his private conduct, were truly exemplary, and secured him the affections of his people wherever he went, as well as occasioned their regret at his removal. While thus employed among his people, or in his study, his actiye mind was also employed in watching the progress of religion, both in his own country and in the world at large, and in manifesting his zeal for the success of it. With a view to procure information on this subject, he commenced a correspondence with several persons of distinguished fame and knowledge, both on th continent and in America. He also procured and read very new publication of merit, all the foreign journals, and whatever could administer to his purpose. His “Sermons,” which were published in 1798, may be ranked among the best specimens of pulpit composition. Between 1742, the year in which he was licensed, and 1798, the year in which his sermons appeared, the literature of Scotland had suffered a complete revolution, and in nothing was the change more apparent than in the manner in which the services of the pulpit were conducted. At the former period, sermons abounded with diffuse illustrations; and were disgraced by colloquial phrases, and vulgar provincialisms, In these later years, pulpit composition has attained a highdignity and elegance. Whoever reads the discourses of Dr. Erskine, which in purity and energy of style, no less than in precision of thought and originality of sentiment, may challenge a comparison with any contemporary sef+ inons, must be sensible that their author, whose education bad been completed sixty years before their publication, must have paid no common attention to literary composition, and could watch the variations of taste, keep pace with its improvements, and adapt his productions to the style of the day. Yet he did not servilely imitate the refinements of others, or allow himself to be passively borne along with the stream of fashion. His labours contributed to accomplish that revolution to which we have just now alluded, and to form that standard which we admire; but he had nobler objects in view than the bare information of the literary taste of his countrymen, although he was far from indifferent to this object. In the detached sermons which he printed when a country clergyman, there was a propriety and correctness which had never been exhibited in any religious productions of North Britain, and which was scarcely surpassed in the English language at that time. His “Theological Dissertations,” which appeared so early as 1765, contain several masterly disquisitions on some highly interesting branches of divinity. The subjects, indeed, did not admit a display of eloquence; but throughout the whole, he has shewn great soundness of judgment, as well as an intimate acquaintance with the doctrines of the Gospel, and history of the Christian church.

He died on the morning of Jan. 19, 1803. He married the hon. Miss Mackay, daughter of lord Rae, who survives him, and by whom he had a son and three daughters. In his temper, Dr. Erskine was ardent and benevolent. His affections were warm, and his attachments perpetual. His piety was constant and lively; and, while he exhibited in his conduct a beautiful example of the graces and virtues of that religion of which he was a minister, he enjoyed, in a high degree, the cheering hopes which the faith of the gospel inspires. He was remarkable for the simplicity of his manners, and for that genuine humility, which is the attendant and brightest ornament of real greatness. His beneficent deeds, which, were Very nilmerous, and remain a precious memorial of him, were performed in the unostentatious manner of real charity. He was never ashamed to avow his own convictions of the truth; and, while he put the most candid construction on the motives of those who differed from him in sentiment, be maintained his own principles with firmness. In the general assembly of the church of Scotland he was considered as a leader of the popular party. There, however, his openness and integrity of character secured him, what few have enjoyed, the confidence and affection of his friends, and the esteem of his opponents. Of the high reputation to which his virtues had raised him, no proof more decisive can be given, than“a circumstance which occurred during the disturbances in Edinburgh, in February 1779, occasioned by the celebrated bill, proposed at that time to have been introduced into parliament for the repeal of the penal statutes against the catholics in Scotland. The furious mob, which, in defiance of the military, had assembled in the college-court with the intention of demolishing the house of principal Robertson, became quiet at his approach; and, in consequence of his exhortation to them, desisted from their purpose. Dr. Erskine’s independence and liberality of mind deserve to be particularly mentioned. These were qualities that shone conspicuously through the whole of his life; and which he possessed in so eminent a degree, that many thought he carried them to an exteme. To his publications we may add a” Reply to a printed Letter directed to him by A. G. in which the gross and palpable misrepresentations, in the said letter, of his Sketches of Church History, as promoting the designs of the infamous sect of the illuminati, are considered," 1718.

, a Scotch divine, was one of the younger of the thirty- three children of Ralph Erskine, of Shieltield, a family of considerable antiquity in the county of Merse, and descended from the noble family of Marr. He was born at Dryburgh, still the family-seat of the Buchan family, in 1624, where he received the rudiments of his education, and in 1650 took the degree of M. A. in the university of Edinburgh. He was ordained to the ministry by the presbyterians in England, to the Jiving of Cornhill, in Durham, but soon after was ejected by the act of uniformity, on which he returned to his own country; but the persecution carried on at that time in Scotland against the presbyterians, obliged Mr. Erskine to take refuge in Holland, whence the want of the common necessaries of life induced him again to return to his native country, where he was apprehended and committed prisoner to the Bass, a strong fort in the mouth of the Forth. There he continued near three years till, through the interest of the then earl of Marr, his kinsman, he was set at liberty but such was the violence of the times, that he was again driven from Scotland. In 1687, when king James’s toleration, was proclaimed, Mr. Erskine embraced it; and on the re-establishment of presbytery in 1690, he was appointed minister of Churnside in the county of Berwick. He died August 10, 1696, aged sixty-eight, much respected by all who knew him, and left behind him several manuscripts, elucidating difficult passages in scripture; but these having been written in Latin, none of them were ever published.

, son of the above, was born in the prison of the Bass, June 22, 1680, and in 1701 took his degree of M. A. in the university of Edinburgh. lu 1703 he was ordained minister of Portmoak in the county of Fife, where he discharged the pastoral duty with great integrity till 1731, when he was made choice of to be one of the ministers of Stirling. In April 1732, being chosen moderator of the synod of Perth and Stirling, it was his turn to preach at the opening of that synod at Perth, and in his sermon he took occasion to censure some late proceedings of the general assembly of the church of Scotland, respecting patronage; and this brought on a prosecution against him, which was conducted with so little judgment or moderation on the part of the assembly, as eventually to occasion a schism in the church of great extent. This is usually known by the name of the secession, and its adherents by that of Seceders, now a very numerous body in Scotland, for whose history we may refer to a very impartial and well-written account under the article Seceders, in the Encyclopaedia Britannica, or to a tract, where their history is more minutely detailed, entitled “An historical account of the rise and progress of the Secession,” by John Brown, minister of the gospel at Hadclington. Mr. Erskine, however, experienced by this no falling off in his popularity, being still beloved by his hearers, and esteemed even by those who were his professed enemies, A meeting was built for him at Stirling, where he officiated to a very numerous congregation, and where he died, June 2, 1754. As a gentleman and a scholar, few ever equalled him; and, although but in low circumstances, his charity was unbounded. Four volumes of his sermons were printed at Glasgow in 8vo, 1762, and a fifth volume at Edinburgh, 1765, under the patronage of the late duchess of Northumberland, in whose family one of his sons lived as a gardener.

, brother of the above, was born at Monilaws in Northumberland, March 15, 1685, was educated along with his brother Ebenezer in the university of Edinburgh, and took the degree of A. M. 1704, after which he was licensed to preach as a probationer in 1709. But notwithstanding his popular abilities as a preacher, yet he did not obtain a settlement in the church till 1711, when he was ordained minister at Dunfermline in Fifeshire. There he continued till 1734, when, joining the st'ceders along with his brother Ebenezer, he was deposed by an order from the general assembly. Esteemed and beloved by his hearers, they built a meeting for him, and attended his ministry till his death, which happened Nov. 6, 1752, in the sixty-eighth year of his age. As a divine, few men were ever more esteemed in Scotland; and the character given of him by the late Mr. Hervey sets his abilities in the highest point of view. His works, in 2 vols. fol. were published in 1764, consisting principally of sermons, “The Gospel Sonnets,” and “A Paraphrase in verse of the Song of Solomon.”

, a French protestant divine in the seventeenth century, was born at Dauphine, and became minister of the French church in London, an office which he sustained during the reigns of James I. and Charles I. He published several s’mall tracts, which were afterwards collected and published at Geneva and the Hague, in three and in two volumes 12mo, about 1670. He also published a work, which he dedicated to Charles I. entitled “Erreurs Populaires en points generaux qui concernent Pintelligence de la Religion,” and in some of his works has a criticism on the catechism of Calvin, which was so much used in the schools at Geneva.

, a learned and orthodox Dutch divine, was born at Bommel, in the duchy of Guelderland, in February 1618, and after having been instructed in classical learning at home, was sent to Utrecht, where he studied under Antonius Emilius, who was at that time moderator of the university. He then went through a course of philosophy, mathematics, and theology, under the ablest professors, and in 1639 his name was put into the list of students who were candidates for the ministry. The following year he was admitted to his degree of M. A. In 1641 he was appointed pastor of the church of Nederlangbroeck. In 1645 he took his doctor’s degree in theology; and in 1651 was chosen minister of the church of Utrecht: two years after, he was appointed joint professor of divinity with Walter de Bruyn, and began his course of lectures, according to the usual mode, by a discourse “De tractatione verbi divini.” He died May 18, 1672, and an eulogium was pronounced on him by his quondam fellowstudent, John Voetius, as appears by one of Graevius’s letters in Burman’s “Sylloge,” vol. IV. p. 419. His works were, 1. “Triumphus Crucis, sive fides catholica de satisfactione Jesu Christi,” Amst. 1649, a work levelled at the Socinian opinions, especially those of Crellius. It was the reputation of this learned performance which first pointed him out as fit for the professor’s chair. 2. “De morah'tate Sabbathi,” 1658. 3. “Disquisitio de moralitate Sabbathi hebdomadalis,” 1665. 4. “Dissertationes de Decalogo et die Sabbathi adversus Abrahamum Heidanum,” Utrecht, 1666, 4to. 5. “Vindiciae quarti praecepti in Decalogo,” ibid. 1666, written in answer to Francis Barman, who defended the opinions of Cocceius. 6. “Defensio concilii Theologici Ultrajectini de Canonicatibus, Vicariatibns, &c.” 1658, 4to, which was answered by Desmarais, in his “Vindicirc de Canonicis,” printed at Groningen, 1660, 4to. 7. “Systema Theologicum,” Utrecht, 1659, 2 vols. 4to, in the preface to which he promises a system of practical divinity. 8. “Synopsis controversiarum Theologicarum, et index locorum totius sacrae Scripturoc,” Arnst. 1661, and Utrecht thrice reprinted, y. “Compendium Theologiae dogmaticum,” Utrecht, 1669, and 1685, 8vo. 10. “Apologia pro ministris in Anglia non conformistis.” The date of this is not in our authority, but the work must not be mistaken for one with a similar title, supposed by Hickman, mentioned in our account of Durell; (see Durell). 11. “Dissertatio de subjectione Christi ad legem divinam.” 12. “Doctrina de nostra redemptione per meritum Jesu Christi.” 13. “Instructio salutaris de Judaeis.” 14. “Refutatio vere catholica contra pontificios.” 15. “Oratio de celsitudine perseverantiie.” 16. “Oratio funebris in obitum Gualteri de Bruyn,” Utrecht, 1653. 17. “Oratio funebris in obitum Gisberti Voetii,” ibid. 1677, 4to. He published also in Dutch, a treatise on the tributemoney, from Matthew xvii. verse 24, &c. and various theological dissertations written as theses for disputation.

, marshal of France, and minister of state, was born at Paris, July 1, 1695, the son of François Michel le Tellier de Courtanvaux, captaincolonel of the Cent-Suisses, son of the marquis de Louvois and Marie Anne Catherine d‘Estrees, daughter of John count d’Estrees, vice-admiral and marshal of France. He first bore arms in the short war which the duke of Orleans, regent, declared against Spain, and served under the command of the marechal de Berwick. Having attained by his services the rank of field-marshal and inspector- general of cavalry, he signalized himself in the war of 1741. The blockade of Egra, the passage of the Meine at Selingstadt, the battle of Fontenoi, the siege of Mons, that of Charleroi, &c. were among the exploits in which he was concerned. He had the greatest share in the victory of Laufeldt; and marshal Saxe, an excellent judge of military merit, trusted him on various occasions with the most critical manoeuvres. On the breaking out of the war in 1756, Louis XV. who had promoted him to the rank of marshal of France, Feb. 24, 1757, appointed him to the command of the army in Germany, consisting of upwards of 100,000 men. He set out in the beginning of spring, after having shewn the monarch the plan of operations. “At the beginning of July,” said he, “I shall have pushed the enemy beyond the Weser, and shall be ready to penetrate into the electorate of Hanover;” and, not content with effecting this, he gave battle to the duke of Cumberland at Hastembeck, the 26th of July; after this, he was replaced by marshal Richelieu, who profited by the advantages that had been gained, to obtain the capitulation of Closterseven, by which the Hanoverians engaged to remain neuter during the rest of the war. Marshal d‘Estrees, recalled by intrigues at court, and sent to Giessen, after the battle of Minden, took no share in the command, but contented himself with giving useful advice to M. de Contades. He obtained the brevet of duke in 1763, and he died the 2d of January, 1771, at the age of seventy-six. Marshal d’Estrees left no children.

That his long seven years’ silence is not to be pardon'd." Which shews that the poem in which these lines are written was just before the publication of our author’s last comedy. Sir George was addicted to great extravagances, being too free of his purse in gaming, and of his constitution with women and wine; which embarrassed his fortune, impaired his health, and exposed him to many reflections. Gildon says, that for marrying a fortune he was knighted; but it is said in a poem of those times, which never was printed (ms collection of satires, in the Harleian collection), that, to make some reparation of his circumstances, he courted a rich old widow; whose ambition was such, that she would not marry him unless he could make her a lady; which he was forced by the purchase of knighthood to do. This was probably about 1683. We hear not of any issue he had by this lady; but he cohabited, whether before or after this said marriage is not known, for some time with Mrs. Barry, the actress, and had a daughter by her on whom he settled five or six thousand pounds but she died young. From the same intelligence we have also learnt, that sir George was, in his person, a fair, slender, genteel man; but spoiled his countenance with drinking, and other habits of intemperance; and, in his deportment, very affable and courteous, of a sprightly and generous temper; which, with his free, lively, and natural vein of writing, acquired him the general character of Gentle George and Easy Etherege; in respect to which qualities we may often find him compared with sir Charles Sedley. His courtly address, and other accomplishments, won him the favour of the duchesi of York, afterwards, when king James was crowned, his queen; by whose interest and recommendation he wa sent ambassador abroad. In a certain pasquil that was written upon him, it is intimated as if he was sent upon ome embassy to Turkey. Gildon says, that, being in particular esteem with king James’s consort, he was sent envoy to Hamburgh but it is in several books evident, that he was, in that reign, a minister at Ratisbon at least from 1686 to the time that his majesty left this kingdom, if not later and this appears also from his own letters which he wrote thence some to the earl of Middleton, inverse to one of which his lordship engaged Mr. Dryden to return a poetical answer, in which he invites sir George to write another play; and, to keep him in countenance for his having been so dilatory in his last, reminds him hovr long the comedy, or farce, of the “Rehearsal” had been hatching, by the duke of Buckingham, before it appeared: but we meet with nothing more of our author’s writing for the stage. There are extant some other letters of his in prose, which were written also from Ratisbon; two of which he sent to the duke of Buckingham when he was in his recess. As for his other compositions, such as have been printed, they consist, for the greatest part, of little airy sonnets, lampoons, and panegyrics, of no great poetical merit, although suited to the gay and careless taste of the times. All that we have met with, of his prose, is a short piece, entitled “An Account of the rejoycing at the diet of Ratisbonne, performed by sir George Etherege, knight, residing therefrom his majesty of Great Britain; upon occasion of the birth of the prince of Wales. In a letter from himself.” Printed in the Savoy, 1688. How far beyond this or the next year he lived, the writers on our poets, who have spoken of him, have been, as in many other particulars of his life, so in the time when he died, very deficient. In Gildon’s short and imperfect account of him, it is said, that after the revolution he went for France to his master, and died there, or very soon after his arrival thence in England. But there was a report, that sir George came to an untimely death by an unlucky accident at Ratisbon; for, after having treated some company with a liberal entertainment at his house there, in which having perhaps taken his glass too freely, and being, through his great complaisance, too forward in waiting on some of his guests at their departure, flushed as he was, he tumbled down the stairs and broke his neck. Sir George had a brother, who lived and died at Westminster; he had been a great courtier, yet a man of such strict honour, that he was esteemed a reputation to the family. He had been twice married, and by his first wife had a son; a little man, of a brave spirit, who inherited the honourable principles of his father. He was a colonel in king William’s wars; was near him in one of the most dangerous battles in Flanders, probably it was the battle of Landen in 1693, when his majesty was wounded, 'and the colonel both lost his right eye, and received a contusion on his side. He was offered, in queen Anne’s reign, twenty-two hundred pounds for his commission, but refused to live at home in? peace when his country was at war. This colonel Ktherege died at Ealing in Middlesex, about the third or fourth year of king George I. and was buried in Kensington church, near the altar; where there is a tombstone over his vault, in which were also buried his wife, son, and sister. That son was graciously received at court by queen Anne; and, soon after his father returned from the wars in Flanders under the duke of Marlborough, she gave him an ensign’s commission, intending farther to promote him', in reward of his father’s service but he died a youth and the sister married Mr. Hill of Feversham in Kent but we hear not of any male issue surviving. The editors of the Biographia Dramatica observe, that, as a writer, sir George Etherege was certainly born a poet, and appears to have been possessed of a genius, the vivacity of which had littlecultivation; for there are no proofs of his having been a scholar. Though the “Comical Revenge” succeeded very well upon the stage, and met with general approbation for a considerable time, it is now justly laid aside on account of its immorality. This is the case, likewise, with regard to sir George’s other plays. Of the “She would if she could,” the critic Dennis says, that though it was esteemed by men of sense for the trueness of some of its characters, and the purity, freeness, and easy grace of its dialogue, yet, on its first appearance, it was barbarously treated by the audience. If the auditors were offended with the licentiousness of the comedy, their barbarity did them honour; but it is probable that, at that period, they were influenced by some other consideration. Exclusively of its loose tendency, the play is pronounced to be undoubtedly a very good one; and it was esteemed as one of the first rank at the time in which it was written. However, ShadwelPs encomium upon it will be judged to be too extravagant.

As to a general character of prince Eugene, it may easily be collected from what has already been said of him. He was always remarkable for his liberality; one instance of which he shewed, while he was here in England, to Mrs. Centlivre, the poetess; who, having addressed to him a trifling poem on his visiting England, received from him a gold snuff-box, valued at about 35 pistoles. He was also a man of great and unaffected modesty, so that he could scarcely bear, with any tolerable grace, the just acknowledgments that were paid him by all the world. Burnet, who was admitted several times to much discourse with him, says, that “he descended to an easy equality with those who conversed with him, and seemed to assume nothing to himself, while he reasoned with others.” He said jokingly one day, when the duke of Marlborough talking of his attachment to his queen, Regina pecunia, “Money is his queen.” This great general was a man of letters; he was intended for the church, and was known at the court of France by the name of the abbé de Savrie. Having made too free in a letter with some of old Louis the Fourteenth’s gallantries, he fled out of France, and served as a volunteer in the emperor’s service in Hungary against the Turks, where he soon distinguished himself by his talents for the military art. He was presented by the emperor with a regiment, and a few years afterwards made commander in chief of his armies. Louvois, the insolent war-minister of the insolent Louis XIV. had written to him to tell him, that he must never think of returning to his country: his reply was, “Eugene entrera un jour en France en dépit de Louvois & de Louis.” In all his military expeditions, he carried with him Thomas a Kempis “de Imitatione.” He seemed to be of the opinion of the great Gustavus Adolphus, king of Sweden, “that a good Christian always made a good soldier.” Being constantly busy, he held the passion of love very cheap, as a mere amusement, that served only to enlarge the power of women, and to abridge that of men. He used to say, “Les amoureux sont dans la société ce que les fanatiques sont en religion.” His amusement was war, and in the Memoirs written by himself, and lately published, he speaks of some of its horrors with too little feeling. It is said that he was observed to be one day very pensive, and was asked by his favourite aid-de-camp on what he was meditating so deeply? “My good friend,” replied he, “I am thinking, that if Alexander the Great had been obliged to wait for the approbation of the deputies of Holland before he attacked the enemy, how impossible it would have been for him to have made half the conquests that he did!” This illustrious conqueror lived to a great age, and being tam Mercurio quam Marte, “as much a scholar as a captain,” amused himself with making a fine collection of books, pictures, and prints, which are now in the emperor’s collection at Vienna. The celebrated cardinal Passionei, then nuncio at Vienna, preached his funeral sermon, from the following text of apocryphal Scripture: “Alexander, son, of Philip the Macedonian, made many wars, took many strong holds, went through the ends of the earth, took spoils of many nations: the earth was quiet before him. After these things he fell sick, and perceived that he should die.”—Maccabees.

, a very eminent mathematician, was born at Basil, on the 14th of April, 1707: he was the son of Paul Euler and of Margaret Brucker (of a family illustrious in literature), and spent the first year of his life at the village of Richen, of which place his father was protestant minister. Being intended for the church, his father, who had himself studied under James Bernoulli!, taught him mathematics, as a ground-work of his other studies, or at least a noble and useful secondary occupation. But Euler, assisted and perhaps secretly encouraged by John Bernoulli, who easily discovered that he would be the greatest scholar he should ever educate, soon declared his intention of devoting his life to that pursuit. This intention the wise father did not thwart, but the son did not so blindly adhere to it, as not to connect with it a more than common improvement in every other kind of useful learn-, ing, insomuch that in his latter days men often wondered how with such a superiority in one branch, he could have been so near to eminence in all the rest. Upon the foundation of the academy of sciences at St. Petersburgh, in, 1723, by Catherine I. the two younger Bernouillis, NichoJas and Daniel, had gone thither, promising, when they set out, to endeavour to procure Euler a place in it: they accordingly wrote to him soon after, to apply his mathetics to physiology, which he did, and studied under the best naturalists at Basil, but at the same time, i. e. in 1727, published a dissertation on the nature and propagation of sound; and an answer to the question on the masting of ships, which the academy of sciences at Paris judged worthy of the accessit. Soon after this, he was called to St. Petersburgh, and declared adjutant to the mathematical class in the academy, a class, in which, from the circumstances of the times (Newton, Leibnitz, and so many other eminent scholars being just dead), no easy laurels were to be gathered. Nature, however, who had organized so many mathematical heads at one time, was not yet tired of her miracles and she added Euler to the number. He indeed was much wanted the science of the calculus integralis, hardly come out of the hands of its creators, was still too near the stage of its infancy not to want to be made more perfect. Mechanics, dynamics, and especially hydrodynamics, and the science of the motion of the heavenly bodies, felt the imperfection. The application of the differential calculus, to them, had been sufficiently successful; but there were difficulties whenever it was necessary to go from the fluxional quantity to the fluent. With regard to the nature and properties of numbers, the writings of Fermat (who had been so successful in them), and together with these all his profound researches, were lost. Engineering and navigation were reduced to vague principles, and were founded on a heap of often contradictory observations, rather than a regular theory. The irregularities in the motions of the celestial bodies, and especially the complication of forces whitfh influence that of the moon, were still the disgrace of geometers. Practical astronomy had jet to wrestle with the imperfection of telescopes, insomuch, that it could hardly be said that any rule for making them existed. Euler turned his eyes to all these objects he perfected the calculus integralis he was the inventor of a new kind of calculus, that of sines he simplified analytical operations and, aided by these powerful help-mates, and the astonishing facility with which he knew how to subdue expressions the most intractable, he threw a new light on all the branches of the mathematics. But at Catherine’s death the academy was threatened with extinction, by men who knew not the connection which arts and sciences have with the happiness of a people. Euler was offered and accepted a lieutenancy on board one of the empress’s ships, with the promise of speedy advancement. Luckily things changed, and the learned captain again found his own element, and was named Professor of Natural Philosophy in 1733, in the room of his friend John Bernouilli. The number of memoirs which Euler produced, prior to this period, is astonishing, but what he did in 1735 is almost incredible, An important calculation was to be made, without loss of time; the other academicians had demanded some months to do it. Euler asked three days—in three days he did it; but the fatigne threw him into a fever, and the fever left him not without the loss of an eye, an admonition which would have made an ordinary man more sparing of the other. The great revolution, produced by the discovery of fluxions, had entirely changed the face of mechanics; still, however, there was no complete work on the science of motion, two or three only excepted, of which Euler felt the insufficiency. He saw, with pain, that the best works on the subject, viz. “Newton’s Principia,” and “Herman’s Phoronomia,” concealed the method by which these great men had come at so many wonderful discoveries, under a synthetic veil. In order to lift this up, Euler employed all the resources of that analysis which had served him so well on so many other occasions; and thus uniting his own discoveries to those of other geometers, had them published by the academy in 1736. To say that clearness, precision, and order, are the characters of this work, would be barely to say, that it is, what without these qualities no work can be, classical of its kind. It placed Euler in the rank of the first geometricians then existing, and this at a time when John Bernouilli was still living. Such labours demanded some relaxation; the only one which Euler admitted was music, but even to this he could not go without the spirit of geometry with him. They produced together the essay on a new theory of music, which was published in 1739, but not very well received, probably, because it contains too much geometry for a musician, and too much music for a geometrician. Independently, however, of the theory, which is built on Pythagorean principles, there are many things in it which may be of service, both to composers, and to makers of instruments. The doctrine, likewise, of the genera and the modes of music is here cleared up with all the clearness and precision which mark the works of Euler. Dr. Burney remarks, that upon the whole, Euler seems not to have invented much in this treatise; and to have done little more than arrange and methodize former discoveries in a scientific and geometric manner. He may, indeed, not have known what antecedent writers had discovered before; and though not the first, yet to have imagined himself an inventor. In 1740, his genius was again called forth by the academy of Paris (who, in 1738, had adjudged the prize to his paper on the nature and properties of fire) to discuss the nature of the tides, an important question, which demanded a prodigious extent of calculations, aud an entire new system of the world. This prize Euler did not gain alone; but he divided it with Maclaurin and D. Bernouilli, forming with them a triumvirate of candidates, which the realms of science had not often beheld. The agreement of the several memoirs of Euler and Bernouilli, on this occasion, is very remarkable. Though the one philosopher had set out on the principle of admitting vortices, which the other rejected, they not only arrived at the same end of the journey, but met several times on the road; for instance, in the determination of the tides under the frozen zone. Philosophy, indeed, led these two great men by different paths; Bernouilli, who had more patience than his friend, sanctioned every physical hypothesis he was obliged to make, by painful and laborious experiment. These Euler’s impetuous genius scorned; and, though his natural sagacity did not always supply the loss, he made amends by his superiority in analysis, as often as there was any occasion to simplify expressions, to adapt them to practice, and to recognize, by final formulae, the nature of the result. In 1741, Euler received some very advantageous propositions from Frederic the Second (who had just ascended the Prussian throne), to go and assist him in forming an academy of sciences, out of the wrecks of the Royal Society founded by Leibnitz. With these offers the tottering state of the St. Petersburgh academy, under the regency, made it necessary for the philosopher to comply. He accordingly illumined the last volume of the “Melanges de Berlin,” with five essays, which are, perhaps, the best things in it, and contributed largely to the academical volumes, the first of which was published in 1744. No part of his multifarious labours is, perhaps, a more wonderful proof of the extensiveness and facility of his genius, than what he executed at Berlin, at a time when he contrived also that the Petersburgh acts should not suffer from the loss of him. In 1744, Euler published a complete treatise of isoperimetrical curves. The same year beheld the theory of the motions of tb.e planets and comets; the well-known theory of magnetism, which gained the Paris prize; and the much-amended translation of Robins’ s “Treatise on Gunnery.” In 1746, his “Theory of Light and Colours” overturned Newton’s “System of Emanations;” as did another work, at that time triumphant, the “Monads of Wolfe and Leibnitz.” Navigation was now the only branch of useful knowledge, for which the labours of analysis and geometry had done nothing. The hydrographical part alone, and that which relates to the direction of the course of ships, had been treated by geometricians conjointly with nautical astronomy. Euler was the first who conceived and executed the project of making this a complete science. A memoir on the motion of floating bodies, communicated to the academy of St. Petersburgh, in 1735, by M. le Croix, first gave him this idea. His researches on the equilibrium of ships furnished him with the means of bringing the stability to a determined measure. His success encouraged him to go on, and produced the great work which the academy published in 1749, in which we find, in systematic order, the most sublime notions on the theory of the equilibrium and mo. tion of floating bodies, and on the resistance of fluids. This was followed by a second part, which left nothing to be desired on the subject, except the turning it into a language easy of access, and divesting it of the calculations which prevented its being of general use. Accordingly in 1773, from a conversation with admiral Knowles, and other assistance, out of the “Scientia Navalis,” 2 vols. 4to, was produced, the “Theorie complette de la Construction et de la Manoeuvre des Vaisseaux.” This work was instantly translated into all languages, and the author received a present of 6000 livres from the French king: he had before had 300l. from the English parliament, for the theorems, by the assistance of which Meyer made his lunar tables . And now it was time to collect into one systematical and continued work, all the important discoveries on the infinitesimal analysis, which Euler had been making for thirty years, and which lay dispersed in the memoirs of the different academies. This, accordingly, the professor undertook; but he prepared the way by an elementary work, containing all the previous requisites for this study. This is called “An Introduction to the analysis of Infinitesimals,” and is a work in which the author has exhausted all the doctrine of fractions, whether algebraical or transcendental, by shewing their transformation, their resolution, and their developernent. This introduction was soon, followed by the author’s several lessons on the “calculus integralis, and differentialis.” Having engaged himself to count Orlow, to furnish the academy with papers sufficient to fill their volumes for twenty years after his death, the philosopher is likely to keep his word, having presented seventy papers, through Mr. Golofkin, in the course of his life, and left two hundred and fifty more behind him; nor is there one of these that does not contain a discovery, or something that may lead to one. The most ancient of these memoirs form the collection then published, under the title of “Opuscula Analytica.” Such were Euler’s labours, and these his titles to immortality His memory shall endure till science herself is no more! Few men of letters have written so much as Euler no geometrician, has ever embraced so many objects at one time or has equalled him, either in the variety or magnitude of his discoveries. When we reflect on the good such men do their fellow-creatures, we cannot help indulging a wish (vain, alas as it is) for their illustrious course to be prolonged beyond the term allotted to mankind. Euler’s, though it has had an end, was very long and very honourable; and it affords us some consolation for his loss, to think that he enjoyed it exempt from the ordinary consequences of extraordinary application, and that his last labours abounded in proofs of that vigour of understanding which marked his early days, and which he preserved to his end. Some swimmings in the head, which seized him on the first days of September, 1783, did not prevent his laying hold of a few facts, which reached him through the channel of the public papers, to calculate the motions of the aerostatical globes; and he even compassed a very difficult integration, in which the calculation had engaged him . But the decree was gone forth: on the 7th of September he talked with Mr. Lexell, who had come to dine with him, of the new planet, and discoursed with him upon other subjects, with his usual penetration. He was playing with one of his grand-children at tea-time, when he was seized with an apoplectic fit. “I am dying,” said he, before he lost his senses; and he ended his glorious life a few hours after, aged seventy-six years, five months, and three days. His latter days were tranquil and serene. A few infirmities excepted, which are the inevitable lot of an advanced age, he enjoyed a share of health which allowed him to give little time to repose. Euler possessed to a great degree what is commonly called erudition he had read all the Latin classics was perfect master of ancient mathematical literature and had the history of all ages, and all nations, even to the minutest facts, ever present to his mind. Besides this, he knew much more of physic, botany, and chemistry, than could be expected from any man who had not made these sciences his peculiar occupation. “I have seen,” says his biographer, Mr. Fuss, “strangers go from him with a kind of surprise mixed with admiration; they could not conceive how a man, who for half a century had seemed taken up in making and publishing discoveries in natural philosophy and mathematics, could have found means to preserve so much knowledge that seemed useless to himself, and foreign to the studies in which he was engaged. This was the effect of a happy memory, that lost nothing of what had ever been entrusted to it nor was it a wonder that the man who was able to repeat the whole Æneis, and to point out to his hearers the first and last verses of every page of his own edition of it, should not have lost what he had learned, at an age when the impressions made upon us are the strongest. Nothing can equal the ease with which, without expressing the least degree of ill-humour, he could quit his abstruse meditations, and give himself up to the general amusements of society. The art of not appearing wise above one’s fellows, of descending to the level of those with whom one lives, is too rare in these days not to make it a merit in Euler to have possessed it. A temper ever equal, a natural and easy chearfulness, a species of satirical wit, tempered with urbane humanity, the art of telling a story archly, and with simplicity, made his conversation generally sought. The great fund of vivacity which he had at all times possessed, and without which, indeed, the activity we have just been admiring could not have existed, carried him sometimes away, and he was apt to grow warm, but his anger left him as quickly as it came on, and there never has existed a man to whom he bore malice. He possessed a precious fund of rectitude and probity. The sworn enemy of injustice, whenever or by whomsoever committed, he used to censure and attack it, without the least attention to the rank or riches of the offender. Recent examples of this are in the recollection of all who hear me.” As he was filled with respect for religion, his piety was sincere, and his devotion full of fervour. He went through all his Christian duties with the greatest attention. Euler loved all mankind, and if he ever felt a motion of indignation, it was against the enemy of religion, particularly against the declared apostles of infidelity. He was of a very religious turn of mind. He published a New Demonstration of the Existence of God, and of the Spirituality of the Soul, which last has been admitted into several divinity schools as a standard book. With scrupulous exactness he adhered to the religion of his country, that of Calvinism, and, fortified by its principles, he was a good husband, a good father, a good friend, a good citizen, a good member of private society.

About a year after the Sicilian defeat, Euripides left Athens, and went to the Macedonian court, to which king Archelaus, who was fond of learned men, invited them by acts of munificence, gave them a gracious reception, and often raised them to very high honours. Euripides, if Solinus may be credited, he made his prime minister. Kpthing can, be a more express proof of the high esteem, Archelaus had for him, than his resenting some personal insults of one Decamnichus offered to Euripides. Our poet was seventy-two years of age when he went to that court, and had passed but few years there, when an unhappy accident concluded his life. He was walking in a wood, and, according to his usual manner, in deep meditation; when unfortunately meeting with Archelaus’s hounds, he was by them torn to pieces. Every account gives him the same end, though it differs from the rest in some minute circumstances. Some indeed relate that he was pulled to pieces by women, to revenge the honour of their sex; but this is a fable, copied from that of Orpheus, who is said to have been destroyed by Bacchanals. It is not certain, whether his death happened by chance, or through envy of some of the courtiers. The anthor of an epigram in the Anthology denies all these accounts, and ascribes his death to a decay of nature. Archelaus, however, buried him with great magnificence; and not contented with solemnizing his funeral obsequies, he also cut his hair, and assumed all the marks of grief. The Athenians were so moved with his death, that the whole city went into mourning; and one of his friends, named Philemon, declared that, could he be persuaded that the dead enjoy a sense of things, he would hang himself, in order to be with Euripides. The Athenians also sent ambassadors to Macedonia, to request of Archelaus that his body might be removed to his native country; but the king refused their demand, and erected in memory of the poet a noble monument in the vicinity of Pella, his chief city. Disappointed of this, the Athenians testified their respect for Euripides by a cenotaph on the road leading from the city to the Pirjcus. Thucydides the historian is said to have written an epitaph on him, to this purpose “All Greece is the monument of Euripides the Macedonian land possesses his bones, for there he reached the boundary of his life. His country is Athens, the Greece of Greece. Having afforded general delight by his muse, he enjoys the recompense of general praise.” That he was the friend of Socrates, may be thought a circumstance which strongly testifies the virtues of his private character. He seems not to have possessed the social qualities which distinguished his rival Sophocles. Both Euripides and his fellow-disciple Pericles are said to have imitated the austere manners of their master Auaxagoras. An ancient noet, Alexander Ætolus, quoted by Gellius, says of him, that he was morose in social intercourse, averse from laughter, and even during the festivity of the banquet, ignorant how to promote hilarity; but that whatever he wrote he tempered with the sweetness of honey, and the charms of the Sirens. He has been charged with a professed antipathy to the fair sex. This should seem to be contradicted by his having been twice married; but it appears that he was unhappily married in both instances, and may from his own experience have contracted some degree of prejudice against the sex in general. Yet although he seems eager to take every opportunity of uttering a bitter or malignant sentiment against women, Sophocles is said to have observed, that the hatred which he expressed against them was confined to the stage. And even there our countryman, Barnes, observes that if he has described some females with all the vices incident to human nature, yet he has delineated many others with all the virtues that can adorn their sex. He was near seventy-five years old when he died; and, notwithstanding some aspersions recorded by Athenaeus, he was, according to the best accounts, a man of great gravity and severity in his conduct, and regardless of pleasures.

, D. D. a dissenting minister of the baptist persuasion at Bristol, was the son, and successor in the ministry, of the rev. Hugh Evans, M. A. pastor of a congregation at Broadmead, in that city, where he was born, in 1737. Having gone through the usual course of studies at the dissenting academy^ Mile-end, London, he was admitted a preacher, and for some time exercised his function in the metropolis, but afterwards became assistant to his father in the congregation at Broadmead, Bristol. On his father’s death he succeeded him, and remained in that office for about thirty-two years, admired and beloved by his people, and not less esteemed as the superintendant of a seminary for the education of young men who were designed for the ministry. He was likewise a man of unwearied benevolence, and liberally promoted the establishment of schools for the instruction and clothing of destitute children at Broadmead, Downend, Mangotfield, &c. and himself set a bright example of personal charity and contributions, while he stirred up others to the performance of a similar duty. His publications having procured him considerable reputation as a divine and scholar, he received in 1789, the degree of D. D. from King’s-college, Aberdeen. He died of a paralytic affection, Aug. 9, 1791. Dr. Evans was twice married; first, in 1762, to miss Sarah Jeffries, the only daughter of the rev. Joseph Jeffries, of Taunton, in Somersetshire, by whom he had five children, one of whom, Joseph Jeffries Evans, esq. a merchant of London, died very lately. Mrs. Evans died in 1771; and in 1774, Dr. Evans married miss Sarah Hazle, of Bristol, who survived him. His publications are,1. “Sermons on the Scripture doctrine of the Son and Holy Spirit,” 1766, 12mo, in answer to a petulant attack on the doctrine of the Trinity by one Williams, who was, or pretended to be, a livery-servant. 2. “A collection of Hymns, adapted to public Worship,” 1769, 12mo. 3. “An address to the serious and candid professors of Christianity,” 1772, 12mo, 5th edit. 4. “Christ crucified; or the Scripture doctrine of the Atonement, in four discourses,” 1789, 12mo. 5. Seventeen occasional Sermons, and a few tracts on fugitive subjects.

, a dissenting divine of Wales, was born, in 1680, at Wrexham, in Denbighshire, descended from a race of clergymen of the establishment until his father, who was ejected for non-conformity from the living of Oswestry, in Shropshire, in 1662, and became the minister to an independent congregation at Wrexham. The son was educated with great care, and inducted to the different branches’ of literature necessary to qualify him for the office of the ministry, which he afterwards exercised in London, first as an assistant, and afterwards as successor to Dr. Daniel Williams. He was also one of the lecturers at tSalter’s hall meeting and belonged to what is called “The Merchant’s lecture.” Tn youth he was remarkably studious, and not only read over all the Christian writers of the first three centuries, but also the whole of Pool’s Synopsis, in five large folio volumes. He married a lady of family, and had a daughter supposed to be a considerable fortune; but he had been tempted to embark his property in the South-sea scheme, and the loss is supposed to have contributed to shorten his days. He died in 1730, in the fifty-first year of his age, highly esteemed by all who knew him. He had ever been eminent for piety, integrity, and public spirit; in his principles he was orthodox, but disposed to think well of and to honour those who differed from him, without any regard to the sentiments which they might hold. He received a diploma of D. D. from the universities of Edinburgh and Aberdeen. His “Practical Discourses concerning the Christian Temper,” are still in considerable estimation. The celebrated Dr. Watts characterized them as “the most complete summary of those duties which make up the Christian life,” and Dr. Doddridge, as the best practical pieces in our language. His other works are, “Sermons upon various subjects, preached to young people,” 1725, 12mo; “A Letter to Mr. Gumming, concerning the regard which ought to be had to Scripture consequences;” “A Second Letter,” in defence of the former, and about twenty occasional Sermons, printed separately. He was the editor also of the “Life of the rev. James Owen,” 1711, 12mo.

, one of the most determined opponents of revealed religion in modern times, was born at Warrington, Lancashire, April, 1731, and at first educated by an uncle, who sent him to Emanuel college, Cambridge, when in his fourteenth year. Here he took the degree of Ib. A. in 1749, and that of M. A. in 1753. At a proper age he was ordained, and for several years officiated as curate to his uncle, who had the living of Mitcham in Surrey. In 1768 he obtained the vicarage of South Mirnms, near Barnet, and resided in the vicarage house about two years, when, by the interest of John Dodd, esq. M. P. for Reading, lord Camden, then lord chancellor, presented him to the rectory of Tewkesbury. In conjunction with this, Mr. Evanson held the vicarage of Longton, a village in Worcestershire, about five miles from Tewkesbury, for which he exchanged that of South Mimms. While settled at Tewkesbury, he seems first to have inclined to those deviations from the opinions of his church, which by degrees led him much farther than he could find any to follow him, even among those who had hitherto been most distinguished for their hostility to orthodoxy. We are told that almost as soon as he began to entertain doubts concerning the doctrine of the Trinity, he wrote a letter to the archbishop of Canterbury, stating the rise of his first scruples, with the grounds of them, and requesting of his grace to favour him, by means of his secretary, with such information as might assist in removing those doubts, and enable him conscientiously to remain in his office as a minister of the Gospel, &c. At what precise time, or to what archbishop this letter was written, we have not been informed, but no answer was returned, or could indeed have been reasonably expected. Perhaps, however, it was about the same time that Mr. Evanson began to take such liberties in reading the Liturgy as suited his new opinions; and for this, and some of those opinions delivered in the pulpit, particularly in a sermon preached in 1771, on the doctrine of the resurrection, a prosecution was commenced against him, which, after a considerable expence incurred on both sides, on account of some irregularity in the proceedings of the prosecutors, ended in a nonsuit. Seven years after this Mr. Evanson published the sermon, with an affidavit to its literal authenticity. To this he appears to have been obliged by the publication, on the part of his opponents, of “A narrative of the origin and progress of the prosecution against the rev. Edward Evanson.” This last was followed by “A word at parting; being a few observations on a mutilated sermon, and an epistle dedicatory to the worthy inhabitants of Tewkesbury, lately published by Edward Evanson, M. A.: to which are added, the arguraents of counsel in the court of delegates touching Mr. Evanson’s prosecution.” Both these were published by the late Neast Havard, esq. town clerk of Tewkesbury, who had been principally active in instituting the prosecution. In favour of Mr. Evanson, however, we are told that it was only “a small party” who found fault with his doctrines, and that the principal inhabitants of Tewkesbury supported him by subscribing a very large sum to defray his expences. The inhabitants of Longdon were still more partial, for it is said that “they would willingly have kept him among them, permitting him to make, as he had been accustomed, any alterations in the church service that his own views of the subject might have dictated:” Mr. Evanson, however, does not appear to have set a very great value on a licence of this description, and acted a more fair and wise part in resigning both his livings. He then (in 3778) returned to Mitcham, and undertook the education of a few pupils, the father of one of whom, col. EvelynJames Stuart, settled an annuity upon him, which was regularly paid until his death.

Being now recommended to sir Richard Brown, bart. the king’s minister there, he made his addresses to his only daughter Mary, whom he married June 27, 1647, and in her right became possessed of Sayes-court near Deptford, in Kent, where he resided after his return to England, which was in October of that year. Soon after his arrival he went to Hampton court, where he had the honour to kiss his majesty’s hand, and gave him an account of several things he had in charge. On Jan. 21, 1648-9, he published his tract on liberty and servitude, for which he wasseverely threatened, and probably on this account he went again to France in July 1649, and in November of that year he attended his father-in-law sir Richard Brown, when he had his first audience at the French court, after the death of Charles I. and delivered his credentials from Charles II. In July 1650 he went again to England, but returned to Paris in the following month. In Jan. 1651-2 he left France, and returning to England, settled at Sayescourt near Deptford, and in May was joined by his wife from France. In all he appears to have spent about seven years in his travels, and with a mind highly improved by what he had seen and read, he silently pursued his studies at this retirement (for such it then was), and wrote and published some of those works which afterwards gave him a distinguished name in the learned world. It was here also that he first shewed his skill in planting and gardening, both then very little understood in England, and rendered this place the wonder and admiration of the most judicious men of his time. The situation, indeed, of public affairs induced him to consider privacy as a very great blessing; and so fond was he of his rural retreat, that he very rarely quitted it, though but a young man, with a considerable fortune, and extremely admired and courted by all his acquaintance. This studious disposition, together with his disgust of the world, occasioned by that strange scene of violence and confusion that was then acted upon the public stage, was so strong, that he actually proposed to the honourable Mr. Robert Boyle, the raising of a kind of college for the reception of persons of the same turn of mind, where they might enjoy the pleasure of agreeable society, and at the same time pass their days without care or interruption. His plan was thus formed: “I propose the purchasing of thirty or forty acres of land, in some healthy place, not above twenty-five miles from London, of which a good part should be tall wood, and the rest upland pastures, or downs sweetly irrigated. If there were not already an house which might be converted, &c. we wonld erect, upon the most convenient site of this near the wood, our building, viz. one handsome pavillion, containing a refectory, library, withdrawing-room, and a closet this the first story for, we suppose the kitchen, larders, cellars, and offices, to be contrived in the half-story under ground. In the second should be a fair lodging-chamber, a palletroom, gallery, and a closet, all which should be well and very nobly furnished, for any worthy person that might desire to stay any time, and for the reputation of the college. The half-story above, for servants, wardrobes, and like conveniences. To the entry fore-front of this court, and at the other back-front, a plot walled in, of a competent square for the common seraglio, disposed into a garden, or it might be only carpet, kept curiously, and to serve for bowls, walking, or other recreations, &c. if the company please. Opposite to the house, towards the wood, should be erected a pretty chapel, and, at equal distances, even within the flanking walls of the square, six apartments or cells for the members of the society, and not contiguous to the pavillion, each whereof should contain a small bed-chamber, an outward room, a closet, and a private garden, somewhat after the manner of the Carthusians. There should likewise be an elaboratory, with a repository for rarities and things of nature; aviary, dovehouse, physic-garden, kitchen-garden, and a plantation of orchard-fruit, &c. all uniform buildings, but of single stories, or a little elevated. At a convenient distance, towards the olitory garden, should be a stable for two or three horses, and a lodging for a servant or two. Lastly, a garden-house and conservatory for tender plants. The estimate amounts thus the pavillion 400l. the chapel, 150. apartments, walls, and out-housing, 600l. the purchase of a fee for thirty acres, at fifteen pounds 1600/, will be the utmost. Three of the cells, or apartments, that is, one moiety with the appurtenances, shall be at the disposal of one of the founders, and the other half at the others. If, I and my wife take up two apartments (for we are to be decently asunder, however, I stipulate, and her inclination will greatly suit with it, that shall be no impediment to the society, but a considerable advantage to the ceeonomicpart), a third shall be for some, worthy person; and, to facilitate the rest, I offer to furnish the whole pavillion completely to the value of 500l. in goods and moveables, if need be for seven years, till there shall be a public stock, &c. There shall be maintained, at the public charge, only a chaplain, well qualified, an ancient woman to dress the meat, wash, and do all such offices; a man to buy provision, keep the garden, horses, &c. a boy to assist him and serve within. At one meal a day, of two dishes only, unless some little, extraordinary upon particular days or occasions (then never exceeding three) of plain and wholesome meat a small refection at night wine, beer, sugar, spice, bread, fish, fowl, candle, soap, oats, hay, fuel, &c. at four pounds per week, 200l. per annum; wages, fifteen pounds; keeping the gardens, twenty pounds; the chaplain, twenty pounds per annum. Laid up in the treasury 145l. to be employed for books, instruments, drugs, trials, &c. The. total, 400l. a year, comprehending the keeping of two horses for the chariot, or the saddle, and two kine; so that 200l. per annum will be the utmost that the founders shall be at to maintain the whole society, consisting of nine persons (the servants included), though there should no others join capable to alleviate the expence. But, if any of those who desire to be of the society be so well qualified as to support their own particulars, and allow for their proportion, it will yet much diminish the charge; and of such there cannot want some at all times, as the apartments are empty. If either of the founders thinks expedient to alter his condition, or that any thing do humanitus contingere, he may resign to another, or sell to his colleague, and dispose of it as he pleases, yet so as it still continue the institution. Orders. At six, in summer, prayers in the chapel. To study till half an hour after eleven. Dinner in the refectory till one. Retire till four. Then called to conversation (if the weather invite) abroad, else in the refectory. This never omitted but in case of sickness. Prayers at seven. To bed at nine. In the winter the same, with some abatements for the hours, because the nights are tedious, and the evening’s conversation more agreeable. This in the refectory. All play interdicted, sans bowls, chess, &c. Every one to cultivate his own garden. One month in spring a course in the claboratory on vegetables, &c. In the winter a month on other experiments. Every man to have a key of the elaboratory, pavillion, library, repository, &c. Weekly fast. Communion once every fortnight, or month at least. No stranger easily admitted to visit any of the society, but upon certain days weekly, and that only after dinner. Any of the society may have his commons to his apartment, if he will not meet in the refectory, so it be not above twice a week. Every Thursday shall be a music-meeting at conversation hours. Every person of the society shall render some public account of his studies weekly, if thought fit, and especially shall be recommended the promotion of experimental knowledge, as the principal end of the institution. There shall be a decent habit and uniform used in the college. One month in the year may be spent in London, or any of the universities, or in a perambulation for the public befiefit, &c. with what other orders shall be thought convenient.”

Before concluding our article, it may be necessary to advert to some particulars of Mr. Evelyn’s history, which are interspersed in his “Sylva,” and could not well be incorporated in our sketch. From that work we learn, that the true signification of his surname, Evelyn, written anciently Avelan or Evelin, was filberd, or rather hazel, which gives him occasion to remark, that these trees are commonly produced where quarries of free-stone lie underneath, as at Hazelbury in Wiltshire, Haslingfield in Cambridgeshire, and Haslemere in Surrey. He more than once remarks, that his grandfather was a great planter and preserver of timber, as it seems were the ancient possessors of the place where he lived, whence it acquired its name of Wotton (i. e.) Woodtown, from the groves and plantations that were about it. He farther remarks, that there was an oak felled by his grandfather’s order, out of which there was a table made, measured by himself more than once, of five feet in breadth, nine and a half in length, and six inches thick, all entire and clear. It was set up in brick-work for a pastry-board; and, to fit it for that use, it was shortened by a foot, being originally ten feet and a half, as appeared from an inscription cut in one of its sides, whence it appeared to have lain there above one hundred years, when pur author wrote this description. When his grandfather’s woods were cut down, which consisted entirely of cak, they sprang up again, not oaks but beeches; and when these too in their turn felt the axe, there arose spontaneously a third plantation, not of oak or beech, but of birch, which he does not set down as a thing singular in itself, but because it happened under his own eye. He is a declared enemy to iron works, on account of their destroying woods; yet he observes, from the prudential maxims prevailing in his own family, they had quite a contrary effect, as being one principal cause of their making such large plantations, and taking so much pains about them. It was a relation of his that sold Richmond new park to kiug Charles I. after planting many fine trees there. Our author carried this disposition with him to Sayes-court, where he must have shewn it very early, since be assures us that the marquis of Argyle presented him with the cones of a peculiar kind of fir, which he takes to be the Spanish pinaster, or wild pine, and gives a very particular account of the manner in which they grew in the marquis’s county in Scotland. He informs us, that it was the lord chancellor Bacon who introduced the true plane tree, which he planted originally about Verulam, whence he had his title. Mr. Evelyn takes to himself the honour of having propagated the alaternus from Cheshire to Cumberland, which was before reputed an inhabitant only of the green-house, but is found very capable not only of living without doors, but of standing unhurt by the rigour of our severest winters. He mentions a most glorious and impenetrable holly-hedge which he had at Sayes-court^ four hundred feet in length, nine feet high, and five in diameter, which occasions his dropping a hint, that the fine gardens he had raised there were wholly ruined by the tzar of Muscovy, who it seems lived there for the sake of being near the yard. He recommended Mr. Gibbons, the carver, to king Charles II. by whom some exquisite works were performed in St. Paul’s cathedral. He was likewise consulted by the Bedford family about preserving their fine trees, so long as the gardens were kept up about Bedford-house, which, before the last edition of his book, were demolished, to make way for the new buildings about Bloomsbury. He takes notice of an admirable remedy for a dysentery, which had been otherwise, in all probability, buried in oblivion; and this is the fungous substance separated from the lobes of walnut kernels, powdered and given in a glass of wine, which, he affirms, relieved the English soldiers in the famous Dundalk campaign in Ireland, soon after the revolution, when all other remedies failed. He was acquainted with the conde Mellor, a Portuguese nobleman, who resided some time at the court of king Charles II. when an exile from his own, by whom he was informed, that his father, when prime-minister, as himself had likewise been, received in a case a collection of plants of china oranges, of which only one escaped, and was with difficulty recovered; and yet from this plant came all the china oranges that ever were seen in Europe, which, our author observes, is a most noble and wonderful instance of what industry may do from the slightest and least promising beginnings. One instance of the vast advantages derived from woods we shall borrow, because the facts are notorious and indisputable. “Upon the estate of George Pitt, esq. of Stratfield-Say, in the county of Southampton, a survey of timber being taken in 1659, it came to ten thousand three hundred pounds, besides near ten thousand samplers not valued, and growing up naturally. Since this there hath been made by several sales, five thousand six hundred pounds, and there has been felled for repairs, building, and necessary uses, to the value, at the least, of twelve hundred pounds; so as the whole falls of timber amount to six thousand eight hundred pounds. The timber upon the same ground being again surveyed anno 1677, appears to be worth above twenty-one thousand pounds, besides eight or nine thousand samplers and young trees to be left standing, and not reckoned in the survey. But, what is yet to be observed, most of this timber abovementioned being oak, grows in hedge-rows, and so as that the standing of it does very little prejudice to the plough or pasture.” To conclude: this worthy person, who was born in a town famous for wood, who derived from his ancestors an affection for plantations, who wrote the most correct treatise of forest-trees extant in our own, or perhaps in any language, and who was himself a most eminent planter, had a strong desire, after the example of sir William Temple, who directed his heart to be deposited in his garden, to have his corpse also interred in the like manner; but very probably he was prevailed upon to alter his mind afterwards, notwithstanding what he had expressed upon that subject in his book; which shews how warm and lasting that passion for improvement was in his own breast, which, with so much learning, eloquence, and success, he laboured to excite in the bosoms of his countrymen.

In 1644 he made the campaign of Fribourg; and the following year he received a dangerous wound at the battle of Notlingen. Being ordered to head a squadron, and to post himself below an eminence which was possessed by the enemy, he was there exposed, for three hours together, to all the fire of their small shot, and a battery of four field-pieces; so that he lost there most of his men, and was himself wounded in the left knee. His wound was so dangerous, that for six weeks he was supposed to be past recovery; but, by the skill of his surgeons, and the excellency of his constitution, his cure was at length effected. Thirty years after, however, his wound opened afresh in, London; but, being properly treated, he felt no inconvenience from it, excepting that his left leg was somewhat weaker than the other. After the taking of Fumes, in 1646, the duke of Enguien appointed M. de St. Evremond to carry the news of it to court; and having, at the same time, opened to him his design of besieging Dunkirk, charged him to propose it to cardinal Mazarin, and to settle with him every thing which was necessary for the execution of that undertaking. M. de St. Evremond managed this business with so much dexterity, that he prevailed on the prime minister to agree to every thing which was required by the duke of Enguien. But, in 1648, he lost the post which he had near that nobleman, now, by the death of his father, become prince of Conde. This prince took great delight in discovering what was ridiculous in the characters of his acquaintance; and often indulged himself in laughing at their foibles in private, in company with the count de Moissens and M. de St. Evremond. But the prince of Conde, who took great pleasure in ridiculing others, was not fond of being ridiculed himself. He was informed, that St. Evremond and the count had found out, that there was somewhat ridiculous even in him; that his extreme solicitude to discover the foibles of others was in itself a species of the ridiculous; and that they sometimes amused themselves with laughing at his highness. This excited in him so much resentment, that he took from M. de St. Evremond the lieutenancy of his guards, and would have no farther correspondence with the count de Moissens. It is, however, supposed, that a reconciliation would have been effected, if they had not been separated by the civil war, which about this time took place in France. When the prince of Conde" returned into France, after the Pyre nean treaty, M. de St. Evremond went to wait upon him, and was very favourably received. The prince offered him his protection; and afterwards, on several occasions, gave him assurances of his affection and esteem.

In 1654, M. de St. Evremond served in Flanders; and about three years after fought a duel with the marquis de Fore. He continued in the service in Flanders till the suspension of arms, which was agreed upon between France and Spain in 1659. The following year, he came over into England with count de Soissons, who was sent on an embassy to congratulate Charles II. on the restoration; and, when cardinal Mazarin set out from Paris with a great retinue, in order to negociate a treaty with the first minister of the king of Spain, St. Evremond was one of those who accompanied him. He afterwards sent a letter concerning the conferences to the marquis de Crequi, in which he informed him, that the cardinal had sacrificed the honour and interests of France to his own private views. In one part of this letter he said, “It is the cardinal’s maxim, that a minister does not so much belong to the state as the state to the minister; and, for this reason, if God grant bim but a few years, he will get all the estates in the kingdom into his own hands.” This letter of St. Evremond, concerning the Pyreneau treaty, became the occasion of his banishment from France. After the death of the cardinal, a copy of the letter fell into the hands of some of the courtiers who had been connected with him. They represented to his majesty the danger of allowing private men to judge of state affairs, and to censure the conduct of ministers. Their representations made such an impression on the mind of Lewis, that he immediately ordered M. de St. Evremond to be committed to the Bastile. But St. Evremoud had no inclination to pay a second visit to that fortress; and, therefore, having received private information of the design, found means to make his escape out of France, and arrived in Holland about the end of the year 1661.

St. Evremond was a kind of epicurean philosopher; but though his speculative morality was too lax, yet in his general conduct he appears to have acted like a man of probity. He preserved his health and his chearfulness to a very great age. In one of his letters to Ninon de TEnclos he says, “At eighty-eight years of age, I eat oysters every morning. I dine heartily, and sup tolerably. Heroes are celebrated for less merit than mine.” He was at length afflicted with a strangury, which was attended with great pain, and by which he was much weakened. Bayle tells us, in one of his letters, that it was publicly known, that St. Evremond used no assistance of minister or priest to prepare him for death; and that it was said, that the envoy from the court of Florence sent to him an ecclesiastic, who, asking him whether he would be reconciled, received for answer, “With all my heart: I would fain be reconciled to my stomach, which no longer performs in usual functions.” Bayle also says, “I have seen verses, which he wrote fifteen days before his death; and his only regret was, that he was reduced to boiled meats, and could no longer digest partridges and pheasants.” He died on the 9th of Sept. 1703, aged ninety years, five months, and twenty days. Des Maizeaux says, “He preserved, to the very last, a lively imagination, a solid judgment, and a happy memory. The great and acute pains, which he felt during his sickness, never disturbed his tranquillity. He bore them with a courage and constancy that may be envied by philosophers of the first rate.” The same writer gives the following description of his person: “M. de St. Evremond had blue, lively, and sparkling eyes, a large forehead, thick eye-brows, a handsome mouth, and a sneering physiognomy. Twenty years before his death, a wen grew between his eye-brows, which in time increased to a considerable bigness. He once designed to have it cut oft; but, as it was no ways troublesome to him, and he little regarded that kind of deformity, Dr. Le Fevre advised him to let it alone, lest such an operation should be attended with dangerous symptoms in a man of his age. He would often make merry with himself on account of his wen, his great leather cap, and grey hair, which he chose to wear rather than a periwig .” Des Maizeaux afterwards adds, “His behaviour was civil and engaging, his conversation lively and pleasant, his repartees quick and happy. We find very few that know how to read well. M. de St. Evre-p mond told me one day, that he had not known three in his whole life that could read justly. He had this art in perfection; and, what is altogether as uncommon, he had a very happy way of telling a story.” “His humour was ever gay and merry; which was so far from declining towards the latter end of his life, that it seemed rather to gather fresh strength.” “He was extremely fond of the company of young people, and delighted to hear the stories of their adventures.” “Although he did not pretend to over-rigid morals, yet he had all the qualities of a man of honour. He was just, generous, and grateful; and full of goodness and humanity.”

, a Lutheran divine, was born at Coslin, a town of Pomerania, in 15D3. In his youth, as his parents were poor, he contrived to defray the expences of his education by instructing a few pupils in what he had already learned, and having the charge of some of them to Rostock, he soon distinguished himself among the learned of that city. Having taken orders, he was chosen preacher at Coslin, and chaplain to the duke Bogislaus XI V. who five years after recommended him to a doctor’s degree at Gripswald. About this time the king of Sweden, Gustavus Adolphus, arriving in Germany, made him his confessor, and superintendant of his army; and after the battle of Lutzen, in which that prince lost his life, the duke Bogislaus recalled Fabricius, and made him superintendant of Upper Pomerania, in which office he was afterwards continued by queen Christina. He was also appointed minister of the principal church of Stettin, and professor of divinity. He died suddenly of an apoplectic stroke, Aug. 11, 165+. His principal writings are, 1. “Disputationes in Genesim, et in Kpistolam ad Romanes. 2.” Probatio visionum,“a work which involved him in disrepute with some of his brethren, and obliged him to publish in defence of it, 'J.” Invictir visionum probationes.“4.” JustaGustaviana." He published besides some pieces in German.

Besides his studies in the belles lettres and philosophy, he had much inclination to that of medicine, and would probably have pursued it as a profession; but Berger, the medical professor, under whom he studied, being removed from Leipsic, he thenceforth devoted himself entirely to divinity. In April 1692 he had been admitted a preacher, and his four disputations on subjects of theology procured him the highest praises from his tutors. In 1693 he went to Hamburgh, without any immediate design, except that of visiting some relations, particularly his maternal uncle. but intended afterwards to travel, from which he was diverted by an unexpected event. His guardian Valentine Albert now wrote to him that his whole patrimony, amounting only to 1000 German crowns, had been expended in his education, and that he was indebted to him for a considerable sum advanced. Fabricius returned an answer to this letter, expressing his concern at the news, but full of gratitude to his guardian for the care he had taken of him and his property. He had, however, to seek for the means of subsistence, and might have been reduced to the greatest distress, had he not found a liberal patron in John Frederick Mayer. This gentleman was minister of the church of St. James at Hamburgh, ecclesiastic-counsellor to the king of Sweden, and honorary professor of divinity at Kiel. Being made acquainted with Fabricius’s situation, and probably no stranger to the fame he had acquired at Leipsic, he gave him an invitation to his house, and engaged him as his librarian, on which office Fabricius entered in June 1694, and during his residence here, which lasted five years, divided his time betwixt study and preaching, in the church of St. James, and other churches. In the month of August 1695, he sustained a disputation at Kiel on the irrational logic of the popes, in the presence of the dukes of Holstein and Brunswick. In 1697 he published the first edition of his “Bibliotheca Latina,” in a small volume, 8vo, and appears to have prepared some of his other works for the press; but a fuller list of these, with their dates, will be given at the conclusion of this article.

, or sometimes Phagius, whose German name was Buchlein, a protestant minister, and one of the early reformers, was born at Rheinzabern in Germany, 1504, and laid the foundation of his learning in that town under the care of his father, who was a school-master. He was sent to Heidelberg at eleven, and at eighteen to Strasburgh; where not being properly supported, he had recourse to teaching others, in order to defray the expence of his own books and necessaries. The study of the Hebrew becoming fashionable in Germany, he applied himself to it; and by the help of Elias Levita, the learned Jew, became a great proficient in it. In 1527 he took upon him the care of a school at Isne, where he married and had a family. Afterwards, quitting the occupation of a schoolmaster, he entered into the ministry, and became a sedulous preacher among those of the reformed religion. Buffler, one of the senators of Isne, being informed of his perfect knowledge in the Hebrew tongue, and of his natural bias to the arts, erected a printing-house at his own charge, that Fagius might publish whatever he should deem useful to religion in that way; but the event did not answer the expence.

, a learned minister of the church, and most intrepid reformer, was the son of a gentleman of Dauphine in France, and born at Gap in 1489. He studied philosophy, and Greek and Hebrew, at Paris with great success, and was for some time a teacher in the college of cardinal le Moine. Briyonnet, bishop of Meaux, hem.; inclined to the reformed religion, invited him to preach in his diocese in 1521; but the persecution raised there against the early protestants who were styled heretics, in 1523, obliged him to provide for his security out of France. He then retired to Strasburgh, where Bucer and Capito admitted him as a. brother; and he was afterwards received as such by Zwinglius at Zurich, by Haller at Berne, and by Oecolampadius at Basil. As he was thought well qualified by zeal and knowledge for such a task, he was advised to undertake the reformation of religion at Montbeliard, in which design he was supported by the duke of Wittenberg, who was lord of that place; and he succeeded in it most happily. He was a man on some occasions of too much warmth and enthusiasm against popery, which, however, he tempered a little, by the advice of Oecolampadius. Once on a procession-day, he pulled out of the priest’s hand the image of St. Antony, and threw it from a bridge into the river, a boldness and imprudence which was unnecessary, and might have cost him his life. Erasmus by no means liked Farel’s temper, as appears from what he wrote of him to the official of Besancon. “You, have,” says he, “in your neighbourhood the new evangelist, Farel; than whom I never saw a man more false, more virulent, more seditious.” Erasmus has also given a very unfavourable character of him elsewhere: but he thought Farel had censured him in some of his writings, and therefore is not to be altogether believed in every thing he says of him; nor indeed was a man of decision and intrepidity likely to be a favourite with the timid and time-serving Erasmus.

In 1528, he had the same success in promoting the reformation in the city of Aigle, and soon after in the bailU wick of Morat. He went afterwards to Neufchatel in 1529, and disputed against the Roman catholic party with so much strength, that this city embraced the reformed religion, and established it entirely Nov. 4, 1530. He was sent a deputy to the synod of the Waldenses, held in the valley of Angrogne. Hence he went to Geneva, where he laboured against popery: but the grand vicar and the other clergy resisted him with so much fury, that he was obliged to retire. He was called back in 1534 by the inhabitants, who had renounced the Roman catholic religion; and was the chief person that procured the perfect abolition of it the next year. He was banished from Geneva with Calvin in 1533, and retired to Basil, and afterwards to Neufchatel, where there was great probability of a large evangelical harvest. From thence he went to Metz, but had a thousand difficulties to encounter; and was obliged to retire into the abbey of Gorze, where the count of Jurstemberg protected him and the new converts. But they could not continue there long; for they were besieged in the abbey, and obliged at last to surrender, after a capitulation. F. rel very happily escaped, though strict search was made alter him, having been put in a cart among the sick and infirm. He took upon him his former functions of a minister at Neufchatel, whence he took now and then a journey to Geneva. When he went thither in 1553, he was present at Servetus’s execution. He went again to Geneva in 1564, to^take his last leave of Calvin, who was dangerously ill. He took a second journey to Metz in 1565, being invited by his ancient flock, to witness the success of his lubours, but returned to Neufchatel, and died there Sept. 13, or, as Dupin says, Dec. 3, in the same year.

Mr. Farmer’s first appearance as an author was in a discourse on the suppression of the rebellion of 1745. It was preached on the day of public thanksgiving appointed upon that occasion in 1746, and printed in the same year. This was the only sermon that we recollect his having ever committed to the press. His abilities, though they might have been usefully displayed in that way, led him to those novel opinions on which his temporary fame was founded. Iiv 1761, he published “An Inquiry into the nature and design of Christ’s Temptation in the Wilderness” the general intention of which is to show, that this part of the evangelical history is not only to be understood as a recital of visionary representations, but that the whole was a divine vision, premonitory of the labours and offices of our Lord’s future ministry. An interpretation so new and singular, could not pass unnoticed. In 1762 there appeared a pamphlet against the Inquiry, entitled “Christ’s Temptations, real facts: or, a Defence of the Evangelic History; shewing that our Lord’s temptations may be fairly and reasonably understood as a narrative of what was really transacted.” A second edition of Mr. Farmer’s treatise was soon called for; in which the subject received additional illustration from a considerable number of new notes. Besides this, he published in 1764, an appendix to the “Inquiry,” containing some farther observations on the point in debate, and an answer to objections. Another tract, the publication of which was occasioned by the “Inquiry,” was entitled “The Sovereignty of the Divine Administration vindicated, or a rational Account of our blessed Saviour’s remarkable Temptation in the Wilderness; the Possessed at Capernaum, the Demoniacs at Gadara, and the Destruction of the Swine: with free Remarks on several other important passages in the New Testament.” This was a posthumous piece, which had been written before Mr. Farmer’s work appeared, by Mr. Dixon, who had been a dissenting minister, first at Norwich, and afterwards at Bolton in Lancashire. Mr. Dixon proposes a figurative or allegorical interpretation of our Lord’s temptation. A third edition, with large additions, of Mr. Farmer’s “Inquiry” was published in 1776. In 1771, he published “A Dissertation on Miracles, designed to shew that they are arguments of a divine interposition, and absolute proofs of the mission and doctrine of a Prophet,” 8vo. Not long -after the appearance of the “Dissertation,” a notion was propagated, that Mr. Farmer had made considerable use of a treatise of Le Moine l s on the same subject, without acknowledging it; and it was asserted, that his book had the very same view with Mr. Le Moine’s, and was a copy of his work.Mr. Farmer therefore endeavoured to vindicate himself in a pamphlet, published in 1772, entitled “An Examination of the late rev. Mr. Le Moine’s Treatise on Miracles,” in which he enters into a particular discussion of that performance, and a defence of himself; but the accusation continued to be repeated, particularly by a writer in th? London Magazine.

In 1775, Mr. Farmer gave to the world “Essay on the Demoniacs of the New Testament,” in which his opinions were too far remote from those of the Christian world to give much satisfaction. It was ably attacked by Dr. Worthington, a learned clergyman, who had already favoured the public with some pious and valuable writings, in “An impartial Inquiry into the case of the Gospel Demoniacs, with an Appendix, consisting of an essay on Scripture Demonology,” 1777. There were some things advanced in this work, which, in Mr. Farmer’s opinion, deserved to be considered; and he thought that certain parts of the subject were capable of farther and fuller illustration. He printed, therefore, in 1778, “Letters to the rev. Dr. Worthington, in answer to his late publication, entitled An impartial Inquiry into the case of the Gospel Demoniacs.” Another of Mr. Fanner’s antagonists was the late rev. Mr. Fell, a dissenting minister, at that time of Thaxted in Essex, and afterwards one of the tutors of the dissenting academy at Homerton. This gentleman pubJished in 177l>, a treatise, entitled “Demoniacs an inquiry into the lieathen and the Scripture doctrine of Daemons; in which the hypotheses of the rev. Mr. Farmer, and others, on this subject, are particularly considered,” In this Mr. Fell deduces the injurious consequences to natural and revealed religion which he apprehends to result from the doctrines advanced in the “Dissertation on Miracles,” and the “Essay on the Demoniacs,” but acquits Mr. Farmer of any evil design, and allows “that he really meant to serve the cause of virtue, which he thought could not be more effectually done than by removing every thing which appeared to him in the light of superstition.”

As a minister Mr. Farmer received every mark of honour from the dissenters which it was in their power to bestow. For a great number of years he preached twice a day at Walthamstow: but, an associate being at length provided for him at that place, he became in 1761 afternoonpreacher to the congregation of Salters-hall, and some time after was chosen one of the Tuesday-lecturers at Salters-hall. He was also a trustee of the rev. Dr. Daniel Williams’ s various bequests; and he was likewise one of Mr. Coward’s trustees; in which capacity he became a dispenser of the large charities that had been left by the gentleman with whom he had been connected in early life. As Mr. Farmer advanced in years, he gradually remitted of his employments as a divine. He resigned first, in 1772, the being afternoon-preacher at Salters-hall; after which, in 1780, he gave up the Tuesday lectureship of the same place. In his pastoral relation at Walthamstow he continued a few years longer, when he quitted the pulpit entirely. In these several cases his resignations were accepted with peculiar regret. After he had ceased to be a preacher, it was his general custom to spend part of the winter at Bath. Early in 1785, Mr. Farmer was afflicted with almost a total failure of sight, which, however, was restored by the skill, first of Baron Wenzel, and afterwards of Mr. Wathen. Infirmities, however, growing upon him, he departed this life on the 6th of February, 1787, in the seventy-third year of his age, and was buried in Walthamstow church-yard, in the same grave with his friends Mr. and Mrs. Snell. On Sunday, the 18th, his funeral sermon was preached by Mr. Urvvick, of Clapham, whose discourse was printed. In his last will, besides providing handsomely for his relations, and remembering his servants, he left a hundred pounds to the fund for the widows of dissenting ministers, and forty pounds to the poor of Walthamstow parish. His regard to the family with which he had so long been connected, and to which he had been so peculiarly obliged, was testified by his bequeathing pecuniary legacies to every member of that family. Smaller legacies were left by him to others of his friends. His executors were William Snell, esq. of Clapham, and William Hood, esq. of Chancery-lane, barrister; the first the son, and the second one of the grandsons of Mr. Farmer’s great patron. To another grandson, the rev. Robert Jacomb, our author bequeathed his library, with the exception of such classic books as Mr. Snell might select; who also was a residuary legatee, in conjunction with his sister, Mrs. Hood. In this will he also made his request (for that is the term used), that his executors would burn his sermons and manuscripts, unless he should direct otherwise by a separate paper; and, in case they should not do it, the legacies of a hundred pounds each, which he had left them, were to be null and void. He had nearly completed a second volume on the demonology of the ancients; a curious dissertation on the story of Balaam, which he had transcribed for the press, and for the printing of which he had given his directions, and had made preparations for a second edition of his Treatise on Miracles, by which it would have been considerably enlarged, and highly improved; all which were destroyed, as, in the opinion of the executors, coming within the intent of his will. His biographer laments bitterly this undistinguishing destruction, which, indeed, seems rather too much to resemble what happened in Don Quixote’s library.

In April 1780, Dr. Farmer was collated by bishop Kurd, then bishop of Lichfield and Coventry, to the prebend of Aldrewas, and the chancellorship annexed, founded in the cathedral church of Lichfield. In February 1782 he was made prebendary of Canterbury, as it is supposed, through the recommendation of the then first minister, lord North, which he resigned in 1788, on being preferred by the late Mr. Pitt to a residentiaryship of St. Paul’s. A few hours after this appointment, he jocosely said to his friend Mr. Nichols, ' I could now, if I thought proper, cheat the minister, for I have in my pocket an appointment to the residentiaryship of St. Paul’s, without having resigned the prebend of Canterbury."

, lord of Pibrac, by which name he is much better known, was born at Toulouse in 1528, and distinguished himself at the bar in that city. He perfected his knowledge of jurisprudence in Italy, and then returned to be advanced to honours in his own country. In 1560 he was deputed by his native city to the states-general held at Orleans, and there presented to the king its petition of grievances, which he had himself drawn up. By Charles IX. he was sent as one of his ambassadors to the council of Trent, where he eloquently supported the interests of the crown, and the liberties of the Gallican church. In 1565 the chancellor de PHopital, appointed him advocate-general in the parliament of Paris, where he revived the influence of reason and eloquence. In 1570, he was, made a counsellor of state, and two years afterwards, probably constrained by his superiors, wrote his defence of the massacre of St. Bartholomew, published in 4to, and entitled “Ornatissimi cujusdam viri, de rebus Gallicis, epistola, et ad hanc de iisdem rebus responsio” but this barbarous measure was too repugnant to the mildness of Pibrac’s character to be approved by him. For this, after the accession of Henry III. he made the best amends in his power, by proposing and bringing to a conclusion, a treaty of peace between the court and the protestants. While that prince was duke of Anjou, and was elected king of Poland, he attended him as minister in that country; but when the succession to the crown of France, on the death of his brother, tempted Henry to quit that kingdom clandestinely, Pibrac was in danger of falling a sacrifice to the resentment of the people. He afterwards tried in vain to preserve that crown to his master. His services were rewarded by being created one of the chief presidents of the courts of law. He died in 1584, at the age of fifty-six. The story of his falling in love with Margaret wife of Henry IV. is supposed to be chiefly owing to the vanity of that lady, who wished to have the credit of such a conquest. Pibrac published, besides his letter on the massacre, which was in Latin, pleadings and speeches, “Les plaisirs de la vie rustique,” Paris, 1577, 8vo, and a discourse on the sool and the sciences. But the work by which he is best known, is his “Quatrains,” or moral stanzas of four lines, which were first published in 1574. The last edition we know of, is that of 1746. They have been extravagantly admired, and translated into almost all languages, even Greek, Turkish, Arabic, and Persian. They were rendered into English by Sylvester, the translator of du Bartas, in a manner not likely to give an advantageous notion of the original, which, though now antiquated, stiil preserves graces that recommend it to readers of taste. Pibrac was a classical scholar; and to the taste he drew from that source, his “Quatrains” owe much of their excellence. The subjects of some of them he took from the book of Proverbs, which he used to say contained all the good sense in the world.

, a dissenting minister, was born at Sleaford in Lincolnshire, Aug. 16, 1715, and after a religious education at home, was placed under Dr. Doddridge at Northampton, where his conduct was exemplary, and his improvement rapid. In 1741, by Doddridge’s particular recommendation, he became a preacher at Taunton; and in 1745 removed to Kidderminster, where he officiated as the pastor of a large congregation of dissenters for thirty-five years, dying in Oct. 1780. He preached thrice every Sunday, besides weekly services, lectures, visits, &c. He also carried on an extensive correspondence with his brethren in various parts of the kingdom, and found leisure to prepare hfs various publications for the press. To enable him to accomplish all this, he was a rigid reconomist of his time, and was seldom in bed after five o'clock in the morning, to which habit, and a temperate mode of living, he used to ascribe his remarkable and almost uninterrupted health and spirits until a short time before his death, when he suffered severely from the stone. It is perhaps more remarkable, that he had no fire in his study in the depth of wiuter. His flow of spirits appears to have been rather immoderate, according to Mr. Orion’s account. “I am told that after preaching twice, and administering the Lord’s Supper, he was so lively in the evening that several of the people were in pain lest he should throw himself out of the pulpit 1” In his sentiments he was what is called a Baxterian, and drew upon himself, on spome occasions, the censures of the more orthodox part of his brethren, particularly by one of his pamphlets, “Candid reflexions on the different modes of explaining the Trinity.” His other works were small pious, tracts some funeral, and occasional sermons and abridgements of Baxter’s “Saints 1 everlasting Rest,” and of some other pieces by that divine. His personal character was so consistent and amiable, that his death was lamented by persons of all persuasions at Kidderminster.

, a brave English officer, the descendant of a very ancient family, was born in 1728 at Shipdenhall, near Halifax, in Yorkshire, which, for many centuries, had been in the possession of his ancestors, and is now the property and residence of their lineal descendant. His father dying when he was very young, his education was superintended by an uncle, a very worthy clergyman. He was brought up at a free school in Lancashire, where he was well grounded in classical learning, and became also a remarkable proficient in mathematics. He has very frequently been heard to declare, that, from his earliest youth, he always felt the strongest predilection for the army, which his mother and nearest relations constantly^ endeavoured to dissuade him from; but, finding all their arguments ineffectual, they either bought, or he had an ensigncy given him, in general Oglethorpe’s regiment, then in Georgia; but the war being then going on in Flanders, he gave up his ensigncy, and went there as a volunteer, furnished with letters from the late marquis of Rockingham and Mr. Lascelles (afterwards lord Harewood) to the commander and several others of the officers. This step was at the time frequently taken by young men of spirit of the first rank and fortune, fte entered as a volunteer, but messed with the officers, and was very soon presented with a pair of colours. Some time after, he married a lady of good fortune and family, and, at the pressing entreaties df her friends, he most reluctantly resigned his commission; which he had no sooner done, than he felt himself miserable, and his new relations finding that his propensity to a military life was invincible, agreed to his purchasing an ensigncy in the third regiment of guards. Having now obtained the object of his most anxious wishes, he determined to lose no opportunity of qualifying himself for the highest situations in his favourite profession. With this view he paid the most unremitting attention to his duty, and every hour he could command was given up to the study of the French and German languages, in which (by the assistance of his classical learning) he soon became such a proficient as not only to understand and write both, grammatically and elegantly, but to speak them fluently. When he was a lieutenant in the guards, he translated from the French, “The Reveries; Memoirs upon the Art of War, by field-marshal count Saxe,” which was published in 1757, in 4to, and dedicated “To the general officers.” He also translated from the German, “Regulations for the Prussian cavalry,” which was also published in 1757, and dedicated to major-general the earl of Albemarle, colonel of the king’s own regiment of dragoons. And he likewise translated from the German, “llegulations for the Prussian Infantry,” to which was gelded “The Prussian Tactics,” which was published in 1759, and dedicated to lieutenant-general the earl of Rothes, colonel of the third regiment of foot guards. Having attained the situation of adjutant in the guards, his abilities and unremitting attention soon became conspicuous; and, on the late general Elliot’s being ordered to, Germany in the seven years war, he offered to take him as his aid-de-camp, which he gladly accepted, as it gave him an opportunity of gaining that knowledge which actual service could alone impart. When he served in Germany, his ardour, intrepidity, and attention to all the duties of his situation, were such, that, on the death of general Elliot, he had immediately offers both from the late prince Ferdinand, the commander in chief, and the late marquis of Granby, to be appointed aid-de-camp. By the advice of a noble earl (who hinted to him that the German war would not last for ever) he accepted the offer of the latter, after making due acknowledgements for the honour intended him by the former. In this his new situation his ardour and attention were, if possible, increased, which gained him the friendship of all those attached to lord Granby, particularly of a noble lord who, being fixed upon to bring to England the account of the battle of Warburgh, gave up his appointment to captain Fawcett; an instance of generous friendship which he always spoke of with the most heartfelt gratitude. On his arrival in England, he was introduced by the then great minister to his late majesty king George the Second, who received him most graciously, and not the less so on his giving the whole account in German. Soon after he was promoted to a company in the guards, with the rank of lieutenant-colonel in the army, and became military secretary to, and the intimate and confidential friend of lord Granby. His manners were formed with equal strength and softness; and to coolness, intrepidity, and extensive military knowledge, he added all the requisite talents of a man of business; and the most persevering assiduity, without the least ostentation. Notwithstanding the most unassuming modesty, his abilities were now so generally known, that he was fixed upon as the most proper person to manage and support the interest of his country, in settling many of the concerns of the war in Germany; and by that means necessarily became known to the great Frederic of Prussia, from whom he afterwards had the most tempting offers, which he declined without hesitation, preferring the service of his king and country to every other consideration.

In 1610, and the two following years, we find him in attendance upon sir Thomas Edmondes, the king’s minister at the court of France. Several of the sermons he preached, during this time, in the ambassador’s chapel, are collected in his “Clavis Mystica,” and those which were levelled at the errors of popery are said to have been very successful both in converting some catholics, and in confirming the opinions of those who had before embraced. the doctrines of the reformation. He had also very frequent conferences in the Cleremont with the Jesuits, and with the members of the Sorboane, but especially with fathers Sirmund and Petau, who, although they at first ridiculed his figure, for he was low of stature, yet afterwards were impressed with a regard for his controversial talents, and treated his memory with respect. His three disputations at Paris are confessed by Holden, an eminent English catholic writer, to have done more harm to the popish cause than thirtythree he had read of before. By most of the foreign universities he was held in such honour as a disputant, that in the tables of the celebrated schoolmen, whom they honoured with the epithets of resolute, subtle, angelic, &c. he was called acutissimus et acerrimus. According to Wood, he commenced B. D. in 1613, and was the preacher at the act of that year. His sermon on this occasion is said to have been No. 37. in the “Clavis Mystica;” but, according to the evidence of his nephew John Featley, he did not take that degree until 1615, and the sermon he delivered was a Latin concio ad clerum, dated March 25. In 1610 he had preached the rehearsal sermon at Oxford, and by the bishop of London’s appointment he discharged the same duty at St. Paul’s cross in 1613. By invitation from Mr. Ezekiel Ascot, who had been his pupil, he accepted the rectory of Northill in Cornwall, which he vacated on his institution to the rectory of Lambeth in 1618. a change which, if not more profitable, was certainly highly agrees ahle to him, as he became now, by the recommendation of the university, domestic chaplain to Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury.

, Sieur des Avaux et de Javerci, counsellor and historiographer to the king of France, was born at Chartres in 1619. He finished his first studies there at the age of fourteen, and then was sent to Paris to improve himself in the sciences, and in the management of affairs: but his inclination soon made him devote himself entirely to the muses, and he gained a great reputation by his knowledge in the fine arts. The marquis de Fontenay-Mareuil, being chosen for the second time ambassador extraordinary to the court of Rome in 1647, Felibien was made secretary to the embassy, and perfectly answered the hopes which that minister had conceived of him. During his stay at Rome, his fondness for the liberal arts made him spend all the time he could spare in visiting those who excelled in them; and especially the celebrated Poussin, from whose conversation he learned to understand all that is most beautiful in statues and pictures: and it was according to the exalted notions he then formed to himself of the excellence and perfection of painting, that he wrote those valuable works which established his reputation. On his return from Italy he went to Chartres; and, as he designed to settle himself, he married a lady of considerable family. His friends introduced him afterwards to Fouquet, who would have done something for him had he not soon after lost the king’s favour: but Colbert, who loved the arts and sciences, did not suffer him to be useless. After he had desired him to make some draughts for his majesty, in order to engage him to complete the works he had begun, he procured him a commission of historiographer of the king’s buildings, superintendant of them, and of the arts and manufactures in France: this commission was delivered to him March 10, 1666. The royal academy of architecture having been established in 1671, he was made secretary to it. The king made him afterwards keeper of his cabinet of antiques, in 1673, and gave him an apartment in the palace of Brion. He was also one of the first members of the academy of inscriptions and medals, and became afterwards deputy comptroller general of the bridges and dykes of the kingdom. He died June 11, 1695, aged seventy-six; and left five children.

a learned divine, was born in the parish of St. Clement Danes, London, 1594; elected student of Christ Church from Westminster school in 1601; took a master of arts degree in 1608, served the office of proctor in 1614, and the year following was admitted bachelor of divinity; and about that time became minister of Freshwater in the Isle of Wight. In May 1619, he was installed canon of Christ Church, and the same year proceeded doctor in divinity, being about that time domestic chaplain to James I. In 1626, he was made Margaret professor of divinity, and consequently had a prebend of Worcester, which was about that time annexed to the professorship. He was then a Calvinist, but at length, renouncing the opinions so called, he was, through Laud’s interest, made dean of Lichfield in 1637; and the year following, dean of Christ Church. In 1645, he was appointed vice-chancellor, which office he served also in 1647, in contempt of the parliamentary visitors, who at length ejected him from that and his deanery, and their minions were so exasperated at him for his loyalty to the king, and zeal for the church, that they actually sought his life: and being threatened to be murdered, he was forced to abscond. He died broken-hearted, Feb. 1, 1648-9; that being the very day he was made acquainted with the murder of his royal master king Charles. He was buried in the chancel of Sunning-well church, near Abingdon, in Berkshire (where he had been rector, and built the front of the parsonage-house) with only this short memorial, on a small lozenge of marble laid over his grave, “Depositum S. F. February 1648.” He was a public-spirited man, and had the character of a scholar. Wood, though he supposes there were more, only mentions these two Small productions of his; viz. “Primitiae; sive Oratio habita Oxoniae in Schola TheologiiE, 9 Nov. 1626,” and, “Concio Latina ad Baccalaureos die cinerum in Coloss. ii. 8.” They were both printed at Oxford in 1627. He contributed very largely to Christ Church college, completing most of the improvements begun by his predecessor, Dr. Duppa, and would have done more had not the rebellion prevented him.

, a dissenting minister of considerable learning, was born, Aug. 22, 1735, at Cockermouth in Cumberland, of poor parents, and was at first brought up to the business of a taylor. He was pursuing this employment in London, when some discerning friends perceived in him a taste for literature, and an avidity of knowledge, which they thought worthy of encouragement; and finding that his principal wish was directed to the means of procuring such education as might qualify him for the ministry among the dissenters, they stepped forward to his assistance, and placed him at the dissenting academy at Mileend, then superintended by Dr. Conder, Dr. Gibbons, and Dr. Walker. Mr. Fell was at this time in the nineteenth year of his age; but, by abridging the hours usually allotted to rest and amusement, and praportionably extending those of application to his studies, and by the assiduous exercise of a quick, vigorous, and comprehensive mind, he made rapid advances in learning, gave his tutors and patrons the utmost satisfaction; and in due time, was appointed to preach to a congregation at Beccles, near Yarmouth. He was afterwards invited to take upon himself the pastoral office in a congregation of Protestant dissenters, at Thaxted, in Essex, where he was greatly beloved by his congregation, and his amiable deportment, and diligence in all the duties of his station, attracted the regard even of his neighbours of the established church. At Thaxted, Mr. Fell boarded and educated a few young gentlemen, and it was also during his residence there, that he distinguished himself by the rapid production of some wellwritten publications, which conduced to establish his character as a scholar. After he had thus happily resided several years at Thaxted, he was unfortunately prevailed upon 'to be the resident tutor at the academy, formerly at Mile-end, when he was educated there, but now removed to Homerton, near London. The trustees and supporters of this academy appear to have been at first very happy that they had procured a tutor peculiarly calculated for the situation; but he had not been there long before differences arose between him and the students, of what nature his biographers have not informed us; but they represent that he was dismissed from his situation without a fair trial and complain that this severity was exerted in the case of “a character of no common excellence a genius of no ordinary size a Christian minister, well furnished with gifts and graces for that office a tutor, who for biblical knowledge, general history, and classic taste, had no superior, perhaps no equal, among any class of dissenters.” This affair happened in 1796, and Mr. Fell’s friends lost no time in testifying their unaltered regard for his character. An annuity of 100l. was almost immediately procured for him, and he was invited to deliver a course of lectures on the evidences of Christianity, for which he was to be remunerated by a very liberal subscription. But these testimonies of affection came too late for his enjoyment of them. Four of his lectures had been delivered to crowded congregations at the Scotch church at Londonwall, when sickness interrupted him, and on Wednesday Sept. 6, 1797, death put a period to his labours. The four lectures he delivered were published in 1798, with eight by Dr. Henry Hunter, who concluded the course, but who does not appear well qualified to fill up Mr. FelPs outline. Mr. Fell’s previous publications, which show that the character given of him by his friends is not overcharged, were 1. “Genuine Protestantism, or the unalienable Rights of Conscience defended: in opposition to the late and new mode of Subscription proposed by some dissenting ministers, in three Letters to Mr. Pickard,” 1773, 8vo. 2. “A Fourth Letter to Mr. Pickard on genuine Protestantism; being a full Reply to the rev. Mr. Toulmin’s Defence of the Dissenters’ new mode of Subscription,” 1774, 8vo. 3. “The justice and utility of Penal Laws for the Direction of Conscience examined; in reference to the Dissenters’ late application to parliament. Addressed to a member of the house of commons,” 1774, 8vo. 4. “Daemoniacs. An enquiry into the Heathen and the Scripture doctrine of Daemons, in which the hypothesis of the rev. Mr. Farmer and others on the subject are particularly considered,” 1779, 8vo. (See Farmer). 5. “Remarks on the Appendix of the Editor of Rowley’s Poems, printed at the end of Observations on the Poem attributed to Rowley by Rayner Hickford, esq.” 8vo, no date (1783). 6. An Essay towards an English Grammar, with a dissertation on the nature and peculiar use of certain hypothetical verbs in the English language,“1784, 12mo. 7.” The Idolatry of Greece and Rome distinguished from that of other Heathen Nations, in a Letter to the rev. Hugh Farmer," 1785, 8vo. Mr. Fell ranks among the orthodox, or calvinistic dissenters; but how far, or whether this had any share in the animosity exerted against him, we are unable to discover, from the obscure manner in which his biographers advert to the disputes in the Homerton academy.

, an eminent writer and statesman during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I. was brother to the preceding, but the time of his birth does not appear. He was certainly educated liberally, though we cannot tell where; since, while a young man, he gave many proofs of his acquaintance with ancient and modern learning, and of his being perfectly versed in the French, Spanish, and Italian languages. He is well known for a translation from the Italian of “The History of the Wars of Italy, by Guicciardini,” the dedication of which to queen Elizabeth bears date Jan. 7, 1579. This was, however, his last work. He had published before, 1. “Certaine Tragical Discourses written oute of French and Latin,” 1567, 4to, reprinted 1579. Neither Ames nor Tanner appear to have seen the first edition. The work is, says Warton, in point of selection and size, perhaps the most capital miscellany of the kind, a. e. of tragical novels. Among the recommendatory poems prefixed is one from Turberville. Most of the stories are on Italian subjects, and many from Bandello. 2. “An Account of a Dispute at Paris, between two Doctors of the Sorbonne, and two Ministers of God’s Word,”1571, a translation. 3. “An Epistle, or Godly Admonition, sent to the Pastors of the Flemish Church in Antwerp, exhorting them to concord with other Ministers: written by Antony de Carro, 1578,” a translation. 4. “Golden Epistles; containing variety of discourses, both moral, philosophical, and divine, gathered as well out of the remainder of Guevara’s works, as other authors, Latin, French, and Italian. Newly corrected and amended. Mon heur viendra, 1577.” The familiar epistles of Guevara had been published in English, by one Edward Hellowes, in 1574; but this collection of Fenton’s consists of such pieces as were not contained in that work. The epistle dedicatory is to the right honourable and vertuous lady Anne, countess of Oxen ford; and is dated from the author’s chamber in the Blackfriars, London, Feb. 4, 1575. This lady was the daughter of William Cecil lord Burleigh; and it appears from the dedication, that her noble father was our author’s best patron. Perhaps his chief purpose in translating and publishing this work, was to testify his warm zeal and absolute attachment to that great minister.

, in Latin Ferrius, a most learned divine of Germany, was born of a considerable family at Metz, in 1591. He was sent to study divinity at Montaban, and made so uncommon a progress, that he was admitted a minister at Metz in 1610. Though he was but nineteen, he had then published a book of poems; the advertisement to which he finished in these words, “sat ludo nugisque datum.” He had eminent talents for preaching: his graceful presence, his venerable countenance, and fine delivery, adding great force to his eloquence, which was very powerful and moving. His enemies reported, falsely, that he was one of the ministers whom cardinal Richelieu had bribed to procure a coalition of the two religions; however, it is certain that he was grieved at the division of the p'otestants, and hoped that he could contribute somewhat to forward a re-union; and it is supposed that with this view he kept a correspondence with Dury (See Dury). His death happened in 1669, when above fourscore stones were found in his bladder, which had occasioned it. He had a very fine library, which he increased by several works of his own. In 1616 he published “Scholastic} Orthodox! Specimen,” in which he shews, that the protestant doctrine of grace has been taught by the schoolmen. This treatise gained him the esteem of Du Plessis Mornay, who wrote him a letter upon it, in which he advised him about another work he was upon, entitled “Le dernier desespoir de la Tradition,” &c. In 1630 he published at Leyden, “Vindiciae pro Scholastico Orthodoxo,” against Perinus, an eminent Jesuit, who had published in 1619 a book entitled “Thrasonica Pauli Ferrii Calvinistae.” In 1654 he published “General Catechisme de la Reformation,” which was answered by Bossuet; and left behind him collections for a history of Metz, which are referred to by Calmet, as abounding in curious researches; and a vast number of sermons, of which about eleven hundred are on the epistle to the Hebrews.

, a protestant minister and professor of divinity at Nismes, of the seventeenth century, is, contrary to his namesake in the preceding article, memorable for becoming a papist, even after having maintained in public disputation, in 1602, that “Pope Clement the VHIth was properly the Antichrist,” yet he was the first who began to yield in the political assemblies of the reformed in France. Many circumstances in his behaviour had made him suspected as a pensioner of the court, as a false brother, and a traitor to the churches. He did not, however, openly change his religion till a popular tumult arose against him > in which his house was plundered, and himself so near being murdered, that, for the sake of escaping he was obliged to lie three days concealed in a tomb. After this he settled at Paris, where he endeavoured to make his fortune. He published in 1614, the year after his conversion, a book of controversy upon the subject of antichrist. The king employed him in several important affairs; and in 1626 he was commanded to attend his majesty to Britanny, where he was honoured with the title of state and privy counsellor. Cardinal de Richelieu had a particular esteem for him. He died of a hectic fever in 1626. His family was numerous; and he made all his children promise that they would live and die in the catholic faith. His only daughter married M. Tardieu, lieutennnt-criminel of Paris, concerning which couple some curious anecdotes are recorded in Boileau’s tenth satire, and in the notes of St. Marc. Ferrier was the reputed author of a famous political work, entitled “Catholique d'Etat,” published in 1625, in answer to some libels which the king of Spain’s partizans had written against France, upon allying herself with the protestant powers to the injury of the catholic religion.

, or Tanaquil Faber, a very learned man, father of madame Dacier, was born at Caen in Normandy in 1615. His father determined to educate him to learning, at the desire of one of his brothers, who was an ecclesiastic, and who promised to take him into his Jiouse under his own care. He had a genius for music, and early became accomplished in it but his uncle proved too severe a preceptor in languages he therefore studied Latin with a tutor at home, and acquired the knowledge of Greek by his own efforts. The Jesuits at the college of La Fleche were desirous to detain him among them, and his father would have persuaded him to take orders, but he resisted both. Having continued some years in Normandy, he went to Paris; where, by his abilities, learning, and address, he gained the friendship of persons of the highest distinction. M. de Noyers recommended him to cardinal Ue Richelieu, who settled on him a pension of 2000 livres, to inspect all the works printed at the Louvre. The cardinal designed to have made him principal of the college which he was about to erect at Richelieu, and to settle on him a farther stipend: but he died, and Mazarine, who succeeded, not giving the same encouragement to learning, the Louvre press became almost useless, and Faber’s pension was very ill paid. His hopes being thus at an end, he quitted his employment; yet continued some years at Pans, -pursuing his studies, and publishing various works. Some years after he declared himself a protestant, and became a professor in the university of Saumur; which place he accepted, preferably to the professorship of Greek at Nimeguen, to which he was invited at the same time. His great merit and character soon drew to him from all parts of the kingdom, and even from foreign countries, numbers of scholars, some of whom boarded at his house. He had afterwards a contest with the university and consistory of Saumur, on account of having, unguardedly and absurdly, asserted in one of his works, that he could pardon Sappho’s passion for those of her own sex, since it had inspired her with so beautiful an ode upon that subject. Upon this dispute he would have resigned his place, if he could have procured one elsewhere: and at last, in 1672, he was invited upon advantageous terms to the university of Heidelberg, to which he was preparing to remove, when he was seized with a fever, of which he died Sept. 12, 1672. He left a son of his own name, author of a small tract “De futilitate Poetices,” printed 1697 in 12mo, who was a minister in Holland, and afterwards lived in London, then went to Paris, where he embraced the Romish religion; and two daughters, one of whom was the celebrated madam Dacier, and another married to Paul Bauldri, professor at Utrecht. Huet tells, that “he had almost persuaded Faber to reconcile himself to the church of Rome,” from which he had formerly deserted; “and that Faber signified to him his resolution to do so, in a letter written a few months before his death, which prevented him from executing his design.” Voltaire,' if he may be credited, which requires no small degree of caution, says he was a philosopher rather than a Hugonot, and despised the Calvinists though he lived among them.

, a nonconformist divine and physician, was born in 1617, in Suffolk, and educated at Cambridge, where he studied physic, and afterwards practised it with great success in New England, to which he fled, as he said, to enjoy liberty of conscience. When that, kowever, was restored about the latter end of the civil wars, he returned to England, was ordained, and became minister at Shalford, in Essex, where he continued till he was ejected, in 1662, by the act of uniformity. He afterwards resumed the practice of physic, but never neglected to preach when he had an opportunity, in which he appears to have been protected by his excellent and charitable character as a physician. He died in 1697, at the age of eighty. He was author of several works, the most known of which is his “Real Christian.” The others are of the controversial kind, with the Quakers, Antinomians, and Anabaptists, or concerning church government. He bad far more moderation as well as loyalty than many of his brethren, and even is said to have joined with a few like himself, during the usurpation, in praying for the exiled royal family.

, a very popular nonconformist divine, was born in Worcestershire about 1627, and educated at University-college, Oxford, where he took his degree of B. A. In 1650 he settled as assistant minister to Mr. Waiplate, rector of Diptford, in Devonshire, and shortly after succeeded to the rectory, which, however, in 1656 he resigned to become minister of a very populous parish at Dartmouth, though the stipend in this situation was much less. In 1662, when ejected with the other nonconformists, he occasionally preached and administered the sacrament privately till the passing of the Oxford act, in 1665, when he was obliged to retire to Slapton, a village five miles from Dartmouth, where also he sometimes preached when he could do it with safety, and sometimes when his safety was endangered. In 1685, the mob was excited against him, and would probably have destroyed him, had he fallen into their hands. He then came to London, where he narrowly escaped being apprehended, but returning to Dartmouth, when in 1687 king James granted more liberty to nonconformists, Mr. Flavel’s congregation immediately obtained for him a large place, in which he was enabled to exercise his ministerial functions; and by the revolution in 1688, he enjoyed complete liberty. He died at KxeUT in 1691, in his sixty-fourth year, having long possessed, in an eminent degree, the respect and esteem of all good men. He was a man of exemplary piety, and his various works are still in considerable popularity, and are regarded by those who hold Calvinistic sentiments. They were collected after his death, in 2 vols. folio, and have been since often printed in 6 vols. 8vo.

, a dissenting minister, and zealous Socinian, was born at Nottingham in 1698, where he was educated and brought up to trade, after which he studied at Warrington, with a view to enter into the ministry among the dissenters. His proficiency and talents being known to Dr. Thomas, bishop of Winchester, he offered him a living to enter into the church, but this he declined, as inconsistent with the opinions he had formed, and was chosen preacher of a congregation in Bartholomew-close, London, where he continued until 1752. He then became assistant to Dr. James Foster, at Pinners’ -hall, whom he succeeded, and remained sole pastor of that congregation as long as he was able to execute the duties of his office. He died in 1779. Few people, says Dr. Kippis, have written a greater number of pamphlets, some of which being published without his name, were but little noticed by the world; and none of them, we may add, a're now in request. There are, says the same author, instances in which he was singular, not to say whimsical, in his positions. His writings might have been more generally acceptable and useful, if they had been free from a certain quaintness and obscurity of style. Aiming at originality and strength of expression, he often lost perspicuity, and never attained to elegance. The doctor adds, that he was a determined enemy to civil and ecclesiastical tyranny, and a very zealous Socinian.

, a Scotch presbyterian clergyman, whose works are still much esteemed in that country, was born at Bathens, or Easter, the seat of the earls of Tweedale, in 1630, where his father, James Fleming, was long a minister of the gospel. He was educated in classics^ philosophy, and divinity, at the universities of Edinburgh and St. Andrew’s, and at the latter studied divinity under the celebrated Samuel Rutherford. His natural parts, according to his biographer, were excellent; hjs understanding quick and penetrating, his judgment clear and profound, and his memory strong. These talents, which he employed in the course of his academical-studies, and especially in theology and ecclesiastical history, recommended hiai to ordination, when in his twenty-third year, and when the church of Scotland was purely presbyterian. His pastoral charge was Cambuslang, in Clydsdale, in which he remained highly venerated by his flock until th^ restoration; but an attempt being then made to establish episcopacy in Scotland, he and such of his brethren as adhered to the presbyterian form of government, were ejected from their livings. After this he resided mostly at Edinburgh, and in Fifeshire until September 1673, when he was apprehended for nonconformity, but was soon liberated, and went to Holland, where he officiated as minister to the Scotch congregation at Rotterdam. He died at this place July 15, 1694, deeply regretted by his flock, as well as by his brethren in Scotland, who considered him. in respect of piety and learning, as a great ornament to his profession. He published a few religious tracts of the practical kind, but is best known by his more elaborate work entitled “The Fulfilling of the Scriptures,” which is in fact, a view of the operations of providence in preserving the church through all the vicissitudes of ecclesiastical history. This was originally published in three parts, separately, which were printed together in a handsome manner, in 1726, folio, with a life prefixed, from which this article is chiefly taken.

, son of the preceding, was born and partly educated in Scotland, but studied afterwards at the universities of Leyden and Utrecht, where he prosecuted all those branches of learning which were deemed necessary to qualify him for the ministerial profession. His first settlement was with the English church at Leyden, whence he afterwards removed to become minister of the Scotch church of Amsterdam. In the course of a few years, he came over to London, and became pastor of a Scotch church in Lothbury, London; urged, as it is said, to make the exchange by king William, who often advised with him on the concerns of his own country, and frequently received him at court. His great learning and talents procured him much respect abroad, and also in this country, where he was esteemed by churchmen and dissenters, as well as by those belonging to the Scotch presbytery. He was on terms of friendship with the archbishop of Canterbury; and was chosen one of the preachers of the lecture, instituted by the merchants of London, at Salters’­hall, every Tuesday. From his early years he was eminently devout; and he xvas firmly attached to the British monarchy and constitution. He died May 24, 1716. His works were numerous, consisting of various sermons, and tracts; particularly, 1. “The History of Hereditary Right.” 2. “The Mirror of Divine Love,” in which is a dramatic poem, called the “Monarchical Image, or Nebuchadnezzar’s Dream.” 3. “Theocraty, or Divine Government of Nations.” 4. “A practical discourse on the death of king William.” 5. “Christology, or a discourse concerning Christ.” 6. “The Rod of the Sword.” 7. “Speculum Davidicum Redivivum, or the Divine right of the Revolution evinced and applied,” and “Discourses on several subjects, viz. the Rise and Fall of Papacy,” c. published in 1701. In the dedication of this last mentioned work to lord Carmichael, principal secretary of state for Scotland, and chancellor of the college of Glasgow, Mr. Fleming mentions his being related to his lordship, and acknowledges his obligations for the offer of so considerable au office as that of principal of the college of Glasgow; which very honourable and beneficial situation he declined, being a dissenter from the church of Scotland. This work, some years ago, was very much the subject of public attention, from the remarkable coincidence between Fleming’s conjectural interpretation of a prophecy in the Revelations, which he supposed to relate to the humbling of the French monarchy, about 1794, and the calamitous events which, within a year of that very period, befel the unhappy Louis XVI. There being at that time a very numerous party in this and other countries, whose object was the humbling of every monarchy and established government, this lucky conjecture of Mr. Fleming’s encouraged the appearance of various prophets (at the head of whom was a lunatic, still in confinement), and their publications for a considerable time agitated the public mind, and produced, in some degree, what was intended, a damp on the spirits of the credulous, and a reluctance to support the war. This, however, like every other popular delusion, was not of long duration, and more recent events have given a happier direction to public sentiment.

Dr. Fletcher left two sons, Giles and Phineas. The eldest, Giles, born, according to Mr. Ellis’ s conjecture, in 1588, was educated at Trinity college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of bachelor of divinity, and died at his living of Alderton, in Suffolk, in 1623. His widow married afterwards the rev. Ramsay, minister of Rougham, Norfolk. Winstanley and Jacob, who in this case have robbed one another, instead of better authorities, divide the two brothers into three, and assign Giles’s Poem of “Christ’s Victory” to two authors.

, zm evninmt French hydrographer, was born at Lyons in 1738, of a fatally distinguished in the profession of the law, but devoted his attention from his infancy to marine studies. He arrived at the rank of a naval captain in the French service, and was employed many years before the revolution in the office of their marine, under the title of director of the ports and arsenals. His countrymen impute to his labours and skill the figure which the French navy was enabled to make in the American war. In 1790 he was appointed minister of the marine, and filled that important situation with great integrity; but dreading the influence of popular opinion, he gave in his resignation in 1791, when the mob were gaining a fatal ascendancy. He had before requested of the king to separate the colonial department of the marine from the other, and make it a distinct office, with which his majesty did not at that time think it necessary to comply. During his administration he published a work to illustrate the history of navigation, entitled “Decouvertes des Francois en 1768 et 1769, dans le sud-est de la Nouvelle-Guine,” Paris, 1790, 4to; the professed object of which is to restore to the French navigators, and particularly to Bougainville, the merit of those discoveries of which the English have endeavoured to deprive them.

Fleurieu’s retirement from public life did not last long, as the king, who had a high opinion not only of his talents, but of his moral character, appointed him, in April 1792, tutor to the dauphin. In 1793, however, he was arrested by the revolutionary party, and imprisoned in the Madelonettes. By what means he escaped the general murder of all men of talents and worth we are not told. In 1797 he was again appointed to his old post of minister of marine, and was at the same time chosen deputy of the department of the Seine in the council of ancients, to which he was also secretary, but lost both of these offices in September following by a new turn of public arrangements. In 1799 Bonaparte appointed him a member of the council of state, of the section of the marine, in tend ant-general of his horse, and grand officer of the legion of honour. In July 1805 he resigned the office of intendant, and was made governor of the Thuilleries, having also just before been chosen member of the institute, and of the board of longitude. The improvements which his country men say he?, made in this last research, and the obligations the English owe to him, are detailed in a Voyage which he printed in 1774, 2 vols. 8vo, which he performed in 1768 and by order of the king, in order to prove some time-pieces invented by Berthoud. In 1800 he was the editor of Marchand’s < Voyage autour du monde.“His latter years were employed in completing a grand” Hydrographic Atlas," which was to have been published in 1811, but this was prevented by his death, Aug. 18, 1810. He had expended above 200,000 franks on this work. His countrymen speak of his talents with profound regard, and his private character appears to have been equally praiseworthy.

, the celebrated cardinal of that name, was born in 1653, at Lodeve in Languedoc, but was brought to Paris at the age of six, and there educated for the church. He distinguished himself in the progress of his studies; and when he began to mix with the world, appeared there with the natural advantages of a handsome figure, pleasing address, and wellmanaged wit. His first preferment was that of a canon of Montpellier; he was also a doctor of the Sorbonne. But his friends becoming numerous, much interest was made for him, and in 1698, Louis XIV. named him bishop of Frejus. “I have made you wait a long time,” said the king, “but you have so many friends, that I was determined to stay till I could have the sole merit of preferring you.” Louis XIV. a little before he died, appointed him preceptor to his grandson, in which office he succeeded Bossuet and Fenelon. In 1726 he was made cardinal, and soon after advanced to the place of prime-minister. He was then turned seventy. Yet the weight of this active: post did not alarm him; and, to the age of ninety, he manifested a mind in full vigour, and capable of conducting affairs. From 1726 to 1740, every thing prospered. He commenced and brought to a glorious conclusion for his country, the war for the succession in Spain; and he added Lorraine to the French territory. In the war which commenced in 174-0 he was not so fortunate; and in 1743 he died, full of grief for a succession of misfortunes, of which the nation reproached him as the author. A too rigid attention to economy had led him to neglect the marine of his country; and the successes of England by sea completed the evil which had been thus begun. We was of a mild and tranquil character, a lover of peace, and not a man to make himself feared. He governed, says Millot, if not like a sublime genius who executes great things, at least like a prudent man, who accommodates his plans to circumstances, prefers essential to specious adVantages, and regards tranquillity and order as the foundation of public happiness. He had neither the pride of Richelieu, nor the avarice of Mazarin. No minister could be less costly to the state; his income did not amount tq five thousand pounds sterling a year, one half of which was employed in secret acts of benevolence. In the state of disorder to which the profusion of Louis XIV. had reduced the finances of France, it was happy for that country to have such a minister as Fleury, whose pacific turn counterbalanced the impetuosity of Villars, which would continually have plunged the country in new wars.

Though his disposition was exceedingly averse to confinement, or restraint of any kind, yet, to oblige his parents, he consented to marry; and, though the most unfeeling and insensible of mortals, was yet so far captivated by the wit and beauty of his \\ne, that he entertained a high opinion of her judgment, and never undertook any considerable work without consulting her. The dutchess of Bouillon, however, niece to cardinal Mazarine, being banished to Chateau-Thierry, Fontaine was presented to her, and had the happiness to please her; and this, added to a desire of conversing with the wits, tempted him to follow her when she was recalled to Paris. Here the intendant Fouquet soon procured him a pension, which he enjoyed in great comfort without troubling himself at all about his wife, or, perhaps, even reflecting that he had one. Upon the disgrace of this minister, he was admitted as gentleman to Henrietta of England; but the death of this princess put an end to all his court hopes, if, indeed, he was susceptible of hope. After this, among other favours from the most illustrious persons in the kingdom, the generous and witty madam de la Sabliere furnished him with an apartment and all necessaries in her house; who, one day, having hastily turned away all her servants, declared that she had kept but three animals in her house, which were her dog, her cat, and La Fontaine. In this situation he continued twenty years, during which time he became perfectly acquainted with all the wits of his time, with Moliere, Racine, Boileau, Chapelle, &c.

, an eminent Scotsman, was born in 1564, when the affairs of the church of Scotland were in great confusion. He was distinguished by his family, an well as by his uncommon merit, being himself lord of Corse, and baron of O'Neil, in the shire of Aberdeen. He was liberally educated both at Aberdeen and St. Andrew’s; and having a plentiful estate, a noble alliance, and great credit in his country, he contributed much towards restoring order, by encouraging pious and peaceable ministers, and by instructing the people in set conferences as well as occasional discourses; especially the papists, who would hear nothing from the pulpit. In this laudable manner he acted as a layman; and his abilities became so conspicuous, that he was often solicited to enter into the ministry by eminent persons both in church and state. He at length submitted to their judgment, and was ordained a presbyter at the age of 28. He was admitted minister of Keith, where he continued with the highest applause till 1618; and then, at the earnest desire of the clergy and laity of the diocese of Aberdeen, as well as at the express command of the king, was promoted to the bishopric of Aberdeen, which he had held about seventeen years. “It was,” says Burnet, “with great difficulty, that king James made him accept that dignity; and for several months he refused it, having proposed to himself to live in a less conspicuous state. It was soon seen, how much, he deserved to be a bishop; and that his refusal was not counterfeit, but the real effect of his humility. In all his behaviour he has displayed the character of a truly apostolic man. He visited his diocese without pomp and noise, attended only by one servant, that he might more easily be informed of what belonged to his care, &c.”

, a French naval officer of great repute, was born in 1656, and bred to the sea-service under a: relation, who was a sea-captain, named Korbin-Gardane. In 1636, he was left by his commander the chevalier de Chaumont, in the service of the king of Siam, to whom he was some time chief admiral. He afterwards distinguished himself on the coast of Spain, where, in 1703, he displayed his generosity no less than he had before proved his valour, by giving up to the owner a French prize, which the governor of Barcelona had ceded to him. In 1708 he was intrusted with conveying the pretender to Scotland, but was so closely watched by admiral Byng, that he was happy in returning his charge to Dunkirk. Louis XIV. admired and esteemed his greatness of soul, and frequently discoursed with him on the subject of his engagements, the recital of which he heard with great satisfaction. Once, when the king had given him some recompence for his services, at the time of going to court to return thanks, his zeal for a brother seaman of great merit, named John Bart, whom he considered as neglected, burst forth in remonstrances for him. The king was pleased with this generous disinterestedness, and remarked to his minister Louvois, that he saw few such examples at his court. But though Forbin was favoured by the king, he was not equally in the good graces of the ministers; and, after he had distinguished himself highly in many engagements against various enemies, his infirmities and his discontent caused him to retire from the service in 1710. He died in 17:53, at the age of 77.

, an eminent political and financial writer of France, was born at Mans, Oct. 2, 1722. His father, Francis, Louis Veron Duverger, was a merchant of that city. Having finished his education at the college of Beauvais, i,Ek Paris, he left it in the sixteenth year of his age, to followthe tarn my trade, which had long been carried on by his family; his great grandfather having established at Mans a, manufactory of tammies, which, from that circumstance, in Spain were called Verones. In 1741 he was sent by his father to Spain and Italy, whence he returned to Mans in 1743. His grandfather by the mother’s side, having soon after retired from business, he was thereby enabled to trade on his own account; but declining, from motives of delicacy, to carry on at Mans the same trade as his father, he Avent to Nantes, where his uncle was established as a shipowner, to obtain a knowledge of the mercantile concerns and transactions of that city. Having spent several years at Nantes, and collected much valuable information on maritime and colonial trade, he entered in 1752 upon a speculation, which induced him to go to Paris. Confined to a small circle of friends and acquaintance, he lived there in great privacy, yet presented to government several memoirs, which experiencing a very cool reception, he resolved to write in future, not for administration, but the public. He published accordingly in 1753, his “ThtJorie et pratique du Commerce et de la Marine,” a free translation from the Spanish of Dr. Geron. de Votariz, which was soon followed by the “Considerations sur les Finances d'Espagne relativement a eel les de France,” a work in which he displayed such intimate acquaintance with the Spanish system of finance, that the Spanish ambassador at the court of Versailles proposed him to marshal cle Noailles, as consul-general of Spain; but the former being soon after recalled by his court, the appointment did not take place. About the same time he published, in 1754, his “Essai sur la partie politique du commerce de terre et de mer, de Pagriculture et des finances,” which within three weeks passed through two editions; the third edition was published in 1766, and the fourth in 1796, considerably improved and enlarged. From his profound knowledge in matters relative to money and coinage, he was appointed in 1755, to examine into the enormous abuses which had crept into the administration <yf the French mint. He immediately proposed a new coinage, but his plan was not carried into execution until 1771; he was, however, in the meanwhile, appointed inspectorgeneral of the mint, a new office expressly established for him. Having obtained free admittance to the library of the family of Noailles, rich in manuscripts relative to the administration of the finances of France, he conceived the idea of composing his “Recherches et considerations sur les finances de France depuis 1595 jusqu'a 1721,” printed at Basle, 1758, in 2 vols. 4to, and reprinted the same, year at Liege, in 6 vols. 8vo. This valuable work expeperienced the most distinguished reception both in France and other countries, and supplied Thomas with matter for his observations on the true principles of financial administration in his eulogy of Suny. The duke de Choiseuil being appointed prime minister, he endeavoured to place Forbonnois in the department for foreign affairs; but the latter declining the appointment, Choiseuil requested he would apply himself to lay down a general system of trade, and to comment on all commercial treaties concluded by France, in order that certain and uniform principles might be introduced into that important department of political economy. While he was making the necessary preparations for executing that commission, the abandoned state of the French finances in 1759, occasioned the appointment of the noted Sithonette to the office of comptroller-general or minister of finances. Without being in the least connected with that minister, Forbonnois received an offer of the place of principal clerk of the department of finance, which being declined, the minister requested he would at least privately lend him his assistance in projecting the first financial operations necessary for opening the war both by sea and land, at a time when 1,500,000 livres only were left in the treasury. Eight days after, Forbonnois brought him all the plans and draughts of edicts for the first operations. They were approved by the minister, and laid before Louis XV. who in consequence thereof appointed Forbonnois inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, a title which he himself suggested, in order to avoid the eclat of a more brilliant appointment. However, Forbonnois’ acknowledged superiority as a financier, which proved exceedingly offensive to the minister’s lady, soon brought on a coolness between her husband and him, which induced Forbonnois to retire into the country until Sithonette’s disgrace and dismission. He might have succeeded him as comptroller-general, had he been willing to consent to sacrifices which he could not reconcile with his honesty and candour. While he held the place of inspector of the depot of the general financial comptrol, he published his “Lettre d'un Banquier a son correspondent cle province;” chiefly intended to give a favourable account of the minister’s operation. In 1760 he pointed out to the Duke de Choiseuil the perilous situation of France, and suggested the plan of a treaty of peace, calculated to tempt the ambition of Great Britain, and at the same time to save resources for France. This plan met with so much applause, that Don de Fuentes, at that lime Spanish ambassador at Paris, who was admitted to the conferences, offered an armed neutrality on the part of his court to tacilitate its execution. Forbonnois was charged to draw up the necessary acts and plans, and to elucidate a great variety of points respecting the fisheries, the means of enlarging them, the sacrifices to be made to England, &c. nay, he was offered the appointment of plenipotentiary to conclude the treaty; but having executed his charge, and demanded a conference, he received no answer. Being entrusted with the secrets of the state, he began to entertain strong apprehensions for his personal safety, and took refuge in a glass-manufactory in the mountains of Burgundy, in which he was concerned. He returned, however, afterwards to Paris, and in order to render both the minister and the financiers perfectly easy on his account, he purchased the place of a counsellor or member of the parliament of Metz.

Jn 1767 and 1768, he published his “Principes et observations economiques,” and “Supplement au journal d'AoCil 1768, ou examen du livre intitule*, Principes sur la liberte* du commerce des grains.” At the abolition of the parliament of Metz, in 1770, he resolved to retire to his estate, which he did; but Terray’s appointment to the place of comptroller-general brought him once more to Paris. He privately assisted that minister in the execution of the memorable financial operations which distinguish his administration, but declined to accept any place under government, resigned the office of inspector-general of the mint, obtained a pension suitable to the station he had filled, and retired again to his estate, where he continued until 1790. In this year we find him at Mans, among the electors assembled in that city.

About this time he became lecturer of Newington-green, and in 1651, vicar of St. Lawrence’s, Reading, where he was considered as an eminent preacher. In 1653 he married Mrs. Anne Thackham. In July 1659 he was chosen by the corporation of Northampton, the patrons, vicar of All Saints; and, in 1665, he took the degree of D. D. and was appointed chaplain to his majesty. In 1670 he removed to London, became minister of Bridewell chapel, and rector of St. Mary Aldermanbury but finding his health impaired by the air of London, he accepted, in 1677, the rectory of Old Swinford, near Sturbridge, in Worcestershire, on the presentation of Thomas Foley, of Kidderminster. Here he died April 7, 1699, and was buried in the church near his (we presume second) wife, Martha Stampe, who died in 1684. He was accounted an able scholar, an elegant Latin poet, and a preacher of great eminence.

, professor of philosophy in the Marischal college, Aberdeen, and author of several valuable works, was born in that city, in 1711, probably in March, as we find he was baptized on April 1. His father was an eminent merchant, who had a family of twenty children by his wife, a sister to Dr. Thomas Blackwell, of whom we have already given an account. This, their second son, after being educated at the grammar school of his native city, was entered of Marischal college in 1724, where he went through a course of philosophy under professor Daniel Garden, and of mathematics under Mr. John Stewart. He took his degree of M. A. in 1728, when he was but little more than seventeen years old. Being intended for the church, his next application was to the study of divinity, under the professor of that branch, Mr. James Chalmers, a man of great learning and piety, whom the editor of this Dictionary is proud to record as his grandfather. Mr. Fordyce studied divinity with great ardour, the utmost of his ambition being ordination in a church that affords her sons but a moderate emolument. Circumstances with which we are unacquainted, appear to have prevented his full intention, as he never became a settled minister in the establishment of his native country. He was admitted, however, to what may be termed the first degree of orders in the church of Scotland, that is, he was licensed to preach, and continued to preach occasionally for some time. He is said, indeed, to have been once domestic chaplain to John Hopkins, esq. of Bretons, near Rumford, in Essex, who had a regular service every Sunday in the chapel of the house; but there is reason to think he did not continue long in this situation, and that he returned home, as in Sept. 1742 he was appointed one of the professors of philosophy in the Marischal college. The duties of the philosophic professorship at that time included natural history, chronology, Greek and Roman antiquities, mechanics, optics, and astronomy, which were taught during three sessions, or years, to the same pupils. This system is now altered, but that My. Fordyce was well qualified for the above-mentioned laborious task was universally acknowledged.

, an English divine and scholar of eminence in the last ceatury, was born Feb. 3, 1717, at Stadscombe, in the parish of Plimstock, Devonshire, of which his father, Robert Forster, was then minister. His mother, Elizabeth, was daughter of the rev. John Tindal, vicar of Cornwood, in the same county, and sister of the rev. Nicolas Tindal, translator of Rapin’s History. His father, soon after the birth of this his eldest child, being chosen lecturer to St. Andrew’s church at Plymouth, went thitherto reside, and continued in the same place and office till his death. His son, the subject of this article, having received the rudiments of a grammatical education at home, in which he made an early progress, was put under the tuition of the rev. John Bedford, master of the grammar-school at Plymouth; and of this numerous seminary he had gained the first place before he was thirteen years old. In 1731-2 he was removed to Eton, and at the same time entered at Pembroke college, Oxford, in order to entitle him to an exhibition. After passing about sixteen months at Eton, while Dr. George was head-master, he went to college, and became a pupil of Dr. Radcliffe. On June 13, 1733, he was admitted scholar of Corpus Christi, where Dr. Burton was tutor. In 1729 he became fellow; and afterwards took the care of pupils himself as assistant to Mr. Paget, but was disappointed in his wishes of succeeding that gentleman as the college tutor, Mr. Patten being appointed by the president to that office. He was admitted to the degree of B. A. Oct. 13, 1735; to that f M. A. Feb. 10, 1738, and to that 'of B. D. April 9, 1746, as soon as his standing allowed, in order to preserve hie seniority in college. His degree of D. D. was deferred till 1750, the time of his leaving the university. In 1739 he received deacon’s orders from Dr. Wynne, bishop of Bath and Wells, and priest’s orders from Dr. Hoadly, bishop of Winchester.

, an English dissenting minister, was born at Exeter, Sept. 16, 1697. His grandfather was 9, clergyman at Kettering in Northamptonshire; but his father, being educated by an uncle who was a dissenter, imbibed the same principles, and was afterwards by trade a tucker, or fuller, in Exeter. He was sent early to the free school in that town, where the foundation of a friendship between him and Dr. Conybeare, afterwards bishop of Bristol, is said to have been laid; and thence was removed to an academy in the same city, where he finished his studies. He there displayed pre-eminent natural abilities, a quick apprehension, a solid judgment, a happy memory, and a free commanding elocution.

, count of Belle-Isle, more known by the name of marechal Bellisle, grandson of the preceding, was born in 1684. Politics and history attracted his attention from his very infancy, to which studies he afterwards added that of mathematics. He had hardly finished his education when Louis XIV. gave him a regiment of dragoons. He signalized himself at the siege of Lisle, received other steps of promotion, and at the peace returned to court, where the king entirely forgot the faults of the grandfather in the merits of his descendant. When war again broke out, after the death of Louis XIV. he proceeded to distinguish himself, but a change of ministry put a check to his career. He shared the disgrace of the minister Le Blanc, was for a time im-prisoned in the Bastile, and then banished to his own estate. In this retreat he composed a complete justification of himself, was recalled to court, and from that time experienced only favour, fortune, and promotion. In the war of 1733, he obtained a principal command in Flanders, distinguished himself before Philipsburg, and commanded during the rest of the campaign in Germany. In 1735 he was decorated with the order of the Holy Ghost, and was the confidential adviser of the minister, cardinal Fleury. About this time, taking advantage of an interval of peace, he wrote memoirs of all the countries in which he had served: but on the death of the emperor Charles VI. in 1740, he urged the cardinal to declare war. Ambition prompted this advice, and his ambition was not long without gratification. In 1741, he was created marechal of France. The witlings attacked him on his elevation, but he despised their efforts: “These rhymers,” said he, “would gain their ends, should I do them the honour to be angry.” At the election of the emperor in 1742, marechal Bellisle was plenipotentiary of France at the diet of Francfort, where his magnificence was no less extraordinary than the extent of his influence in the diet. He appeared rather as a principal elector than an ambassador, and secured the election of Charles VII. Soon after, by the desertion of the Prussians and Saxons, the marechal found himself shut up in Prague, and with great difficulty effected a retreat. He was obliged to march his army over the ice, and three thousand troops left in Prague were compelled to surrender, though with honour. On his return to Francfort, Charles VII. presented him with the order of the golden fleece, having already declared him a prince of the empire. In December 1743, as he was going again into Germany, he was taken prisoner at Elbingerode, a small town encircled by the territory of Hanover, and was carried into England, where he remained till August 1744. He then served against the Austrians in Provence; and, returning to Versailles to plan the campaign of 1748, was created a peer of France. He had enjoyed the title of duke of Gisors, from 1742. Afterthe peace in 1743, his influence at court continued to increase, and in 1757 he became prime minister; but in this situation he lived only four years; falling a victim, it is said, to his application to business, his sorrow for the misfortunes of France, and his anxious cares to extricate her from them. This patriotic character coincides with other anecdotes related of him. Having lost his brother, whom he tenderly loved, at a very critical period of public affairs, he suppressed his private grief as soon as possible, saying, “I have no brother; but I have a country, let me exert myself to save her.” He died in January, 1761, at the age of 77.

M. de Fourcroy was employed successively in various parts of the kingdom; principally, indeed, at Calais, at Rousillon, and in Corsica. Everywhere he served with diligence, and everywhere he acquired esteem and veneration. Of this conduct he received the reward in the most flattering manner. M. de St. Germain being appointed minister at war, wished to avail himself in his office of the abilities of some superior officer in the corps of engineers. On this he consulted the directors of that corps, then assembled at Versailles. All with an unanimous voice pointed out M. de Fourcroy, as the most capable of fulfilling the intentions of the minister. M. de St. Germain, who was scarcely acquainted with M. de Fourcroy, wrote to him to come to Perpignan, where he resided. When the minister told this gentleman that he had sent for him without knowing him, to fill a post near himself, and that he was recommended by the officers of his corps, his astonishment may easily be conceived. Of the opinion given of him he shewed himself worthy; and his conduct both public and private, made him honoured and respected.

, a clergyman originally of the church of England, was the son of John Fowler of Marlborough, in Wiltshire, where he was born in 1610 or 1611. In 1627 he was admitted a servitor at Magdalencollege, Oxford, and continued there until he took his bachelor’s degree; and then went to Edmund-hall, and took that of master. Having entered into holy orders, he preached some time in and near Oxford; and afterwards at West-Woodhay, near Donnington castle, in Berkshire. In 1641 he took the covenant, and joined the presbyterians being then, as Wood imagines, minister of Margaret’s, Lothbury, but his name does not occur in the registers until 1652. In 1641 he became vicar of St. Mary’s, Reading, and an assistant to the commissioners of Berkshire, for the ejection of such as were then styled “scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters.” He was at length, a fellow of Eton college, though he had refused the engagement, as it was called. After the restoration, he lost his fellowship of Eton, and, being deprived of the vicarage of St. Mary’s for non-conformity, he retired to London, and afterwards to Kennington, in Surrey, where he continued to preach, although privately. For some time before his death, he was much disordered in his understanding, and died in Southwark, Jan. 15, 1676, and was buried within the precincts of St. John Baptist’s church, near Dowgate. He is said by Wood to have used odd gestures and antic behaviour in the pulpit, unbecoming the serious gravity of the place, but which made him popular in those times. His character by Mr. Cooper, who preached his funeral sermon, is more favourable, being celebrated “as an able, holy, faithful, indefatigable servant of Christ. He was quick in apprehension, solid in his notions, clear in his conceptions, sound in the faith, strong and demonstrative in arguing, mighty in convincing, and zealous for ther truth against all errors.” We are told, likewise, that “he had a singular gift in chronology, not for curious speculation or ostentation, but as a key and measure to know the signs of the times,” &c.

His works are, 1. “Daemonium meridianum, or Satan at noon; being a sincere and impartial relation of the pro-; ceedings of the commissioners of the county of Berks, authorized by the ordinance for ejection, against John Pordage, late minister of Bradfield, in the same county,'” Lond. 1655, 4to. This Pordage appeared to these commissioners to be unsound in the doctrine of the Trinity. 2. “Daemonium meridianum, the second part, discovering the slanders and calumnies cast upon some corporations, with forged and false articles upon the author, in at pamphlet entitled `The case of Reading rightly stated,' by the adherents and abettors of the said J. Pordage,” Lond. 1656, 4to. To this is subjoined “A Word to Infent Baptism,” &c. Fowler likewise published a few occasional Sermons; and “A sober answer to an angry epistle directed to all public teachers in this nation,” prefixed to a book called “Christ’s innocency pleaded against the cry of the Chief Priests,” by Thomas Speed, qnaker, &c. Lond. 1656. In this he was" assisted by Simon Ford, vicar of St. Laurence, Reading, and it was animadverted on by George Fox, in one of his publications.

, a learned English prelate, was born in 1632, at Westerleigh, in Gloucestershire; of which place his father was minister, but ejected for noncon formitjr after the restoration. He was sent to the College-school in Gloucester, where he was educated under William Russel, who had married his sister. In the beginning of 1650 he became clerk of Corpus Christi college, Oxford, and being looked upon, says Wood, “as a young man well endowed with the spirit, and gifted with extemporary prayer, he was admitted one of the chaplains thereof in 1653, and the same year took a bachelor of arts degree.” Afterwards removing to Cambridge, he took his master’s degree as a member of Trinity college, and returning to Oxford, was incorporated in the same degree July 5, 1656., About the same time he became chaplain to Arabella, countess dowager of Kent, who presented him to the rectory of Northill, in Bedfordshire. Having been educated a presbyterian, he scrupled about conformity at the restoration, but conformed afterwards, and became a great ornament to the church. His excellent moral writings renderedhim so considerable, that archbishop Sheldon, in order to introduce him into the metropolis, collated him in August 1673, to the rectory of All-hallows, Breadtreet. In February 1675-6, he was made prebendary of Gloucester; and in March IbSl, vicar of St. Giles’s, Cripplegate, on which he resigned the living of Allhallows. The same year, he accumulated the degrees of bachelor and doctor of divinity. During the struggle between protestantism and popery in this kingdom, he appeared to great advantage in defence of the former; but this rendered him obnoxious to the court, and in all probability tvas the secret cause of a prosecution against him, in 1685, by some uf his parishioners, who alledged that he was guilty of Whiggism, that he admitted to the communion excommunicated persons before they were absolved, &c. We are told this matter was carried so far, that, after a trial at Doctors’-couimons, he was suspended, under the pretence of having acted in several respects contrary to the canons of the church. This affront, however, did not intimidate him from doing what he thought his duty; for he was the second, who in 1688, sighed the resolution of the London clergy, not to read king James’s new declaration for liberty of conscience. He was rewarded for this and other services at the revolution; for in 1691, he was preferred to the see of Gloucester, and continued there till his death, which happened at Chelsea, Aug. 26, 1714, in his eighty-second year. His widow survived him some years, dying April 2, 1732. She was his second wife, the widow of the rev. Dr. Ezekiel Burton, and daughter of Ralph Trevor, of London, merchant. His first wife, by whom he had a large family, was daughter of Arthur Barnardiston, one of the masters in chancery. She died Dec. 19, 1696, and was buried, as well as the bishop, in Hendon church-yard, Middlesex, in the chancel of which church is a monument to his memory.

After having displayed his talents to the greatest advantage in favour of the minister for about six years, the latter (lord North) procured his dismissal from office in a manner not the most gracious, and which, if it did not leave in Mr. Fox’s mind some portion of resentment, he must have been greatly superior to the infirmities of our nature, a pre-eminence which he never arrogated. It is said, that on Feb. 19, 1774, while he was actually engaged in conversation with the minister on other subjects in the house of commons, he received the following laconic note by the hands of one or the messengers of the house:

To this trifling dispute, we are left to refer the whole of Mr. Fox’s subsequent conduct, and as he appears to have immediately commenced hostilities with the minister and his friends, -it has been recorded, as peculiarly fortunate for him, that he had no occasion to degrade his consistency by opposing any of the measures he had formerly supported, in detail at least; and that a new sera of political hostility had just commenced on which he could enter with all the apparent earnestness of honest conviction. This, we need scarcely add, originated in the dispute between Great Britain and her American colonies. During the whole of this period, and of the war which followed, Mr. Fox spoke and voted in direct opposition to the ministerial system, which ended at last in the separation of the colonies from the mother state. It was now that Mr. Fox’s talents appeared in their fullest lustre, and that he took the foremost rank among the speakers of the house, although it could at that time, and in his own. party, boast of a Burke, a Barre, and a Dunning.

In 1753, he published a poem called “Translation,” in which he announced his intention of giving a translation of “Sophocles.” In January 1757, on the periodical paper called “The World” being finished, he engaged to publish a similar one, under the title of “The Centinel,” but after extending it to twenty-seven numbers, he was obliged to drop it for want of encouragement, The next year he published “A Fast Sermon” preached at Queen-street chapel, of which he was minister, and at St. Paul’s Coveut-garden, of which he was lecturer; and he afterwards published a few sermons on occasional topics, or for charities. In 1759 appeared his translation of “Sophocles,” 2 vols. 4to, which was allowed to be a bold and happy transfusion into the English language of the terrible simplicity of the Greek tragedian. This was followed by a “Dissertation on ancient Tragedy,” in which he mentioned Arthur Murphy by name, and in terms not the most courtly. Murphy, a man equally, or perhaps more irritable, replied in a poetical “Epistle addressed to Dr. Johnson,” who calmly permitted the combatants to settle their disputes in their own way, which, we are told, amounted to a cessation of hostilities, if not to an honourable peace. At this time Francklin is said to have been a writer in the Critical Review, which indeed is acknowledged in an article in that review, and might perhaps be deduced from, internal evidence, as, besides his intimacy with Smollet, his works are uniformly mentioned with very high praise. In 1757 he had been preferred by Trinity-college to the livings of Ware and Thundrich, in Hertfordshire, and although his mind was more intent on the stage than the pulpit, he published in 1765 a volume of “Sermons on the relative duties,” which was well received by the publick. Next year he produced at Drury-lane theatre, the tragedy of “The Earl of Warwick,” taken, without any acknowledgement, from the French of La Harpe. In Nov. 1767, he was enrolled in the list of his majesty’s chaplains. In 1768 he published apiece of humour, without his name, entitled “A Letter to a Bishop concerning Lectureships,” exposing the paltry shifts of the candidates for this office at their elections; and next year he wrote “An Ode on the Institution of the Royal Academy.” In March of the same year, he translated Voltaire’s “Orestes” for the stage. In July 1770 he took the degree of D. D. but still debased his character by producing dramatic pieces of no great fame, and chiefly translations; “Electra,” “Matilda,” and “The Contract,” a farce. About 1776 he was presented to the living of Brasted, in Surrey, which he held until his death. He had for some years employed himself on his excellent translation of the works of *' Lucian,“which he published in 1780, in 2 vols. 4to. He was also concerned with Smollet, in a translation of Voltaire’s works, but, it is said, contributed little more than his name to the title-pages. There is a tragedy of his still in ms. entitled” Mary Queen of Scots.“Dr. Francklin died at his house in Great Queen-street, March 15, 1784. He was unquestionably a man of learning and abilities, but from peculiarities of temper, and literary jealousy, seems not to have been much esteemed by his contemporaries. After his death 3 volumes of his” Sermons" were published for the benefit of his widow and family. Mrs. Francklin died in May 1796. She was the daughter of Mr. Venables, a wine-merchant.

, commonly called Du Cange, a learned Frenchman, was descended from a good family, and born at Amiens in 1610. After being taught polite literature in the Jesuits college there, he went to study the Jaw at Orleans, and was sworn advocate to the parliament of Paris in 1631. He practised some time at the bar, but without intending to make it the business of his life. He then returned to Amiens, where be devoted himself to study, and ran through all sorts of learning, languages and philosophy, law, physic, divinity, and history. In 1668, he went and settled at Paris; and soon after a proposal was laid before Colbert, to collect all the authors who at different times had written the history of France, and to form a body out of them. This minister liking the proposal, and believing Du Fresne the best qualified for the undertaking, furnished him with memoirs and manuscripts for this purpose. Du Fresne wrought upon these materials, and drew up a large preface, containing the names of the authors, their character and manner, the time in which they lived, and the order in which they ought to be arranged. Being informed from the minister that his plan was not approved, and that he must adopt another, and convinced that if he followed the order prescribed, the whole work would be spoiled, he frankly told his employers that since he had not been happy enough to please those in authority, his advice was, that they should look out some of the best hands in the kingdom; and at the same time he returned them all their memoirs. (See Bouquet). Being thus disengaged from a tedious and laborious undertaking, he finished his Glossary of low Latin, or “Glossarium Mediæ et infimæ Latinitatis,” which was received with general commendation; and though Hadrian Valesius, in his preface to the Valesiana, notes everal mistakes in it, it is nevertheless a very excellent and useful work. It was afterwards enlarged by the addition of more volumes; and the edition of Paris, by Carpentier, in 1733, makes no less than six in folio; to which Carpentier afterwards added four of supplement. Both have been since excellently abridged, consolidated, and improved, in 6 vols. 8vo, published at Halle, 1772 1784. His next performance was a “Greek Glossary of the middle age,” consisting of curious passages and remarks, most of which are drawn from manuscripts very little known. This work is in 2 vols. folio. He was the author and editor also of several other performances. He drew a genealogical map of the kings of France. He wrote the history of Constantinople under the French emperors, which was printed at the Louvre, and dedicated to the king. H published an historical tract concerning John Baptist’s head, some relics of which are supposed to be at Amiens. He published, lastly, editions of Cinnamus, Nicephorus, Anna Commena, Zonaras, and the Alexandrian Chronicon, with learned dissertations and notes.

, a learned critical and poetical writer of Germany, was born at Baling, in Suabia, in 1547. His father being a minister and a man of letters, taught him the rudiments of learning, and then sent him to Tubingen, where he made so amazing a progress in the Greek and Latin tongues, that he is said to have written poetry in both when he was no more than thirteen years of age. He continued to improve himself in compositions of several kinds, as well prose as verse; and at twenty years old was made a professor in the university of Tubingen. Though his turn lay principally towards poetry, insomuch, that as Melchior Adam tells us, he really could make verses as, fast as he wanted them, yet he was acquainted with every part of science and learning. He used to moderate in philosophical disputes; and to read public lectures in mathematics and astronomy, before he had reached his twenty-fifth year. In 1579, his reputation being much extended, he had a mind to try his fortune abroad, and therefore prepared to go to the ancient university of Friburg, where he had promised to read lectures. But he was obliged to desist from this purpose, partly because his wife refused to accompany him, and partly because the duke of Wirtemberg would not consent to his going thither, or any where else.

, an English historian and divine, was the son of the rev. Thomas Fuller, minister of St. Peter’s, in Aldwincle, in Northamptonshire, and born there in 1608. The chief assistance he had in the rudiments of learning was from his father, under whom he made so extraordinary a progress, that he was sent at twelve years of age to Queen’s-college, in Cambridge; Dr. Davenant, who was his mother’s brother, being then master of it, and soon after bishop of Salisbury. He took his degrees in arts, that of A. B. in 1624-5, and that of A. M. in 1628, and would have been fellow of the college; but there being already a Northamptonshire man a fellow, he was prohibited by the statutes from being chosen, and although he might have obtained a dispensation, he preferred removing to Sidney-college, in the same university. He had not been long there, before he was chosen minister of St. Bennet’s, in the town of Cambridge, and soon became a very popular preacher. In 1631, he obtained a fellowship in Sidney-college, and at the same time a prebend in the church of Salisbury. This year also he issued his first publication, a work of the poetical kind, now but little known, entitled “David’s Hainous Sin, Heartie Repentances, and Heavie Punishment,” in a thin 8vx>.

, an English antiquary, was the son of a tradesman at Penshurst, in Kent, where he was born in Nov. 1632, and his early capacity being known to the celebrated Dr. Hammond, who was minister of that place, he took him with him to Oxford during the usurpation. There he procured him the place of chorister in Magdalen college, and at the same time had him educated at the school belonging to that college. In 1647 he became a candidate for a scholarship in Corpus Christi college, and succeeded by his skill in classical learning. The next year he was ejected by the parliamentary visitors, along with his early patron, Dr. Hammond, to whom, however, he faithfully adhered, and was serviceable to him as an amanuensis. Dr. Hammond afterwards procured him a tutor’s place in a family, where he remained until the restoration, and then resuming his scholarship at college, was created M. A. and obtained a fellowship. He was, several years after, presented by his college to the rectory of Meysey Hampton, near Fairford, in Gloucestershire, on which he resided during his life, employing his time that was not occupied in professional duties, in the study pf history and antiquities, particularly what regarded his own country. He died June 28, 1688, according to Wood, but Atkins mentions his successor, Dr. Beale, with (he date 1697. Wood informs us that Mr. Fulmau made large collections of history, but published little. We have, however, of his, 1. “Academiae Oxoniensis Notitia,” Oxford, 1665, 4to, reprinted at London in 1675, with additions and corrections from Wood’s Latin history, the sheets of which he communicated to Mr. Fulman as they came from the press. 2. “Appendix to the Life of Edmund Stunton, D. D. wherein some passages are further cleared, which were not fully held forth by the former authors,” Lond. 1673. This is a censure of some particulars in Mayow’s Life of Dr. Stanton. 3. “Corrections and Observations on the first part of Burnet’s History of the Reformation,” not a distinct publication, but communicated by the author to Burnet, who published them at the end of his second volume, and, according to Wood, not completely. Fulman also collected what are called the “Works of Charles I.” but happening to be taken ill about the intended time of publication (1662), the bookseller employed Dr. Periuchief as editor. It contains, however, Fulman’s notes. Many of his ms collections are in the library of Corpus Christi college. He will occur to be noticed hereafter as editor of Dr. Hammond’s works.

, a celebrated Lutheran divine, was born in 1518, at Werdeti, near Nuremberg. He adopted the doctrine of Osiander, whose daughter he married, and particularly became a strenuous advocate for Osiander 1 s opinions on the subject of justification. He was a minister in Prussia, and wrote a “Chronology,” from Adam to 1560, published at separate times, but completely at Wittemberg, 1570, fol. with various other tracts. At length being convicted of giving Albert, duke of Prussia, to whom he was chaplain, advice disadvantageous to Poland, he was condemned, with some others, as a disturber of the public peace, and beheaded at Konigsberg, October 28, 1566. He is said to have composed the following distich a little before his execution

, an English clergyman and traveller, was descended from Robert Gage of Haling, in Surrey, third son of sir John Gage, of Firle, in Sussex, who died in 1557. He was the son of John Gage, of Haling, and his brother was sir Henry Gage, governor of Oxford, who was killed in battle at Culham-bridge,' Jan. 11, 1644. Of his early history we are only told that he studied in Spain, and became a Dominican monk. From thence he departed with a design to go to the Philippine islands, as a missionary, in 1625; but on his arrival at Mexico, he heard so bad an account of those islands, and became so delighted with New Spain, that he abandoned his original design, and contented him with a less dangerous mission. At length, being tired of this mode of life, and his request to return to England and preach the gospel among his countrymen being refused, he effected his escape, and arrived in London in 1637, after an absence of twentyfour years, in which he had quite lost the use of his native language. On examining into his domestic affairs, he found himself unnoticed in his father’s will, forgotten by some of his relations, and with difficulty acknowledged by others. After a little time, not being satisfied with respect to some religious doubts which had entered his mind while abroad, and disgusted with the great power of the papists, he resolved to take another journey to Italy, to “try what better satisfaction he could find for his conscience at Rome in that religion.” At Loretto his conversion from popery was fixed by proving the fallacy of the miracles attributed to the picture of our Lady there; on which he immediately returned home once more, and preached his recantation sermon at St. Paul’s, by order of the bishop of London. He continued above a year in. London, and when he saw that papists were entertained at Oxford and other parts of the kingdom attached to the royal cause, he adopted that of the parliament, and received a living from them, probably that of Deal, in Kent, in the register of which church is an entry of the burials of Mary daughter, and Mary the wife of “Thomas Gage, parson of Deale, March 21, 1652;” and in the title of his work he is styled “Preacher of the word of God at Deal.” We have not been able to discover when he died. His work is entitled “A new Survey of the West-Indies; or the English American his Travail by sea and land, containing a journal of 3300 miles within the main land of America. Wherein is set forth his voyage from Spain to St. John de Ulhua; and from thence to Xalappa, to Flaxcalla, the city of Angels, and forward to Mexico, &c. &c. &c.” The second edition, Lond. 1655, thin folio, with maps. The first edition, which we have not seen, bears date 1648. Mr. Southey, who has quoted much from this work in the notes on his poem of “Madoc,” says that Gage’s account of Mexico is copied verbatim from Nicholas’s “Conqueast of West-India,” which itself is a translation from Gomara. There is an Amsterdam edition of Gage, 1695, 2 vols. 12mo, in French, made by command of the French minister Colbert, by mons. de Beaulieu Hues O'Neil, which, however, was first published in 1676, at Paris. There are some retrenchments in this edition. Gage appears to be a faithful and accurate relator, but often credulous and superstitious. His recantation sermon was published at London, 1642, 4to; and in 165L he published “A duel between a Jesuite and a Dominican, begun at Paris, fought at Madrid, and ended at London,” 4to.

In the mean time the publication of his “Court of the Gentiles” had- proceeded gradually, in consequence of the great care he took to complete and digest his collections, and to make the work in all respects a masterly production. The first part was published at Oxford in 1669, and, being received with great applause, was followed by the other three, the last of which came out in 1677, the year when he succeeded Mr. Rowe. But this work, large 'and laborious as it was, did not prove sufficient to employ his spare hours: he wrote also, within the same period, several other works; namely, 2. “The true Idea of Jansenism,” 1669, 4to; with a large preface by Dr. John Owen. 3. “Theophilus, or a Discourse of the Saints’ amity with God in Christ,” 1671, 8vo. 4. “The Anatomy of Infidelity, &c.”' 1672, 8vo. 5. “A Discourse of Christ’s coming, &c.” 1673, 8vo. 6. “Idea Theologiae tarn contemplative quam activoe, ad formam S. S. delineata,” 1673, 12mo. 7. “A Sermon, entitled, Wherein the Love of the World is inconsistent with the Love of God,” 1674; printed also in the supplement to the morning exercise at Cripplegate. 8. “Philosophia generalis in duas partes disterminata, &c.” 1676, 8vo. 9., “A Summary of the two Covenants,” prefixed to a piece published by him, entitled “A Discourse of the two Covenants,” written by William Strong, sometime preacher at the Abbey church at Westminster. “The Life and death of Thomas Tregosse, minister of the gospel at Milar and Mabe in Cbrnwal, with his Character,” was also written by him, and published in 1671, though he seems to have concealed the circumstance as much as possible. Such were the fruits of our author’s studies; for the sake of prosecuting which, with the privacy requisite, he chose Newington for his retreat; where he instructed a few young persons under his own roof. But he was frequently visited hy persons of distinction, and some of a different opinion from him in religious matters, out of a desire to testify their esteem for unaffected piety and extensive learning. In 1678 he published proposals for printing by subscription, “Lexicon Grreci Testamenti Etymologicon, Synonymum, sive Glossarium Homonymum.” This, as the title imports, was intended by him for a lexicon and concordance together: he finished it as far as the letter Iota, and the most considerable words were also placed under other letters. But he was prevented from carrying it further by his death; which happened in March that year, when he was not quite fifty. As to his character, besides what has been already mentioned, he was a most zealous non-conformist, stedfast in those opinions, and warm in the defence of them. His zeal this way extended itself beyond the grave; he wished, he resolved, to perpetuate them as far as he was able. In that spirit he bequeathed all his estate to young students of his own principles, and appointed trustees to manage it for their support. He bequeathed also his well-chosen library toward promoting useful learning in New England, where those principles universally prevailed. But, notwithstanding this warm concern for supporting and propagating his own communion, he was not without charity for those who differed from him, whom he would labour to convince, but not to compel; being as much an enemy to sedition as he was to persecution. Hence we find even Wood giving him all his just commendations without those abatements and restrictions which are usual in his characters. It was allowed also, that, in hit “Court of the Gentiles,” and other works, he shewed extensive learning, and considerable abilities.

, a learned Frenchman, was born of a good family, at Paris, in 1632. He bad studied divinity, ecclesiastical and profane history, philosophy, mathematics, the Oriental, together with the Italian, Spanish, English, and German languages; and was deemed an universal scholar. He is now memorable chiefly for having been the first who published the “Journal des Sgavans,” in conjunction with M. de Sallo, who had formed the design of this work. The first journal was published on Jan. 5, 1665; but these gentlemen censured new books with so much severity, that the whole tribe of authors rose up against their work, and effectually cried it down. De Sallo abandoned it entirely, after having published a third journal, in March following. Gallois was determined to continue' it, yet did not venture to send out a fourth journal till Jan. 1666, and then not without an humble advertisement in the beginning of it, in which it is declared, that the author “will not presume to criticize, but only simply to give an account of books.” This, and the protection shewn by the minister Colbert, who was much pleased with the work, gradually reconciled the public to the Journal. Thus began literary journals, which have been continued from that time to this under various titles, and by various authors; among whom are the names of Bayle and Le Clerc. Gallois continued his journal to 1674, when more important occupations obliged him to drop it, or rather transfer it to another person. Colbert had taken him into his house the year before, with a view of being taught Latin by him; and the minister of state, it is said, took most of his lessons in his coach, as he journeyed from Versailles to Paris, Voltaire observes on this occasion, that “the two men, who have been the greatest patrons of learning, Louis XIV. and Colbert, neither of them understood Latin.” ' Gallois had been made member of the academy of sciences in 1668, and of the French academy in 1675. He lost his patron by death in 1683; and then, being at liberty, was first made librarian to the king, and afterwards Greek professor in the royal college. He died of the dropsy in 1707; and in 1710 a catalogue of his books was printed at Paris, consisting of upwards of 12,000 volumes. It is remarkable of this learned man, that though he had served many friends by his interest with Colbert, yet he had neglected to make any provision for himself: whence it happened, that, at the death of that minister, he was but in poor circumstances, although an abbé.

, a pious bishop among the Moravian brethren, was born near Haverford Wes in SouthWales, and became a member of Christ- church, Oxford, where he took the degree of M. A. May 30, 1734; and was afterwards vicar of Stanton Harcourt, in Oxfordshire, to which he was presented by Dr. Seeker, when bishop of Oxford. At this place, in 1740, he wrote “The Martyrdom of Ignatius, a Tragedy,” published after his death by the rev. Benjamin La Trobe with the Life of Ignatius, drawn from authentic accounts, and from the epistles written by him from Smyrna and Troas in his way to Rome, 1773, 8vo. A sermon, which he preached before the university of Oxford, was published under the title of “Christianity, Tidings of Joy,” 1741, 8vo. In 1742 he published at Oxford, from the university-press, a neat edition of the Greek Testament, but without his name, “Textu per omnia Milliano, cum divisione pericoparum & interpunctura A. Bengelii,” 12mo. Joining afterwards the Church of the Brethren, established by an act of parliament of 1749, and known by the name of “Unitas Fratrum,” or, the United Brethren; he was, for many years, the regular minister of the congregation settled at London, and resided in Neville’s-court, Fetter-lane, where he preached at the chapel of the society. His connexion with these sectaries commenced in 1748, when Peter Boehler visited Oxford, and held frequent meetings with John and Charles Wesley, for the edification of awakened people, both learned and unlearned. His discourses were in Latin, and were interpreted by Mr. Gambold. He was consecrated a bishop at an English provincial synod held at Lindsey house in Nov. 1754, and was greatly esteemed for his piety and learning by several English bishops, who had been his contemporaries in the university of Oxford. In 1765 a congregation was settled by bishop Gatnbold, at Cootbill, in Ireland. Soon after he had joined the brethren, he published a treatise, written while he was at Stariton Haiv.ourt, and which proves his steady attachment to the church of England, entirely consistent with his connexion with, and ministry in, the church of the brethren. The title of it is, “A short summary of Christian Doctrine, in the w.iy ol question and answer; the answers being all made in the sound and venerable words of the Common-? prayer-book of the church of England. To which are added, some extracts out of the Homilies. Collected for the service of a few persons, members of the established church i but imagined not to be unuseful to others.” We know not the exact date of this treatise; but a second edition of it was printed in 1767, 12mo. Mr. Gam-bold also published in 1751, 8vo, “Maxims and Theological Ideas and Sentences, collected out of several dissertations and discourses of count Zinzendorf, from 1738 till 1747*” His “Hymns for the use of the Brethren” were printed in 174-8, 1749, and 1752; Some Hymns, and a small hymnbook for the children belonging to the brethren’s congregations, were printed entirely by Mr. Gambold’s own hand in Lindsey house at Chelsea. A letter from Mr. Gambold to Mr. Spangenberg, June 4, 1750, containing a concise and well-written character of the count of Zinzendorf, was inserted in Mr. James Mutton’s “Essay towards giving some just ideas of the personal character of count Zinzendorf, the present advocate and ordinary of the brethren’s churches,” 1755, 8vo. In 1752 he was editor of “Sixteen Discourses on the Second Article of the Creed, preached at Berlin by the ordinary of the Brethren,” 12mo. In June 1753 appeared “The ordinary oi' the Brethren’s churches his short and peremptory remarks on the way and manner wherein he has been hitherto treated in controversies, &c. Translated from the High Dutch, with a preface, by John Gambold, minister of the chapel in Fetterlane.” In the same year he published, “Twenty-one discourses, or dissertations, upon the Augsburg Confession, which is also the Brethren’s Confession of Faith; delivered by the ordinary of the Brethren’s churches before the seminary. To which is prefixed a synodical writing relating to the subject. Translated from fche High Dutch, by F. Okeley, A. B.” In 1754 he was editor of “A clest Plea for the Church of the Brethren,” &c. 8vo with a preface hy himself. In the same year, in conjunction with Mr. Hutton, secretary to the brethren, he also drew up 4< The representation of the committee of the English congregation in union with the Moravian church,“addressed to the archbishop of York; and also” The plain case of the representatives of the people known by the name f the Unitas Fratrum, from the year 1727 till these times, with regard to their conduct in this country under misrepresentation.“And in 1755 he assisted in the publication of” A letter from a minister of the Moravian branch of the Unitas Fratrum, together with some additional notes by the English editor, to the author of the Moravians compared and detected;“and also of” An exposition, or true state of the matters objected in England to the people known by the name of Unitas Fratrutn; by the ordinary of the brethren; the notes and additions by the editor.“In 1756 he preached at Fetter-lane chapel, and printed afterwards, a sermon upon a public fast and humiliation, setting forth” the reasonableness and extent of religious reverence.“He was not only a good scholar, but a man of great parts, and of singular mechanical ingenuity. It was. late in both their lives before the learned Bowyer was acquainted with his merits; but he no sooner knew them, than he was happy in his acquaintance, and very frequently applied to him as an occasional assistant in correcting the press; in which capacity Mr. Gambold superintended (among many other valuable publications) the beautiful and very accurate edition of lord chancellor Bacon’s works in 1765; and in 1767 he was professedly the editor, and took an active part in the translation from the High Dutch, of” The History of Greenland;“containing a” description of the country and its inhabitants; and particularly a relation of the mission carried on for above these thirty years by the Unitas Fratrum at New Herrnhut and Lichtenfels in that country, by David Crantz; illustrated with maps and other copper-plates: printed for the brethren’s society for the furtherance of the Gospel among the Heathen," 2 vols. 8vo. In the autumn of 1768 he retired to his native country, where he died, at Haverford West, universally respected, Sept. 13, 1771.

In 1618, he took the four vows, and became a father or his order. This is the highest title conferred on that or any other of the monastic institutions; and our author, being thereby admitted to read and study the sublimest mysteries of his religion, in a few years appeared upon the stage of the public in the character of a zealous champion for the faith, against the infidels and prophaners of those mysteries. But in the mean time his pen was far from lying idle. In 1620 he printed a piece entitled “Rabelais reformed by the ministers, particularly Peter du Moulin, minister of Charenton, in answer to the buffooneries inserted in his book” (of the invocation of pastors); and two years afterwards he ventured to attack the ghost of Stephen Pasquier, in another piece, entitled “Recherches des Recherches & autres ceuvres d'Etienne Pasquier.” There cannot be given a better specimen of the peculiar strain of his satirical wit, than is furnished by the epistle dedicatory to this book. It is addressed to the late Stephen Pasquier, wherever he may be “for,” says he, “having never been able to find out your religion, I know not the route or way you took at your departure out of this life; and therefore I am forced to write to you at a venture, and to address this packet wherever you may be.”

But his views were far from being confined to the university. He had some time before been taken into the family of the duke of Norfolk, and thence into that of Cardinal Wolsey, who made him his secretary. This post he now held, and it proved the foundation of his rise at court. The cardinal having projected the treaty of alliance with Francis I. in 1525, employed his secretary to draw up the plan, and the king coming to his house at Morepark, in Hertfordshire, found Gardiner busy at this work. He looked at it, liked the performance extremely well, the performer’s conversation better, and his fertility in the invention of expedients best of all; and from this time Gardiner was admitted into the secret of affairs, and entirely confided in, both by the king and his first minister. He received a public mark of that confidence in 1527, when he was sent to Rome, in order to negociate the arduous business of Henry’s divorce from queen Katharine. Edward Fox, provost of King’s-college, in Cambridge, went with him on this embassy; but Gardiner was the chief, being esteemed the best civilian in England at this time; and having been admitted into the king’s cabinet-­council for this affair, he is styled in the cardinal’s credential letters to the pope, “primary secretary of the most secret counsels.” He was now in such favour with the cardinal, that, in these very letters, he called Gardiner the half of himself, “Dimidium sui,” than whom none was dearer to him. He wrote that Gardiner should unlock his [the cardinal’s] breast to the pope; who, in hearing him speak, he might think he heard the cardinal himself. The successful issue of this embassy in obtaining a new commission, directed to the cardinals Wolsey and Campejus, as well as Gardiner’s address in the negociation, may be seen in the general histories of England. We shall only notice one particular not mentioned there, which is his success in disposing Campejus to make a tour to England. This requiring some extraordinary management, Gardiner took it upon himself; and having put every thing requisite to set the affair in a proper light at home, into the hands of his colleague Fox, dispatched him to carry the account to the king, who joined with Anne Boleyn in applauding the ingenuity, intrepidity, and industry of the new minister. But the loudest in his praises was the cardinal, in whose private business Gardiner had reconciled the pope to the endowment of his two colleges at Oxford and Ipswich, out of the revenues of the dissolved lesser monasteries. This added to the rest, made such an impression upon the cardinal’s mind, that crying out, “O inestimable treasure and jewel of this realm!” he desired Fox to remark those words, and insert them in his letter. There was still another instance of Gardiner’s abilities and attachment to Wolsey, which had its share in exciting this burst of admiration. During the course of this embassy, the pope falling dangerously ill, the cardinal set all his engines to work, to secure the keys provisionally to himself, in case of a new election, and the suffrages of one-third part of the cardinals were procured for him. He dispatched orders immediately to provide that those cardinals should be withdrawn to a place of safety, and should there declare him pope, though the majority should appear against him; assuring his own party, that they should be vigorously sustained by king Henry and his allies. This scheme, however, was rendered abortive by the recovery of Clement VII. but the pains taken in it by the cardinal’s agents, among whom Gardiner had at least an equal share, could not fail to be highly pleasing to him. In the event, indeed, the king had most reason to be satisfied with his minister, who gave his opinion that all solicitations at Rome would be lost time; the pope, in his judgment, being immoveable in the resolution to do nothing himself; though he might not improbably be brought to confirm such a sentence as his majesty could draw from the legates Henry, fully persuaded in the issue of the sincerity and judgment of this advice, recalled Gardiner, resolving to make use of his abilities in managing the legantine court .

In 1535, Cranmer visiting the see of Winchester, in virtue of his metropolitan power, Gardiner disputed that power with great warmth. Some time afterwards, he resumed his embassy to France, where he procured the removal of Pole (then dean of Exeter, afterwards cardinal) out of the French dominions, having represented him as his master’s bitter enemy; and this was the original root of that disagreement between them, which in time became public. Before his return this second time, being applied to by Cromwell for his opinion about a religious league with the protestant princes of Germany, he declared himself against it, and advised a political alliance, which he judged would last longer, as well as answer the king’s ends better, if strengthened by subsidies. In 1538 he was sent ambassador to the German diet at Ratisbon, where he incurred the suspicion of holding a secret correspondence with the pope. Whatever truth there may be in this charge, it is certain that Lambert this year was brought to the stake by his instigation, for denying the real presence in the sacrament. This instance of a sanguinary temper was then shown before the statute of the six articles was enacted; a law on which many were put to death, and which he undeniably framed and promoted in the house of lords to the utmost extent of his influence. This act passed in 1540; and the first person condemned by it, and burnt in Smithfield, the same year, was Robert Barnes, who at his death declared his suspicion of Gardiner’s having a hand in it . Upon the death of Cromwell, his rival long in the king’s favour, the university of Cambridge, where he still held his mastership of Trinity-hall, chose him their vice-chancellor; and in return he shewed his sense of it by an assiduity in his office among them, and a warm zeal to assist them on all occasions with his interest at court; which, as long as the sunshine of any signal service lasted, was very good. But in this, his case, like other courtiers, was subject to the sudden vicissitudes of light and shade which so remarkably checquered the series of that reign; and this minister was no more excepted than his fellows from complying with those conditions of ministerial greatness, which were indispensable as long as Henry sat at the helm: and, though he tells us himself that, after the king had let him into the secret, that he could look sour and talk roughly, without meaning much harm, he ever after bore those sallies with much less anxiety, and could stand a royal rattling pretty well ; yet this was only sometimes, and on some occasions. For upon others, we rind him submitting to very disagreeable supplications and expressions of deep humility, and great sense of his failings, directly contrary to the convictions of his own conscience and understanding. Of this we have the following remarkable instance. The bishop had for his secretary a relation of his own name, Gardiner, who, in some conferences with Fryth the martyr, had acquitted himself so well that they were judged fit for the public view. This young clergyman was much in his master’s favour, yet he fell under a prosecution upon the act of supremacy; and being very obstinate, was executed as a traitor, March 7, 1544. This was made an engine against the bishop by his enemies, who whispered the king that he was very likely of his secretary’s opinion, notwithstanding all he had written; and that if he was once in the Tower, matter enough would come out against him. On this suggestion, his majesty consented to his proposed imprisonment. But the bishop being informed of it in time, repaired immediately to court; confessed all that his majesty had charged him with, whatever it was; and thus, by complying with the king’s humour, and shewing the deepest concern for real or pretended failings, obtained full pardon, to the great mortification of his enemies. We have selected this instance from many others of a similar nature, all which are evident proofs of Gardiner’s want of honest and sound principle, because it may be of use in discovering his real principles upon the subject of the supremacy, which will at last be found to be nothing more, in fact, than an engine of his political craft. It has indeed been alleged in his behalf, that he was not always so servile and ready an instrument of the king’s will, especially upon the matter of the supremacy, and Strype publishes (Memorials, vol. I. p. 215) a letter in the Cottonian library, which Gardiner wrote to the king in consequence of his majesty’s being angry with him for approving some sentiments in a book that seemed to impugn his supremacy. But if this letter, as Strype conjectures, was written about 1535, this was the time when the king had some thoughts of a reconciliation with the see of Rome, and of returning the supremacy to the pope, which being very well known to Gardiner, might encourage him to speak with the more freedom on that subject. Gardiner, than whom no man seems to have more carefully studied the king’s temper, was not accustomed to look upon himself as undone because he sometimes received such notices of his majesty’s displeasure as threw some other courtiers into the most dreadful apprehensions. This knowledge and his artful use of it taught him to seek his own safety, in taking a share with others, in the divorce of Anne of Cleves, and that of queen Catherine Howard; the first of which, if we consider his skill in the law, must have been, against his conscience, and the second as much against his inclination, on account of his attachment to that noble family. The same regard for himself might also, had he been in the kingdom at the time, have led him to take a part against queen Anne Boleyn, sir Thomas More, and bishop Fisher.

All his sagacity, subtlety, and contrivance, however, were not sufficient to save him from a cloud, which shewed itself in the close of this reign; a change which might be attributed to the unsteadiness of the master, were there not facts sufficient to throw the imputation in some measure upon the servant.' Certain it is, though upon what particular provocation is not known, that he engaged deeply in a plot against the life of Cranmer; which being discovered and dispersed by the king, his majesty, fully satisfied of the archbishop’s innocence, left all his enemies, and among the rest Gardiner, to his mercy. The malice, though forgiven by Cranmer, cannot be supposed to be forgotten by Henry. But this did not hinder him from making use of this willing servant, against his last queen, Katharine Parr. That lady, as well as her preceding partners of the royal bed, falling under her consort’s distaste, he presently thought of a prosecution for heresy; upon which occasion he singled out Gardiner, whose inclinations that way were well known, as a proper person for his purpose to consult with. Accordingly the minister listened to his master’s suspicions, improved his jealousies, and cast the whole into the form of articles; which being signed by the king, it was agreed to sendKatherine to the Tower. But she had the address to divert the storm from breaking upon her head, and to throw some part of it upon her persecutors. The paper of the articles, being entrusted to chancellor Wriothesly, was dropt out of his bosom, and carried to her; and she, with the help of this discovery to her royal consort, found charms enough left to dispel his suspicions: the result whereof was, severe reproaches to the chancellor, and a rooted displeasure to the bishop, insomuch that the king would never see his face afterwards. His behaviour to him corresponded with that resentment. In the draught of his majesty’s will, before his departure on his last expedition to France, the bishop’s name was inserted among his executors and counsellors to prince Edward. But after this, when the will came to be drawn afresh, he was left out; and though sir Anthony Brown moved the king twice, to put his name as before into it, yet the motion was rejected, with this remark, that “if he (Gardiner) was one, he would trouble them all, and they should never be able to rule him.” Besides this, when the king saw him once with some of the privy- counsellors, he shewed his dislike, and asked his business, which was, to acquaint his majesty with a benevolence granted by the clergy: the king called him immediately to deliver his message, and having received it, went away. Burnet assigns Gardiner’s known attachment to the Norfolk family for the cause of this disgrace: but, whatever was the cause, or whatever usage he met with on other occasions, this justice is undeniably due to him, that he ever shewed a high respect to his master’s memory, and either out of policy or gratitude, he always spoke and wrote of him with much deference.

In the course of the proceedings, Gardiner always behaved himself contemptuously toward the judges, and particularly called them sacramentarians and heretics; on which account he was ordered to be removed to a meaner lodging in the Tower; to be attended by one servant only, of the lieutenant’s appointment to have his books and papers taken from him to be denied pen, ink, or paper; and nobody suffered to visit him. However, as he continued a close prisoner here during the rest of Edward’s reign, the severity of this order was afterwards mitigated; as appears from various pieces written by him in this confinement. He is said to have kept up his spirits and resolution, and it is not improbable, that he foresaw the great alteration in affairs which was speedily to take place. The first dawning of this began to appear on the demise of king Edward, when Mary was publicly proclaimed queen July 19, 1553. On Aug. 3 she made her solemn entry into the Tower, when Gardiner, in the name of himself and his fellow-prisoners, the duke of Norfolk, duchess of Somerset, lord Courtney, and others of high rank, made a congratulatory speech to her majesty, who gave them all their liberty. The spokesman took his seat in council the same day, and on the 8th performed the obsequies for the late king in the queen’s presence. On the 9th he went to Winchester-house in Southwark, after a confinement of somewhat more than five years; and was declared chancellor of England on the 23d. He had the honour of crowning the queen Oct. I, and on the 5th opened the lirst parliament in her reign. By these hasty steps Gardiner rose to the prime ministry; and was possessed at this time of more power, civil and ecclesiastical, than any English minister ever enjoyed, except his old master cardinal Wolsey. He was also re-chosen chancellor of Cambridge, and restored to the mastership of Trinity-hall there, of which, among his other preferments, he had been deprived in the former reign.

, a French protestant divine, was born in 1587, at Montauban. During his academical studies, he made so rapid a progress in divinity, that he was appointed minister at Puylaurens, when only twentyfour years of age, by the synod of Castres. He was afterwards minister and professor of divinity at Montauban, and died there in 1650. His principal works are, an epic poem in 12 books, entitled “Adolphidos,” in which he celebrates the great exploits of Gustavus Adolphus, in elegant Latin verse another Latin poem in praise of the protestant Swiss Cantons several theological theses a treatise “De Imputatione priuai peccati Adse,” 8vo another, “De Christo Mediators,” 4to and an explanation in Latin of Calvin’s Catechism, which he wrote with his colleague M. Charles, 8vo, &c.

In politics, Dr. Garth was prompted not more by good sense than by good disposition, to make his muse subservient to his interest, only by proceeding uniformly in the same road, without any malignant deviations. Thus, as he had enjoyed the sunshine of the court during lord Godolphin’s administration in queen Anne’s reign, that minister had the pleasure to find him among the first of those who paid the muse’s tribute on the reverse of his fortune in 1710; and in the same unchangeable spirit, when both the sense and poetry of this address were attacked by Prior with all the outrage of party virulence, he took no notice of it; but had the satisfaction to see an unanswerable defence made for him, by Addison. The task, indeed, was easy, and that elegant writer in the conclusion of it observes, that the same person who has endeavoured to prove that he who wrote the “Dispensary” was no poet, will very suddenly undertake to shew that he who gained the battle of Blenheim, was no general. There was, indeed, no need of a prophetic spirit to inspire the prediction. It was written in Sept. 1710; and the following year, in December, the duke of Marlborough was removed from all his places, and having obtained leave to go abroad, embarked at Dover for Ostend, Nov. 30, 1712. Dr. Garth had lived in the particular favour and esteem of this great man while in power, and when he was out of power he lamented in elegant verse, his disgrace and voluntary exile.

, an eminent physician, and very amiable man, was born at Kircudbright, the principal town of the county of that name in Scotland, Oct 28, 1732. He was the son of the rev. George Garthshore, the minister of Kircudbright, and received his early education at home. At the age of fourteen he was placed with a surgeon-apothecary in Edinburgh, where he attended the medical classes of the university, and the infirmary. In his twenty-second year, when he had finished his medical studies, he entered the army, as mate to surgeon Huck (afterwards Dr. Huck Sauntiers) in lord Charles Hay’s regiment. In 1756 he had an opportunity of relinquishing this service for the more advantageous situation of succeeding to the practice of Dr. John Fordyce, a physician at Uppingham, in Rutlandshire, who was about to remove to London. In this place, Dr. Garthshore resided until 1763, giving much satisfaction by his activity, assiduity, and successful practice in physic and midwifery, in a very extensive range of country. Here also he formed some valuable connections, and in 1759 married a young lady heiress to a small estate. This last advantage encouraged him to remove to London in 1763, and after a short residence in Bed ford -street, Coventgarden, he settled in a house in St. Martin’s lane, where he continued nearly fifty years. His professional views in coming to London were amply gratified; but here he was soon assailed by a heavy domestic affliction, the loss of his wife, which took place the 8th of March, 1765. From this calamity Dr. G. sought relief in the practice of his public duties. His natural susceptibility, the instruction of his father, the correspondence of Mr. Maitland, an early friend and patron, had deeply impressed him with devotion to his Maker, and taught him to consider it as inseparable from good-will and beneficence to men. Volumes of his Diary, kept for the whole of his life in London, and amounting to many thousands of close-written pages, in contractions very difficult to decypher, consist of medical, miscellaneous, and eminently pious remarks, meditations, and daily ejaculations of praise and thanksgiving, with fervent prayers to be kept steady in that course of well-doing essential to happiness in the present life and in that which is to come. The tone and temper, elevation and energy, acquired by this sublime heavenly intercourse, appeared indispensable to this good man, not only as the consolation of sorrow, and the disposer to patience and resignation under the ills of life, but as the spring and principle of unwearied perseverance in active virtue; the diligent, liberal, charitable exercise of the profession to which he was devoted. From this time forward he continued for nearly half a century cultivating medicine in all its branches, most attentive to every new improvement in themf, physician to the British lying-in hospital, fellow of the royal and antiquarian societies, rendering his house an asylum for the poor, as well as a centre of communication for the learned; for his connection with the higher orders of men never prevented his habitual attentions and services to the less fortunate: in general, to stand in need of his assistance was the surest recommendation to his partiality.

, a very learned English divine aud critic, descended from a family of that name at Gatacre-hall, in Shropshire, was born Sept. 4j 1574, in the parsonage-house of St. Edmund the King, in Lombardstreet, London, where his father, an eminent Puritan divine (who died in 1593) was then minister. At sixteen years of age he was sent to St. John’s college in Cambridge; where, in due time, he took both the degrees in arts. He was greatly distinguished by his abilities, learning, and piety; insomuch that the foundation of Sidney college being laid about this time, he was, by archbishop Whitgift, and Dr. Goodman dean of Westminster, the trustees of that foundation, appointed a fellow of that society, even before the building was finished. In the mean while he went into Essex, as tutor to the eldest son of Mr. (afterwards sir) William Ayloff, of Berksted, who himself learned Hebrew of him at the same time. During his residence here, he usually expounded a portion of scripture to the family every morning; in this task, after rendering the text into English from the original language, he explained the sense of it, and concluded with some useful observations. In the space of two years he went through all the prophets in the Old Testament, and all the apostolical epistles in the New. Dr. Stern, then suffragan bishop of Colchester, being nearly related to the mistress of the family, happened in a visit to be present at one of these performances; and, being struck with admiration, instantly exhorted the expounder to enter into the priesthood; and Mr. Gataker was ordained by that suffragan.

, a divine of the church of England, but a native of Scotland, was educated and probably born at Edinburgh, where he took the degree of M. A. and was in July 1671 incorporated in the same at Oxford, being one of the first four natives of Scotland, who partook of bishop Warner’s exhibitions intended for Balliol college. Some demur occurring on the part of the college, these scholars were first placed in Gloucester-hall (now Worcester college), but, in 1672, they were removed to Balliol. In 1678 Mr. Geddes went to Lisbon, as chaplain to the English factory the exercise of which function giving offence to the inquisition, he was sent for by that court in 1686, and notwithstanding he pleaded a privilege which had never been called in question, founded on the treaty between England and Portugal, he was forbid to continue his ecclesiastical duties. The English merchants resenting this violation of their privilege, wrote immediately to the bishop of London, representing their case, and their right to a chaplain; but before their letter reached his lordship, he was suspended by the ecclesiastical commission ordered by king James, who was now endeavouring to establish popery at home. They were deprived therefore of all exercise of their religion till the arrival of Mr. Scarborough, the English envoy, under whose character as a public minister they were obliged to shelter themselves. Mr. Geddes finding matters in this situation, thought proper to return to England in May 1688, where he took the degree of LL. D. and after the promotion of Dr. Burnet to the bishopric of Salisbury, who speaks very respectfully of him in his “History of the Reformation,” was promoted by him to be chancellor of his church. He died before 1714, but at what time we have not been able- to discover. During his residence at Lisbon, he had collected materials of the historical kind from scarce books and Mss. in the Spanish and Portuguese language^ which he translated and published in various forms after his return to England. Among these publications are: 1. “The Church History of Malabar,” Lond. 1694, 8vo. 2. The Church History of Ethiopia,“ibid. 1696, 8vo. 3.” The Council of Trent plainly discovered not to have been a free assembly,“ibid. 1697 and 1714, 8vo. 4.” Miscellaneous Tracts,“of civil and ecclesiastical history, ibid. 1702—5, 8vo, extended afterwards to S vols. 1714, and 1730. 5.” Several Tracts against Popery," ibid. 1715, 8vo.

, an eminent Lutheran divine, doctor of divinity, professor of Hebrew, minister of St. Thomas, preacher, confessor, and member of the elector of Saxony’s ecclesiastical councils, was born April 24, 1614, at Leipsic, and died August 22, 1681. He left valuable commentaries in Latin on Ecclesiastes, Proverbs, Daniel, and the Psalms a treatise on the “Mourning of the Jews,” in the same language and several other works which are esteemed, and were published at Amsterdam, 1695, 3 vols. fol.

, an eminent divine of the church of Scotland, eldest son of the rev. Gilbert Gerard, minister of Chapel-Garioch, in Aberdeenshire, was born there Feb. 22, 1728; he was educated partly at the parish school of Foveran, whence he was removed to the grammar-school at Aberdeen, after his father’s death. Here he made such rapid progress, that he was entered a student in Marischal-college when he was but twelve years of age. He devoted his first four years to the study of Greek, Latin, the mathematics, and philosophy, and was at the close of the course admitted to the degree of M. A. He now commenced his theological studies, whtch he prosecuted at the universities of Aberdeen and Edinburgh. Immediately on the completion of his twentieth year, in 1748, he was licensed to preach in the church of Scotland, and in 1750 was chosen assistant to Mr. David Fordyce, professor of philosophy in the Marischal college at Aberdeen, and in two years afterwards, upon the death of the professor, Gerard was appointed to succeed him. Here, after a short time, the department assigned to Mr. Gerard was confined to moral philosophy and logic, the duties of which he discharged with conscientious and unwearied diligence, and with equal success and reputation. He was a member of a literary society at Aberdeen, consisting of Drs. Blackwell, Gregory, Reid, Campbell, Beattie, &c. which met very regularly every fortnight during the winter, when the members communicated their sentiments with the utmost freedom, and received mutual improvement from their literary discussions; and hence originated those well-known works, Reid’s “Inquiry into the Human Mind” Gregory’s “Comparative View;” Gerard’s “Essay on Genius” Beattie’s “Essay on Truth” andCampbell’s “Philosophy of Rhetoric.” In 1759 Mr. Gerard was ordained a minister of the church of Scotland, and in the following year he was appointed professor of divinity in the Marischal college, and about the same period he took his degree of D. D. He continued to perform the several duties attached to his offices till 1771, when he resigned the professorship, together with the church living, and was preferred to the theological chair in the university of King’s-college, a situation which he held till his death, which happened on his birth-day, Feb. 22, 1795. Dr. Gerard’s attainments were solid rather than brilliant, the effect of close and almost incessant study, and a fine judgment. He had improved his memory to such a degree, that he could in little more than an hour get by heart a sermon of ordinary length. He was author of “An Essay on Taste,” which was published in 1759, and which obtained for him the prize of a gold medal, from the society of Edinburgh. This work was afterwards much enlarged, and reprinted in 17 So. His “Dissertations on the Genius and Evidences of Christianity,” published in 1766, are well known and highly appreciated; so also are his “Essay on Gesius,” and his sermons in 2 volumes. In 1799 his son and successor, Dr. Gilbert Gerard, gave the world a posthumous work of much merit, which had been left among the papers of his father, entitled “The Pastoral Care,” which made a part of his theological course of lectures. As a clergyman the conduct of Dr. Gerard was marked with prudence, exemplary manners, and the most punctual and diligent discharge of his ministerial duties; his sermons were simple and plain, adapted to the common class of hearers, but so accurate as to secure the approbation of the ablest judges. As a professor of divinity, his great aim was not to impose by his authority upon his pupils any favourite system of opinions; but to impress them with a sense of the importance of the ministerial office; to teach them the proper manner of discharging all its duties; and to enable them, by the knowledge of the scriptures, to form a just and impartial judgment on controverted subjects. Possessing large stores of theological knowledge, he was judicious in selecting his subjects, happy and successful in his manner of communicating instruction. He had the merit of introducing a new, and in many respects a better plan of theological education, than those on which it had formerly been conducted. Having a constant regard to whatever was practically useful, rather than to unedifying speculations, he enjoined no duty which he was unwilling to exemplify in his own conduct. In domestic life he was amiable and exemplary; in his friendships steady and disinterested, and in his intercourse with society, hospitable, benevolent, and unassuming; uniting to the decorum of the Christian pastor, the good breeding of a gentleman, and the cheerfulness, affability, and ease of an agreeable companion.

, an English divine of the puritan cast, was born in Yorkshire in 1600, and in 1615 entered as a servitor of Magdalen-hall. In 1621 he took his degree of M. A. and being ordained, became minister of Tewkesbury, in Gloucestershire, where he was afterwards silenced by bishop Goodman for objecting to certain ceremonies of the church. In 1641 this suspension was removed by one of the parliamentary committees which took upon them to new-model the church. In 1645 he became by the same interest minister of St. Albans, and about four years afterwards that of St. Faith’s, under St. Paul’s, London. Although a puritan' in matters of the ceremonies and discipline, -he appears soon to have penetrated into the designs of the reformers of his age, and opposed the civil war, aad especiaMy the murder of the king, the barbarity of which is said to have hastened his death. He died at his house in Ivy-lane, Paternoster-row, in February 1649. Wood gives a long list of sermons and tracts published by this author, against the baptists and independents; one of them is entitled “An exercise, wherein the evil of Health-drinking is by clear and solid arguments convinced,” 1648, 4to. Another, more useful in that age, was his “AstrologoMastix; or, the vanity of judicial astrology,” 1646. He had an elder brother, Stephen, also a puritan divine, who wrote against Dr. Crisp, in the Antinomian controversy.

, an eminent English historian, was descended from an ancient family of that name in Kent. His grandfather, Edward Gibbon, a citizen of London, was appointed one of the commissioners of customs under the Tory administration of the last four years of queen Anne, and was praised by lord Bolingbroke for his knowledge of commerce and finance. He was elected one of the directors of the unfortunate South-sea company, in 1716, at which time he had acquired an independent fortune of 60,000l. the whole of which he lost when the company failed in 1720. The sum of 10,000l. however, was allowed for his maintenance, and on this foundation he reared another fortune, not much inferior to the first, an<,i secured a part of it in the purchase of landed property. He died in December 1736, at his house at Putney, and by his last will enriched two daughters, at the expence of his son Edward, who had married against his consent. This son was sent to Cambridge, where at Emanuel college, he “passed through a regular course of academical discipline,” but left it without a degree, and afterwards travelled. On his return to England he was chosen, in 1734, member of parliament for the borough of Petersfield, and in 1741 for Southampton. In parliament he joined the party which after a long contest, finally drove sir Robert Walpole and his friends from their places. Our author has not concealed that “in the pursuit of an unpopular minister, he gratified a private revenge against the oppressor of his family in the South-sea persecution.” "Walpole, however, was not that oppressor, for Mr. CoxC has clearly proved that he frequently endeavoured to stem the torrent of parliamentary vengeance, and to incline the sentiments* of the house to terms of moderation.

His father was now advised to send him fot some time to Lausanne, in Switzerland, where he was placed, with a moderate allowance, under the care of. Mr, Pavilliard, a Calvinist minister. Mr. Pavilliard was instructed to reclaim his pupil from the errors of popery; but as he could not speak English, nor Mr. Gibbon French, some time elapsed before much conversation of any kind became practicable. When their mutual industry had removed this obstacle, Mr. Pavilliard first secured the attention and attachment of his pupil by kindness, then directed his studies into a regular plan, and placed within his power such means of information as might remove the errors into which he had fallen. This judicious method soon proved successful; on Christmas day 1754, after“a full conviction,” Mr. Gibbon received the sacrament in the church of Lausanne; and here it was, he informs us, that he suspended his religious inquiries, acquiescing with implicit belief in the tenets and mysteries which are adopted by the general consent of catholics and protestants.

As a minister, his sentiments were of the Calvinistic kind, as put forth by the elders of the baptist churches in and about London in 1677 and 1689. His preaching was sincere, lively, and pathetic; and his faculties remained so Ion* unimpaired, that it was generally said, “he would die popular,” which proved true, although febis is seldom the lot of the dissenting clergy, their flocks too often deserting them when their strength begins to fail, and their powers of popular attraction to relax. For the last twenty ­five years of his life, he preached a monthly lecture at the meeting in Little St. Helen’s, in connection with several ministers of the Independent persuasion. The last time he administered the Lord’s Supper was on June 6, 1784, when he was very weak and low. On the following evening, he preached a sermon to the “Friendly Society” which meet at Eagle-street, when he took an affectionate leave of them, and of all farther public duties. He died June 19th following, in the eighty-fourth year of his age, and was buried in Bunhill Fields. He left 400l. to the above meeting in Eagle-street, and his books, pictures, and manuscripts to the baptist academy at Bristol, where they are * buried in comparative obscurity. Dr. Gifford published nothing of his own, except the sermon above mentioned, but was frequently a contributor to literary undertakings. In 1763 he superintended through the press, and enlarged the edition of Folkes’s “Tables of English silver and gold Coins,” printed at the expence of the Society of Antiquaries, 2 vols. 4to. To this he added the Supplement, the Postscript, and six plates.

, a nonconformist divine of very considerable abilities, was the son of William Gilbert of Priss, in Shropshire, and was born in 1613. In 1629 he was admitted a student of Edmund-hall, Oxford, where he took his bachelor’s degree, and after a short residence in Ireland, returned and took that of master in 1638. By the favour of Philip lord Wharton, he became minister of Upper Winchington, in Buckinghamshire; and in 1647, having taken the covenant, and become a favourite with the usurping powers, he was appointed vicar of St. Lawrence’s, Reading, and next year was created B. D. at the parliamentary visitation of the university of Oxford. About the same time he obtained the rich rectory of Edgemond, in his native county, where he was commonly called the bishop of Shropshire. In 1654 he was appointed an assistant to the commissioners of Shropshire, Middlesex, and the city of Westminster, for the ejection of such as were styled “scandalous, ignorant, and insufficient ministers and schoolmasters;” and according to Wood, was not sparing of the power which this sweeping commission gave him. After the restoration, he was ejected for nonconformity, and, retiring to Oxford, lived there very obscurely, with his wife, in St. Ebbe’s parish, sometimes preaching in conventicles, and in the family of lord Wharton. Nor was he without respect from some gentlemen of the university on account of his talents. Calamy informs us that, in a conversation with the celebrated Dr. South on the subject of predestination, he so satisfied him, that South became ever after an assertor of that doctrine. When a toleration or temporary indulgence was granted to the nonconformists in 1671, although a professed independent, he joined with three presbyterians in establishing a conventicle in Thames street, in the suburbs of Oxford; but this indulgence was soon called in. In his last days he was reduced to great distress, and was supported by the contributions of private persons, and of several heads of colleges. He died July 15, 1694, and was buried in the church of St. Aldate. He was esteemed a good philosopher, disputant, and philologist, and a good Latin poet. He published, 1. “Vindicise supremi Dei dominii,” against Dr. Owen, Lond. 1655, 8vo. 2. “An Assize Sermon,” ibid. 1657, 4to. 3. “England’s Passing-Bell, a poem written soon after the year of the plague, the fire of London, and the Dutch war,” 1675, 4to. 4. “Super auspicatissimo regis Gulielmi in Hiberniam descensu, et salva ex Hibernia reditu, carmen gratulatorium,” 1690, 4to, written in his eightieth year. 5. “Epitapbia diversa,” chiefly on persons not of the church of England. 6. “Julius Secundus,” a dialogue, Ox. 1669, 12mo, and 168O, 8vo. To this is prefixed a preface, also in the form of a dialogue, proving that piece to have been written by Erasmus. Dr. Jortin seems of the same opinion, and has reprinted it in his Life of Erasmus, pointing out some curious omissions by Gilbert. With the second edition, Gilbert republished “Jani Alex. Ferrafii Euclides catholicus,” an ironical work against the Romish church, written by an English convert who chose to conceal his true name. Gilbert translated into Latin a considerable part of Francis Potter’s book entitled “An interpretation of the number 666,” printed at Amsterdam, 1677. He is likewise supposed to have been concerned in the pamphlets called “Anni mirabiles,” printed in 1661, 1662, and the following years."

In 1724 he appeared as an author by the publication of two sermons; but in 1726 he first distinguished himself as a champion for the peculiar tenet which divides the baptists from other denominations, by engaging in a controversy with Mr. Maurice, an independent minister. Zealously, however, as Dr. Gill was attached to the baptist tenets, and frequently as he wrote in favour of them, it was for the most part in his own defence. “Intimate witli him as I was,” says Mr. Toplady, “I never so much as once ueard him drop a single hint, in all our conversations, directly or indirectly, concerning the article of baptism.” In 1728 he published his “Exposition of the Song of Solomon,” folio. The year before it appeared, Whiston had published a pamphlet in which he endeavoured to prove that the Song of Solomon was a spurious book, and not fit to stand in the canon of scripture. To all this Gill answered with great ability. It does not appear whether Whiston had seen this answer, but he himself informs us that in 17 J-& he had heard a great character of Dr. Gill for his skill in the Oriental languages, and had a mind to hear him preach, but being informed that he had written a folio book, on the Canticles, he declined to go and hear him; a proof that Whiston’s dislike to bigotry was to the bigotry of others only. In 1751 a new edition of the "Exposition*' was published in 4 to, with corrections and additions, and a third, likewise: with additions, in 1767.

In the same year (1728) he published “The Prophecies of the Old Testament respecting the Messiah, considered, and proved to be literally fulfilled in Jesus,” in answer to Collins’ s “Scheme of literal Prophecy considered.” Becoming now a preacher of high reputation among dissenters of all denominations, many of whom wished to hear Dr. Gill frequently, but could not be expected to join his congregation, a weekly lecture was established by subscription in 1729, which he continued to preach until 1756, when age, and a multiplicity of engagements, obliged him to resign it. Here a numerous congregation heard those sermons, many of which he moulded afterwards into treatises for publication, particularly his “Treatise on the doctrine of the Trinity,” which appeared in 1731. One object of this treatise was to check the progress Sabellianism had at this time made among the baptists. In 1735, and following years, he published his “Cause of God and Truth,” 4 vols. 8vo, a defence of the Calvinistic against the Arminian sentiments, on the subjects of election, original sin, &c. Dr. Gill’s supralapsarian opinions in this (for such he held with great zeal) being animadverted on in an anonymous pamphlet, he published an answer called “Truth defended, c.” In 1737 he again engaged in controversy on the subject of baptism, with Mr. Samuel Browne, a dissenting minister.

When in order to enlighten the nation in true learning and religion, public schools began to be recommended, Mr. Gilpin endeavoured to promote the good work with the utmost of his ability. As his manner of living was most affluent and generous, and his hospitality and charities made daily a larger demand upon him, it was thought extraordinary, that, amidst such great expences, he should entertain the design of building and endowing a grammar school; yet his exact ceconomy soon enabled him to accomplish this, and the effects of his endowment were very quickly seen: his school was no sooner opened than it began to flourish, and to afford the agreeable prospect of a succeeding generation rising above the ignorance and errors of their forefathers. He not only placed able masters in his school, whom he procured from Oxford, but himself constantly inspected it, and took an active part in the education of the scholars. Such was his benevolence that whenever he met with a poor boy upon the road, he would make trial of his capacity l)y a few questions; and if he found it such as pleased him, he would provide for his education. From the school also he sent several to the universities, where he maintained them wholly at his own expence. Nor was this munificent and uncommon care unrewarded. Many of his scholars became great ornaments to the church, and exemplary instances of piety, among whom have been particularly mentioned, Henry Ayray, afterwards provost of Queen’s college; George Carleton, bishop of Chichester; and Hugh Broughton. It was also at Mr. Gilpin’s suggestion that his friend bishop Pilkington founded a school at the place of his nativity in Lancashire, the statutes of which he revised and corrected at the bishop’s request. Mr. Gilpin’s general reputation for learning and piety, made it the desire of persons of all religious persuasions to have their cause credited by his authority; and among others, the first dissenters, or puritans, who had contracted prejudices against certain church ceremonies, habits, &c. made early applications to Mr. Gilpin, but without effect. The reformation, he said, was just; essentials were there concerned; hut at present he saw no ground for disaffection. " The church of England, he thought, gave no reasonable offence. Some things there might be in it, which had been perhaps as well avoided (probably meaning the use of the vestments), but to disturb the peace of a nation for such trifles, he thought, was quite unchristian. And what indeed appeared to him chiefly blameable in the dissenters, was, that heat of temper with which they propagated their opinions, and treated those who differed from them. Such was not his practice, for he confined all his dislike to their sentiments, urged with intemperate warmth, but bore not the least ill-will to their persons. One of the most intimate friends he ever had was Mr. Lever, a minister of their persuasion, and a sufferer in their cause. It is almost needless to add, that he found it equally or more easy to resist the solicitations of the papists, who lamented, as they well might, that so good a man had forsaken their communion, and consequently they left no methods untried to bring him back.

, a nonconformist divine and physician, probably of the same family with the preceding, was a native of Cumberland, and educated in Queen’s college, Oxford, whence he took the degree of M. D. but afterwards entered into holy orders, and became minister of Greystock, in his own county; but preached with great applause in London, at Lambeth, the Savoy, &c. and in many other parts of the kingdom; till he was silenced for refusing to comply with the act of uniformity, 1662. He afterwards practised physic in the north of England, particularly at Newcastle, where he was greatly esteemed by all that knew him, both as a physician and a divine. He died in 1657. He was the author of several treatises; but his discourse on “Satan’s Temptations,” 1677, 4to, is most esteemed.

, a Scotch clergyman, and founder of a sect, was born at Dundee, 1638, and educated in the New-college, at St. Andrew’s, where he took his degrees, and was settled minister of a country church, near the place of his nativity. In 1727 he published a treatise to prove that the civil establishment of religion was inconsistent with Christianity, for which he was deposed, and became the father of a new sect, called from him Glassites; and afterwards from another leading propagator, Sandemanians. Some account of their tenets will be given under the article Sandeman. Glass wrote a great number of controversial tracts, which have been published at Edinburgh, in 4 vols. 8vo. He died at Dundee, in 1773, aged seventy-five.

Glover’s “Leonidas” amply entitles him to a distinguished place among the poets of his country, but the public has not held it in uniform estimation. From the time of its first appearance in 1737, it went through six, if not seven editions; but for nearly forty years there has not been a demand for another, although that published in 1770 was highly improved and enlarged. Its history may probably account in part for this singular fate, and public taste must explain the rest. On its first publication, it was read and praised with the utmost avidity. Besides the encomiums it drew from Lyttelton and Pemberton, its fame reached Ireland, where it was reprinted, and became as much in fashion as it had been in England. “Pray who is that Mr. Giover,” says Swift to Pope, in one of his letters, *' who writ the epic poem called Leonidas, which is reprinting here, and hath great vogue“Unfortunately, however, the whole of this tribute of praise was not paid to the intrinsic merit of the poem. It became the adopted favourite of the party in opposition (to sir Robert Walpoie) who had long endeavoured to persuade the nation that public liberty was endangered by the measures of that minister, and that they formed the chosen band who occupied the straits of Thermopylae in defiance of the modern. Xerxes. Leonidas therefore was recommended, to rouse an oppressed and enslaved people to the vindication of their rights. That this should be attempted is less wonderful than that it should succeed. We find very few passages in this poem which will apply to the state of public affairs in. England at that time, if we except the common-place censure of courts and courtiers, and even that is appropriated with so strict historical fidelity to the court of Xerxes, that it does not seem easy to borrow it for any other purpose.” Nothing else,“however, Dr. Warton informs us,” was read or talked of at Leicester-house," the illustrious owner of which extended his patronage to all poets who fanned the sacred flame of patriotism. The consequence of all this was, that Leonidas, which might have laid claim to a considerable rank among English poems of the higher order, was pushed beyond it, and when the purposes for which it had been extolled were either answered, or no longer desirable, it fell lower than it deserved. This is the more justly to be regretted, as we have no reason to think the autlior solicited the injudicious praise of his friends and patrons, or had any hand in building the airyedifice of popular fame. He was, indeed, a lover of liberty, which has ever been the favourite theme of poets, but he did not write for a temporary purpose. Leonidas had been the fruit of very early ambition to be known to posterity, and when he had outlived the party who pressed his poem, into their service, he corrected and improved it for a generation that knew nothing of the partialities which first extended its fame. If his object, however, in this epopee, had been solely to inculcate a love of liberty, a love of our country, and a resolute determination to perish with its freedom, he could not have chosen a subject, at least from ancient times, so happily adapted to elevate the mind. The example was unparalleled in history, and therefore the more capable of admitting the embellishments and attractions that belong to the epic province. Nor does it appear that he undertook a task to which his powers were inadequate, when he endeavoured to interest his readers in the fate of his gallant hero and faithful associates. He is not deficient either in the sublime or the pathetic, although in these essentials he may not bear an uniform comparison with the great masters of the passions. The characters are varied with much knowledge of the human heart. Each has his distinctive properties, and no one is raised beyond the proportion of virtue or talent which may be supposed to correspond with the age he lived in, or the station he occupied.

Bishop Burnet says, “that he was the silentest and mojdestest man, who was perhaps ever bred in a court. He had a clear apprehension, and dispatched business with great method, and with so much temper, that he had no personal enemies. But his silence begot a jealousy, which hung long upon him. His notions were for the court; but his incorrupt and sincere way of managing the concerns of the treasury created in all people a very high esteem for him. He had true principles of religion and virtue, and never heaped up wealth. So that, all things being laid together, he was one of the worthiest and wisest men, who was employed in that age.” In another place the same historian observes, “that he was a man of the clearest head, the calmest temper, and the most incorrupt of all the ministers he had ever known; and that after having been thirty years in the treasury, and during nine of those lord treasurer, as he was never once suspected of corruption, ur of suffering his servants to grow rich under Jiim, so in all that time his estate was not increased by him to the value of four thousand pounds.” It is also said, that he had a penetrating contemplative genius, a slow, but unerring apprehension, and an exquisite judgment, with few words, though always to the purpose. He was temperate in his diet. His superior wisdom and spirit made han despise the low arts of vain-glorious courtiers; for he never kept suitors unprofitably in suspense, nor promised any thing, that he was not resolved to perform; but as he accounted dissimulation the worst of lying, so on the other hand his denials were softened by frankness and condescension to those whom he could not gratify. His great abilities and consummate experience qualified him for a prime minister; and his exact knowledge of all the branches of the revenue particularly fitted him for the management of the treasury. He was thrifty without the least tincture of avarice, being. as good an ceconomist of the public wealth, as he was of his private fortune. He had a clear conception of the whole government, both in church and state; and perfectly knew the temper, genius, and disposition of the English nation. And though his stern gravity appeared a little ungracious, yet his steady and impartial justice recommended him to the esteem of almost every person; so that no man, in so many different public stations, and so great a variety of business, ever had more friends, or fewer enemies. Dean Swift’s character of him is not so favourable, and in our references may be found many other opposite opinions of his merit and abilities. He had a brother of some poetical talent, noticed by Mr. Ellis.

In 1616 he published in Latin, “Rerum Anglicarum Henrico VIII. &c.” which was translated and published by his son, Morgan Godwin, under the title of “Annales of England, containing the reigns of Henry VIII. Edward VI. and queen Mary,” fol. These, as well as his lives of the bishops, are written in elegant Latin, and with much impartiality. In 1630, he published a small treatise, entitled “A computation of the value of the Roman Sesterce and Attic Talent.” After this he fell into a low and languishing disorder, and died in April 1633. He married, when a young man, the daughter of Wollton, bishop of Exeter, by whom he had many children. He appears to have been a man of great learning and personal worth, and a zealous champion for the church of England. His son, Dr. Morgan Godwin, was archdeacon of Shropshire, and translated, as we have noticed, his father’s “Annales.” He was ejected by the parliamentary commissioners, and his family reduced to distress: he died in 1645, leaving a son of his own names, who was educated at Oxford, and afterwards became a minister in Virginia, under the government of sir William Berkeley, but was at last beneficed near London. When he died is not mentioned. He wrote some pamphlets, while in Virginia, on the state of religion there, and the education of the negroes. The late rev. Charles Godwin, an antiquary, and benefactor to Baliol college, Oxford, who died in 1770, appears to have been a son of Charles Godwin, of Mon mouth, another son of bishop Francis Godwin.

, a learned and zealous Lutheran, was born at Leipsic in 1668, studied at Wirtemberg and Jena, and exercised his functions as a minister in various parts of Germany. He was the author of many very singular works in Latin and German, of which Moreri gives a list of 152, but the greater part of these are dissertations, or theses, on various subjects of divinity, sacred criticism, and ecclesiastical history. He was lastly superintendant of the churches at Lubec, and died in that city, March 25, 1729. The most distinguished among hU Latin works are, “Selecta ex Historia Litteraria,” Lubecce, 1709, 4to; “Meletemata Annebergensia,” Lubecae, 1709, 3 vols. 12mo, containing several dissertations, which have appeared separately.

About this time, however, he appears to have had recourse to his pen. His first attempt was a tragedy, which he probably never finished. In 1758 he obtained, by means of Dr. Milner, a dissenting minister, who kept a school at Peckham, which our author superintended during the doctor’s illness, the appointment to be physician to one of our factories in India. In order to procure the necessary expences for the voyage, he issued proposals for printing by subscription “The present state of Polite Literature in Europe,” with what success we are not told, nor why he gave up his appointment in India. In the same year, however, he wrote what he very properly calls a catch-penny “Life of Voltaire,” and engaged with Mr. Griffiths as a critic in the Monthly Review. The terms of this engagement were his board, lodging, and a handsome salary, all secured by a written agreement. Goldsmith declared he usually wrote for his employer every day from nine o'clock till two. But at the end of seven or eight months it was dissolved by mutual consent, and our poet took lodgings in Green Arbour court, in the Old Bailey, amidst the dwellings of indigence, where he completed his “Present State of Polite Literature,” printed for Dodsley, 1759, 12mo.

, one of the great opponents of Arminius, and from whom the Calvinists were at one time called Gomarists, was born at Bruges, Jan. 30, 1S63. His father and mother, Avho were protestants, retired into the palatinate in 1578, and sent him to Strasburgh to study under the celebrated John Stimulus. Three years after he went to prosecute his studies at Newstad, where the professors of Heidelberg found a refuge when Lewis, the elector palatine, had banished them because they were not Lutherans. In 1582 he came to England, and heard at Oxford the divinity lectures of Dr. John Rainolds, and at Cambridge those of Dr. William Whitaker, and at this latter university he was admitted to the degree of bachelor of divinity, June, 1584. The elector Lewis dying in 1583, prince Casimir, his brother, restored the professors of Heidelberg, to which place Gomar returned from Cambridge, and spent two years. In 1587 he accepted an invitation from the Flemish church at Francfort to be their minister, and exercised the functions of that office until 1593, when his flock were dispersed by persecution. The following year he was appointed professor of divinity at Leyden, but before entering upon the office, he took his degree of doctor at Heidelberg. Here he remained quietly until 1603, when his colleague Arminius began to place himself at the head of a party, known by his name ever since, and Gomarus resisted him with a zeal which his enemies have construed into bigotry and intolerance. The truth seems to have been that Arminius and his followers, while they disputed with equal warmth, chose to represent the subjects of their disputes as matters of indifference which need not interrupt church-fellowship, while Gomarus considered them as essentials. Vorstius having succeeded Arminius, Gomarus foresaw only a renewal of the controversy under such a colleague, and retired to Middleburgh in 1611, where he preached and read lectures until 1614. He was then invited by the university of Saumur to be professor of divinity, and four years after he exchanged this for the professorship of divinity and Hebrew at Groningen, where he remained during the rest of his life. The only times when he was absent were, once when he attended the synod of Dort, where the errors of Arminius were condemned; and again when he went to Leyden in 1633 to revise the translation of the Old Testament. He died Jan. 11, 1641. His various works, most of which had been published separately, were printed together at Amsterdam in 1644, fol. He was a man of acknowledged abilities, especially in the Oriental languages.

, a noted puritan, who has been sometimes classed among the reformers of religion in Scotland, was born at Chester about 1520, and in 1536 entered a student of Brazemiose college, Oxford, where he took both degrees in arts. In 1547 he was constituted one of the senior students of Christ church, of the foundation of Henry VIII. About the end of the reign of king Edward VI. he was admitted to the reading of the sentences, and chosen divinity lecturer of the university. On the accession of queen Mary he was obliged to quit the kingdom, with many other protestants, and retire to Francfort. Here he became involved in the disputes which arose among the English exiles respecting forms of divine worship, some adhering to the model of the church of England, as far as appeared in the Book of Common Prayer, and others, among whom was Goodman, contending for a more simple form. After these disputes had occasioned a separation among men whose common sufferings might have made them overlook lesser matters, Goodman went to Geneva, where he and the celebrated John Knox were chosen pastors of the English church, and remained there until the death of queen Mary. While there he assisted Knox in compiling “The Book of Common Order,” which was used as a directory of worship in their congregations, and he is said to have taken a part in the Geneva translation of the Bible. On the accession of queen Elizabeth, he went into Scotland, where, in 1560, he was appointed minister at St. Andrew’s, and in other respects by his public services assisted in establishing the reformation in that nation. About 1565 he removed to England, and accompanied sir Henry Sidney in his expedition against the rebels in Ireland, in the character of chaplain. In 1571 he was cited before archbishop Parker, for having published, during his exile, a book answering the question “How far superior powers ought to be obeyed of their subjects, and wherein they may be lawfully, by God’s word, obeyed and resisted” This had been written against the tyrannical proceedings of queen Mary but, as his positions were of a kind too general not to be applicable to sovereigns of another description, and become an apology for rebellion, he consented to a recantation, and an avowal of his loyalty to queen Elizabeth. He lived many years after this, and was preacher at Chester, where he died in 1601, or 1602. Besides the above mentioned, he wrote “A Commentary on Amos,” but not, as Wood says, “The first blast of the Trumpet against the monstrous regiment of Women,” which was written by Knox.

was a celebrated poet and translator, who lived in the sixteenth century, but of whom little is known, unless that he was educated at Christ’s College, Cambridge, whence he removed to Staples Inn. Mr. Ellis conjectures that he might have been born about 1538. We have no doubt that he was the same Barnaby Googe who was a relation and retainer to sir William Cecil, queen Elizabeth’s minister, and who was gentleman-pensioner t6 the queen. Mr. Churton thinks, with great probability, that he was the father of Barnaby Googe, master of Magdalen college, Cambridge, who was incorporated at Oxford in August 1605, when king James was there. In 1563 he published a very elegant little volume, now of the greatest rarity, entitled “Eglogs, Epitaphs, and Sonnetes.” One of the sonnets, superior, as the rest are, in point of harmony, to most of the productions of those days, is addressed to Alexander No well, afterwards the celebrated dean of St. Paul’s, and reprinted in Mr. Churton’s elaborate life of that divine. It is said there are only two copies of this volume in existence, one in the possession of Mr. Heber, who purchased it at George Steevens’s sale, and the other in the library of Trinity college, Cambridge Googe’s principal translation was the “Zodiake of Life,” from Marcellus Palingenius Stellatus, a very moral, but tiresome satire, perfectly unconnected with astronomy, the author merely distinguishing each of the twelve books of his poem by the name of a celestial sign. The first three books appeared in 1560, and the first six in 1561; the whole was printed complete in 1565, 12mo. In 1570 he translated from Naogeorgus, a poem on Antichrist; in 1577, Herebach’s ceconomical treatise on agriculture; and in 1579, Lopes de Mendoza’s Spanish proverbs, and afterwards Aristotle’s “Table of the Ten Categories.” The few specins published from these very rare works are highly favourable to the author’s talents and principles.

, a native of Scotland, and onc distinguished by his party writings on political and religious subjects, was born at Kircudbright in Galloway, about th fend of the seventeenth century. He had an university education, and went through the common course of aca* demical studies; but whether at Aberdeen or St. Andrew’s is uncertain. When a young man he came to London, and at first supported himself by teaching the languages, but afterwards commenced party writer, and was employed by the earl of Oxford in queen Anne’s time; but we know not in what capacity. He first distinguished himself in the Bangorian controversy by two pamphlets in defence of Hoadly, which recommended him to Mr. Tjrenchard, an author of the same stamp, who took him into his house, at first as his amanuensis, and afterwards into partnership, as an author. In 1720, they began to publish, in conjunction, a series of letters, under the name of “Cato,” upon various and important subjects relating to the public. About the same time they published another periodical paper, under the title of “The Independent Whig,” which was continued some years after Trenchard’s death by Gordon alone. The same spirit which appears, with more decent language, in Cato’s letters against the administration in the state, shews itself in this work in much more glaring colours against the hierarchy in the church. It is, in truth, a gross and indecent libel on the established religion, which, however, Gordon was admirably qualified to write, as he had no religion of his own to check his intemperate sallies. After Trenchard’s death, the minister, sir Robert Walpole, knowing his popular talents, took him into pay to defend his measures, for which end he wrote several pamphlets. At the time of his death, July 28, 1750, he was first commissioner of the wine-licences, an office which he had enjoyed many years, and which diminished his patriotism surprisingly. He was twice married. His second wife was the widow of his friend Trenchard by whom he had children, and who survived him. Two collections of his tracts have been preserved the first entitled, “A Cordial for Low-spirits,” in three volumes; and the second, “The Pillars of Priestcraft and Orthodoxy shaken,” in two volumes. But these, like many other posthumous pieces, had better have been suppressed. His translations of Sallust and Tacitus, now, perhaps, contribute more to preserve his name, although without conferring much reputation on it. His Tacitus appeared in 2 vols. fol. in 1728, with discourses taken from foreign commentators and translators of that historian. Sir Robert Walpole patronised a subscription for the work, which was very successful; but no classic was perhaps ever so miserably mangled. His style is extremely vulgar, yet affected, and abounds with abrupt and inharmonious periods, totally destitute of any resemblance to the original, while the translator fancied he was giving a correct imitation.

, an Anglo-American divine and historian, and minister at Roxburg in Massachusetts, was born at Hitchin, in Hertfordshire, in 1729, and educated at a dissenting academy in or near London. He was afterwards pastor of an independent congregation at Ipswich, where he officiated for several years. In 1772 he went to America, and settled at Roxburg. When the revolution commenced in America, he took a very active part against his native country, and was appointed chaplain to the provincial congress of Massachusetts. In 1776 he appears first to have conceived the design of writing the history of the revolution and war, and began to collect materials on the spot, in which he was assisted by the communication of state papers, and the correspondence of Washington and the other generals who had made a distinguished figure in the field. In 1786 became to England, and in 1788 published, in 4 vols. 8vo, “The History of the rise, progress, and establishment of the Independence of the United States of America.” This, however, is rajther a collection of facts, than a regular history, for the writing of which, indeed, the author had no talent; his style is vulgar and confused, and his reflections common-place. The best parts of it occur where he made most use of Dodsley’s Annual Register. The colouring he attempts to give, as may be expected, is entirely unfavourable to the English, nor does he endeavour to disguise his partialities. He is said to have published also some sermons; a pamphlet recommending a society for the benefit of widows, another against the doctrine of universal redemption, and an abridgment of Edwards, “on religious affections.” He appears not to have returned to America after the publication of his history, but to have resided partly at St. Neots, and partly at Ipswich, at which last he died in 1807.

, a very celebrated puritan divine, was born at Bow near Stratford, Middlesex, Nov. 1, 1575, and educated at Eton school, whence he went in 1595 to King’s college, Cambridge. He was endowed with considerable powers of mind, and by close application to study, accumulated a great fund of learning. Such was his ardour and regularity in his literary pursuits, that during his first three years, he slept only one night out of college, and for nine years never missed college prayers at halfpast five in the morning, unless when from home. It was his invariable rule to read fifteen chapters in the Bible every day, at three times. When chosen reader of logic and philosophy in the college, he was equally precise in regularity of duty and attendance. Having taken his degrees, and been admitted into orders, he was in 1608 preferred to the rectory of St. Anne’s Blackfiiars, London, where he became extremely popular; and having instituted a lecture on Wednesday mornings, it was frequented by many persons of the first rank. Having, however, imbibed some of the prejudices which were then so common against the church of England, he was occasionally censured, and at one time threatened with a prosecution in the Star-chamber for having become a member of a society for the purchase of impropriations; but this did not take effect, and the subsequent disturbances relieved him from any farther molestation. In 1643, he was nominated one of the assembly of divines, and took an active part in the various proceedings instituted by the then ruling powers for the reformation of the church. But when in 1648, he saw the lengths to which their reformations tended, he united with a large body of his brethren in declaring against putting the king to death. For forty-five years, says Granger, he was the laborious, the exemplary, and the much loved minister of St. Anne’s Blackfriars, where none ever thought or spoke ill of him, but such as were inclined to think or speak ill of religion itself. He died Dec. 12, 1653. He appears, indeed, to have had the suffrages of all his contemporaries, and is honourably mentioned by many foreign divines. He was at one time offered the provostship of King’s college, but declined it; his usual saying was, that it was his highest ambition “to go from Blackfriars to heaven.” He published several pious tracts and some sermons, which bishop Wilkins classes among the most excellent of his time; but his principal work was “A Commentary on the Epistle to the Hebrews,” 1655, fol. He had also a share in the commentary on the Bible, usually called “The Assembly’s Annotations.”

, the Camden of the eighteenth century, and one of the most illustrious antiquaries England has produced, was the only son of Harry Gough, esq. of Perry-hall. This gentleman, for whom his son ever preserved a reverential affection, was born April 2, 1681, and in his eleventh year, went with his uncle sir Richard Gough, to China, where he kept his accounts. In 1707, he commanded the ship Streatham, of which his younger brother Richard was purser in 1709. He continued to command this ship till 1715, when he retired with a decent competency, and was elected a director of the East India company about 1731. In this situation, his knowledge of the company’s affairs, the result of his many voyages in their service, and his zeal for their interests, joined to habitual activity and integrity, gave him great weight. He became also a representative in parliament in 1734, for the borough of Bramber, for which he sat until his death. His political career was marked by independence of spirit. Although attached to, and in the confidence of, sir Robert Walpole, he refused several offices from that minister, and yet supported him to the last. He died in 1751, and was buried in the rector’s vault in St. Andrew’s church, Holborn. In 1717, he purchased of the lady of sir Richard Shelley, one moiety of the Middlemore estate in Warwickshire (the other moiety of which he before possessed), which afterwards descended to his son and heir Richard, together with the property at Enfield, which he purchased in 1723. In 1719 he married Elizabeth, daughter of Morgan Hynde, esq. of London, an eminent brewer.

By this lady, who died May 27, 1774, he had an only son, the subject of this article, who was born Oct. 21, 1735, in a large house in Winchester-street, on the site of the monastery of the Austin friars. He received the first rudiments of Latin and Greek under the tuition of one Barnewitz, a Courlander; and afterwards, on his death, was committed to the care of the rev. Roger Pickering, a dissenting minister, a man unfortunate in life, but an accomplished scholar, who. died in 1755*; when Mr. Gough finished his Greek studies under Mr. Samuel Dyer, the friend of Dr. Johnson and of the contemporary literati. Under these instructors, Mr. Gough has not left us to question his proficiency, nor that early ambition to know and to communicate, which forms the instructive editor and author. At the very early age of eleven he commenced a task which would have reflected credit on any period of life, and he completed it with a perseverance of which there is probably no other instance in our literary annals. This was “The History of the Bible, translated from the French,” (of an Amsterdam edition of 1700) “by II. G. junior,” printed at London in 1747. Of this curious volume, consisting of 160 sheets in folio, his mother, delighted at such a display of laudable application, bore the expence of printing twenty-five copies, as presents to a few friends; and when completed at the press, it was marked, by way of colophon, “Done at twelve years and a half old,” after which, in the copy now before us, follows, “A short Chronology of the Holy Scripture,” in

Among the works which he edited and commented upon, were those of Plutarch, St. Cyprian, Seneca, &c. He made a collection of “Remarkable Histories,” in 2 vols. 8vo, and wrote several pieces relating to the history of his own times, particularly a “Collection of the most memorable events which occurred during the League, with notes and original documents,” in 6 vols. 4to. Many of his pieces were anonymous, but to these he usually affixed the initials S. G. S. signifying “Simon Goulart Senlisien.” He was so well acquainted with the secrets of literary history, and of anonymous publications, that Henry III. of France, wishing to know the author of a piece published under the assumed name of Stephanus Junius Brutus, and intended to propagate republican doctrines, sent a person to Geneva to consult Goulart, but the latter refused to communicate the fact, for fear of exposing the author to serious injury. He had a son, who was a minister of the Walloon church at Amsterdam, and a strenuous assertor of Arminian tenets, but did not attain his father’s reputation.

, an eminent protestant divine, was born Oct. 7, 1635, of a good family at Blois, and was cousin-german to the celebrated Isaac Papin. He was appointed minister at Poitiers in 1662, and remained there till the revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685. He then went to England, and afterwards to Holland, where he was chosen minister of the Walloon church at Dort. Five years after he was appointed professor of Greek and divinity at Groningen, where he died Nov. 4, 1704, leaving a great number of works, both printed and in ms.: the principal are, a Hebrew dictionary, or “Commentarii Lingua? Hebraicce” a valuable work, the best edition of which is that of Leipsic, 1743, 4to a refutation, in Latin, of rabbi Isaac’s “Chizzouck Emounak,” or Shield of Faith, Dort, 1688, 8vo, and Amsterdam, 1712, fol. This refutation has been much praised by several among the learned; but others doubt whether it merits such high encomiums: the book against which it was written may be found in WagensaPs “Tela ignea Satanaj.” He also published “Considerations theologiques et critiques centre le Projet d'une nouvelle Version de la Bible,” 1698, 12mo. This last was written against Charles le Cene’s project of a translation of the Bible, which should favour the Arminian doctrines.

Being confirmed in this resolution, he gave in to the electoral college at Sambia in Prussia, a memorial, containing the reasons for his change, in 1695; and, leaving Koningsberg, set out in order to put it in execution in some catholic country. He was in the road to Erfurt in this design, when there were presented to him three tracts in answer to his memorial, from the elector of Brandenburgh, who had given immediate orders to three Prussian? divines to write them for the purpose. The names of these divines were Philip James Spener, Bernard Van Sanden, and John William Baier. The first was ecclesiastical counsellor to the elector, and principal minister at Berlin; and the second principal professor at Koningsberg. The three answers were printed the same year: the first at Berlin, the second at Koningsberg, both in 4to, and the third at Jana, in 8vo. Grabe was entirely disposed to pay all due respect to this address from his sovereign; and, having perused the tracts with care, his resolution for embracing popery was so much weakened, that he wrote to one of the divines, Spener, to procure him a safe-conduct, that he might return to Berlin, to confer with him. This favour being easily obtained, he went to that city, where Spener prevailed upon him so far as to change his design, of going among the papists, for another. In England, says this friend, you will meet with the outward and uninterrupted succession which you want take then your route thither this step will give much less dissatisfaction to your friends, and at the same time equally satisfy your conscience. Our divine yielded to the advice; and, arriving in England, was received with all the respect due to his merit, and presently recommended to king William in such terms, that his majesty granted him a pension of 100l. per annum, to enable him to pursue his studies.

The “Septuagint” had never been entirely printed from the Alexandrian ms. in St. James’s library, partly owing to the great difficulty ef performing it in a manner suitable to its real worth, and partly because that worth itself had been so much questioned by the advocates of the Roman copy, that it was even grown into some neglect. To perform this task, and to assert its superior merit, was an honour marked out for Grabe; and when her majesty acquainted him with it, she at the same time presented him with a purse of 60l. by the suggestion of her minister Harley, to enable him to go through with it. This was a most arduous undertaking, and he spared no pains to complete it. In the mean time he employed such hours as were necessary for refreshment, in other works of principal esteem. In 1705 he gave a beautiful edition of bishop Bull’s works, in folio, with notes; for which he received the author’s particular thanks; and he had also a hand in preparing for the press archdeacon Gregory’s edition of the New Testament in Greek, which was printed the same year at Oxford, revising the scholia, which Gregory, then dead, had collected from various authors, and making the proper references.

, a French historical writer, was born Feb. 6, 1653, at St. Lo, in Normandy. After studying philosophy at Caen, he entered into the congregation of the oratory in 1671, where he applied to the belles lettres and theology, but quitted it in 1676, and went to Paris, where he engaged in the education of two young men of rank, the marquis de Vins, and the duke cTEstrees, and at the same time applied himself to the study of history under the direction of father Le Cointe, who formed a very high opinion of him. He first appeared as a writer in 1688, in “A History of the Divorce of Henry VIII. and Catharine of Arragon,” in three vols. 12mo. The main object of this work is to refute certain facts and arguments contained in the first two books of Burnet’s History of the Reformation. In 1685, when Burnet was at Paris, he had an interview with Le Grand in the presence of Messrs. Thevenot and Auzout, in which the latter proposed his doubts, and the former answered them, both preserving a tone of elegance and mutual respect. The publication of the above work, however, produced a controversy, in the course of which, in 1691, Le Grand addressed three letters to the bishop, to which he replied. How long the controversy might have continued is uncertain, as Le Grand was necessarily diverted from it in 1692, when he received the appointment of secretary to the abbe d'Estrees, in his embassy to Portugal. In this situation he continued till 1697. The leisure which his diplomatic functions allowed was employed in translations of voyages and travels from the Portuguese. In 1702 he accompanied the same minister in Spain, where he remained about two years as secretary. Soon after this, the marquis de Torci, minister of state, took him into his service, and employed his pen in drawing up several memorials concerning the Spanish monarchy, and other political topics, in which he acquitted himself with great ability, but most of them were printed without his name. He employed much of his time in writing a life of Louis XL; but, although this was quite finished in 1728, it still remains in manuscript. In that year, however, hepublished his translation of Lobo’s History of Abyssinia, with many additions; and about the same time his treatise “De la succession a la Couroune de France.” He died of an apoplectic stroke, April 30, 1733. He had been possessed of church preferment, and had held, for a time, the office of censor royal of books.

, curate and canon of Loudun in France, famous for his intrigues and tragical end, was the son of a notary royal of Sable, and born at Bouvere near Sable, in the latter part of the fifteenth century, but we know not in what year. He was a man of reading and judgment, and a famous preacher; for which the rnonka of Loudun soon hated him, especially after he had urged the necessity of confessing sins to the parochial priests at Easter. He was a handsome man, of an agreeable conversation, neat in his dress, and cleanly in his person, which made him suspected of loving the fair sex, and of being beloved by them. In 1629, he was accused of having had a criminal conversation with some women in the very church of which he was curate on which the official condemned him to resign all his benefices, and to live in penance. He brought an appeal, this sentence being an encroachment upon the civil power; and, by a decree of the parliament of Paris, he was referred to the presidial of Poitiers, in which he was acquitted. Three years after> some Ursuline nuns of Loudun were thought, by the vulgar, to he possessed with the devil; and Grandier’s enemies, the capuchins of Loudun, charged him with being the author of the possession, that is, with witchcraft. They thought, however, that in order to make the charge succeed according to their wishes, it was very proper to strengthen themselves with the authority of cardinal Richlieu. For this purpose, they wrote to father Joseph, their fellowcapuchin, who had great credit with the cardinal, that Grandier was the author of the piece entitled “La Cordonnierre de Loudun,” or “The Woman Shoemaker of Loudon,' r a severe satire upon the cardinal’s person and family. This great minister, among many good qualities, harboured the most bitter resentment against the authors of libels against him; and father Joseph having persuaded him that Grandier was the author of” La Cordonniere de Loudun," he wrote immediately to De Laubardemont, counsellor of state, and his creature, to make a diligent inquiry into the affair of the nuns. De Laubardemont accordingly arrested Grandier in Dec. 1633; and, after he had thoroughly examined the affair, went to meet the cardinal, and to take proper measures with him. In July 1634, letters patent were drawn up and sealed, to try Grandier; and were directed to De Laubardemont, and to twelve judges chosen out of the courts in the neighbourhood of Loudun; all men of honour indeed, but very credulous, and on that account chosen by Grandier’s enemies. In Aug. 18, upon the evidence of Astaroth, the chief of possessing devils; of Easas, of Celsus, of Acaos, of Eudon, &c. that is to say, upon the evidence of the nuns, who asserted that they were possessed with those devils, the commissaries passed judgment, by which Grandier was declared well and duly attainted, and convicted of the crime of magic, witchcraft, and possession, which by his means happened on the bodies of some Ursuline nuns of Loudun, and of some other lay persons, mentioned in his trial; for which crimes he was sentenced to make the amende honor' able, and to be burnt alive with the magical covenants and characters which were in the register-office, as also with the ms. written by him against the celibacy of priests; and his ashes to be thrown up into the air. Grandier heard this dreadful sentence without any emotion; and, when he went to the place of execution, suffered his punishment with great firmness and courage, April 18, 1634.

, a philosopher and mathematician, was born Oct. 1, 1671, at Cremona, where his father, a branch of a decayed family, carried on the business of ai> embroiderer. His mother, a woman of considerable talents, taught him Latin, and gave him some taste for poetry. Being disposed to a studious life, he cliose the profession of theology, that he might freely indulge his inclination. He entered into the religious order of Camaldolitesj at Raverrna, in 1687, where he was distinguished for his proficiency in the different branches of literature and science, but was much dissatisfied with the Peripatetic philosophy of the schools. He had not been here long before he established an academy of students of his own age, which he called the Certanti, in opposition to another juvenile society called the Concordi. To his philosophical studies he added those of the belles lettres, music, and history. It appears to have been his early ambition to introduce a new system in education, and with that view he obtained the professorship of philosophy at Florence, by the influence of father Caramelli, although not without some opposition from the adherents to the old opinions. He now applied himself to the introduction of the Cartesian philosophy, while, at the same time, he became zealously attached to mathematical studies. The works of the great Torricelli, of our countryman Wallis, and of other celebrated mathematicians, were his favourite companions, and the objects of his familiar intercourse. His first publication was a treatise to resolve the problems of Viviani on the construction of arcs, entitled “Geometrica Demonstnuio Vivianeorum problematum,” Florence, 1609, 4to. He dedicated this work to the grand duke. Cosmo Til. who appointed the author professor of philosophy in the university of Pisa. From this time Grandius pursued the higher branches of mathematics with the stmost ardour, and had the honour of ranking the ablest mathematicians among his friends and correspondents. Of the number may be named the illustrious Newton, Leibnitz, and Bernoulli. His next publications were, “Geometrica dernonslratio theorematum Hugenianorum circa logisticam, seu Logarithmicam lineatn,” 1701, 4to, and “Quadratura circuii et hyperbola3 per infinitas hyperbolas et parabolas geometrice exhibita,” Pisa, 1703, 8vo. He then published “Sejani et Rufini dialogus de Laderchiana historia S. Petri Damiani,” Paris, 1705, awd “Dissertationes Camaldu lenses,” embracing inquiries into the history of the Camaldolites, both which gave so much offence to the community, that he was deposed from the dignity of abbot of St. Michael at Pisa; but the grand duke immediately appointed him his professor of mathematics in the university. He now resolved some curious and difficult problems for the improvement of acoustics, which had been presented to the royal society in Dublin, and having accomplished his objecvt, he transmitted the solutions, by means of the British minister at the court of Florence, to the Royal Society at London. This was published under the title of “Disquisitio geometrica in systema sonorum D. Narcissi (Marsh) archiepiscopi Armachani,” in 1709, when he was chosen a fellow of the royal society. This was followed by his principal work, “De infinitis infinitorum, et infinite parvorum ordinibus disquisitio geometrica,” Pisa, 1710, 4to, and by many other works enumerated by his biographer, few of which appear in the catalogues of the public libraries in this country. Among other subjects he defended Galileo’s doctrine respecting the earth’s motion, and obtained a complete victory over those who opposed it. He was deeply versed in subjects of political economy; and various disputes were referred to his decision respecting the rights of fishery, &c. He was appointed commissioner from the grand duke and the court of Rome jointly, to settle some differences between the inhabitants of Ferrara and Bologna, concerning the works necessary to preserve their territories from the ravages of inundation. For these and other important public services, he was liberally rewarded by his employers. He died at the age of sevejity-two, in July 1742.

, a well-known biographer, but who has been himself left without any memorial, was the son of Mr. William Granger, by Elizabeth Tutt, daughter of Tracy Tutt. Of the condition of his parents, or the place of his education, we have not been able to recover any particulars. He studied, however, for some time at Christ-church, Oxford, which he probably left without taking a degree; and having entered into holy orders, was presented to the vicarage of Shiplake, in Oxfordshire, a living in the gift of the dean and chapter of Windsor. He informs us, in the dedication of his “Biographical History,” that his name and person were known to few at the time of its publication (1769), as he had “the good fortune to retire early to independence, obscurity, and content.” He adds, that “if he has an ambition for any thing, it is to be an honest man and a good parish priest,” and in both those characters he was highly esteemed by all who knew him. To the duties of his sacred office, he attended with the most scrupulous assiduity and zeal, and died in the performance of the most solemn office of the church. Such was his pious regard for the day appointed for religious observances, that he would not read the proofs of his work while going through the press on that day; and with such an impression of what was his duty, found no great difficulty in resisting the arguments of his bookseller, Tom Davies, who endeavoured to persuade him that this was a “work of necessity.” It appears that some time before his death he was anxious to obtain a living within a tenable distance of Shiplake, but did not succeed. In 1773 or 1774 he accompanied lord Mountstuart, now earl of Bute, on a tour to Holland, where his lordship made an extensive collection of portraits. In 1772 he published a sermon entitled “An Apology for the Brute Creation, or Abuse of Animals censured.” This was preached in his parish^church, Oct. 18, 1772, and, as we are informed in a postscript, gave almost universal disgust; “the mention of horses and dogs was censured as a prostitution of the dignity of the pulpit, and considered as a proof of the author’s growing insanity;” but more competent judges, and indeed the public at large, applauded him for exerting his humanity and benevolence in a case which is so often overlooked, the treatment of the brute creation. Mr. Granger, who was a man of some humour, and according to the evidence of his friend and correspondent the rev. Mr. Cole, a frequent retailer of jokes, dedicated this sermon “To T. B. Drayman,” for which he gives as a reason that he had seen this man exercise the lash with greater rage, and heard him at the same time swear more roundly and forcibly, than he ever heard or saw any of his brethren of the whip in London. Mr. Granger appears to have taken some pains with this man, but to little purpose. He was, however, afterwards killed by a kick from one of the horses whom he delighted to torment, which gave Mr. Granger an opportunity of strength-. cning his arguments with his parishioners by a warning like this, which could not fail, for sorneaime at least, to make an impression on their minds. In 1773 he printed another sermon, entitled “The nature and extent of Industry,” preached before his grace Frederic, archbishop of Canterbury, July 4, 1775, in the parish church of Shiplake. This was gravely dedicated, “To the inhabitants of the parish of Shiplake who neglect the service of the church, and spend the Sabbath in the worst kind of idleness, this plain sermon, which they never heard, and probably will never read, is inscribed by their sincere wellwisher and faithful minister J. G.” Both these discourses were favourably received by the public, and many clergymen and others purchased quantities of them for distribution. His memory, however, is best preserved by his “Biographical History of England from Kgbert the Great to the Revolution,” at which he employed himself for many years, and lived to see two editions sold, and a taste created for collections of portraits, which is indeed the principal intention of the author, his biography including only those persons of whom some engraved portrait is extant. It was first published in 4 thin 4to vols. in 1769, but the second and subsequent editions have been printed in 8vo. The preparation of such a work could not fail to yield the author much amusement, and likewise procured him the correspondence of many eminent scholars and gentlemen who were either collectors of portraits, or conversant in English biography. He had amassed considerable materials for a continuation of this work, which was prevented by his sudden and much-lamented death. On Sunday April 14, 1776, he read prayers and preached apparently in good health, but while afterwards at the communion-table, in the act of administering the sacrament, he was seized with an apoplectic fit, and notwithstanding immediate medical assistance, died next morning. This affecting circumstance was happily expressed by a friend in these lines:

SacheverelPs trial, which happened not long after, brought on that remarkable change in the ministry in 1710, when Mr. Granville^s friends came again into power. He was elected for the borough of Helston, but, being returned at the same time for the county of Cornwall, he chose to represent the latter; and on September 29, he was declared secretary at war, in the room of Robert Walpole, esq. afterwards the celebrated minister. He continued in this office for some time, and discharged it with reputation; and, towards the close of the next year, 1711, he married the lady Mary, daughter of Edward Villiers, earl of Jersey, at that time possessed of a considerable jointure, as widow of Thomas Thynne, esq. He had just before succeeded to the estate of the elder branch of his family, at Stow; and December 31, he was created a peer of Great Britain, by the title of lord Lansdowne, baron of Bideford, in the county of Devon. In this promotion he was one of the twelve peers who were all created at the same time; and so numerous a creation, being unprecedented, gave much offence, although but little in his case. His lordship was now the next male-issue in that noble family, in which two peerages, that of the earl of Bath, and that of lord Grenville of Potheridge, had been extinguished almost together: his personal merit was universally allowed; and as to his political sentiments, those who thought him most mistaken, allowed him to be open, candid, and uniform. He stood always high in the favour of queen Anne; and with great reason, having upon every occasion testified the greatest zeal for her government, and the most profound respect for her person. For these reasons, in the succeeding year, 1712, he was sworn of her majesty’s privy-council, made controller of her household, about a year after advanced to the post of treasurer in. the same office; and to his other honours, says Dr. Johnson, was added the dedication of Pope’s “Windsor Forest.” His lordship continued in his office of treasurer to the queen, until her death, when he kept company with his friends in falling a sacrifice to party-violence, being removed from his treasurer’s place by George I. Oct. 11, 1714.

, a native of Holhwic in the diocese of Minister, whose name was Graes, taught ethics and philosophy at Cologn, in a college of which he became the head, and died there May 22, 1542. His attachment to the catholic religion involved him in disputes with Reuchlin, Hutten, and other professors; who, to ridicule the style of the Romish divines, the monks, and some religious ceremonies, are supposed to have published “Epistolos obscurorum virorum ad Dominum Magistrum Ortuinum Gratium,” 1516 and 1517, 4to, in two parts, of which there have been editions since. But it is more probable that this book was really written by Van Hutten and John Jaeger, alias John Crotus, Luther’s contemporary and friend, and who afterwards returned to the church of Rome, and was then reproached by Christopher Olearius for writing such a satire. Erasmus is said to have been so pleased with it, as to be thrown into a violent fit of laughter, which burst an imposthume in his face. In 1710, a beautiful edition was published in 12 mo, at London, dedicated to the author of the Tatler. It was condemned by Leo X. March 15, 1517; and Gratius wrote in opposition to it, “Lamentationes obscurorum virorum non prohibits per Sedem Apostolicam,” Cologn, 1518, 8vo, reprinted in 1649. He also published “Triumphus B. Job,” in elegiac verse, in three books, Cologn, 1537, folio; “Fasciculus rerum expetendarum et fugiendarum,” Cologn, 1535, folio, reprinted under the inspection of Edward Brown, London, 1690, 2 vols. folio; which is a curious collection of pieces respecting the council of Basil.

, a learned protestant divine, brother to the preceding, was born at Nismes, September 11, 1636. He was minister at Lyons, but left that place on the revocation of the edict of Nantes, and went to Amsterdam, and afterwards to London, where he exercised the ministerial office, and died in 1718. His works are numerous; the principal one is, “Ivloses vindicatus,” Amsterdam, 1694, 12mo, in which he brings proofs of the creation, and of the account given by Moses, against Dr. Thomas Burnet’s “Archaeologia Philosophical”

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.

Long previous, however, to these high appointments, he was elected, May 26, 1698, master of Bene't college, upon the recommendation of his friend Tenison, and proved an excellent governor of that society. Soon after he became master, he introduced the use of public prayers in the chapel immediately after the locking up of the gates, that he might know what scholars were abroad, and if necessary, visit their chambers: this practice was found so beneficial as to be continued ever since. In other respects, when vice-chancellor, which office he served in 1699 and 1713, and at the public commencement, he acquitted himself with great skill and dignity. The zeal also which he shewed for the protestant succession in the house of Hanover, upon the death of queen Anne, and his prudent conduct at that juncture, were so acceptable to the court, that they are thought to have laid the foundation of his church preferments; an earnest of which George I. gave him in appointing him one of his domestic chaplains the year following. Dr. Greene resigned the mastership of his college in 1716. He married Catherine sister of bishop Trimnell, by whom he had two sons and seven daughters. Having made a handsome provision for this family, he died in a good old age, May 18, 1738, and was buried in his cathedral. Those who knew him most intimately inform us that it was his unfeigned and uniform endeavour to exercise a conscience void of offence towards God and man, and to discharge his duty, in the several relations he bore to his fellow creatures, to the best of his judgment and abilities, with the same faith and spirit which appear through all his writings. These writings are, 1. “The Sacrament of the. Lord’s Supper explained to the meanest capacities,” Lond, 1710, 12mo, in a familiar dialogue between a minister and parishioner. 2. “The principles of religion explained for the instruction of the weak,” ibid. 1726, 12mo. 3. “Four discourses on the four last things, viz. Death, Judgment, Heaven, and Hell,” ibid. 1734, 12mo; and seven occasional sermons,

, the first of an eminent family of learned men in Scotland, was the son of the Rev. Mr. John Gregory, minister of Drumoak in the county of Aberdeen, and was born at Aberdeen in November 1638. His mother was a daughter of Mr. David Anderson of Finzaugh, or Finshaugh, a gentleman who possessed a singular turn for mathematical and mechanical knowledge. This mathematical genius was hereditary in the family of the Andersons, and from them it seems to have been transmitted to their descendants of the names of Gregory, Reid, &c. Alexander Anderson, cousin -german of the said David, was professor of mathematics at Paris in the beginning of the seventeenth century, and published there several valuable and ingenious works; as may be seen in our vol. II. The mother of James Gregory inherited the genius of her family; and observing in her son, while yet a child, a itrong propensity to mathematics, she instructed him herself in the elements of that science. His education in the languages he received at the grammar-school of Aberdeen, and went through the usual course of academical studies at Marischal college, but was chiefly delighted with philosophical researches, into which a new door had been lately opened by the key of the mathematics. Galileo, Kepler, and Des Cartes were the great masters of this new method; their works, therefore, Gregory made his principal study, and began early to make improvements upon their discoveries in optics. The first of these improvements was the invention of the reflecting telescope, which still bears his name; and which was so happy a thought, that it has given occasion to the most considerable improvements made in optics, since the invention of the telescope. He published the construction of this instrument in his “Optica promota,” 1663, at the age of twenty-four. This discovery soon attracted the attention of the mathematicians, both of our own and foreign countries, who immediately perceived its great importance to the sciences. But the manner of placing the two specula upon the same axis appearing to Newton to be attended with the disadvantage of losing the central rays of the larger speculum, he proposed an improvement on the instrument, by giving an oblique position to the smaller speculum, and placing the eye-glass in the side of the tube. It is observable, however, that the Newtonian construction of that instrument was long abandoned for the original or Gregorian, which is now always used when the instrument is of a moderate size; though Herschel has preferred the Newtonian form for the construction of those immense telescopes which he has of late so successfully employed in observing the heavens.

In the performance of these services, Gresham often stretched his own credit, and kept up the exchange at his own risk, by which he frequently lost several hundred pounds at a time; and on one particular time he took up 50,000l. for the king’s service. In the course of these transactions, he had frequently occasion to meddle with political affairs, as well as those immediately committed to his charge, through the application of the emperor’s sister, then regent in the Netherlands, as well as that of the Icing his master; so that he made at least forty journeys from England to Antwerp during the remainder of the short reign of Edward VI. These services were so acceptable to the young monarch, that about three weeks before his death, he granted to Mr. Gresham, as a mark of his favour, Iool a year to him and his heirs for ever. Mr. Gresham also obtained, in the course of that reign grants of estates and reversions to the value of about 300l. a year. He was but a young man when first employed by king Edward; and the skill and prudence displayed in the various matters in which he was employed, discovered an uncommon knowledge of mercantile affairs. But notwithstanding his abilities, and the considerable services he had rendered to the crown, he was, upon the accession of queen Mary, removed from his agency. This induced him to draw up a memorial of his services to the late king, which he sent to a minister of state to be laid before her majesty; and the services lepresented as done, not only to the king, but to the nation in general, by the increase both of money and trade, and the advancement of the public credit, being observed to be fact, he was taken soon after into the queen’s service, and reinstated in his former employment, as appears by the commissions given him at different times during that reign. After the decease of queen Mary, in 1558, he was taken immediately into the service of queen Elizabeth, who employed him on her accession to provide and buy up arms; and in 1559 she conferred on him the honour of knighthood, and appointed him her agent in foreign parts. In this state of credit and reputation, he thought proper to provide himself with a mansion-house in the city, suitable to his station and dignity; and with this spirit built a large and sumptuous house for his own dwelling, on the west-side of Bishopsgate-street, London, afterwards called Gresham-college, where he maintained an establishment becoming his character and station. But this flow of prosperity received a heavy check by the loss of his only son, aged 16 years, who died in 1564, and was buried in St. Helen’s church, opposite to his mansion house.

, a worthy parish priest, was born in November 1607, at Atherston, in the parish of Manceter, Warwickshire; and, having been well grounded in grammar-learning under his uncle Mr. John Denison, was admitted a student of Baliol college, Oxford, in 1624. Here pursuing his studies carefully, he became qualified for academical honours; and, taking both his degrees in arts at the regular times, he was ordained at twenty-eight years of age by Dr. Wright, bishop of Coventry and Lichfield. In the beginning of the civil wars he sided with the parliament party, took the covenant, and, at the request of the corporation of Coventry, became minister of the great parish of St. Michael in that city, in which station he was admired for his conscientious performance of all his duties. The soundness of his doctrine according to his persuasion, the prudence and sanctity of his conversation, the vigilancy and tenderness of his care, were of that constant tenor, that he seemed to do all which the best writers upon the pastoral office tell us should be done. As he sided with the presbyterians against the hierarchy, so he joined with that party also against the design of destroying the king. In this, as in other things, he acted both with integrity and courage, of which we have the following remarkable instances. In 1648, when Cromwell, then lieutenant-general, was at Coventry upon his march towards London, Mr. Grew took this opportunity to represent to him the wickedness of the design, then evidently on foot, for taking off his majesty, and the sad consequences thereof, should it take effect; earnestly pressing him to use his endeavours to prevent it, and not ceasing to solicit him till he obtained his promise for it. Nor was he satisfied with this; for afterwards, when the design became more apparent, he addressed a letter to him, reminding him of his promise, and took care to have his letter delivered into CromwelPs own hands. At another time he was required to read in the church the proclamation against sir George Booth, and threatened by Lambert’s soldiers, then in Coventry, with the loss of his place if he refused, yet he determined not to read it. Of his liberality we have this instance: When Mr. Panton, a minister of the royalist party, was obliged to sell his library, Dr. Grew bought some of the books, and being afterwards requested to return them, with an offer of the money he paid, he returned the books, but refused the money, as he knew that Mr. Panton could not yet afford the money so well as himself.

, an eminent professor of law, was born in 1632, at Leipsic. His father, who was minister in that city, dying in 1685, the celebrated Mencke married the widow, and took great care of her son’s education. Gribner assisted in the “Leipsic Journal,” was professor of law at Wittenburgh, then at Dresden, and finally at Leipsic, where he was chosen to succeed M. Mencke. He died in 1734. Besides several academical dissertations, he left < Principia processes Judiciarii“” Principia Juris* prudentite naturalis;^ a small work much esteemed; *' Opuscula Juris public! et privatl," He was also a benefactor to the university of Letpsic, by leaving a considerable legacy co the library, a sum of money as a provision for the widows of the professors, and an annual sum as an exhibition >Y,r a. law student.

, a very extraordinary woman, (whose maiden name is nowhere mentioned), was born in the county of Kilkenny in Ireland, and married to Mr. George Grierson, printer in Dublin. She died in 1733, at the age of twenty-seven; and was allowed to be an excellent scholar, not only in Greek and Roman literature, but in history, divinity, philosophy, and mathematics. She gave a proof of her knowledge in the Latin tongue by her dedication of the Dublin edition of Tacitus to lord Carteret; and by that of Terence to his son, to whom she likewise wrote a Greek epigram. Dr. Harwood esteems her Tacitus one of the best edited books ever published. Among the editions of her husband’s press, is a very fine one of Dupin’s Ecclesiastical History, 1724, 3 vols. folio, a rare book in this country. Mrs. Grierson composed some poems in English, several of which are inserted by Mrs. Barber amongst her own. When lord Carteret was lordlieutenant of Ireland, he obtained a patent for Mr. Grierson, her husband, to be the king’s printer; and, to distinguish and reward her uncommon merit, had her life inserted in it. Besides her parts and learning, she was also a woman of great virtue and piety. Mrs. Pilkington has recorded some particulars of her, and tells us, that, “when about eighteen years of age, she was brought to her father, to be instructed in midwifery; that she was mistress of Hebrew, Greek, Latin, and French, and understood the mathematics as well as most men: and what,” says Mrs. Pilkington, “made these extraordinary talents yet more surprising was, that her parents were poor illiterate country people; so that her learning appeared like the gife poured out on the apostles, of speaking all the languages without the pains of study.” Mrs. Pilkington inquired of her, where she had gained this prodigious knowledge: to which Mrs. Grierson sail, that “she had received some little instruction from the minister of the parish, when she, could spare time from her needle-work, to which she was closely kept by her mother.” Mrs. Pilkington adds, that “she wrote elegantly both in verse and prose; that her turn was chiefly to philosophical or divine subjects; that her piety was not inferior to her learning; and that some of the most delightful hours she herself had ever passed were in the conversation of this female philosopher.” Her son, who was also his majesty’s printer at Dublin, and instructed by her, was a man of uncommon learning, great wit, and vivacity. He died in Germany, at the age of twenty-seven. Dr. Johnson highly respected his abilities, and often observed, that he possessed more extensive knowledge than any man of his years he had ever known. His industry was equal to his talents, he particularly excelled in every species of philological learning, and was perhaps the best critic of his time.

On April 15, 1564, he took the degree of D. D. at Cambridge, and the same year executed the queen’s express command, for exacting uniformity in the clergy; but proceeded so tenderly and slowly, that the archbishop thought fit to excite and quicken him; whence the puritans supposed him inclined to their party. However, he brought several nonconformists to comply; to which end he pub* Jished a letter of Henry Bullinger, minister of Zurich, in Switzerland, to prove the lawfulness of compliance, which had a very good effect. The same year, October 3, on the celebration of the emperor Ferdinand’s funeral, he preached a sermon at St. Paul’s, afterwards printed, from which Strype has given extracts. In 1567 he executed the queen’s orders in proceeding against the prohibited and unlicensed preachers; but was so treated by some with reproaches and rude language, that it abated much of his favourable inclinations towards them, which was felt and resented on their part. Even although some years afterwards he both procured the liberty of some separatists who had been imprisoned according to law, and indulged their ministers with a licence to preach on their promising not to act against the laws, yet they immediately abused that liberty, and when he proceeded against them for it, they had the boldness to lodge a complaint in the privy council representing his dealings with them. The archbishop, touched with their ingratitude, joined with the council in opinion that such men ought to be severely punished as a warning to others. Grimial was also threatened with a premunire by some of his clergy for raising a contribution upon them the preceding year for the persecuted Protestants abroad, without the queen’s licence. But this did not discourage him, and having procured a commission from her majesty to visit the Savoy, the hospital appointed for the relief and entertainment of poor travellers, he deprived the master, who had almost ruined the charity by his abuses and mismanagement. This was the last piece of service he performed for his diocese, being on May I, 1570, translated to the see of York. He owed this promotion to secretary Cecil and archbishop Parker, who liked his removal from London, as not being resolute enough for the government there. The same year he wrote a letter to his patron Cecil, that Cartwright the famous nonconformist might be silenced; and in 1571, at his metropolitical visitation, he shewed a hearty zeal, by his injunctions, for the^discipline and good government of the church. In 1572 he petitioned the queen to renew the ecclesiastical commission. In 157* he held one for the purpose of proceeding against papists, whose number daily diminished in his diocese, which he was particularly careful to provide with learned preachers, as being in his opinion the best method of attaining that end. He rejected therefore such as came for institution to livings if they were found deficient in learning, and in this policy he was encouraged by the queen, to whom it was highly agreeable. In other respects he had frequently to contend with the avarice of the courtiers, some of whom, would have greatly impoverished the church, if he and Other prelates had not opposed them.

, a French protestant clergyman, born at Paris in 1647, was educated in the reformed religion, and after applying with success to classical studies, was advised by his father to follow the law. In 1664, accordingly, he was admitted to the title and privilege of a doctor of the civil and canon law, and the year following was received as an advocate at Paris, and was distinguishing himself, when by the persuasion of some friends, he quitted his profession, and began to study divinity at Saumur. In 1675 he was appointed minister of the church of Lisy, and was ordained. In -1677 and 1678 he received pressing invitations from the churches of Gien and Amiens, both which he declined, as it was his intention to spend a few more years in close study. At length, however, in 1682, he accepted an invitation from the church at Rouen, but did not remain long connected with it, a decree of council having separated him from his flock, and forbid him to come nearer the place than seven leagues. He was confined by sickness at the time this decree arrived, and on his recovery went to England in 1685, and connected himself in the exercise of his ministerial functions with Messieurs Allix and Lombard. In 1694 he became minister of the Savoy, which office he held until his death, Sept. 30, 1713. His widow is said to have given his library to the Savoy church, on Condition of its being open to the public certain days in every week. He published “Trait< de Pinspiration des livres sacrt-es,” Amst. 1695, and several sermons and pious tracts. He appears to have been a very active member of the society for propagating the gospel.

Hitherto Grotius had passed his life with uninterrupted honour and fame; but a reverse was now approaching The United Provinces had been kindled into a warm dis*­pute about grace and predestination, from 1603, when Arminius first broached his opinions. His doctrines, being directly opposite to those of Calvin, gave great offence to that party, at the head of which appeared Gomar, who accused his antagonist before the synod of Rotterdam. Gomar’s party prevailing there, Arminius applied to the States of Holland, who promised the disputants to have the affair speedily discussed in a synod. The dispute still continuing with much bitterness, in 1611 the States ordered a conference to be held between twelve ministers on each side: but the consequence of this was, that men’s minds were the more inflamed. Arminius died October 19, 1609, some time before this conference; and Grotius made his eulogium in verse. He had hitherto applied little to these matters, and ingenuously owns he did not understand a great part of them, being foreign to his profession; and certainly every admirer of his unrivalled talents must wish that he never had involved himself; but having once studied the controversy, he embraced the Arminian doc* trine. In 1610, the partisans of Arminius drew up a remonstrance, setting forth their belief; first negatively against their adversaries, and then positively their own sentiments, each comprehended in six articles. This remonstrance was drawn up by Utengobard, minister at the Hague, and was probably made in concert with Grotius, the intimate friend and quondam pupil of that minister. To this the Gomarists opposed a contra-remonstrance: the former proposed to end the matter by a toleration, the latter to decide it by a national synod; and, the disputes increasing, the StateSj at the motion of the grand pensionary, with the view of putting an end to them, revived an obsolete law made in 1591, placing the appointment of ministers in the civil magistrates. But this was so far from answering the purpose, that the Contra-remoustrants resolved not to obey it. Hence grew a schism, which occasioned a sedition, and many riots. It was at this time that Grotius was nominated pensionary at Rotterdam, as mentioned above; and ordered to go to England, with secret instructions, as is thought, to persuade the king and principal divines of that kingdom to favour the Arminians, and approve the conduct of the States. He had several conferences with king James on that subject, and while here he wrote his tract in favour of the Arminians, entitled “A reconciliation of the different opinions on Predestination and Grace,” which is printed among his theological works. On his return to Holland he found the divisions increased: Barnevelt and he had the direction of the States’ proceedings in this matter; and he was appointed to draw up an edict which might restore tranquillity, the draught of which was approved by the States; but it was so favourable to the Arminians that it gave great offence to the Contra-remonstrants, who determined to pay no regard to it. Hence this edict serving to increase the troubles, by driving the Gomarists to despair, the grand pensionary Barnevelt, in hourly expectation of fresh riots, proposed to the States of Holland, that their magistrates should be empowered to raise troops for the suppression of the rioters, and the security of their towns. Dort, Amsterdam, and three others of the most favourable to the Gomarists, protested against this step, which they regarded, and in fact it was, as a declaration of war against the Contra-remonstrants. Barnevelt’s motion however was agreed to, and, August 4, 1617, the States issued a placart accordingly. This fatal decree occasioned the death of the grand pensionary, and the ruin of Grotius, by incensing prince Maurice of Nassau against them, who looked upon the resolution of the States, taken without his consent, to be derogatory to his dignity, as governor and captain-general.

He had been above 18 months shut up at Louvesteih, when, January 11, 1620, Muys van-Halli, his declared enemy, who had been one of his judges, informed the States general, that he had advice from good authority, that their prisoner was seeking to make his escape. Some persons were sent to examine into this matter; but, notivithstanding all the inquiry that could be made, they found no reason to believe that he had contrived any means to escape. H s wife, however, was very industriously and ingeniously employed in contriving it, which she effected in the following manner. He had been permitted to borrow books of his friends, and when he had done with them they were carried back in a chest with his foul linen, which was sent to Gorcum to be washed. The first year his guards were very exact in examining the chest; but, being used to find nothing in it besides books and linen, they grew tired of searching, and even did not take the trouble to open it. His wife, observing their negligence, proposed to take advantage of it. She represented to her husband, that it was in his power to get out of prison when he pleased, if he would put himself into this chest; and not to endanger his health, she caused holes to be bored opposite where his face was to be, to breathe at, persuading him to try if he could continue shut up in that confined posture, as long as it would require to go from Louvestein to Gorcum. Finding it might be done, she resolved to seize the first favourable opportunity; which very soon offered. The commandant of Louvestein going to Heusden to raise recruits, she paid a visit to his lady, and told her in the course of conversation, that she was desirous of sending away a chest of books; for, her husband was so weak, that it gave her great uneasiness to see him study with such application. Having thus prepared the commandant’s wife, she returned to her husband’s apartment, and in concert with a valet and a maid who were in the secret, shut him up in the chest; and at the same time, that the people might not be surprised at not seeing him, she spread a report of his being ill. Two soldiers carried the chest; one of them, finding it was heavier than usual, said there must be “an Arminian in it.” Grotius’s wife, who was present, said with great coolness, “There are indeed Arminian books in it.” The chest was brought down on a ladder with great difficulty; the soldier insisted on its being opened, to see wiiat was in it; he even went and informed the commandant’s wife, that the weight of the chest gave him reason to suspect the contents, and that it would be proper to have it opened. She told him that Grotius’ s wife had said there was nothing but books in and that they might carry it to the boat. It is even said that a soldier’s wife, who was present, reminded them there was more than one example of prisoners making their escape in boxes. In this way, however, eiither by negligence, or connivance, which there seems no reason to suspect, the chest was brought down, and put into the boat; and Grotius’s maid, who was in the secret, had orders to go to Gorcum with it, and put it into a house there. When it came to Gorcum, they wanted to put it on a sledge; but the maid telling the boatman that there were some brittle things in it, and begging of him to take care how it was carried, it was put on a horse, and carried by two chairmen to David Dazelaor’s, a friend of Grotius, and brother-in-law to Erpenius; and, when every body was gone, the maid opened the chest. Grotius had felt no inconvenience in it, though its length was not above three feet and a half. He got out, dressed himself like a mason with a rule and a trowel; and was secretly conveyed in this disguise to Valvic in Brabant. Here he made himself known to some Arminians, and hired a carriage to Antwerp; and, at Antwerp, he alighted at the house of Nicolas Grevincovius, who had been formerly a minister at Amsterdam., but did not make himself known to any other person. It was on March 22, 1621, that he thus recovered his liberty.

He had now lived a year in the noise of Paris, and began to think of retiring into the country, when the presiDe Meme offered him one of his seats at Bologne, near Senlis. Grotius accepted the offer, and passed there the spring and summer of 1623. In this castle he began his great work, which alone is sufficient to render his name immortal, his “Treatise of the Rights of Peace and War.” He had visited the most distinguished men of learning; among others Salmasius and Rigault, and had the free use of de Thou’s library: he sometimes also made excursions to St. Germain’s, where the court was; but, having learned that De Meme wanted to reside at Bologne, he returned to Paris in October. Btirigny informs us, which somewhat diminishes our respect for Grotius’s firmness of mine!, that he took particular care not to offend De Meme, who was a zealous catholic, and was even so submissive as to eat meagre on Fridays, to receive none of his Dutch refugee ministers, and to abstain from every public or private exercise of the protestant religious worship. In April 1625, prince Frederic Henry succeeding to the post of stadtholder on the death of his brother Maurice, Grotius’s friends conceived great hopes of obtaining leave for his return to Holland and, at their request, he wrote to the new stadtholder for this purpose, but without effect as he had before conjectured. However, he was now in the height of his glory by the prodigious success of his book “De Jure Belli Si Pacis,” which was published this year. In the mean time he began to grow tired of that city. His pension was ill-paid, and his revenue insufficient to keep him decently with a wife and a family. He had an offer of being professor of law in a college at Denmark; but, though he was satisfied with the salary, he thought the place beneath his acceptance. While he remained in suspense, cardinal Richelieu was nominated prime minister in 1626, and being very desirous of becoming acquainted with Grotius, invited him to his house at Limours. Here it is supposed that he wished to engage Grotius to devote himself entirely to him, and that Grotius’s reservations gave offence. It is certain that from this time his pension was unpaid, which greatly distressed him, but his love for Paris induced him to bear with such a privation as long as it was possible.

He had always entertained a very high opinion of Gustavus king of Sweden; and that prince having sent to Paris Benedict Oxenstiern, a relation of the chancellor, to bring to a final conclusion the treaty between France and Sweden, this minister became acquainted with Grotius, and resolved, if possible, to draw him to his master’s court: and Grotius writes, that if that monarch would nominate him ambassador, with a proper salary for the decent sup* port of the dignity, the proposal might be accepted. In this situation Salvius, vice-chancellor of Sweden, a great statesman, and a man of learning, being then at this city, Grotius was introduced to him, and saw him frequently. Polite literature was the subject of their conversation. Salvius conceived a great esteem for Grotius, and the favourable report he made of him to the high-chancellor Oxenstiern determined the latter to write to Grotius to come to him, that he might employ him in affairs of the greatest importance. Grotius accepted of this invitation; and setting out for Francfort on the Maine, where that minister Avas, arrived there in May 1634. He was received with the; greatest politeness by Oxenstiern, who did not yet, how-> ever, explain his intentions. In confidence of the highchancellor’s character, and apparent sincerity, he sent for his wife, who arrived at Francfort with his daughters and son, in the beginning of August The chancellor after for some time continuing to heap civilities upon him, without mentioning a word of business, ordered that he should follow him to Mentz, and at length declared him counsellor to the queen of Sweden, and her ambassador to the court of France.

But the vessel was scarce sailed when a violent storm arose, which obliged her after three days tossing to put in, August 17, on the coast of Pomerania, fourteen miles from Dantzic. Grotius set out in an open waggon for Lubeck, and arrived at Rostock, August 26, very ill, having travelled about sixty miles through wind and rain. He lodged with Balleman, and sent for Stochman the physician, who, from the symptoms, judged he could not live long. Ou the 28th he sent for Quistorpius, minister of that town, who gives the following account of his last moments: “You are desirous of hearing how that phoenix of literature, Hugo Grotius, behaved in his last moments; I am going to tell you.” He then proceeds to give an account of his voyage, and his sending for Stochman, a Scotch physician, after which he goes on as follows: “he sent for me about nine at night; I went, and found him almost at the point of death. I said, * There was nothing I desired more than to have seen him in health, that I might have had the pleasure of his conversation;‘ he said, ’ God hath ordered it otherwise. 7 I desired him t to prepare himself for a happier life, to acknowledge he was a sinner, arrd repent of his faults;‘ and happening to mention the publican, who acknowledged he was a sinner, and asked God’s mercy, he answered, * I am that publican.’ I went on, and told him that ‘ he must have recourse to Jesus Christ, without whom there is no salvation.’ He replied, * I place my hope in Jesus Christ.‘ I began to repeat aloud in German the prayer that begins ’ Holy Jesus;‘ he followed me in a very low voice with his hands clasped. When I had done, I asked him if he understood me he answered, < I understand you very well.’ I continued to repeat to him those passages of the word of God, which are commonly offered to the remembrance of dying persons; and, asking if he Understood me, he answered me, * I heard your voice, but did not understand what you said.'. These were his last Words; soon after he expired, just at midnight. His body was delivered to the physicians, who took out his bowels, and easily obtained leave to bury them in our principal church, dedicated to the Virgin Mary.”

, an eminent Swiss divine, and one of the first reformers, was born at Zurich in 1529. In his youth he attained an accurate knowledge of Greek and Latin, and acquired much fame as an orator and Latin poet. He married the daughter of Zuinglius, and being admitted into orders, preached at Zurich from 1542 to 1575, when he was chosen to succeed Bullinger, as first minister of the protestant church there. His writings also, which consisted of homilies, or sermons on the prophets, evangelists, and apostles, procured him great fame both at home and abroad, and were long regarded as standard books among the protestant churches. He died Nov. 25, 1586. In the early part of queen Elizabeth’s reign we find him corresponding with the English divines who had been exiles in the preceding reign, and brought over an attachment to the simple forms of the Genevan church, which Elizabeth wished to discourage. His works, as enumerated by Verheiden, consist of Latin poems, commentaries on various books of the Scripture, works on grammar and history, and some translations. His son, of the same names, spent some years in Merton college, Oxford, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1573, and returning to Zurich, became minister of St. Peter’s church there. Wood attributes several Latin poems to him, some of which we suspect were the production of his father: but this young man died in 1577, when oniy twenty five years of age.

On his return to France, he pursued his literary turn, and produced “Le Connetable de Bourbon,” a tragedy, and afterwards two other tragedies, the “Gracchi,” and “Anna Bullen,” of which his biographer speaks very highly; but they were not published, the author being called to assist the celebrated M. de Saint Germain, in his reform of the French army. He is said to have been the soul of this minister; and much to his honour, he continued his friendship in his patron’s disgrace. After the new organization was completed, Guibert returned to his studies, and among others, wrote the famous panegyrics on marshal Catinat, and the chancellor de PHopital. He afterward assisted at the camp in Normandy; and during the disputes concerning the number of ranks in which troops should be drawn up, he published the “Refutation complete du systeme de M. Menil-Durand.”

He continued thus employed in the proper business of his profession till 1511; but that year the cKsis of the public affairs gave occasion to call forth his abilities for more important matters. The Florentines were thrown into great difficulties by the league, which the French and Spaniards had entered into against the pope. Perplexed about their choice to remain neuter or engage in the league* they had recourse to our advocate, whom they sent ambassador to Ferdinand, king of Spain, to treat of this matter; and at the same time charged him with other affairs of the highest importance to the state. With this character he left Florence in 1512, and arriving safely afc Bruges, where his Spanish majesty then resided, remained two years at that court. Here he had an opportunity of exerting and improving his talents as a statesman. Many events happened in that time, the consequences whereof came within his province to negociate; such as the taking and plundering Ravenna and Prato by the Spaniards, the deposing of Piero Soderini, and the restoration of the family of Medici. In these and several other occurrences, which happened at that time, he adopted such measures, and with such address, that the republic found no occasion to employ any other minister; and the king testified his satisfaction by a great quantity of fine-wrought plate, which he presented to him at his departure. On his arrival at Florence in 1514, he was received with, uncommon marks of honour; and, in 15 15, constituted advocate of the consistory by Leo X. at Cortona. The pope’s favours did not stop here. Guicciardini’s extraordinary abilities, with a hearty devotion to the interest of the church, were qualifications of necessary use in the ecclesiastical state. Leo, therefore, that he might reap the full advantage of them, sent for him not long after to Rome, resolving to employ him where his talents might be of most service. In 1518, when Modena and Reggio were in great danger of being lost, he was appointed to the government of those cities, and proved himself equal to the charge.

When the commotions took place in consequence of king Charles’s endeavours to establish episcopacy in Scotland, the Perth articles, as they were called, were opposed by the Scotch covenant, which was subscribed by the majority of the clergy and people of Scotland, but not being so rigorously enforced as to prohibit all exercise of private judgment, Dr. Guild was permitted to subscribe it under such limitations as he was pleased to specify, which implied a loyal adherence to the king, but no condemnation of the articles of Perth, or of episcopal government. He was afterwards one of the commissioners in the general assembly of Scotland which met in 1638, and abolished the hierarchy of the church; and after his return from Glasgow, where this assembly met, officiated as formerly at Aberdeen in the pastoral function, and, with a view to beal the animosities then prevailing between the episcopal and presbyterian party, published “A friendly and faithful advice to the nobility, gentry, and others,” recommending that moderation which was then impossible, while the two great bodies who divided the sentiments of the two kingdoms, persisted in mutual encroachments. Yet notwithstanding an obvious leaning to the loyal side in Dr. Guild’s conduct, he was, on a vacancy, elected principal of King’s college, Aberdeen, in 1640, and preached his last sermon, as minister of Aberdeen, in June 1641. This was followed by a special mark of favour from his majesty, who bestowed upon Dr. Guild “a free gift of a house and garden, which had formerly been the residence of the bishop of Aberdeen.” He did'not, however, allow this to increase his private fortune, but wiih his usual liberality, devoted it to the service of the public, in benefactions to the college, the town, and the poor of the adjoining parish.

His works were, “A contention for truth, in two publick disputations upon infant baptism, between him and Mr. Henry Denne, in the church of St. Clement-Danes, 26 Nov. 1657,” Lond. 16.58, 4to. “Schism unmasked; or a late conference between him and Mr. John Pierson, minister, on the one part, and two disputants of the Romish persuasion on the other, in May 1657.” This was published in 8vo, the year following, with a large preface, by a catholick at Paris. “A view and correction of the Common Prayer,” 1662. “The Paschal or Lent Fast, Apostolical and perpetual,” Lond. 1662, 4to. Besides these, it ought never to be omitted that he wrote that excellent prayer in our Liturgy, called “The general supplication.”

, a miscellaneous writer and compiler, whose name is now chiefly preserved by a geographical grammar, which it is said he did not write, was a gentleman descended from an ancient family, being the representative of the Guthries of Haukerton, in the county of Angus, Scotland. He was born at Brichen in that county in 1708, and educated at King’s college, Aberdeen, where he took his degrees, and followed the profession of a schoolmaster. He is said to have removed to London, in consequence of a love-affair, which created some disturbance in his family; others report that having but a small patrimony, and being an adherent of the unfortunate house of Stuart, he could not accept of any office in the state; he came therefore to London, and employed his talents and learning as, what he himself calls, “an author by profession.” His talents and learning were not of the inferior kind, when he chose to employ them leisurely; but he wrote hastily, and often in need, and seems to have cared little for his reputation, by lending his name frequently where he did not contribute with his pen. Among his first employments was that of compiling the parliamentary debates for the Gentleman’s Magazine, before Dr, Johnson had undertook that business; for this purpose Guthrie sometimes attended the house, but more frequently had to depend on very slight information. Connecting himself terwards with the booksellers, he compiled a variety of work among which are “A History of the English Peerage,” “History of the World,” 12 vols. 8vo, “A History of England,” “History of Scotland,” 10 vols. 8vo, and the well-known “Geographical Grammar,” said to have been really compiled by Knox the bookseller. Besides these, he translated “Quintilian,” 3 vols. 8vo, “Cicero’s Offices,” 8vo, and “Cicero’s Epistles to Atticus,” 2 vols. 12mo. Of his original compositions we have heard only of a beautiful poem, “The Eagle and Robin Red-breast,” in the collection of poems called the “Union,” where, however, it is said to be written by Archibald Scott, before 1600; “The Friends, a sentimental history,” 1754, 2 vols. 12mo; and “Remarks on English Tragedy,” a pamphlet. He was engaged, however, in many political papers and pamphlets, to which his name did not appear; and in 1745-6, received a pension of 200l. from government, for the services of his pen, which was continued during his life. In 1762 he renewed the offer of his services to the minister of the day, and they probably were accepted. He had the pen of a ready writer, and his periodical essays were perhaps his best. Much was expected from his “Peerage,” in which he was assisted by Mr. Ralph Bigland, each individual article being submitted to the inspection of the representative of the noble family treated of; yet, notwithstanding all this care, the work abounds with errors, contradictions, and absurdities His “History of England” merits greater praise, and had at least the honour of irritating Horace Wai pole to a gross abuse of Guthrie, because he had anticipated some of Walpole’s opinions concerning Richard III. Guthrie wrote at that time in the Critical Review, and pointed out his own discoveries. Boswell informs us, that Dr. Johnson esteemed Guthrie enough to wish that his life should be written. This, however, was neglected when the means of information were attainable. He died March I', 177O, and was interred in Marybone burial-ground, with a monument and inscription against the east wall.

, an eminent dissenting divine, of the independent persuasion, was a native of Hertford, where he was born in 1680, and having shewn a pious disposition from his youth, was admitted a member of the dissenting congregation of that place. He afterwards pursued his studies, with a view to the ministry, under Mr. Payne of Saffron Walden, and being admitted to preach at the age of twenty, became assistant to the rev. Mr. Haworth of Hertford, whom he afterwards succeeded in that congregation. Here he continued some years, and was very successful in opposing the Arian doctrines which had crept in among his Hock; and to strengthen his efforts he published in 1719, a small volume on the divinity of Christ, and in 1721, another on the divinity of the Holy Ghost. In 1727 he was invited to London, and became minister to a congregation in New Broad-street. In 1732 he received the degree of D. D. from one of the universities of Scotland. Besides his regular duty at New Broad-street, he was for niany years a preacher of the Tuesday’s lecture at Pinners* Hall, and of that at St. Helen’s on a Friday. In his avowal of his religious principles (those called Calvinistic) he was open, steady, and consistent, and his character and conduct were, in every point of view, uniform, and amiable. The goodness of his natural disposition, heightened by a spirit of real religion, exerted him to an activity which rendered his life very important. He was a kind and useful friend to the young, and extremely liberal to the poor, always devoting a tenth part of his annual income to charitable uses. After enjoying a considerable share of health for many years, he became lame and blind, but was enabled to continue his public services almost to the time of his death, which took place Nov. 22, 1761. Jle published a great variety of occasional sermons, and of pious tracts, and had a short controversy with Dr. Chandler, in which the latter is said to have appeared to very little advantage. But his great work was his “Paraphrase on the New Testament,” 1739 1752, 3 vols. 4to, and reprinted in 6 vols. 8vo, which is said to display a sound judgment, intimate acquaintance with the original, and considerable critical powers.

Gyllenborg afterwards waited on Charles XII. and was appointed, with baron Goertz, minister-plenipotentiary at the conferences of pacification which were opened with the court of Russia in the isle of Aland, but which terminated without success. In 1719 he was raised to the dignity of high chancellor of Sweden. In the beginning of the following year he also acted an important part in the negociations respecting the accession of Frederick I. to the throne, and gained constantly greater influence during the reign of this monarch, who appointed him counsellor of the Swedish empire, and chancellor of the university of Lund; and in 1739, when a great change took place in the senate and ministry, in which he took an active part, he was made president of chancery, minister for the foreign and home departments, and soon after chancellor of tin* university of Upsal. He died Dec. 14, 1746, with a high character for political talent, general learning, and ambition to promote learning and science in his country. He left to the university of Upsal, his valuable cabinet of natural history, remarkable for a great number of amphibious productions and corals, which Linnæus has described under the title “Amphibia Gyllenborgiana.” He appears also to have been a man of a religious turn of mind, from his translating into the Swedish language Sherlock’s “Discourse on Death,” but which he could not get licensed, as the Swedish clergy pretended to find some things in it contrary to sound doctrine. He procured it, therefore, to be printed in Holland, and distributed the whole edition for the benefit of his countrymen. He als* translated some English comedies, with alterations suitable to the genius of the Swedes, which were acted with applause at Stockholm. He had a concern in a periodical paper called the “Argus,” printed at Stockholm, but which, owing to the editor meddling imprudently with politics, appears to have been discountenanced. The count married an English lady, second daughter of John Wright, esq. attorney-general of Jamaica, and widow of Elias Deritt, esq. deputy o'f the great wardrobe under the duke of Montague, by whom he had no issue; the counts of his name in Sweden are his collateral relations. His lady’s daughter by Mr. Deritt, accompanying her mother to Sweden, was created countess Gyllenborg, and afterwards married Baron Sparre, on whose dqath she returned to England, where she died in 1766, and her daughter by the Baron died at Thirske in Yorkshire in 1778.

, a celebrated German poet of the last century, was born at Hamburgh in 1708. His father was minister from the king of Denmark to the circles of Lower Saxony, a well informed man, who associated with men of letters, and was capable of giving a direction to his son’s studies suitable to his genius. By various misfortunes, however, he lost his property, and died when our poet was only fourteen, and very ill provided for the liberal education which his father intended. His mother endeavoured to make up this loss by placing him at a college at Hamburgh, where, having previously imbibed a taste for poetry, he read the ancient as well a* the modern poets with eagerness and assiduity. Without the help of a master, or the salutary aid of criticism, he endeavoured to draw from his own stock the power of dissipating the fogs of dulness in the north, as Haller had done in the south of Germany. In 1728 or 1729, he published a small collection of poems, which have many marks of youth, and though his versification is free, and his language often very pure, the thoughts are frequently cold, and the expression too concise. In subjects which require little taste and philosophy, he has succeeded better than in works of sentiment and imagination. Of his taste at this time, he has given a bad specimen in his satire entitled “The Poet,” in which he puts Pietsch by the side of Virgil.

, a dissenting clergyman, was born at Exeter in 1692, and educated under the care of Mr. Pierce, who was assistant to his father Mr. Hallet, minister of a congregation of protestant dissentars in that city. Joseph was ordained in 1713, and in 1722 he succeeded his father as joint-minister with Mdf. Pierce. Prior to this event he had engaged in the controversy, then warmly carried on in the west of England, concerning the Trinity; and in 1720, adopted the principles of Dr. Clarke, which he demonstrated in a treatise entitled “The Unity of God not inconsistent with the Divinity of Christ; being remarks upon Dr. Waterland’s Vindication, relating to the Unity of God, and the Object of Worship.” He published other pieces on the same subject; but his reputation is chiefly founded on his work entitled “A free and impartial Study of the Holy Scriptures recommended, being notes on some peculiar texts, with discourses and observations,” 1729 1736, 3 vols. published at different times. Our author published many other works, which being of the controversial kind, are now forgotten. Those which merited most general approbation were his “Discourse of the nature, kinds, and numbers of our Saviour’s Miracles” his “Immorality of the Moral Philosopher,” and his “Consistent Christian,” against the infidel writers, Woolston, Morgan, and Chubb. Mr. Hallet died in 1744.

, a pious Scotch divine, and professor of divinity in the university of St. Andrew’s, was born at Duplin in the parish of Aberdalgy, near Perth, Dec. 25, 1674. His father had been minister of that parish, from which he was ejected after the restoration, for nonconformity. He died in 1682, and as the country was still unsafe for those who professed the presbyterian religion, his mother went over to Holland with her son, then about eight years old. During their stay there, he was educated at Erasmus’s school, and made great proficiency in classical literature. On his return to Scotland in 1687, he resumed his studies, and was also sent to the university. When he had finished his philosophical course there, he entered upon the study of divinity; and being, in June 1699, licensed to preach, he was in May 1700, appointed minister of the parish of Ceres, in which he performed the part of a zealous and pious pastor; but his labours proving too many for his health, the latter became gradually impaired. In April 1710, he was appointed by patent from queen Anne, professor of divinity in the college of St. Leonard at St. Andrew’s, through the mediation of the synod of Fife. On this occasion he entered on his office an inaugural oration, in qua, post exhibitam rationem suscepti muneris, examinatur schedula nupera, cui titulus ' Epistola Archimedis ad Regem Gelonem Albae Graecae reperta anno serae Christianas 1688, A. Pitcarnio, M. D. ut vulgo creditur, auctoreV Pitcairn’s reputation as a deist was at that time very common in Scotland, however justly he may have deserved it; and Mr. Halyburton’s attention had been much called to the subject of deism as revived in the preceding century. He did not, however, enjoy his professorship long, dying Sept. 23, 1712, aged only thirty-eight. It does not appear that he published any thing in his life-time; but soon after his death two works were published, which still preserve his memory in Scotland. 1. “The Great Concern of Salvation,” 1721, 8vo. 2. “Ten Sermons preached before and after the celebration of the Lord’s Supper,” 1722. But the work which proves his ability as a controversial writer, and the great extent of his reading, although it is less known than the preceding, is his “Natural Religion insufficient; and Revealed necessary to man’s happiness,” Edinburgh, 1714, 4to. This was written in confutation of the deism of lord Herbert and Mr. Blount. In this elaborate performance he largely and distinctly shews that the light of nature is greatly defective, even with respect to the discoveries of a Deity, and the worship that is to be rendered to him with respect to the inquiry concerning man’s true happiness with respect to the rule of duty, and the motives for enforcing obedience, &c. Dr. Leland says that “whosoever carefully examines what this learned and pious author has offered on these several heads, will find many excellent things; though the narrowness of his notions in some points has prejudiced some persons against his work, and hindered them from regarding and considering it so much as it deserves.”

Among the papers left by sir William at his death, are found more than fifty memoirs directed by Father Anthony to the marquis of Sambuca, soliciting his patronage for the great work of the manuscripts, to which solicitations that minister seemed to be deaf. Numberless other memoirs of the kind were also presented to several persons in the royal service, and they met with no better success. The consequence was, that Father Anthony at last put himself under the protection of sir William, and tendered his services for any information which the latter might wish concerning the Museum. The propriety of accepting this offer may be questioned. It was considered, however, by one who was not particularly acquainted with the administration of the establishment, as too important not to meet with an immediate compliance: a treaty was concluded, that sir William should grant to Father Anthony a pension of 600 ducats a year (100l.), and the latter should regularly send to him every week a sheet of original information; and in order to elude any ministerial inquisition, it was also agreed that the correspondence should be carried on in cyphers. This correspondence lasted till the death of Father Anthony in 1798; and, if we except a want of delicacy, and perhaps also a breach of trust in the monk, we may presume that, in the main object, it proved satisfactory to both parties: sir William was indeed so satisfied, that, some years after the commencement of the treaty, he procured for Father Anthony an additional pension, of the same sum of 600 ducats a year (100l.), from his royal highness the Prince of Wales; and Father Anthony, on his side, seemed also so sensible of the favours he had received, that on his death, he bequeathed all his manuscripts and papers of every kind to his patron.

With regard to his diplomatic exertions, which naturally constituted the immediate duties of his station, we may notice, 1. the explanations, which, in 1772, he had with the first minister, marquis Tanucci, on account of Michael Torcia, who, in his performance, “The Political Sketch of Europe,” had used some improper expressions 2. the negotiations which he successfully concluded for the neutrality of his Sicilian majesty in the American war: 3. his excellent conduct during the family misunderstanding between Spain and Naples, from 1784 to 1786: but these are matters which belong to political history. The fame of sir William Hamilton will ultimately rest on his talents, learning, and patriotic spirit.

, descended from a family long situated at Somersham-place, in Huntingdonshire, was born in 16u3, and educated at St. John’s college, Cambridge. He was a commissioner of the navy, a good speaker in parliament, had the name of “silver-tongued Hammond” given him by lord Bolingbroke, and was a man of note among the wits, poets, and parliamentary writers, in the beginning of the last century. A volume of “Miscellany Poems,” was inscribed to him, in 1694, by his friend Mr. Hopkins; and in 1720 he was the editor of “A new Miscellany of Original Poems,” in which he had himself no small share. His own pieces, he observes in his preface, “were written at very different times, and were owned by him, lest in a future day they should be ascribed to other persons to their prejudice, as the ‘ Ode on Solitude’ has been, in wrong, to the earl of Roscommon, and as some of the rest have been to others.” He was the intimate friend of Mr. Moyle, and wrote the “Account of his Life and Writings,” prefixed to his works in 1727. Their acquaintance began, through sir Robert Marsham, in the latter end of 1690, soon after Hammond’s return from a short tour into Holland and some parts of Flanders. The places of resort for wits at that period were May n waring' s coifee-house in Fleet-street, and the Grecian near the Temple; where Moyle, having taken a disgust against the clergy, had several friendly disputes with Hammond, and at the same place had a share with Trenchard in writing the argument against a standing army. In Moyle’s works are three valuable letters to Hammond; a copy of verses, by Hammond, to Moyle; another, by Hopkins, to the same; and a third, by Hopkins, to Hammond. Mr. Hammond is said to have married Susanna, a sister of Mr. Walpole, afterwards the celebrated minister of state; but that Mr. Hammond was a different person. Our author married a Miss Clarges, and died in 1738, as Winston informs us, in the Fleet-prison, where he was confined for debt, and so preserved what he had not spent of his estate for his eldest son. His second son is the subject of the following article.

, a benevolent and amiable character, was born at Portsmouth in 1712. He was at a very early age bound apprentice to a merchant at Lisbon, and afterwards connected himself with a mercantile house at Petersburgh, in consequence of which he was induced to travel into Persia. On leaving Russia with an independent fortune, he returned to his own country, and passed the remainder of his life as a private gentleman, honourably to himself and useful to the world. In 1753, he published an account of his travels through Russia into Persia, and back again through Russia, Germany, and Holland. To this work also was added an account of the revolutions of Persia during the present century. His other publications are very numerous; most of them were well received, and all of them calculated to prove him an excellent citizen and liberal-minded man. The institution of the Marine Society, justly attributed to his activity and benevolence, was the favourite object of Mr. Han way’s care; and in 1758, he was also particularly instrumental in the establishment of the Magdalen charity. His public spirit, and, above all, his disinterestedness, were so conspicuous, that a deputation of the principal merchants in London waited upon the earl of Bute, when prime minister, and represented to him that an individual like Mr. Hanway, who had done so much public good to the injury of his private fortune, was deserving of some signal mark of the public esteem. He was accordingly made a commissioner of the navy, a situation which he held more than twenty years, and, when he resigned, he was allowed to retain the salary for life, on account of his known exertions in the cause of universal chanty. To enumerate the various instances in which the benevolent character of his heart was successfully exerted, would be no easy task. Sunday-schools in a great measure may look upon' Mr. Hanway as their father; the chimney-sweepers’ boys are much indebted to his humanity; and perhaps there never was any public calamity in any part of the British empire which he did not endeavour to alleviate. So greatly and so universally was he respected, that when he died, in 1786, a subscription of many hundred pounds was raised to erect a monument to his memory. The great character of his numerous works is a strong masculine spirit of good sense, and a very chaste simplicity. In his private life he was remarkable for the strictest integrity of conduct, and for a frankness and candour which naturally inspired confidence. The number of his publications amounted to almost seventy, a catalogue of which is annexed to his Life by Mr. Pugh, a work highly edifying and entertaining.

, a learned dissenter, was born at Norwich in 1715. He received the elements of classical learning in the country, and discovering an inclination for the profession of a dissenting minister, was sent to London to study un'ler the tuition of Mr. Eames. When he had finished his studies, he settled with a small congregation at Wattsfield, in Suffolk, where he improved his acquaintance with the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages, in each of which he acquired much critical skill. The favourite object of his pursuit was oriental history, which he applied to the illustration of the sacred writings. Observing a striking conformity between the present customs of the eastern nations and those of the ancients, as mentioned or alluded to in various passages of scripture, he conceived a design at a very early period, of making extracts of such passages in books of travels and voyages, as appeared to him to furnish a key to many parts of holy writ. In 1764 he published a volume of “Observations on divers Passages of Scripture,” &c. The favourable reception which this work met with, encouraged Mr. Harmer to proceed in it, and in 1776 he gave the public an enlarged edition of it, in 2 vols. 8vo. By the preface to this impression we learn that Dr. Lowth bishop of London furnished him with some ms papers of sir John Chardin. In 17S7 Mr. Haroier published two other volumes. A new edition of the whole of this most useful work has lately been published by the rev. Adam Clarke. He was author also of the ' Outlines of a new Commentary on Solomon’s Song, drawn by the help of instructions from the East;“an” Account of the Jewish Doctrine of the Resurrection of the Dead," and some other tracts of less consequence. Mr. Harrner died without a struggle, in November 1788, having passed the preceding day in perfect health.

, a young gentleman high in esteem, and (as Swift expresses it) “a little pretty fellow, With a great deal of wit, good sense, and good nature,” was educated at Winchester, and was afterwards of New college, Oxford, of which he became a fellow. He appears to have been employed in private tuition, which was not a very profitable employment. He had no other income than 40l. a year as tutor to one of the duke of Queensbury’s sons. In this employment he fortunately attracted the favour of Dr. Swift, whose generous solicitations with Mr. St. John obtained for him the reputable employment of secretary to lord Raby, ambassador at the Hague, and afterwards earl of Stafford. A letter of his, whilst at Utrecht, dated December 16, 1712, printed inthedean’s works, informs us that his office was attended with much vexation and little advantage. Even in Jan. 13, 1713, when he brought over the barrier treaty, and, as Swift says, was the queen’s minister, entrusted in affairs of the greatest importance, he had not a shilling in his pocket to pay his hackney coach. He died soon after this, Feb. 14,1712-13. See the “Journal to Stella” of that and the following day, where Dr. Swift laments his loss with the most unaffected sincerity. Mr. Tickell has mentioned him with respect, in his “Prospect of Peace;” and Dr. Young, in the beautiful close of an “Epistle to lord Lansdown,” most pathetically bewails his loss. Dr. Birch, who has given a curious note on Mr. Harrison’s “Letter to Swift,” has confounded him with Thomas Harrison, M. A. of Queen’s college. In the “Select Collection,” by Nichols, are some pleasing specimens of his poetry; which, with “Woodstock-Park” in Dodsley’s “Collection,” and an “Ode to the duke of Marlborough, 1707,” in Duncombe’s “Horace,” are all the poetical writings that are known of this excellent young man, who figured both as an humourist and a politician in the fifth volume of the “Tatler,” of which (under the patronage of Bolingbroke, Henley, and Swift) he was professedly the editor. There was another William Harrison, author of “The Pilgrim, or the happy Convert, a pastoral tragedy,” 1709.

, an English poet and divine, was the son of a father of both his names, who was fellow of Pembroke college, Oxford, prebendary of Wales, canon, of Bristol, and vicar of St. Mary Magdalen, Taunton, Somersetshire. Refusing to take the oaths after that revolution which placed a new family on the throne, he relinquished *all his preferments, in 1691, and retired to Kentbury in Buckinghamshire, where he died Feb. 10, 1736, aged eighty-five. His son informs us, that when judge Jeffries came to Taunton -assizes in 1685, to execute his commission upon the unfortunate persons concerned in Monmouth’s rebellion, Mr. Harte, then minister of St. Mary Magdalen’s, waited on him in private, and remonstrated much against iiis severities. The judge listened to him calmly, and with some attention, and though he had never seen him before, advanced him in a few months to a prebendal stall in the cathedral church of Bristol. Old Mr. Harte was so much respected for his piety and learning, that the prelates Kidder, Hooper, and Wynne, who successively filled the see of Bath and Wells, contrived that he should receive the profits of his prebend of Wells as long as he lived; and Mr. Simon Harcourt, afterwards lord chancellor, offered him a bishopric in queen Anne’s time, which he declined with grateful acknowledgments. According to his son’s account, he was a most laborious student, employing ten or twelve hours a day, without any interruption, but that of casual sickness, for fifty years successively. His principal business was in referring every difficult part of Scripture to those particular passages in the fathers and eminent modern divines who had explained them expressly or occasionally.

, a learned divine, was born in 1680, at Minister, of catholic parents. After having been several years a Je.uit, he turned protestant at Cassel in 1715, was soon after made professor of philosophy and poetry, and, in 1722, appointed professor of history nnd rhetoric at Marpurg, where he died in 1744. His most esteemed works are, “Hist. Hassiaca,” 3 vols. “Vita? Pontificum Romanorum Victoris III. Urbani II. Pascalis II. Gelasii II. Callisti II. Honorii II.;” “State of the Sciences in Hesse,” in German; “Praecepta eloquentiae rationalis,” &c. He has also left above eighty “Academical Discourses.” He must be distinguished from George Hartman, a German mathematician, who, in 1540, invented the bombarding-staff, “Baculus Bombardicus,” and was author of a treatise on perspective, reprinted at Paris, 1556, 4to and from Wolfgang Hartman, who published the Annals of Augsburg, in folio, 1596.

, a dissenting clergyman, was born in 1729, and having passed with reputation through his grammatical learning, he was entered as student for the profession of a dissenting minister, in the academy supported by Mr. Coward’s funds. Upon quitting this place, he engaged as an assistant to a boarding-school at Peck ham, and preached occasionally for some neighbouring ministers in and out of London. During this period of his life he studied very diligently the Greek and Roman classics, to which he was devoted through life. In 1754 he undertook the care of a grammar-school at Congleton, in Cheshire, and preached for some years on alternate Sundays, to two small societies in the vicinity of that town. In 1765 he removed to Bristol, and in about five years he was obliged, as he pretended, to quit his situation on account of his principles as an Arian and Arminian, being for some time scarcely able to walk along the streets of Bristol without insult; but the truth was, that a charge of immorality was brought against him, which he never satisfactorily answered, and which sufficiently accounted for his unpopularity. He had previously to this, in 1768, obtained the degree of D. D. from the university of Edinburgh, and with this he came to London, and obtained employment as a literary character, and also as an instructor in the Greek and Latin classics. He died miserably poor, in 1794, after having been confined many years in consequence of a paralytic attack. He was author of many works, the most important of which is “A View of the various Editions of the Greek and Roman Classics,” which has been several times reprinted, and has, as well as his “Introduction to the New Testament,” been translated into several foreign languages. His other works were pamphlets on the Arian and Socinian controversy, if we except an edition of the Greek Testament, 2 vols. 8vo, and a “Translation of the New Testament,” into modern English, which exhibits an extraordinary proof of want of taste and judgment.

, an eminent doctor and minister of Bremen, son of Cornelius de Hase, minister and professor of divinity at Bremen, and Sarah Wolter, a lady distinguished by her learning, and her knowledge of Hebrew, was born November 30, 1682, and was appointed professor of belles-lettres at Hanau, but recalled to Bremen the following year, to be minister and professor of Hebrew, and admitted D. D. at Francfort upon Oder in 1712, though absent; and member of the royal society at Berlin in 1718. In 1723 he was made professor of divinity at, Bremen, and died there April 25, 1731. He left a volume of “Dissertations,” which are much esteemed; and assisted M. Lampe in a journal begun under the title of “Bibliotheca Historico-Philologico-Theoiogica,” and continued under that of “Musieum Historico-PhilologicoTheologicum.” His brother James was also a man of considerable erudition. He published many classical tracts, which were well received by the learned. He died in 1723.

In the summer of 1785 he left London, and resided for the remainder of his life principally at Southwell, of which., church he became, in 1788, vicar-general. He died May 28, 1795. He left a son, Ralph Heathcote, esq. his majesty’s minister plenipotentiary to the elector of Cologne, and to the landgrave of Hesse-Cassel, who died in Germany in 1801.

, a German protestant divine, was born at Halle in Saxony in 1696, and hecame minister of Essan in East Friezeland, where he died in 1748. He wrote several treatises in the German language, and some in Latin, the most esteemed of which are his “Com mentatio de secta Scribarum,” and “Antiquitas Haraeorum inter Judaeos in Poloniue et Turcici Imp. regionibus. florentis sectrc,” &c.

, at first an advocate, afterwards an ecclesiastic, and abbé of Auhignac and Meimac, was born at Paris in 1604. Cardinal Richelieu, whose nephew he educated, bestowed on him his two abbeys, and the protection of that minister gave him consequence both as a man of the world and as an author. He figured by turns as a grammarian, a classical scholar, a poet, an antiquary, a preacher, and a writer of romances; but he was most known by his book entitled “Pratique du Theatre,” and by the quarrels in which his haughty and presumptuous temper engaged him, with some of the most eminent authors of his time. The great Corneille was one of these, whose disgust first arose from the entire omission of his name in the celebrated book above mentioned. He was also embroiled, on different accounts, with madame Scuderi, Menage, and Richelet. The warmth of his temper exceeded rhat of his imagination, which was considerable; and yet he lived at court a good deal in the style of a philosopher, rising early to his studies, soliciting no favours, and associating chiefly with a few friends, as unambitious as himself, he describes himself as of a slender constitution, not capable of taking much exercise, or even of applying very intensely to study, without suffering from it in his health; yet not attached to any kind of play. “It is,” ays he, “too fatiguing for the feebleness of my body, or too indolent for the activity of my mind.” The abbé d'Aubignac lived to the age of seventy-two, and died at xnours in 1676. His works are, 1. “Pratique du Theatre,” Amsterdam, 1717, two vols. 8vo; also in a 4to edition published at Paris; a book of considerable learning, but little calculated to inspire or form a genius. 2. “Zenobie,” a tragedy, in prose, composed according to the rules laid down in his “Pratique,” and a complete proof of the total inefficacy of rules to produce an interesting drama, being the most dull and fatiguing performance that was ever represented. The prince of Condé said, on the subject of this tragedy, “We give great credit to the abbé d'Aubignac for having so exactly followed the rules of Aristotle, but owe no thanks to the rules of Aristotle for having made the abbé produce so vile a tragedy.” He wrote a few other other tragedies also, which are worse, if possible, than Zenobia. 3. “Macaride; or the Queen of the Fortunate Islands,” a novel, Paris, 1666, 2 vok 8vo. 4. “Conseils d'Ariste à Celimene, 12mo. 5.” Histoire da terns, ou Relation du Royaume de Coqueterie,“12mo, 6.” Terence justifié,“inserted in some editions of his” Pratique.“7.” Apologie de Spectacles," a work of no value. A curious book on satyrs, brutes, and monsters, has been attributed to him; but, though the author’s name was Hedelin, he does not appear to have been the same.

"A wealthy canonry was promised me then, so that I might, if I pleased, turn myself to divinity but saint Bernard affrighted me from it, saying, that I should eat the sins of the people. 7 I begged therefore of the Lord Jesus, that he would vouchsafe to call me to that profession in which 1 might please him most. The Jesuits began at that time to teach philosophy at Louvain, and one of the professors expounded the disquisitions and secrets of magic. Both these lectures I greedily received; but instead of grain, I reaped only stubble, and fantastic conceits void of sense. In the mean time, lest an hour should pass without some benefit, I run through some writings of the stoics, those of Seneca, and especially of Epictetus, who pleased me exceedingly. I seemed, in moral philosophy, to have found the quintessence of truth, and did verily believe, that through stoicism I advanced in Christian perfection; but 1 discovered afterwards in a dream, that stoicism was an empty and swollen bubble, and that by this study, under the appearance of moderation, I became, indeed, most self-sufficient and haughty. Lastly, 1 turned over Mathiolus and Dioscorides; thinking with myself nothjng equally necessary for mortal man to know and admire, as the wisdom and goodness of God in vegetables; to the end that he might not only crop the fruit for food, but also minister of the same to his other necessities. My curiosity being now raised upon this branch of study, I inquired, whether there were any book, which delivered the maxims and rule of medicine for I then supposed, that medicine was not altogether a mere gift, but might ]be taught, and delivered by discipline, like other arts and sciences: at least I thought, if medicine was a good gift coming down from the Father of lights, that it might have, as an human science, its theorems and authors, into whom, as into Bazaleel and Aholiab, the spirit of the Lord had infused the knowledge of all diseases and their causes, and also the knowledge of the properties of things. I inquired, I say, whether no writer had described the qualities, properties, applications, and proportions of vegetables, from the hyssop even to the cedar of Libanus? A certain professor of medicine answered me, that none of these things were to be looked for either in Galen or Avicen. I was very ready to believe this, from the many fruitless searches I hau made in books for truth and knowledge before; however, following my natural bent, which lay to the study of nature, I read the institutions of Fuchsius and Fernelius; in whom I knew I had surveyed the whole science of medicine, as it were in an epitome. Is this, said I, smiling to myself, the knowledge of healing Is the whole history of natural properties thus shut up in elementary qualities Therefore I read the works of Galen twice of Hippocrates once, whose aphorisms I almost got by heart; all Avicen, as well as the Greeks, Arabians, and moderns, to the tune of 600 authors. I read them seriously and attentively through; and took down, as I went along, whatever seemed curious and worthy of attention; when at length, reading over my common-place book, I was grieved at the pains I had bestowed, and the years I had spent, in throwing together such a mass of stufc Therefore I straightway left off all books whatever, all formal discourses, and empty promises of the schools; firmly believing every good and perfect gift to come down from the Father of lights, more particularly that of medicine.

, professor of the Greek and eastern languages, and of divinity, in the university of Giessen, was born Dec. 26, 1581, at Sprendlingen, a little town near Francfort, where his father was minister. He went throb gh his studies in Marpurg, where he took his degree of M. A. in 1599, having taken his bachelor’s in 1595. He was an early genius composed a prodigiousnumber of Greek verses at fifteen years old and was capable of teaching Greek, Hebrew, and even philosophy, before he was twenty. The Hebrew he spoke as fluently as if it had been his native language. He thoroughly read the Greek authors; and even studied physic for some time, though he had devoted himself to the ministry. In 1605, he was chosen to teach Greek and Hebrew, in the college which the landgrave had recently established at Giessen;, and which the year after was converted into an university by the emperor, who endowed it with privileges. Having discharged for five years the several duties of his employment with great reputation, he was appointed divinity professor in 1610. In 1611, a church was offered him in Moravia, and a professorship at Hamburgh with a considerable stipend: but he refused both. In 1613, he took the degree of D. D. at the command of the landgrave; who sent him to Francfort, that he might view the library of the Jews, who had been lately driven away by popular tumults. Helvicus, fond of reading the rabbins, bought several of their books on that occasion. He died in the flower of his age, Sept. 10, 1616; and his loss was bewailed by the German poets of the Augsburg confession. A collection was made of his poems, which were printed with his funeral sermon and some other pieces, under the title of “Cippus Memorialis,” by the care of Winckleman, who had been his colleague.

, a French poet, was the son of a baker at Paris, and at first a receiver of the taxes at Fores. Then he travelled into Holland and England, and was employed by the superintendant Fouquet, who was his patron. After his return to France, he soon became distinguished as one of the finest geniuses of his age; and gained a prodigious reputation by his poetry. His sonnet on the miscarriage of mad. de Guerchi is looked upon as a master-piece, though it has little intrinsic merit. He also wrote a satirical poem against the minister Colbert, which is reckoned by Boileau among his best pieces. This was written by way of revenging the disgrace and ruin of his patron Fouquet, which Henault ascribed to Colbert. The minister being told of this sonnet, which made a great noise, asked, “Whether there were any satirical strokes in it against the king” and being informed there were not, “Then,” said he, “I shall not mind it, nor shew the least resentment against the author.” Henault was a man who loved to refine on pleasures, and gloried in infidelity. He went to Holland on purpose to visit Spinoza, who did not much esteem him. When, however, sickness and death came to stare him in the face, he became a superstitious convert, and was for receiving the Viaticum or Sacrament, with a halter about his neck, in the middle of his bed-chamber. He died in 1682.

, author of a History of England on a new plan, which has been generally and highly approved, was the son of James Henry, a farmer, at Muirtown in the parish of St. Ninian’s, Scotland, and of Jean Galloway his wife, of Stirlingshire. He was born on Feb. 18, 1718; and, having early resolved to devote himself to a literary profession, was educated first under a Mr. John Nicholson, at the parish school of St. Ninian’s, and for some time at the grammar-school at Stirling. He completed his academical studies at the university of Edinburgh, and afterwards became master of the grammar-school of Annan. He was licensed to preach on the 27th of March, 1746, and was the first licentiate of the presbytery of Annan, after its erection into a separate presbytery. Soon after he received a call from a congregation oi presbyterian dissenters at Carlisle, where he was ordained in November 1748. In this station he remained twelve years, and, on the 13th of August, 1760, became pastor of a congregation in Berwick upon Tweed. Here, in 1763, he married the daughter of Mr. Balderston, a surgeon, and though he had no children, enjoyed to the end of his life a large share of domestic happiness. In 1768, he was removed from Berwick, to be one of the ministers of Edinburgh, and was minister of the church of the New Grey Friars, from that time till November 1776. He then became colleague-minister in the old church, and in that station remained till his death, which happened in November, 1790. The degree of doctor in divinity was conferred on him by the university of Edinburgh, in 1770; and in 1774, he was unanimously chosen moderator of the general assembly of the church of Scotland, and is the only person on record who obtained that distinction the first time he was a member of the assembly.

, French, Didier Herault, a counsellor of the parliament of Paris, has given good proofs of uncommon learning by very different works. His “Adversaria” appeared in 1599; which little book, if the “Scaligerana” may be credited, he repented having published. His notes on Tertullian’s “Apology,” on “Minutius Fe&­lix,” and on “Arnobius,” have been esteemed. He also wrote notes on Martial’s “Epigrams.” He disguised himself under the name of David Leidhresserus, to write a political dissertation on the independence of kings, some time after the death of Henry IV. He had a controversy with Salmasius “de jure Attico ac Romano;” but did not live to finish what he had written on that subject. What he he had done, however, was printed in 1650. He died in June 1649. Guy Patin says, that “he was looked upon as a very learned man, both in the civil law and in polite literature, and wrote with great facility on any subject he pitched on.” Daille, speaking of such protestant writers as condemned the execution of Charles I. king of England, quotes the “Pacifique Royal en deuil,” by Heranlt. This author, son to our Desiderius Heraldus, was a minister in Normandy, when he was called to the service of the Walloon-church of London under Charles I. but was so zealous a royalist, that he was forced to fly to France, to escape the fury of the commonwealth’s-men. He returned to England after the restoration, and resumed his ancient employment in the Walloon-church at London: some time after which he obtained a canonry in the cathedral of Canterbury, and enjoyed it till his death.

Here he was particularly esteemed by the cardinals Barberini and Grimaldf, and contracted a firm friendship with Lucas Holstenius and Leo Allatius. Upon his return from this journey, in which he did not spend above a year and a half, Fouquet invited him to his house, and settled on him a pension of 1500 livres. The disgrace of this minister, which happened soon after, did not hinder Herbelot from being preferred to the place of interpreter for the eastern languages; because, in reality, there was nobody else so fit for it: for Voltaire says, “he was the first among the French who understood them.” Some years after he took a second journey into Italy, where he acquired so great a reputation, that persons of the highest distinction for their rank and learning solicited his acquaintance. The grand duke of Tuscany, Ferdinand II. whom he had the honour to see first at Leghorn, gave him extraordinary marks of his esteem had frequent conversations with him; and made him promise to visit him at Florence. Herbelot arrived there July 2, 1666, and was received by a secretary of state, who conducted him to a house prepared for him, where he was entertained with great magnificence, and had a chariot kept for his use, at the expence of the grand duke. These were very uncommon honours, but one remained much more grateful to a man of literature; a library being at that time exposed to sale at Florence, the duke desired Herbelot to see it, to examine the Mss. in the Oriental languages, and to select and value the best: and when this was done, the generous prince made him a present of them.

The distinction with which he was received by the duke of Tuscany, taught France to know his merit, which had hitherto been but little regarded; and he was afterwards recalled and encouraged by Colbert, who encouraged every thing that might do honour to his country. The grand tluke was very unwilling to let him go, and even refused to consent, till he had seen the express order of the minister for his return. When he came to France, the king often did him the honour to converse with him, and gave him a pension of 1500 livres. During his stay in Italy, he began his “Bibliotheque Orientale, or Universal Dictionary, containing whatever related to the knowledge of the eastern world;” and finished it in France. This work, equally curious and profound, comprises the substance of a great number of Arabic, Persian, and Turkish books which he had read; and informs us of an infinite number of particulars unknown before in Europe. He wrote it at first in Arabic, and Colbert had a design to print it at the Louvre, with a set of types cast on purpose. But after the death of that minister, this resolution was waved; and Herbelot translated his work into French, in order to render it more universally useful. He committed it to the press, but had not the satisfaction to see the impression finished; for he died Dec. 8, 1695, and it was not published till 1697, folio. What could not be inserted in this work was digested by him under the title of “Anthologie:” but this was never published, nor his Turkish, Persian, Arabian, and Latin dictionary, which, as well as other works, he had completed.

, a German philosopher of the new school, was born in 1741, in a small town of Prussia, and was originally intended for the profession of a surgeon, but afterwards studied divinity, and was invited to Buckeburg, to officiate as minister, and to be a member of the consistory of the ecclesiastical council, In 1774 he was promoted by the duke of Saxe Weimar, to be first preacher to the court, and ecclesiastical counsellor, to which was afterwards added the dignity of vice-president cjf the consistory of Weimar, which he held until his death, Pec. 18, 1803. Some of his ficst works gained him great^ praise, both as a critic antj philosopher; such as his, 1. “Three fragments on the new German Literature,” Riga, 1776. 2. “On the Writings of Thomas Abbt,” Berlin, 1768; and “On the origin of Language,” ibid. 1772. But he afterwards fell into mysticism, and that obscure mode of reasoning which has too frequently been dignified, with the name of philosophy. The first specimen he gave of this was in his “Oldest Notices of the Origin of Mankind,” Riga, 1774; after which his system, if it may be so called, was more fully developed in his “Outlines of a philosophy of the history of Man,” of which an English translation was published in 1800, 4to, but without attracting much public notice. It was not indeed to be supposed that such extravagant opinions, conveyed in an obscure jargon, made up of new and fanciful terms, and frequently at variance with revealed religion, could be very acceptable to an English public.

In 1719 he was ordained priest, and was successively minister of the several pa ishes of Great Shelford, Stow cumqui, and Trinity, in Cambridge. In these stations he deservedly acquired the character of a celebrated preacher. His person was majestic; he had a gracefulness in his behaviour, and gravity in his countenance, that always procured him reverence. His pronunciation was so remarkably sweet, and his address so insinuating, that his audience, immediately on his beginning to speak, were prepossessed in his favour. Nor were these conspicuous talents suffered to remain long without being rewarded; for, in the year 1722, bishop Fleetwood made him his domestic chaplain, and, the same year, presented him to the rectory of Rettenden in Essex, and soon after to that of Barclay in Hertfordshire; which occasioned his fellowship to become vacant the year following.

, an English divine of exemplary piety and virtue, was born at Hardingstonc, a village about a mile from Northampton, on Feb. 26, 1713-14. His father was minister of the parish of Collingtree, within two miles of Hardingstone. He received his early education at the free grammar-school of Northampton, where he attended for nearly ten years, learning the Latin and Greek languages; and would have made a much greater progress if he had not been impeded by the caprice of his master, who, it is said, would not suffer any of his boys to learn faster than his own son. At the age of seventeen he was entered of Lincoln-college, Oxford, and resided in the university about seven years, but without proceeding farther than his bachelor’s degree. His time, however, was not mispent. Besides a very considerable stock of learning which he accumulated here, he imbibed those habits of regularity and principles of piety which gave a colour to his future life and writings, and made him one of the most useful and popular preachers of his time.

The principal works of Dr. Hickes are the three following: 1. “Institutiones Grammaticse Anglo-Saxonicae & Maeso-Gothicae. Grammatica Islandica Runolphi Jonas. Catalogus librorum Septentrionalium. Accedit Edwardi Bernardi Etymologicum Britannicum,” Oxon. 1689, 4to. inscribed to archbishop Sancroft. While the dean was writing the preface to this book, there were great disputes in the house of commons, and throughout the kingdom, about the original contract; which occasioned him to insert the ancient coronation oath of our Saxon kings, to shew, what was not very necessary, that there is not the least footstep of any such contract. 2. “Antiquae literature Septentrionalis libri duo: quorum primus G. Hickesu S. T. P. Linguarum Veterum Septentrionalium thesaurum grammatico-criticum & Archaeologicum, ejusdem de antique literatures Septentrionalis militate dissertationem epistolarum, & Andreas Fountaine equitis aurati numismata Saxonica& Dano-Saxonica, complectitur alter contn Humfredi Wanleii librorum Veterum Septentnonaliiim, qui in Ano-liae Bibiiothecis extant, c.ialogum histonco-cr im, necmTn multorum veteruni codicum Septentrionalium alibi extantiuro notitiam, cum totius operis sex mdicibus, Oxon. 1705, 2 or sometimes 3 vols. folio. Foreigners as well as Englishmen, who had any relish for antiquities, have justly admired this splendid and laborious work, which is now scarce and dear. It was originally published at 3l. 3s. the small, and 5l. 5s the large paper. The latter now rarely appears, and the former is worth 15l. The great duke of Tuscany' s envoy sent a copy of it to his master, which his highness looking into, and finding full of strange characters, called a council of the Dotti, and commanded them to peruse and give him an account of. They did so, and reported it to be an excellent work, and that they believed the author to be a man of a particular head; for this was the envoy’s compliment to Hirkes, when he went to him with a present from his master. 3. Two volumes of Sermons, most of which were never before printed, with a preface by Mr. Spinckes, 1713, 8vo. After his death was published another volume of his Sermons, with some pieces relating to schism, separation, &c. 4.” A Letter sent from beyond the seas to one of the chief ministers of the ndnconforming party, &c. 1674“which was afterwards reprinted in 1684, under the title of” The judgment of an anonymous writer concerning these following particulars first, a law for disabling a papist to inherit the crown secondly, the execution of penal laws against protestant dissenters; thirdly, a bill of comprehension all briefly discussed in a letter sent from beyond the seas to a dissenter ten years ago.“This letter was in reality an answer to his elder brother, Mr. John Hickes, a dissenting minister, bred up in Cromwell’s time at the college of Dublin; whom the doctor always endeavoured to convince of his errors, but without success. John persisted in them to his death, and at last suffered for his adherence to the duke of Monrnouth; though, upon the doctor’s unwearied application, the king would have granted him his.life,^ but that he had been falsely informed that this Mr. Hickes was the person who advised the duke of Monmouth to take upon him the title of king. 5.” Ravillac Redivivus, being a narrative of the late trial of Mr. James Mitchel, a conventicle preacher, who was executed Jan. 18, 1677, for an attempt on the person of the archbishop of St. Andrew’s, &c.“6.” The Spirit of Popery speaking out of the mouths of fanatical Protestants; or, the last speeches of Mr. John Kid and Mr. John King, two presbyterian ministers, who were executed for high treason at Edinburgh, 'ten Aug. 14, 1679.“These pieces were published in 1630, and they were occasioned by his attendance on the duke of Lauderdale in quality of chaplain. The spirit of faction made them much read, and did the author considerable service with several great personages, and even with the king. 7.” Jovian; or, an answer to Julian the apostate;“printed twice in 1683, 8vo. This is an ingenious and learned tract in defence of passive obedience and nonresistance, against the celebrated Samuel Johnson, the author of” Julian.“8.” The case of Infant Baptism, 1683;“printed in the second vol. of the” London Cases, 168.5,“4to. 9.” Speculum beatae Virginis, a discourse on Luke i. 28. of the due praise and honour of the Virgin Mary, by a true Catholic of the Church of England, 1686.“10.” An apologetical Vindication of the Church of England, in answer to her adversaries, who reproach her with the English heresies and schisms, 1686,“4to; reprinted, with many additions, a large preface, and an appendix of” Papers relating to the Schisms of the Church of Rome,“1706, 8vo. 11.” The celebrated story of the Thebati Legion no fable: in answer to the objections of Dr. Gilbert Burners Preface to his Translation of Lactantius de mortibus persecutorum, with some remarks on his Discourse of Persecution;“written in 1687, but not published till 1714, for reasons given in the preface. 12.” Reflections upon a Letter out of the country to a member of this present parliament, occasioned by a Letter to a member of the house of commons, concerning the Bishops lately in the Tower, and now under suspension, 1689.“The author of the letter to which these reflections are an answer, was generally presumed to be Dr. Bumet, though that notion was afterwards contradicted, 13.” A Letter to the author of a late paper entitled A Vindication of the Divines of the Church of England, &c. in defence of the history of passive obedience, 16S9.“The author of the” Vindication,“was Dr. Fowler, bishop of Gloucester, though his name was not to it. 14.” A Word to the Wavering, in answer to Dr. Gilbert Burnet’s Inquiry into the present state of aflairs, 1689.“15.” An Apology for the new Separation, in a letter to Dr. Sharp, archbishop of York, &c. 1691.“16.” A Vindication of some among ourselves against the false principles of Dr. Sherlock, &c. 1692.“17.” Some Discourses on Dr. Burnet and Dr.Tillotson, occasioned by the lute funeral sermon of the former upon the latter, 1695.“It is remarkable, that in this piece Hickes has not scrupled to call Tiilotson an atheist. 18.” The Pretences of the Prince of Wales examined and rejected, &c. 1701.“19. A letter in the” Philosophical Transactions,* entitled, “Epistola viri Rev. D G. Hickesii S. T. P ad D. Hans Sloane, M. D. & S. R. Seer, de varia lectione inscriptions, quse in statua Tagis exaratur per quatuor alphabeta Hetrusca” 20. “Several Letters which passed between Dr. G. Hickes and a Popish priest, &c. 1705.” The person on whose account this book was published, was the lady Theophila Nelson, wife of Robert Nelson, esq. 21. “A second collection of controversial Letters relating to the church of England and the church of Rome, as they passed between Dr. G. Hickes and an honourable lady, 1710.” This lady was the lady Gratiana Carew, of Hadcomb in Devonshire. 22. “Two Treatises; one of the Christian Priesthood, the other of the dignity of the episcopal order, against a book entitled, The Rights of the Christian Church.” Trie third edition in 1711, enlarged into two volumes, 8vo. 23. “A seasonable ana 1 modest apology in behalf of the Rev. Dr. Hickes and other nonjurors, in a letter to Thomas Wise, D. D. 1710.” 24. “AVindication of Dr. Hickes, and the author of the seasonable and modest apology, from the reflections of Dr. Wise, &c. 1712.” 25. “Two Letters to Robert Nelson, esq. relating to bishop Bull,” published in Bull’s life. 26. “Some Queries proposed to civil, canon, and common lawyers, 1712;” printed, after several editions, in 1714, with another title, “Seasonable Queries relating to the birth and birthright of a certain person.” Besides the works enumerated here, there are many prefaces and recommendations written by him, at the earnest request of others, either authors or editors.

, an English divine and writer, was, the son of Roger Hieron, a learned clergyman, vicar of Epping, in Essex, who died in 1592. His son, who was born in 1572, received his early education from his father, who afterwards sent him to Eton school, whence he was elected by the free choice of provost Goade, into a scholarship of King’s college, Cambridge. On the death of his father, who probably left no great provision behind him, he was much assisted in the prosecution of his studies in the university by sir Francis Barrington, of Barringtonhall, in Essex, knt. While at Cambridge he studied divinity under Lawrence Chaderton, master of Emanuel college, and made such progress that at his first preaching at King’s, he was heard with the utmost approbation, seeming, as his biographer says, “rather a bachelor in divinity than a bachelor in arts, and rather a divine of forty, than only twenty-four years of age.” On his appearance as a preacher in London, he immediately became so popular that many congregations, together with the inns of court, desired to have him settled as their minister. But being offered the living of Moclbury, in Devonshire, in the gift of Eton college, he preferred that, and preached with great success, both there and at other places, particularly Plympton, where, by the means of sir Ferdinand Gorges, and other gentlemen of the neighbourhood, a lecture was established, of which he became one of the preachers. His public and private character procured him the reverence both of the poor and rich, and it appears by the dedications of his works that he had many friends of high rank. He inclined to puritan principles, but with a strict adherence to the church of England; and was particularly zealous against popery. He was long afflicted with a chronical distemper, but continued his public services and private studies notwithstanding the apparent incapacity of his weak body. This disorder, however, put an end to his useful life in the forty-fifth year of his age, in 1617. He was interred in Modbury church. His works, consisting principally of sermons and commentaries, printed often separately, in 4to and 8vo, were collected by him and published in 1614 in fol. and reprinted at London in 1620, with an additional volume edited by Robert Hill, D. D. rector of St. Bartholomew, Exchange. To this Dr. Hill prefixed a life, from which the above particulars are taken.

At first, with the sanction and support of the society, Dn Hildesley printed only the New Testament; the “Book of Common Prayer” translated, untler his direction, by the clergy of his diocese; “The Christian Monitor;” Mr. Lewis’s “Exposition of the Catechism,” and bishop Wilson’s “Form of Prayer” for the use of the Herring-fishery. But the benefactions came in so far beyond their expectation, that about 1766 they were encouraged to set on foot a Manks version of the Old Testament, which had scarcely, been accomplished, when the good prelate’s health, which was always delicate, showed alarming symptoms of approaching dissolution, and although he had alternations of apparent recovery, and in June 1772 had gained firmness enough to visit his hospital near Durham, yet his usual vivacity was visibly much reduced, and application to business of any kind proved rather irksome. This continued till about the middle of November following, when he was ao-ain enabled to dispatch common affairs without apparent fatio-ue. and performed the duties of his ministerial office with ereat alacrity. On Saturday, Nov. 28, he received the last part of the translation of the Bible, so long the sbject of his ardent prayers upon which occasion, accord in'g to his own repeated promise, he very emphatically sang Nunc, Dentine, Dimtitis, in the presence of his congratulating family. Next Sunday he officiated in his own chapel, and preached “on the uncertainty of human life,” which subject he repeated in private exhortation to his family in the evening. On the Monday following, Nov. 30, after dining and cheerfully conversing in his palace, with his family and one of the neighbouring clergy around him, he was seized with a stroke of apoplexy on the left side, which in a moment deprived him of his intellectual powers, and in that situation he remained, until Dec. 7, when he calmly expired, deeply regretted by the clergy and inhabitants of his diocese, to whom his amiable manners and active benevolence had endeared him. In the work to which we are indebted for the particulars of this sketch, may be found many proofs of his piety, liberality, and anxiety for the best concerns of his flock. A narrative, indeed, like that of Mr. Butler’s, strengthened by so much authentic and minute information, and interesting correspondence, cannot be too frequently consulted by the junior clergy. Bishop Hildesley is known as an author, only by a small tract which he published without his name, entitled “Plain Instructions for young persons in the principles of the Christian religion in six conferences, between a minister and his disciple designed for the use of the isle and diocese of Mann. By a resident clergyman,” in two parts, 1762 and 1767.

, an English divine and lexicographer, was born Oct. 1625, at Bromley, near Leeds, where his father, Joshua Hill, was a puritan preacher. He was carefully educated in classical learning, and sent to Cambridge in 1644, where he was admitted of St. John’s college. Jn 1649, he was chosen fellow of Magdalen college, and became a favourite tutor. In 1658 he served the office of senior proctor, and in 1660 kept the act for the degree of bachelor of divinity, and having declared his sentiments in favour of nonconformity, his fellow-collegians erased his name from their books, that he might be enabled to retire without suffering a formal ejectment. He then retired to London, and preached ibr a while at the church of Allhallows Barking, but in 1663 went abroad, and, after visiting various parts of the continent, passed three years at the university of Leyden. In 1667 he was invited to be minister of the English church at Mtddleburgh in Zealand, where he continued till 167'5, when his too late publishing his “Defence of the Zealander’s choice,” occasioned the governors of that province to order him to ktave the placre. On his arrival in England, however, and waiting on diaries II. he rewarded him for writing that book with a sinecure of 50/, and, according to Calamy, offered him a bishopric if he would conform. But this being against his principles, he accepted an invitation to the English church at Rotterdam in 1678, where he exercised the office of pastor until his death, Nov. 5, 1707. Mr. Hill was much esteemed as a preacher, and has left one or two specimens of his talents but tie is more noticeable as the editor of Scbreveiius’s Lexicon, which he augmented with 8000 words, and purged of nearly as many faults. He published his edition in 1676, since which it has often been reprinted, sometimes with improvements, and is still a standard book. Mr. Hill had accumulated a very fine library, in which he employed his leisure hours to the last.

, a learned annotator on Dionysius Periegetes, was born in 1619, at Cudworth in Warwickshire, and educated at Merton college, Oxford, of which he was made one of the post-masters. He was -elected probationer-fellow of that house in 1639, and afterwards bachelor-fellow, and thence was promoted to a-free-school at Sutton-Colfield in his own county, which school he brought into considerable credit during his abode there. He then removed to London, and practised physic, and in 164i> and 1652, had leave from the delegates of the university to accumulate the degrees in physic, but Wood could not discover that he took the benefit of this licence it is probable he did not, as in his “Dionysius” he styles himself only master of arts. After this he removed to Ireland to resume the art of teaching, and became chief master of the great school of St. Patrick’s, Dublin, but at the restoration, as he had sided with the parliamentary interest, or at least was indebted to it for his promotion, he was ejected from this office, and went to Finglass, near Dublin, where he taught and boarded children of people of quality, and was made minister of the church there. Before his death he was created D. D. by the university of Dublin. He died of a pestilential fever in Nov. 1667. His edition of Dionysius is entitled “Dionisii orbis descriptio, annotationibus Eustathii, et Hen. Stepheni, nee non Gul. Hill eommentario critico et geographico, ac tabulis illustrata,” Lond. 1658, 8vo, reprinted 1659, 1663, 1678, 1683, which last Harwood reckons a valuable edition. He is said also to have epitomized some of the works of Lazarus Riverius, a physician. As his wife was brought to bed seven months after their marriage, he wrote a treatise to prove the child lawfully begotten, and submitted the ms. to two physicians, who returned it with apparent approbation, but seriously considered it as not very conclusive.

In consequence of this, Dr. Hinchliffe was appointed tutor and domestic chaplain to the duke of Devonshire, with whom he continued at Devonshire-house till his grace went abroad; and, by the joint interest of his two noble patrons he was presented to the vicarage of Greenwich, in 1766. About this time, Miss Elizabeth, the sister of his pupil Mr. Crewe, a young lady about twenty-one years of age, was courted by an officer of the guards, who not being favoured with the approbation of Mr. Crewe, this latter gentleman applied to Dr. Hinchliffe, requesting him to dissuade his sister from encouraging the addresses of her suitor. This he did so effectually, that the lady not only gratified her brother’s wishes, but her own, by giving both her heart and hand to the doctor. Mr. Crewe acquiesced immediately in his sister’s choice, encreasing her fortune from five thousand^ the sum originally bequeathed to her, to fifteen thousand pounds; but at the same time withdrawing the three hundred per annum before mentioned. Dr. Hinchliffe, it is said, was offered the tuition of the prince of Wales, which important trust he declined, from his predilection, as it is supposed, to what were called Whig principles. On the death of Dr. Smith, in 1768, his lordship was elected, through the recommendation of the duke of Grafton, master of Trinity college, Cambridge; and scarce a year had elapsed, when he was raised to the bishopric of Peterborough on the death of Dr. Lamb, in. 1769, by the interest of the duke of Grafton, then prime minister. It is probable his lordship might have obtained other preferment, had he not uniformly joined the party in parliament who opposed the principle and conduct of the American war. The only other change he experienced was that of being appointed dean of Durham, by which he was removed from the mastership of Trinity college. He died at his palace at Peterborough Jan. 11, 1794, after a long illness, which terminated in a paralytic stroke. His lordship, although a man of ^considerable learning, published three sermons, preached on public occasions. He was a graceful orator in parliament, and much admired in the pulpit. Mr. Jones, in his Life of bishop Home, says that “he spake with the accent of a man of sense (such as he really was in a superior degree), but it was remarkable, and, to those who did not know the cause, mysterious, that there was not a corner of the church, in which he could not be heard distinctly.” The reason Mr. Jones assigns, was, that he made it an invariable rule, “to do justice to every consonant, knovxing that the vowels will be sure to speak for themselves. And thus he became the surest and clearest of speakers: his elocution was perfect, and never disappointed his audience.” Two years after his death, a volume of bishop Hinchliffe’s “Sermons” were published, but, probably from a want of judgment in the selection, did not answer the expectations of those who had been accustomed to admire him in the pulpit.

Being again settled in Paris, he continued his mathematical studies with the utmost intenseness: and published some works, which gained him so much reputation, that he was made a member of the academy of sciences in 1678. The minister Colbert having formed a design of a better chart or map of the kingdom than any whica tiad hitherto been taken, de la Hire was nominated, with Picard, to make the necessary observations. He went to Bretagne in 1679, to Cayenne in 1680, to Calais and Dunkirk in 168, and into Provence in 1682. In these peregrinations he did not confine nis attention to their main object, but philosophized upon every thing that occurred, and particularly upon the variations of the magnetic needle, upon refractions, and upon the height of mountains, as determined by the barometer. In 1683 he was employed in continuing the meridian line, which Picard had begun in 1669. De la Hire continued it to the north of Paris, while Cassini pushed it on to the south: but Colbert dying the same year, the work was left unfinished. He was next employed, with other geometricians of the academy, 'in. taking the necessary levels for those grand aqueducts which Louis XIV. was about to make.

During this long course of professional industry, he had shewn himself a no less diligent guardian of a numerous family. At an early period of its increase he maintained a regular correspondence on the subject of “parental duties” with Mr. Chandler, a brother of the dissenting minister of that name, and distinguished among his friends for the integrity of his mind and conduct. Many of these letters and replies still exist. He extended to all his children the most unwearied attention, and bestowed on them every advantage of education which Bath could supply. He expended on them all that his long life of diligence had amassed, and left them, at his death, which happened in 1792, scarcely any other possessions than the remembrance of his virtues and his useful labours.

, an eminent English philosopher and miscellaneous writer, was born at Malmsbury in Wiltshire, April 5, 1588, his father being minister of that town. The Spanish Armada was then upon the coast of England; and his mother is said to have been so alarmed on that occasion, that she was brought to bed of him before her time. After having made a considerable progress in the learned languages at school, he was sent, in 1603, to Magdalen hall, Oxford; and, in 1608, by the recommendation of the principal, taken into the family of the right honourable William Cavendish lord Hardwicke, soon after created earl of Devonshire, as tutor to his son William lord Cavendish. Hobbes ingratiated himself so effectually with this young nobleman, and with the peer his father, that he was sent abroad with him on his travels in 16:0, and made the tour of France and Italy. Upon his return with lord Cavendish, he became known to persons of the highest rank, and eminently distinguished for their abilities and learning. The chancellor Bacon admitted him to a great degree of familiarity, and is said to have made use of his pen for translating some of his works into Latin. He was likewise much in favour with lord Herbert of Cherbury; and the celebrated Ben Jonson had such an esteem for him, that he revised the first work which he published, viz. his “English Translation of the History of Thucyciides.” This Hobbes undertook, as he tells us himself, “with an honest view of preventing, if possible, those disturbances in which he was apprehensive his country would be involved, by shewing, in the history of the Peloponnesian war, the fatal consequences of intestine troubles.” This has always been esteemed one of the best translations that we have of any Greek writer, and the author himself superintended the maps and indexes. But while he meditated this design, his patron, the earl of Devonshire, died in 1626; and in 1628, the year his work was published, his son died also. This loss affected him to such a degree, that he very willingly accepted an offer of going abroad a second time with the son of sir Gervase Clifton, whom he accordingly accompanied into France, and staid there some time. But while he continued there he was solicited to return to England, and to resume his concern for the hopes of that family, to which he had attached himself so early, and owed many and great obligations.

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.”

, a Lutheran minister, superintendant and professor at Helmstad, was the author of an idle controversy towards the end of the sixteenth century. He started some difficulties about subscribing the concord, and refused to concur with Dr. Andreas in defence of this confession. He would not acknowledge the ubiquity, but only that the body of Jesus Christ was present in a great many places; this dispute, though laid asleep soon after, left a spirit of curiosity and contradiction upon people’s minds, so that in a little time they began to disagree and argue veiy warmly upon' several other points, Hoffman being always at th.e head of the party. Among other things in an academical disputation, he maintained that the light of reason, even as it appears in the writings of Plato and Aristotle, is averse to religion; and the more the human understanding i s cultivated by philosophical study, the more perfectly is the enemy supplied with weapons of defence. The partiality wh;ch at this time universally prevailed in favour of the Aristotelian philosophy was such, that an opinion of this kind could not be advanced publicly, without exciting general dissatisfaction and alarm. A numerous band of professors, though they differed in opinion among themselves, united to take up arms against the common enemy. At the bead of this body was John Cassel; whence the advocates for philosophy were called the Casseiian party. They at first challenged Hoffman to a private conference, in expectation of leading him to a sounder judgment concerning philosophy; but their hopes were frustrated. Hoffman, persuaJed that interest and envy had armed the philosophers against him, in his reply to his opponents inveighed with great bitterness against philosophers, and acknowledged, that he meant to oppose not only the abuse of philosophy, but the most prudent and legitimate use of it, as necessarily destructive of theology. This extravagant assertion, accompanied with many contumelious censures of philosophers, produced reciprocal vehemence; and Albert Graver published a book “De Unica Veritate,” which maintained “the Simplicity of Truth;” a doctrine from which the Casseiian party were called Simplicists, whilst the followers of Hoffman (for he found means to engage several persons, particularly among the Tbeosophists, in his interest) opposing this doctrine, were called, on the other hand, Duplicists. John Angel Werdenhagen, a Boehmeiu'te, who possessed some poetical talents, wrote several poems against the philosophers. In short, the disputes ran so high, and produced so much personal abuse, that the court thought it necessary to interpose its authority, and appointed arbitrators to examine the merits of the controversy. The decision was against Hoffman, and he was obliged to make a public recantation of his errors, acknowledging the utility and excellence of philosophy, and declaring that his invectives had been only directed against its abuses.

Hoffman and Beza wrote against each other upon the subject of the Holy Eucharist. Hoffman accused Hunnius, an eminent Lutheran minister, for having misrepresented the book of the Concord; for here, says Hoffman, the cause of election is not made to depend upon the qualifications of the person elected but Hunnius, says he, and Mylius assert, that the decree of election is founded upon the foresight of faith. Hunnius and Mylius caused Hoffman to be condemned at a meeting of their divines in 1593, and threatened him with excommunication, if he did not comply. The year following, Hoffman published an apology against their censure. Hospinian gives the detail of this controversy: he observes, that some divines of Leipsic, Jena, and Wittemburg, would have had Hoffman publicly censured as a Calvinist, and such a heretic as was not fit to be conversed with; others who were more moderate, were for admonishing him by way of letter before they came to extremities: this latter expedient was approved, and Hunnius wrote to him in the name of all his brethren. Hoffman’s apology was an answer to this letter, in which he gives the reasons for refusing to comply with the divines of Wittemburg, and pretends to shew that they were grossly mistaken in several articles of faith. At last he was permitted to keep school at Helmstadt, where he died in 1611. He must not be confounded with Melchior Hoffman, a fanatic of the sixteenth century, who died in prison at Strasburgh. There was also a Gasper Hoffman (the name being common), a celebrated professor of medicine at Altdorf, who was born at Golha in 1572, and died in 1649; and who left behind him many medical works.

After almost begging his way to England, as Patin tells us, he found an easy admittance to the lord-chancellor, sir Thomas More, having brought with him Erasmus’s picture, and letters recommendatory from him to that great man. Sir Thomas received him with all the joy imaginable, and kept him in his house between two and three years; during which time he drew sir Thomas’s picture, and those of many of his friends and relations. One clay Holbein happening to mention the nobleman who had some years ago invited him to England, sir Thomas was very solicitous to know who he was. Holbein replied, that he had indeed forgot his title, but remembered his face so well, that he thought he could draw his likeness; and this he did so very strongly, that the nobleman, it is said, was immediately known by it. This nobleman some think was the earl of Arundel, others the earl of Surrey. The chancellor, having now sufficiently enriched his apartments with Holbein’s productions, adopted the following method to introduce him to Henry VIII. He invited the king to an entertainment, and hung up all Holbein’s pieces, disposed in the best order, and in the best light, in the great hall of his house. The king, upon his first entrance, was so charmed with the sight of them, that he asked, “Whether such an artist were now alive, and to be had for money?” on which sir Thomas presented Holbein to the king, who immediately took him into his service, with a salary of 200 florins, and brought him into great esteem with the nobility of the kingdom. The king from time to time manifested the greac value he had for him, and upon the death of queen Jane, his third wife, sent him into Flanders, to draw the picture of the duchess dowager of Milan, widowto Francis Sforza, whom the emperor Charles V. had recommended to him for a fourth wife; but the king’s defection from the see of Rome happening about that time, he rather chose to match with a protestant princess. Cromwell, then his prime minister (for sir Thomas More had been removed, and beheaded), proposed Anne of Cleves to him; but the king was not inclined to the match, till her picture, which Holbein had also drawn, was presented to him. There, as lord Herbert of Cherbnry says, she was represented so very charming, that the king immediately resolved to marry her; and thus Holbein was unwittingly the cause of the ruin of his patron Cromwell, whom the king never forgave for introducing him to Anne of Cleves.

, a celebrated chemist, was born at Batavia in the island of Java, Jan. 3, 1652, the son of John Homberg, a Saxon gentleman, governor of the arsenal of that place. His father at first put him into the army, but soon after quitting the service of the Dutch, and a military life, brought him to Amsterdam, where he settled. He was now educated, by paternal indulgence, at Jena and Leipsic, for the law, and was received as an advocate in 1674 at Magdebourg, but the sciences seduced him from the law: in his walks he became a botanist, and in his nocturnal rambles an astronomer. An intimacy with Otto de Guericke, who lived at Magdebourg, completed his conversion, and he resolved to abandon his first profession. Otto, though fond of mystery, consented to communicate his knowledge to so promising a pupil; but as his friends continued to press him to be constant to the law, he soon quitted Magdebourg, and went into Italy. At Padua and Bologna he pursued his favourite studies, particularly medicine, anatomy, botany, and chemistry. One of his first efforts in the latter science was the complete discovery of the properties of the Bologna stone, and its phosphoric appearance after calcination, which Casciarolo had first observed. The efforts of Hombergr in several scientific inquiries, were pursued at Rome, in France, in England with the great Boyle, and afterward in Holland and Germany. With Baldwin and Kunckel he here pursued the subject of phosphorus. Not yet satisfied with travelling in search of knowledge, he visited the mines of Saxony, Hungary, Bohemia, and Sweden. Having materially improved himself, and at the same time assisted the progress of chemistry at Stockholm, he returned to Holland, and thence revisited France, where he was quickly noticed by Colbert. By his interposition, he was prevailed upon to quit his intention of returning to Holland to marry, according to the desire of his father, and fixed himself in France. This step also alienated him from his religion. He renounced the Protestant communion in 1682, and thus losing all connexion with his family, became dependent on Louis XIV. and his minister. This, however, after the death of Colbert in 1683, became a miserable dependence; men of learning and science were neglected as much as before they had been patronized; and Homberg, in 1687, left Paris for Rome, and took up the profession of physic. He now pursued and perfected his discoveries on phosphorus, and prosecuted his discoveries in pneumatics, and other branches of natural philosophy. Finding, after some time, that the learned were again patronized at Paris, he returned there in 1690, and entered into the academy of sciences tinder the protection of M. de Bignon. He now resumed the study of chemistry, but found his finances too limited to carry on his experiments as he wished, till he had the good fortune to be appointed chemist to the duke of Orleans, afterwards regent. In this situation he was supplied with the most perfect apparatus, and all materials for scientific investigation. Among other instruments, the large burning mirror of Tschirnaus was given to his care, and he made with it the most interesting experiments, on the combustibility of gold and other substances. In examining the nature of borax he discovered the sedative salt, and traced several remarkable properties of that production. Pleased with the researches of his chemist, the duke of Orleans in 1704 appointed him his first physician. About the same time he was strongly solicited by the elector palatine to settle in his dominions, but he was too much attached to his present patron to quit Paris, and was besides not without an inclination of a more tender kind for mademoiselle Dodart, daughter to the celebrated physician of that name. He married her in 1708, though hitherto much averse to matrimony; but enjoyed the benefit of his change of sentiments only seven years, being attacked in 1715 with a dysentery, of which he died in September of that year.

, was a protestant minister of a distinguished family in Scotland, but educated in France, where he passed the chief part of his life. James I. employed him to reconcile the differences between Tilenus and du Moulin, on the subject of justification; and, if possible, to reconcile the protestants throughout Europe to one single form of doctrine; but this was found impracticable. The chief work of Home is, his, 1. “Apologia Basilica; seu Machiavelli ingenium examinatum,” 1626, 4to. There are attributed to him also, 2. “Le contr' Assassin, ou reponse a TApologie des Jesuites,” Geneve, 1612, in 8vo. 3. “L'Assassinat du Roi, ou maximes du Viel de la Montagne, pratiquees en la personne de defunt Henri le Grand,” 1617, 8vo. He is also the author of several conipositions in the “Delicise Poetarum Scotorum.” The times of his birth and death are not known,

Not long after, while on a visit in England, he was introduced to Collins, the poet, at Winchester, and Collins addressed to him his “Ode on the Superstition of the Highlanders.” In 1750 Home was settled as minister of the parish of Athelstaneford in East Lothian, on the demise of the rev. Robert Blair, author of the “Grave;” but such a situation could not be very agreeable to one who had tasted the sweets of literary society, and who, in particular, had a paramount ambition to shine as a dramatic writer. His first tragedy was “Agis,”“with which it is said he went to London, where the managers refused it, and immediately returning home he wrote his” Douglas,“which Garrick peremptorily refused. By such discouragement, however, the ardour of the author was not to be suppressed. Being acquainted with the leading characters in Scotland, a ready reception of his play was secured; and accordingly” Douglas" was performed at the theatre in the Canongate, Edinburgh, in December 1756, Mr. Home and several of his clerical brethren being present. Such a departure from the decorum enjoined by the church of Scotland could not be overlooked, and the author was so threatened with ecclesiastical censures, and in reality became so obnoxious in the eyes of the people, that in the following year he resigned his living, and with it all connexion with the church, wearing ever afterwards a lay habit. In the mean time the presbytery of Edinburgh published an admonition and exhortation against stage-plays, which was ordered to be read in all the pulpits within their bounds on a Sunday appointed, immediately after divine service. In it there is no mention of Home or his play, although the latter was probably the cause. It merely contains a recapitulation of what had formerly been done by the church and the laws to discourage the theatres.

, an illustrious professor of divinity in the universities of Utrecht and Leyden, was born at Haerlem in 1617, and studied there till he was sixteen, when he was sent to Leyden, and afterwards in 1635, went to study at Utrecht. In 1632, he was admitted a minister, went to pertform the functions of his office secretly at Cologne, and was never discouraged by the dangers to which he was exposed, in a city where most of the inhabitants were zealous papists. He returned to Holland in 1643, and that year was made D. D. The proofs he gave of his great learning were such> that he was chosen in 1644 to fill the chair of divinity professor at Utrecht; and the next year was made minister in ordinary of the church in that C;ty. However difficult the functions of these two employments were, yet he acquitted himself in them with great diligence almost ten years. As a pastor, he often visited the members of his church: he encouraged the pious, instructed the ignorant, reproved the wicked, refuted the heretics, comforted the afflicted, refreshed the sick, strengthened the weak, cheered the drooping, assisted the poor. As a professor, he took as much care of the students in divinity, as if they had been his own children: he used to read not only public lectures, but even private ones, for them; and to hold ordinary and extraordinary disputations. He was chosen to exercise the same employments at Leyden which he had at Utrecht, and accepted them in 1654. He died in 1666; and though he was but forty-nine years of age, yet considering his labours, it is rather a matter of wonder that he lived so long, than that he died so soon. He published a great number of works, didactical, polemical, practical, historical, and oratorical. The principal are, “A Refutation of Socinianism,” from 1650 to 1664, 3 vols. 4to a treatise for the “Conviction of the Jews,” 1658, 8vo, and “of the Gentiles,” 1669, 4to “A System of Practical Divinity,” 4to “Theological Institutions,” &c. all in Latin. He understood many languages, both ancient and modern the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, Chaldaic, Syriac, Rabbinical, Dutch, German, English, French, Italian, and some little of Arabic and Spanish. He never departed one inch from the most strict orthodoxy; and was not less commendable for his integrity, than for his parts and learning. Bayle, who had little in common with so sound a divine, exhibits him as the complete model of a good pastor and divinity-professor. He married at Utrecht in 1650; and left two sons.

, a learned and worthy prelate, whojxperienced a fate extremely singular, was born in 1633, at Sandford in Devonshire, where his father was curate; became chorister of Magdalen college, Oxford, ia 1649; at the age of about sixteen, he was usher of the school adjoining, being already B. A.; he was chaplain of the college when M. A.; and would have been fellow, had his county qualified him. All this time he lived and was educated under presbyterian and independent discipline; and about the time of the restoration became assistant to Dr. Spurstow of Hackney. He was afterwards elected preacher at one of the city churches; the bishop of London, however, refused to admit him, as he was a popular preacher among the fanatics; but after some time he was settled in the parish church of St. Mary Wolnoth. Having retired to Exeter on account of the plague, he obtained the living of St. Mary’s church at Exeter, was countenanced by bishop Ward, and much admired for the comeliness of his person and elegance of preaching. The lord Robartes in particular (afterwards earl of Truro) w*as so pleased with him, that he gave him his daughter Araminta in marriage, took him as his chaplain to Ireland in 1669, gave him the deanery of llaphoe, and recommended him so effectually to his successor lord Berkeley, that he was consecrated bishop of Raphoe, Oct. 27, 1671, and translated to Londonderry in 1681. Driven thence by the forces under the earl of Tyrconnel, in 1688, he retired into England, and was elected minister of Aldermanbury in Sept. 1689, where he died, June 22, 1690. He published five single sermons, afterwards incorporated in two volumes; “An Exposition of the Ten Commandments, 1692, 4to, with his portrait; and an” Exposition of the Lord’s Prayer," 1691, all printed in one volume, 171O, folio. An edition of his works has very recently appeared in 4 vols. 8vo.

, archbishop of Tuam, appears to have been of a dissenting family, as he was educated in a dissenting school, between 1690 and 1695, under the direction of the rev. Thomas Rowe, and was a fellow-student with the celebrated Dr. Watts, who said of him, that he was “the first genius in that seminary.” After his academical studies were finished, he resided some time as chaplain with John Hampden, esq. M. P. for Bucks, and afterwards settled as a dissenting minister at Marshfield, in Gloucestershire. The time of his conformity is not ascertained, though it is evident that he was a clergyman of the church of England so early as 1708, for in that year he published a sermon preached at the archdeacon’s visitation at Aylesbury. In the preceding year he had printed a Thanksgiving Sermon on our national Successes, from Ps. cxlix. 6 8. There is a tradition in the family, that he had so greatly recommended himself to the court by his zeal and services in support of the Hanover succession, that, as he scrupled re-ordination, it was dispensed with, and the fivst preferment bescowed on him, was that of a bishopric in Ireland. It is certain that he went into that kingdom as chaplain to the lord lieutenant. He was consecrated bishop of Ferns and Leighlin, February 10, 1721, was translated to Kilinore and Ardagh, July 27, 1727, and preferred to the archiepiscopal see of Tuam, January 27, 1742, with the united bishopric of Enaghdoen, in the room of Dr. Synge, deceased, and likewise with liberty to retain his other bishopric of Ardagh. He died December 14, 1751, in a very advanced age. His publications were, 1. in 1738, at Dublin, a volume of Sermons, sixteen in number, in 8vo; they are judicious and impressive discourses. These were reprinted in London, in 1757, with the addition of the Visitation Sermon mentioned before. In this volume is a Sermon preached in the castle of Dublin, before the duke of Bolton the lord lieutenant of Ireland, after the suppression of the Preston rebellion. 2. A Charge entitled “Instructions to the Clergy of the Diocese of Tuam, at the primary visitation, July 8, 1742.” This, after the death of the author, was reprinted in London, with theapprobation and consent of the rev. Dr. Hort, canon of Windsor it is an excellent address. In the preface to the volume of sermons we learn, that for many years prer vious to its appearance from the press, the worthy author had been disabled from preaching by an over-strain of the voice in the pulpit, at a time when he had a cold with a hoarseness upon him. The providence of God, he says, having taken from him the power of discharging that part of his episcopal office which consisted in preaching, he, thought it incumbent on him to convey his thoughts and instructions from the press, that he might not be useless. The solemn promise that he made at his consecration, “to exercise himself in the Holy Scriptures, so as to be able by them to teach and exhort with wholesome doctrine,” was no small motive to that undertaking, as being the only means left him for making good that promise. It appears, that he kept up an epistolary correspondence with his “old friend,” as he called him, and fellow-student, Dr. Watts, to the closing period of the life of each. In Swift’s works we find a humorous paper of Dr. Hort’s, entitled “A New Proposal for the better regulation and improvement of Quadrille,” and some letters respecting it.

, a learned and pious English divine, the son of Laurence Horton, a merchant of London, was born in that city. In July 1623 he was admitted a pensioner of Emanuel college, Cambridge, where he took the degree of B. A. in 1626, and that of master in 1630. He was also a fellow pf his college. In 1637 he took the degree of B. D. and was appointed one of the twelve university preachers. The following year he was chosen master of Queen’s-college, in that university, after the death of Mr. Herbert Palmer, and in July of the same year minister of St. Mary Colechurch, in London, a donative of the Mercers’ company, of which his father was a member.

, a learned Swiss writer, who rendered important service to the Protestant cause, was born at Altdorf near Zurich, where his father was minister, in 1547. He began his studies with great diligence and success at Zurich, under the direction of Woltius, his uncle by his mother’s side; and losing his father in 1563, found an affectionate patron in his godfather Rodolphus Gualterus. He left Zurich in 1565, in order to visit the other universities and spent some time in Marpurg and Heidelberg. He was afterwardsrecalled, and received into the ministry in 1568; the year following he obtained the freedom of the city; and was made provisor of the abbey school in 1571. Though his school and his cure engrossed much of his time, he had the courage to undertake a noble work of vast extent, “An History of the Errors of Popery.” He considered, that the Papists, when defeated by the Holy Scriptures, had recourse to tradition; were for ever boasting of their antiquity, and despised the protestants for being modern. To deprive them of this plea, he determined to search into the rise and progress of the Popish rites and ceremonies; and to examine by what gradations the truth, taught by Christ and his apostles, had been corrupted by innovations. He could not, however, complete his work, agreeably to the plan he had drawn out; but he published some considerable parts of it, as, 1. “De Templis: hoc est, de origine, progressu, usu, & abusu Templorum, ac omnino rerum omnium ad Templa pertinentium,” 1587, folio. 2. “De Monachis: seu de origine & progressu monachatus & ordinum monasticorum,” 1588, folio. 3. “De Festis Judaeorum, et Ethnicorum: hoc est, de origine, progressu, ceremoiiiis, et ritibus festorum dierum Judaeorum, Graecorum, Romanorum, Turcarum, & Indianorum,” 1592, folio. 4. “Festa Christianorum,” &c. 1593, folio. 5. “Historia Sacramentaria hoc est, libri quinque Je Ccsnae Dominicae prima institutione, ejusque vero usu & abusu, in primaeva ecclesia necnon de origine, progressu, ceremoniis, & ritibus Missas, Transubstantiationis, & aliorum pene infinitorum errorum, quibus Ccenx prima institutio horribiliter in papatu polluta & profanata est,” 1598, folio. 6. “Pars altera: de origine et progressu controversies sacramentarias de Coena Domini inter Lutheranos, Ubiquistas, & Orthodoxos, quos Zuinglianos seu Calvinistas vocant, exortae ab anno 1517 usque ad 16,02 deducta, 1602,” folio. These are all of them parts of his great work, which he enlarged in succeeding editions, and added confutations of the arguments of Bellarmin, Baronius, and Gretser. What he published on the Eucharist, and another work entitled “Concordia Discors,” &c. printed in 1607, exasperated the Lutherans in a high degree; and they wrote against him with great animosity. He did not publish any answer, though he had almost finished one, but turned his arms against the Jesuits and published “Historia Jesuitica hoc est, de origine, regulis, constitutionibus, privileges, incrementis, progressu, & propagatione ordinis Jesuitarum. Item, de eorum dolis, fraudibus, imposturis, nefariis faci- ­noribus, cruentis consiliis, falsa quoque, seditiosa, & sanguinolenta doctrina,” 1619, folio.

These works justly gained him high reputation, and considerable preferment. He was appointed archdeacon of Caroline church in 1588; and, in 1594, minister of the abbey-church. He was deprived of his sight for near a year by a cataract, yet continued to preach as usual, and was happily couched in 1613. In 1623, being 76 years of age, his faculties became impaired, and so continued till his death in 1626. The public entertained so high an opinion of his learning from his writings, that he was exhorted from all quarters to refute Baronius’s “Annals;” and no one was thought to have greater abilities for the task. A new edition of his works was published at Geneva, 1681, in seven thin volumes, folio.

Many employments were immediately conferred on him: among the rest, he was elected president of the commissioners who were to revise the German translation of the Bible. A civil war breaking out in Switzerland in 1664, he was sent into Holland on state affairs. Many universities would willingly have drawn Hottinger to them, but were not able. That of Ley den offered him a professorship of divinity in 1667; but, not obtaining leave of his superiors, he refused it, until the magistrates of Zurich consented, in complaisance to the States of Holland, who had interested themselves in this affair. As he was preparing for this journey, he unfortunately lost his life, June 5, 1667, in the river which passes through Zurich. He went into a boat, with his wife, three children, his brotherin-law, a friend, and a maid-servant, in order to go and let out upon lease an estate which he had two leagues from Zurich. The boat striking against a pier, which lay under water, overset: upon which Hottinger, his brother-in-law, and friend, escaped by swimming. But when they looked upon the women and children, and saw the danger they were in, they jumped back into the water: the consequence of which was, that Hottinger, his friend, and three children, lost their lives, while his wife, his brother-in-law, and servant-maid, were saved. His wife was the only daughter of Huldric, minister of Zurich, a man of very great learning, and brought him several children: for besides the three who were drowned with him, and those who died before, he left four sons and two daughters.

, a learned non-conformist divine in the seventeenth century, was a minister’s son, and nephew to Mr. Obadiah Howe, vicar of Boston in Lincolnshire. He was born May 17, 1630, at Loughborough in Leicestershire, of which town his father was minister, being settled there by archbishop Laud, though afterwards ejected by that prelate on account of his adherence to the Puritans; upon which he went with his son to Ireland, where they continued till the Irish Rebellion broke out, when they returned to England, and settled in Lancashire, where our author was educated in the first rudiments of learning and the knowledge of the tongues. He was sent pretty early to Christ college in Cambridge, where he continued till he had taken the degree of bachelor of arts, and then removed to Oxford, and became bible-clerk of Brazen-nose college in Michaelmas term 1648, and took the degree of bachelor of arts Jan. 18, 1649. He was made a demy of Magdalen college by the parliament visitors, and afterwards fellow; and July 9, 1652, took the degree of master of arts. Soon after this he became a preacher, and was ordained by Mr. Charles Herle at his church of Winwick in Lancashire, and not long after became minister of Great Torrington in Devonshire. His labours here were characteristic of the times. He informed Dr. Calamy, that on the public fasts it was his common way to begin about nine in the morning with a prayer for about a quarter of an hour, in which he begged a blessing on the work of the day; and afterwards read and expounded a chapter or psalm, in which he spent about three quarters; then prayed for about an hour, preached for another hour, and prayed for about half an hour. After this he retired, and took some little refreshment for about a quarter of an hour or more (the people singing all the while), and then came again into the pulpit, and prayed for another hour, and gave them another sermon of about an hour’s length, and so concluded the service of the day, about four o'clock in the evening, with half an hour or more in prayer.

In March 1654 he married the daughter of Mr. George Hughes, minister of Plymouth. Having occasion to take a journey to London, he went as a hearer to the chapel at Whitehall. Cromwell was present, and, struck with his demeanor and person, sent a messenger to inform him that he wished to speak with him when the service was over. In the course of the interview he desired him to preach before him the following Sunday: he requested to be excused, but Cromwell would not be denied, and even undertook to write to his congregation a sufficient apology for his absence from them longer than he intended. This led to the appointment of Mr. Howe to the office of his domestic chaplain, and he accordingly removed with his family to Whitehall. Dr. Calamy tells us, that while he was in this station, he behaved in such a manner that he was never charged, even by those who have been most forward to inveigh against a number of his contemporaries, with improving his interest in those who then had the management of affairs in their hands, either to the enriching himself, or the doing ill offices to others, though of known differing sentiments. He readily embraced every occasion that offered, of serving the interest of religion and learning, and opposing the errors and designs which at that time threatened both. The notion of a particular faith prevailed much at Cromwell’s court; and it was a common opinion among them, that such as were in a special manner favoured of God, when they offered up prayers and supplications to him for his mercies, either for themselves or others, often had such impressions made upon their minds and spirits by a divine hand, as signified to them, not only in the general that their prayers would be heard and answered, but that the particular mercies which were sought for would be certainly bestowed; nay, and sometimes also intimated to them in what way and manner they would be afforded, and pointed out to them future events beforehand, which in reality is the same with inspiration. Mr. Howe told Dr. Calamy, that not a little pains was taken to cultivate and support this notion at Whitehall and that he once heard a sermon there from a person of note, the avowed design of which was to defend it. He said, that he was so fully convinced of the ill tendency of such a principle, that after hearing this sermon, he thought himself bound in conscience, when it came next to his turn to preach before Cromwell, to set himself industriously to oppose it, and to beat down that spiritual pride and confidence, which such fancied impulses and impressions were apt to produce and cherish. He observed, while he was in the pulpit, that Cromwell heard him with great attention, but would sometimes knit his brows, and discover great uneasiness. When the sermon was over, a person of distinction came to him, and asked him, if he knevy. what he had done? and signified it to him as his apprehension, that Cromwell would be so incensed at that dis’A course, that he would find it very difficult ever to make his peace with him, or secure his favour for the future. Mr. Howe replied, that he had but discharged his conscience, and could leave the event with God. He afterwards observed, that Cromwell was cooler in his carriage to him than before; and sometimes he thought he would have spoken to him of the matter, but never did.

Upon the death of Oliver Cromwell, his son Richard succeeding him as protector, Mr. Howe stood in the same relation to him of chaplain as he had done to the father; and was in his judgment very much averse tp Richard’s parting with his parliament, which he foresaw would prove his ruin. When the army had set Richard aside, Mr. Howe returned to his people at Great Torrington, among whom he continued till the act of uniformity took place August 24, 1662, after which he preached for some time in private houses in Devonshire. In April 1671 he went to Ireland, where he lived as chaplain to the lord Massarene in the parish of Antrim, and had leave from the bishop of the diocese and the metropolitan to preach in the public church of that town every Sunday in the afternoon, without submitting to any terms of conformity. In 1675, upon the death of Dr. Lazarus Seaman, he was chosen minister of his congregation, upon which he returned to England and settled at London, where he was highly respected, not only by his brethren in the ministry among the dissenters, but also by several eminent divines of the church of England, as Dr. Whichcot, Dr. Kidder, Dr. Fowler, Dr. Lucas, and others. In August 1685 he travelled beyond sea with the lord Wharton, and the year following settled at Utrecht, and took his turn in preaching at the English church in that city. In 1687, upon king James’s publishing his “Declaration for liberty of conscience,” Mr. Howe returned to London, where he died April 2, 1705, and was interred in the parish church of Allhallows Bread-street.